a6400 vs X-T30?

G

goodgoings

Well-known member
Title says it all.

Which one would you recommend? Both of them don't have IBIS which is a shame. The a6400's rolling shutter is probably the biggest limitation I see on the Sony and the 10 minute recording with 4k on the X-T30.

AF seems slightly better on the a6400.
Colors seem slightly better on the X-T30

A few questions:
1. How is the screen brightness on the X-T30? Can it be seen in bright sunlight like the a6400?
2. Does the X-T30 8bit Flog recording have micro blocking or mush? Is the Flog unusable? Is S-log2 better than Flog?
3. Does the Fringer or any other brands Canon to XF adapter have usable AF on the X-T30? Considering using a Sigma 18-35mm f1.8.

@NorBro since you have both of them, which one would you sell and which one would you keep?
 
The Sony's history.

Amazing camera, but I needed a breath of fresh air and the X-T30 is it. I knew the eye-AF would eventually have me, and I would have waited for the camera if I could have, but I needed something for a week in the beginning of March and I did not want to rent because I still wasn't 100% sure what I was going to do (constant inner struggle with these AF cameras).

Both have really, really good AF as we know, and I urge you not to trust every YouTube review on the Fuji. Not everyone is using the lenses that are meant to be used with the camera. There are also various settings that not everyone has the time to go through.

I wish I had the ambition to shoot tests like other people and YouTubers do, but I really don't operate that way. I take them out and use them at events and jobs, and just review footage later. I see how they did during interviews (very important, especially with people wearing glasses), on a gimbal, low light, etc.

I talk to myself during the b-roll and let the camera know which settings I am using regarding speed or sensitivity or environment. And basically draw conclusions later like:

"Do not use anything more than +4 on interviews because the transitions will be too abrupt if the subject moves."
"Use multi-area when shooting on a gimbal."
"Use this # for tracking sensitivity when sniping b-roll as people walk through the frame because the box continues to detect original target."
[ETC]

You have to get to know your cameras if they offer you the ability to change them how they work.

However, I will say that the a6400 is probably the safer choice out of the two because it provides you less flexibility (not a number scale), it has really good object tracking (the T30 doesn't), and it will most likely work much better for way more lenses (even adapted ones).

Speaking of adapters...I don't know if the Fringer would work well with the Sigma, but my guess is the T30 may be picky. If you're buying the camera for AF, it's such a no-brainer to stay native. The camera literally is being sold with two of the best AF lenses Fujifilm offers (23mm and 35mm) only for an additional $100. You can always try the Sigma if you have it if you do go that route.

Color science: I really do like all cameras, but the Fujifilm was a nice change of pace here. F-log is working great for me, but I am really not the person to ask about 8-bit or macro-blocking or any other artifacts that will be unnoticeable by normal human beings.

Other notes:
- The T30 can have its screen adjusted to be brighter, but I'll have to get back to you about if I can see it outside in harsh daylight.
- I never use S-Log2 on Sony cameras and only S-Log3...but they are all good although sometimes I don't like how noisy S-Log can be. I think only you will know which one is "better".
- Some places out there say that the T30 comes with a charger, but it actually doesn't. You charge the camera via its cable, just like the Sony. (Chargers are sold separately.)

You truly can't go wrong with either one. They are really great cameras.

I don't have the Sony anymore, but happy to answer any specific questions about the X-T30 (or Sony if I remember, but can't physically check settings/options/features).
 
I think these cameras are so close. I am thinking in the long term and wondering which one to invest in. I am waiting for the Fujifilm X-H2 with IBIS plus 4k 60fps and I think that would be the almost the perfect camera for me expect it isn't fullframe and I can use the X-T30 as a B-camera. But this can be said the same with the a6400 and use whatever new Sony fullframe comes out as an A-camera. Fujifilm is more affordable at their high end while Sony seems like they will never let anyone else have better tech then them for long but they will price theirs at a premium and honestly I don't know if I can afford their next 10-bit mirrorless camera system.

I must say I am looking to use these cameras as documentary cameras and as a photo camera secondary. The most affordable documentary system I can see is a Sony FF camera with the Tamron 28-75mm, but that's already getting close to 3 grand with the A7m3.

I sold the a6500 for a lot of reasons but I miss the IBIS. Shooting outside in bright sunlight and not seeing the image on the LCD was the biggest gripe I had with the Sony and if anyone could say how the X-T30 or X-T3 fares in bright sunlight would be nice to hear. I also see some focus hunting with the Fuji, but maybe they will tweak their fw later and keep improving.

The reason I am looking to use the Sigma 18-35mm is because Sony doesn't have fast zooms and I would like a more shallow depth of field than f2.8 on an APS-C sensor. I believe the Sigma on the Sony is usable but not so sure about the Fuji. Maybe again this has to do with the AF on the Fuji not being there yet.

On another note, does anyone shoot with both Sony and Fuji? Can colors be matched fairly well?
 
Last edited:
Totally hear you, but I just want to make sure you saw the note I wrote about Fujifilm and native AF lenses.

To be more clear on my end, the X-T30's AF is just as good as the Sony's if you use the right lenses (IMO).

If you don't, it will be unusable and it's like using a different camera. I posted the other day that I used Fuji's own 56mm (old lens) and it just bugged out randomly. There was no movement in the frame and it would still reset itself in the middle of filming to focus again when it had already locked focus perfectly.

So in that sense - OVERALL reliability with system and lenses - the Sony is better...(safer really as mentioned), but not when it's apples to apples when using the best Fujifilm AF lenses and you're just evaluating AF performance.

If you have any particular videos that show X-T30 hunting in mind, please point them to me as I'd like to see.

I also recommend watching the video below. (There are many out there, but this one is short.)

It explains how using the correct settings in the Sonys is necessary (the guy was sitting in a chair and the camera still lost focus because the AF track speed was set to 'responsive' vs. 'standard').

It's similar with the T30 except you adjust this "sensitivity" via numbers.

(I know the a6400's AF is/should be better than both of those older Sonys in the video but it's still valuable to watch.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syBH6yB5h9M
 
NorBro said:
The Sony's history.

Amazing camera, but I needed a breath of fresh air and the X-T30 is it. I knew the eye-AF would eventually have me, and I would have waited for the camera if I could have, but I needed something for a week in the beginning of March and I did not want to rent because I still wasn't 100% sure what I was going to do (constant inner struggle with these AF cameras).

Both have really, really good AF as we know, and I urge you not to trust every YouTube review on the Fuji. Not everyone is using the lenses that are meant to be used with the camera. There are also various settings that not everyone has the time to go through.

I wish I had the ambition to shoot tests like other people and YouTubers do, but I really don't operate that way. I take them out and use them at events and jobs, and just review footage later. I see how they did during interviews (very important, especially with people wearing glasses), on a gimbal, low light, etc.

I talk to myself during the b-roll and let the camera know which settings I am using regarding speed or sensitivity or environment. And basically draw conclusions later like:

"Do not use anything more than +4 on interviews because the transitions will be too abrupt if the subject moves."
"Use multi-area when shooting on a gimbal."
"Use this # for tracking sensitivity when sniping b-roll as people walk through the frame because the box continues to detect original target."
[ETC]

You have to get to know your cameras if they offer you the ability to change them how they work.

However, I will say that the a6400 is probably the safer choice out of the two because it provides you less flexibility (not a number scale), it has really good object tracking (the T30 doesn't), and it will most likely work much better for way more lenses (even adapted ones).

Speaking of adapters...I don't know if the Fringer would work well with the Sigma, but my guess is the T30 may be picky. If you're buying the camera for AF, it's such a no-brainer to stay native. The camera literally is being sold with two of the best AF lenses Fujifilm offers (23mm and 35mm) only for an additional $100. You can always try the Sigma if you have it if you do go that route.

Color science: I really do like all cameras, but the Fujifilm was a nice change of pace here. F-log is working great for me, but I am really not the person to ask about 8-bit or macro-blocking or any other artifacts that will be unnoticeable by normal human beings.

Other notes:
- The T30 can have its screen adjusted to be brighter, but I'll have to get back to you about if I can see it outside in harsh daylight.
- I never use S-Log2 on Sony cameras and only S-Log3...but they are all good although sometimes I don't like how noisy S-Log can be. I think only you will know which one is "better".
- Some places out there say that the T30 comes with a charger, but it actually doesn't. You charge the camera via its cable, just like the Sony. (Chargers are sold separately.)

You truly can't go wrong with either one. They are really great cameras.

I don't have the Sony anymore, but happy to answer any specific questions about the X-T30 (or Sony if I remember, but can't physically check settings/options/features).
Click to expand...
Holy ****
 
ha...I never knew the forum automatically changes that word into 'poo poo'.

(Quote him to see what he actually wrote.)

The mouth on you!
 
So he's using the 18-55 lens (7:43 in the video).

For what it's worth, that lens has a 'linear AF motor' and it was released 7 years ago. The 56mm was released 5 years ago (the one I tested/mentioned above).

They are dinosaurs from a world that barely had video AF. Just not optimized (especially from Fujifilm) for the best video AF performance like other lenses. They may have received firmware updates that "helped", but the hardware is still the same.

___

PM me next week if you'd like, and I'll show you what AF looks like with the new 2019 16mm f/2.8 lens that has a 'stepping AF motor'.

I think you would be very pleased with the results.
 
Only because it's flatter which results in 'contrasty' LUTs working with it better when you're just "copying and pasting".
 
James0b57 said:
@NorBro, is there a reason you use Slog3 over 2?
Click to expand...

I found Sony SLog2 works similarly to Canon Log 3- the main difference is SLog2 has slightly higher blacks, otherwise the curves are nearly identical. These curves work well for 8-bit- no need for a LUT, just quick curves, contrast, black level, saturation and done (SGamut3.cine colorspace). SLog3 is like CLog2- a bit flat for 8-bit: can have noise, banding and blocking issues.

I’d need to test the Fuji to be more confident, given my Sony, Canon, and ARRI experience, I’d go with Sony over Fuji for skin tones, low light, lens options, and AF.

On the low end, nothing really motivating in terms of better color for skin and AF over the now ancient in camera years Canon 80D. In terms of ‘Alexa Like’ colors, haven’t seen anything match tweaked Canon color (e.g. Filmic Skin). Additionally, lots of info online with folks doing minor post work to match Canon to ARRI. Fuji can have nice skin tones, however it doesn’t tend to look like Canon or ARRI from most examples online.


This is the best Fuji skintones I have seen so far. I can understand why someone would say it looks better than the Canon. However the Canon looks more like ARRI.

Emulating ARRI color science in a single fixed LUT is of course impossible. When marketing products it’s best to be honest- “ here’s our best attempt to match ARRI color (or Canon or Kodak etc.)”. One of ARRI’s strengths is exposure invariant color. Emulation attempts that exhibit exposure variant color (e.g green/yellow shadows when overall WB is mostly correct) are exposing a significant issue with the effective combined color science (original camera + LUT or software process (e.g FilmConvert)).

Top image: original, bottom image: edited to look more like what I'd expect from an ARRI camera. Was not possible to get white white and skin tones to look right at the same time without using masking/secondaries.
FUJI_ARRI.jpg
 
Last edited:
JCS, your re-grade came out really good on my phone. That almost never happens.
 
As for the fuji vs canon video, it is kind of a wash. Even if Canon would be prefered, the fuji does 10bit. Not something that is easy to shot on youtube, but makes a big difference.
 
The R outputs 10-bit if it's required.

(Rumors are also suggesting a worthy FW update is coming.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top