I’m planning a few trips this summer and want to pick up a good landscape camera for hiking in national parks and forests. My main subjects would be rivers, lakes, mountains, rock formations, and canyons. This is more of an occasional hobby than something I’ll do every weekend, but I’d still like to buy something that will last me a while instead of feeling the need to upgrade again in a couple of years.

I’ve been researching a lot of options, and Fuji keeps standing out because of the balance between body prices, Fuji lenses, and third-party lens support. I’ve also read that Fuji bodies can use older Canon lenses with an adapter, which could potentially save some money if that works well in practice.

I’m also considering the Sony a6700, but I’m still leaning heavily toward Fuji overall. My ideal budget is around $2,000 or less including a lens.

Right now I’ve mainly been looking at the X-E3, X-T3, X-T30, X-T50, and possibly stretching to the X-T5 if it’s really worth it long term.

For lenses, I’ve mainly been considering the Fuji 16-50 f/2.8, Sigma 18-50 f/2.8, Tamron 17-70 f/2.8, and some of the 18-300 style zooms.

Would appreciate any advice or experiences with these setups. Thanks!

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Ackks,

I have a Fuji X100V. The camera has the capability to use “recipes.” It takes excellent pictures. Personally, any Fuji that can use Recipe’s would be part of the decision.

I am on the verge of pulling the trigger on the Fuji XE-5. Looking at the Sigma lens as well, only thing that is giving me pause is the Fuji lenses have aperture ring on the lens body and the Sigma aperture has to be set via the camera body. XT-5 is just a bit bigger to me....

I should say, I have a Canon 6D MkII, with 24-70 2.8L, 70-200 2.8 L, 300/4 L and a 35-350 L. All of that is way to much to lug around any more. I want to start shooting more, so the Fuji is very appealing.

quote:

Originally posted by PghPI:
I am on the verge of pulling the trigger on the Fuji XE-5. Looking at the Sigma lens as well, only thing that is giving me pause is the Fuji lenses have aperture ring on the lens body and the Sigma aperture has to be set via the camera body. XT-5 is just a bit bigger to me....

I should say, I have a Canon 6D MkII, with 24-70 2.8L, 70-200 2.8 L, 300/4 L and a 35-350 L. All of that is way to much to lug around any more. I want to start shooting more, so the Fuji is very appealing.

Yeah, that Sigma issue isn't ideal. I like the size of the T50, but it's not sealed like the T5. Another issue is I'll be shooting in a lot of shadows in high-contrast environments with mountains and rock formations, and someone told me I should be concerned about the 40 mp causing noise because of high pixel density. A bit over my head as to why, but that may throw a wrench into things.

quote:

Originally posted by Ackks:

quote:

Originally posted by PghPI:
I am on the verge of pulling the trigger on the Fuji XE-5. Looking at the Sigma lens as well, only thing that is giving me pause is the Fuji lenses have aperture ring on the lens body and the Sigma aperture has to be set via the camera body. XT-5 is just a bit bigger to me....

I should say, I have a Canon 6D MkII, with 24-70 2.8L, 70-200 2.8 L, 300/4 L and a 35-350 L. All of that is way to much to lug around any more. I want to start shooting more, so the Fuji is very appealing.

Yeah, that Sigma issue isn't ideal. I like the size of the T50, but it's not sealed like the T5. Another issue is I'll be shooting in a lot of shadows in high-contrast environments with mountains and rock formations, and someone told me I should be concerned about the 40 mp causing noise because of high pixel density. A bit over my head as to why, but that may throw a wrench into things.

I would think that might be handled in Lightroom or Photoshop since you can do RAW and JPEG both. Not quite point and shoot if you need to do it that way but RAW should let you save most contrasty images. At least I hope so .

quote:

I would think that might be handled in Lightroom or Photoshop since you can do RAW and JPEG both. Not quite point and shoot if you need to do it that way but RAW should let you save most contrasty images. At least I hope so . Smile

Yeah, that's where they said the issues would show up. It doesn't make sense to me, but I'm a beginner.

Like others have said, Fuji products are impressive. I have an X100F that still takes phenom photos. I don't know if the fixed lens is what you are looking for, but the XT5 would be a fantastic option.

I'd also say this, if you are looking for an artistic outlet, get an Olympus OM-1 or Canon AE-1 and use film. I found myself taking hundreds of photos when I'd travel. Last trip, I took 6 rolls of film. Really slowed down and planned things out. Used the phone for quick snapshots.

quote:

Originally posted by Cous2492:
Like others have said, Fuji products are impressive. I have an X100F that still takes phenom photos. I don't know if the fixed lens is what you are looking for, but the XT5 would be a fantastic option.

I'd also say this, if you are looking for an artistic outlet, get an Olympus OM-1 or Canon AE-1 and use film. I found myself taking hundreds of photos when I'd travel. Last trip, I took 6 rolls of film. Really slowed down and planned things out. Used the phone for quick snapshots.

Thank you for the suggestions. Wow, it's been years since I've used film. That had to be a lot of fun!

quote:

Originally posted by Ackks:

quote:

Originally posted by Cous2492:
Like others have said, Fuji products are impressive. I have an X100F that still takes phenom photos. I don't know if the fixed lens is what you are looking for, but the XT5 would be a fantastic option.

I'd also say this, if you are looking for an artistic outlet, get an Olympus OM-1 or Canon AE-1 and use film. I found myself taking hundreds of photos when I'd travel. Last trip, I took 6 rolls of film. Really slowed down and planned things out. Used the phone for quick snapshots.

Thank you for the suggestions. Wow, it's been years since I've used film. That had to be a lot of fun!

It was! Film is making a big comeback. There is something about the image quality (or lack thereof) that is very pleasing to the eye. I think it's the same with vinyl records, tube amps, carburators, and sourdough. Things are "better" now, but "better" can feel very sterile. Modern digital technology takes a lot out of the hands and eyes of the photographer. I still primarily shoot with my D850 or X100f, but when I want to be a 'photographer," I'll grab my Minolta Autocord TLR, Zeiss Ikon Contessa, or my Olympus OM-1. I slow down. I take in my scene, looking for the right framing because there is no cropping. I decide if I want to expose for the shadows, or keep them dark and contrasty. I can't rely on VR or IBIS. Steady. Easy on the shutter button. Sometimes I blow it completely and there is that feeling of the shot that got away... Which makes you learn from your mistakes, not just find new software or editing tricks to fix it.

How important is it for a camera to be sealed? Outside of dropping it in the ocean or using it in the rain will I have a problem? I'd like to take pictures of the sun coming up on a beach or a waterfall where I'm not being sprayed, but nothing crazy. The X-T50 is much lighter to carry than the X-T5.

No experience with Fuji gear, long time Canon user here with landscape and wildlife being my preferred subjects.

Looks like all the cameras you mentioned are APS-C or “crop” bodies. Smaller sensor compared to a full frame camera with a 35mm film sized sensor. Not bad in and of itself, but need to be aware of the “effective focal length” of any lens used on a crop body, for Fuji it is about 1.5x.

The lenses you list would be effective FL of 24mm at the widest with a 16mm lens. In my opinion, not quite into true “landscape” range 12-16mm (effective)

I’m a big fan of Sigma lenses and I would suggest their 10-18mm lens over the 18-50mm if only getting one. It’s about $80 more than the 18-50mm but gives you a much wider FOV for landscape shots. Also happens to be on sale at BH Photo for $50 off right now. Similar design and construction, I have both the 10-18mm and 18-50mm Sigma lenses for my Canon APS-C bodies and love them.

Sigma also makes a 16-300mm lens which I also have. I think it has a slight edge over the Tamron 18-300mm in build quality as well as the extra 2mm on the wide end. It may not sound like much, but an extra 2 or 3mm of wide angle is a big improvent in angle of view.

quote:

Originally posted by Ackks:
How important is it for a camera to be sealed? Outside of dropping it in the ocean or using it in the rain will I have a problem? I'd like to take pictures of the sun coming up on a beach or a waterfall where I'm not being sprayed, but nothing crazy. The X-T50 is much lighter to carry than the X-T5.

For occasional, travel use I wouldn’t worry about weather sealing too much. If a camera I was otherwise interested in had it, I’d consider it a bonus but it’s never been a criteria for me in choosing a camera.

There are camera “ponchos” available to give protection while outdoors and any camera should be ok with light spray or a few drizzles. If caught in unexpected rain with no overhead cover, my gear just goes in the bag. Not likely to be missing any shots in such weather anyway. I always carry a terry cloth towel in my bag to wipe down if needed, even with “sealed” cameras and lenses.

quote:

Originally posted by Ackks:
…Another issue is I'll be shooting in a lot of shadows in high-contrast environments with mountains and rock formations, and someone told me I should be concerned about the 40 mp causing noise because of high pixel density. A bit over my head as to why, but that may throw a wrench into things.

Here is a real basic primer on Pixel Count, Pixel Density, and “noise”…

40mp on a crop body is a LOT! To get that count, the pixels have to be much smaller and crammed closer together creating a higher pixel density.

The smaller the pixel in physical size, the less sensitive it is to light.

In film days “ISO” was a rating of the film’s sensitivity to light. In digital the term ISO is used, but when you set the ISO value you are really setting a “pre-charge” to the pixels so the actual light coming in is added in to get enough light for an exposure.

The lower the light or the lower the pixel sensitivity to light, the more “pre-charge” (higher “ISO”) setting needed. Driving the pixels with electricity to pre-charge them introduces noise or “static” (for lack of a better term) and the higher the ISO, or the smaller the pixels, the greater effect it has.



This is why larger sensor cameras or sensors with fewer but larger pixels generally have better low light performance and less noise. A bigger full frame sensor with fewer pixels allows room for BIGGER pixels.

Example, the Canon EOS R6 (Mark I) full frame camera was released and only had 20mp. A very “low” MP count for a FF camera. However it quickly became the “must have” camera for a lot of professionals due to previously unheard of low light/high ISO noise-free performance from those big beautiful pixels.

Everything is a trade off.


This shot taken with FF R6 Mark II (24mp) with 14-35mm lens at 19mm (low res reduced size, click on pic to see detail)



Kilimanjaro by Wayne Wilson, on Flickr

This message has been edited. Last edited by: 911Boss,

If you are open to Canon, I have been very happy with my R7 and R10 crop bodies.

The R7 is Canon’s top end 32.5mp crop body with pro level autofocus and all the bells and whistles (including some weather sealing). New with the Canon 18-150mm lens it runs about $2000.

The R10 is what I consider Canon’s top “consumer” crop body. It is physically a touch smaller than the R7 has a 24mp sensor, dedicated wheels for aperture/shutter settings, pop up flash, etc. New with the Canon 18-150mm lens it runs about $1500.

Both models have the expected “manual” controls and buttons for setting exposure and selecting features without having to resort to touch screen menus to make adjustments. Much faster and easier to use in my opinion.

I bought the R10 as a “daily carry” when I want a lightweight kit without a high dollar value risk in case of theft/damage compared to my other gear.


A neat feature of the R7 and R10 is “Panorama” mode similar to a phone where you can pan the camera during exposure for wider shots. This helps to compensate for lens that might not be wide enough to get everything in.



Both of these are regularly available direct from Canon USA as refurbs for about $500 less than new prices. No worries with Canon refurb, gear is spotless and carries same 1 year warranty as new.

They frequently have refurb sales with crazy low prices. As an example, I bought the R10 with kit 18-45mm lens. New, it is a $1200 combo. “Regular” refurb price on it is about $900, I snatched it on a refurb sale for $650.


Quick check of comparison reviews rates the R10 as equal or a slight edge over most the Fuji models you listed until you get to the T50 and T5
Overall it looks like the R10 might be slightly “chunkier” in front to back depth, but it is still pretty compact for an interchangeable lens camera and the added depth is the grip area. I have small hands and it is plenty comfortable.

For comparison on size, here are some side by side pics of the R10 and the X-T3…

Birdseye view with Sigma 10-18mm lens:

https://camerasize.com/compact...0.1119,889.1168,ha,t

Front view:

https://camerasize.com/compact...0.1119,889.1168,ha,f

Back view:

https://camerasize.com/compact...0.1119,889.1168,ha,b

Side view:

https://camerasize.com/compact...0.1119,889.1168,ha,l


You mentioned one plus for the Fuji is using older Canon lenses with an adapter. The current Canon bodies also have an adapter for older Canon lenses with 100% compatibility. I don’t know about Fuji, but sometimes adapting one brand to another you may not have full compatibility with auto focus or auto aperture. Compatibility might even vary between lens models in some cases. Something to keep in mind if planning on combining brands.

I'm a bit of a gear addict, but my experiences may be of assistance. I own an X-E3, and out of the Fujifilm cameras I've owned and sold (X-T3, X-T4, X-H1), the E3 has stuck around because it's the most useful as a small "grab and go" camera. If you can find one used for a good price, then I'd recommend picking up one with the XF27mm (version 1 or 2 are both fine) for a travel package. At 41mm equivalent, you'll probably need to add a wider prime to suit your needs as well, but the XF27 is a good default for most things. Here are the others we have on the shelf if you have any comparison questions:
Canon R5
Canon R8
Sony A7R5
Sony A7C
Leica D-lux 8
Leica Q2
Leica M11P

Facts.

The Nikon Z lens mount is the most adaptable lens mount in existence. See a nice Sony lens that looks perfect, purchase a 100 dollar Viltrox electronic adapter and that Sony Mount lens will function perfectly.

Nikon has ASP-C cameras and the Z50II that was released about 1 years ago offers Autofocusing with the latest features and 20.9 mp of resolution. BTW I have 45.7, 24.5, and 20.9 mp cameras and they are all capable of making wonderful 3 x 4.5 feet Prints. The plain truth is that the only thing that more than 25mp offers is the ability to crop down to 1/3 of the frame. Compose your images well and there is no benefit to higher resolution cameras. BTW the Fuji AF is years behind Canon, Sony, and Nikon.

That super adaptable Z mount also features the shortest distance from lens to sensor with the largest opening and as a result offers the greatest amount of freedom for lens designs that any other mount. As a result every single ASP-C lens that Nikon makes has amazing Image Quality.

Finally there is the matter of prices. You can get a 2 lens Kit with the Z50II that covers lens perspectives from 24mm to 375mm for just 1400 dollars. In addition the 16-50mm "kit" Zoom is tiny and very light. BTW, I have done a direct comparison of this lens to the Nikon 24-120mm Full frame zoom and the two lenses match in terms of Image Quality. The downside is that the two "Kit" lenses are "slow" with F3.5-6.3 or f4.5-6.3 variable apertures. So you may need to run your ISO a bit high. NOT a problem, at ISO 800 this camera is very clean in terms of noise and I have taken pics at ISO 52,800 that cleaned up well using DXO DeepPrime 3.

Finally there is the matter of lenses available for the Z50II. If you have a "need for Speed" Nikon offers a 16-50mm f2.8 VR lens that is fantastic and light at just 330 grams. There are also Optically Stabilized lens from Sony, Sigma, and Tamron in the Sony mount that will function perfectly on the Z50II. I happen to keep a Sony Mount Tamron 17-70mm f2.8 DI III-A VC RXD lens on my Z50II as a general use lens with a 25.5-105mm equivalent zoom. Note, it's much heavier than that 16-50 f2.8 at 1.2 lbs but that is the price you pay for f 2.8 speed combined with a wide range zoom.

Final note. The Z50II does NOT have In Body Image Stabilization or IBIS. Which is why all of the Nikon Zooms with focal lengths that extend to 50mm or more feature Nikon's VR (optical Stabilization).

Fuji does offer some cameras that do have IBIS. Downside for Fuji is their lenses do run a bit "pricey" and the less capable Auto Focus. In addition to Nikon you really do need to look into Canon and Sony ASP-C cameras because both makers offer fantastic auto focus.

Refurb R10 with 18-45mm lens in stock and on sale $649…

https://www.usa.canon.com/shop...-6-3-is-stm-lens-kit

Great information. Thank you 911Boss, Scooter123, and teombe!

And great picture, 911Boss! Wow!!