>>4186851i was going to buy a deeply discounted x-h2 originally, but went with the a7riii based on cost and features. it's an older camera, but the autofocus tracking is a bit faster and more accurate (especially if you use zone instead of wide), and more importantly for small animals like tiny dogs and birds, cropped images are a bit cleaner. fuji files always look like they have an AA filter (xtrans), and average lenses on such a tightly packed sensor like that aren't helping. sony a7r cameras have no AA filters and neither do the z8 and z9, so you get more moire on fabric or even some dense hair but sharper pixel peeping (crops) and imho nikon and sony have an easier time making lenses that keep up with their sensors. autofocus or no autofocus i think this is the most important feature for photographing distant subjects. you can never get enough reach and xtrans just gets in the way of that.
if i wasn't a shut in and actually shot portraits for people i'd go for the fuji for moire reduction and the softness and colors being more flattering and less realistic on people, but since i just take pictures of my pets and random shit on walks i like sony and would buy a z7ii/z8 if i liked wasting money.
>>4187560the a6100 does not have picture profiles, only creative styles which are more limited. picture profiles give you way more control over the jpeg result (RGBCMY hue shifts, global hue shift, in camera sharpening/softening, gamma, black gamma, knee, saturation, etc) to set it and forget it. it also doesn't have ibis. buy the xs10 unless you can buy an a6600. even on this much newer camera, its not capable of producing half decent sooc jpegs without a tweaked picture profile.
>>4187574post a photo of your camera and then a photo you took with it. it doesn't have to be good, just any photo, even a terrible one. do it. i'll go first.