Quoted By:
I currently own an X-T4 with a 16-55mm 2.8 and the 18mm 1.4 prime. I'm really happy with the optical quality of the lenses but I hate the X-T4 ergonomics and autofocus performance.
I'm thinking of upgrading to an X-H2 for better ergonomics and AF performance (plus generally better sensor performance from what I've read) but I can't help shake the feeling that I'm still coping by not going FF. I hate poor low light performance; I mostly use my camera for family events indoors and I am constantly seething at having bad noise performance above 3200 ISO and slow shutter speeds with blurry movements, even when using my 1.4 lens wide open. I'm floored by the optical quality of the latest Sony lenses and from what I can see the noise performance wipes Fuji's butthole up to 10,000 ISO on the latest cameras. Size/weight is a negligible difference too since the 16-55mm 2.8 and the 24-70gm II are less than 100 grams different in terms of weight and the X-H2 is actually bigger than the A7RV kek. I also think S-Cinetone mogs Eterna and I also use my camera for home videos. Having a straight-out-og-camera profile that I like is necessary and it looks like the 4k/60 capabilities of the X-H2 and the A7RV are comparable. And to mention the obious: the AF performance on the A7RV is even better than it used to be and Sony was already the best.
I'm curious if anyone else has been in a situation like me. I could spend ~$7k, go full frame, get better performance, have essentially optically perfect lenses, and be perfectly happy and not miss my money. Or I could Only spend $2k, get all-around upgrades to everything that dissatisfies me about the X-T4, but then I'm afraid I'd still be seething and coping with the same issues just to a lesser extent. But I'd be too in the hole to then turn around and upgrade again. Suggestions?
