Quoted By:
>tfw so used to OVFs that you ignore colour casts
I thought I'd write a little about my experience shooting cars with a X-T10. I had the 56, 18-55, and XC 50-230 with me.
Let's start with the big one: the EVF. The EVF is fine to look through, although it's very contrasty, and it's hard to tell if you're going to blow the highlights or clip the shadows because of that. I found that somewhat annoying. Also, I fell for the Fuji JPG meme, so I didn't shoot RAW (also I hate uncompressed RAWs). Panning is not easy with an EVF; the blackout time is long, and very sudden. I've not shot with the A6300's fade to black, but I can say that it's hard to pan subjects at sub 1/100 speeds with the X-T10. Continuous shooting is better since the screen updates in a stuttering fashion. It'd be hard to track erratic motion, but cars move rather predictably.
Autofocus is a different beast with the Fujis. With the mode in AF-C, the Fujis continuously do a contrast detect step. If you have a static subject, it will fade in and out of focus as it re-confirms focus. This is really annoying when panning at a fixed distance. I found myself using focus traps for panning, and AF-S for head-on shots. The camera performs really well in AF-S shots actually, I had a really good keeper rate for that. AF-C seemed less dependable. Just mash the shutter when the car gets to the right place, and the camera should be able to do the rest. All that being said, I don't believe the X-T10/T1/E2 can really compete against traditional PDAF. Also note that PDAF points are located very centrally, probably about the same size as a FX camera's autofocus point cluster. CDAF isn't slow at least, although subject to all the trappings that CDAF is associated with.
