>>3556471I noticed in your pic you pitted a Fuji lens against a mft lens with a 1 stop slower equiv aperture. Here's a pic with equivalent focal length AND aperture. The Fuji is $400 vs $700 for the mft.
>Incorrect, we already established and you admitted that MFT was only 38.65% smaller than APS-C.>saying the same thing a different way because it sounds better to bahbee earsFuji sensor has 141.7 additional square mm of surface area gathering light. That's why it's better at high ISO:
>>3555961>>APS-C has roughly 1 stop better high ISO. This was addressed earlier.>"roughly" meaning less than 1 stop, which we've already addressed is an imperceptible difference, Oh no, everyone who is not blind (i.e. not you) can see the difference:
>>3555961>>The Fuji X-T3 is arguably the best hybrid video camera out right now.>The XT3 is essentially useless for professional video with native lenses. Yet people are using it for professional video with native and non-native lenses. Amazing.
>>X-T3 AF is dramatically improved and on par with the competition.>This is objectively false and anyone who's EVER tested the XT2 We were talking about the X-T3. Improved AF was cited as one of the major changes.
>>No idea what you're talking about, Fuji weather sealing is decent.>It isn't. It's not even covered under warranty. No one covers water exposure under warranty.
>If not, go ahead and spray your WR lenses and Xt3 with a hose and see what happens! I'd love to see it!Didn't you admit to water ingress in your precious camera in another thread?
>They're also vastly overpriced Prices the lenses in pic.
>and generally no smaller then FF glass. See pic.
>Also, slow, noisy, obsolete AF motors.There are some slow, noisy Olympus lenses. Unlike you I don't extrapolate that to ALL of them.
