>>2875719Continued from
>>2876090>ergonomicsSubjective, I guess, and it depends on whether you're talking about the overall feel of the camera in the hand or what it's like to interact with the camera.
Sony's body is probably nicer to hold, given its grip. Fuji's controls, though, are much better, at least in my opinion, as they offer physical switches for many of the things that are in menus on the Sony. I also felt, when comparing the two bodies, that the feel of the dials, buttons, etc were much better on the Fuji, but I know that's kind of splitting hairs.
>Oh and the fuji is around £150 more expensive at the moment.That's UK specific I guess. Both bodies are exactly the same price from the same retailers in the US right now. It's worth pointing out that you'll spend substantially more on a comparable Sony system too, at least if you go with first party lenses.
I won't deny that the XP2 is kind of crazy expensive for a crop camera, but it's also not unjustified. There's a lot of complexity and technology in it, and a lot of parts that involve expensive machining processes etc. (The knurling on the dials, for example, isn't cheap.) I'd guess that the hybrid viewfinder alone makes up the cost difference in the sensors.
I don't think anybody can claim that the Fuji wins on paper, so I don't disagree with that website. Where it's ahead, at least for me, is in the actual experience of owning and using the camera. It's a joy to shoot with, and the files it returns are gorgeous. I've used a lot of cameras over the years, including modern Sony bodies, and I can publish Fuji files in a fraction of the time because they're so close to perfect right out of the gate. For somebody who's not working for publication and enjoys massaging files, that's not a benefit, but for me it's been a real game-changer.
