>>2881379I say this every time as well, and people haven't come up with many answers.
I guess what people really mean is that for a given focal length, Fuji doesn't offer much choice, and you're stuck with current-gen first party glass. I can see how maybe the system would be hard for somebody on a tight budget, because there's pretty much no third-party support (aside from Zeiss, whose lenses cost more than Fuji's and aren't any better) and you don't have the oceans of older used glass that you get with Nikon or Canon.
I think Sigma would be quite smart to adapt their APS-C glass to Fuji, and I'm really surprised they haven't. I can see X-T2 and X-Pro2 owners being a prime market for their 1.8 zooms, since they've already proven they're willing to invest FF money into an APS-C system.
>>2881381What system? It might be worth looking at Yongnuo or Godox for Canon or Nikon. If you're a Fujifag, though, the i40 is kind of the only game in town if you want a full-featured flash. (With High Speed Sync etc.)
>>2881393I looked at it a few weeks ago and wasn't impressed. Their APS-C lineup is particularly bad, it's just a whole bunch of normal zooms and a handful of slow and overpriced primes (their 24mm 1.8 costs substantially more than Fuji's 23 1.4. The FF E-mount lineup is a bit better, but it's also got a lot of slow and overpriced lenses ($800 35mm f/2.8 wtf), and you're into a size and price range that puts them into competition with FF DSLRs, not other mirrorless systems.
Of course, like I said above, that kind of changes when you factor in 3rd party glass. Sigma has been killing it lately and Sony gets access to much of their lineup, though some of the coolest stuff still needs an adapter. (Like the 1.8 zooms, which for some reason are A-mount and not E-mount, despite A-mount basically being dead when they came out.)
