>>2899171I had the fujifilm X-e2, the problem is the lenses. You're aiming for the cheapest camera in the system, and therefore you're going to find that every lens you want is out of your reach financially, and you'll soon be unsatisfied with the camera. The quality of the lenses that are 35mm and longer are good, I'll give them that, but all the wides are either bank shatteringly expensive (until the 23 f/2.0 comes around, seriously that lens has been the huge gap in the lineup for years and they've only just got around to it) or absolutely shit (18mm is a big turd that only Ken Rockwell could praise), the kit zoom never really sharpens up, and the pro zoom is unsurprisingly expensive. The EVFs are the best part of the X series post first generation X-Pro1/X-E1, it makes no sense to miss out on that by getting the X-A2.
The canon m series seem surprisingly good, and will get even better. The 22mm f/2 is apparently amazing, I'd buy one just for that lens alone really, but I'm not sure I can recommend a camera without an EVF and with an immature set of lenses.
With the sony... well once again no EVF, you really should be picking cameras with an EVF, makes for a much better experience. Anyway, you'll be relying on Sigma's E-Mount primes and the one or two sony lenses that are simultaneously good and affordable. Good news is that you'll be getting the best video in the price range, and a good sensor, especially compared to the canon.
Also, digital zoom isn't a feature, it's just another word for cropping.
I can't make a decision for you, but there's some more facts mixed in with a lot of opinion. And I should say it again, *get a camera with an EVF!*
