>>3137600I shoot both too
>iqStop and a half better dr is hardly slightly. And low light noise is over a stop better on the sony
>sharpness is all about the lensNope. No lens, not even the otus range, outresolve a modern sensor, yes the lens is the limiting factor, but there's a more important factor, image circle. As the crop sensor is less than half the size of ff, the lens needs to be able to render more than twice as much detail to be comparable when you view the images at normal size. Even at 100% crop fuji will look worse due to it's much smaller pixel pitch. You can't escape physics.
>sony lenses cost too muchBe less poor, they also represent better value for money, my 55mm sells for more 2nd hand than when I bought it at launch, as x mount is dying, so are your lens resale prices.
>you can't say x mount is dyingI'm pretty sure their roadmap agrees with me ;)
>>3137612Lol, check out the bs.
A6300 no longer overheats, fixed within 3 months of launch.
A7ii has no issues with overheating, freezing, error messages and never has. It has the same af performance as the a6500 and a7rii with non native glass.
A9 fixed it's overheating issues within one week of launch, and what's not working about over 200 raw images cleared in 30 seconds?
>>3137619>buying f1.4 fuji lenses to only be able to use them at f4 or slower.This is why you're called cucks.
>>3137623So on a stop worse sensor, with a stop slower lens, you need to stop down at least twice to start getting into the same ballpark as sony. That's a 4 stop difference, you ever compare iso 400 to iso 6400, hardly a fair comparison, but fuji do apply a SHITTON of nr to it's raws because they can't trust their users.
>>3137626Every sony ff lens is pant shittingly sharp wide open, the 35 1.4 is insane.
>>3137627So it was a one off isolated issue that Sony resolved, nice.
>>3137628>>3137632But every sony lens is spot on, we use the 56 as it's the most revered, the fuji 90 sucks next to sonys 90.
