Fujifilm X-T4 Vs. Sony A6600: Top APS-C Mirrorless Cameras Compared | Digital Trends

    That Fujifilm and Sony are actually direct opponents for flagship APS-C mirrorless cameras is a bit unusual.
    A number of years in the past, you picked Sony when you preferred high-tech devices with quick efficiency, and Fujifilm when you had been a extra conventional photographer who most popular a slower, methodical strategy to picture making however nonetheless wished high-quality outcomes. The firms focused totally different prospects, and their merchandise had been effective dwelling of their respective bubbles.
    This is now not the case. More than ever earlier than, Fujifilm’s new X-T4 takes Sony head-on, placing the highly effective A6600 to the take a look at. Both are glorious cameras, however the Fujifilm has a couple of benefits for knowledgeable fans, from a better shutter pace vary to higher-quality video. Sony’s autofocus stays unbeatable, nonetheless, and the A6600 is now promoting for fairly a bit lower than the X-T4, making it a fantastic purchase.
    Here’s what you want to know when you’re deciding between these two cameras — however reality be advised, you possibly can’t actually go flawed.
    At a look:
    Fujifilm X-T4
    26MP BSI X-Trans APS-C sensor
    3.69-million-dot digital viewfinder
    15 fps steady taking pictures
    4K/60 10-bit video
    600-shot battery life
    21.4 ounces

    Sony A6600
    24MP APS-C sensor
    2.36-million-dot digital viewfinder
    11 fps steady taking pictures
    4K/30 8-bit video
    810-shot battery life
    17.7 ounces

    Sensor and picture high quality
    Both of those cameras use APS-C sensors with a 1.5X crop issue in comparison with full-frame, and whereas the X-T4 has a slight edge in decision, no person goes to note these further 2 megapixels.
    That’s not say that these sensors are equal, nonetheless. The X-T4’s is of a more recent, backside-illuminated (BSI) design which will increase gentle sensitivity. It additionally encompasses a sooner readout pace which ends up in enhancements when utilizing the digital shutter (extra on that within the video part).
    Shot on Sony A6600 David Elrich / Digital TrendsMoreover, the X-T4 makes use of Fujifilm’s extra complicated X-Trans filter array, which may improve sharpness by foregoing an anti-aliasing filter with out the same old elevated threat of moiré (the rainbow-like false colours that may seem when photographing very effective patterns, like these in some materials). The A6600 makes use of a conventional Bayer array.
    However, don’t suppose the X-T4 is miles forward of the A6600. Despite the obvious technical benefits of its sensor, actual world benefits are fairly slim. It does a greater job of suppressing moiré than the Sony, however until you’re taking pictures take a look at charts, you might by no means discover it.
    High-ISO efficiency can be remarkably comparable, with the 2 cameras neck-and-neck by means of ISO 6,400. Past that, the Sony truly has a slight edge — though you’ll be straining your eyes to see the distinction in any real-world setting. The A6600 may also attain a 1-stop greater expanded ISO of 102,400 in comparison with the X-T4’s most of 51,200.  (Naturally, each fall behind full-frame sensors; when you shoot lots in low gentle, it’s best to think about taking a look at the perfect full-frame cameras).
    What this all boils all the way down to is that when you plan to shoot RAW, don’t count on an enormous distinction between these two sensors. For JPEG, nonetheless, the story is a bit more attention-grabbing. We’re followers of Fujifilm’s movie simulations (colour profiles by another title), and the X-T4 introduces a brand new one: Eterna Bleach Bypass. This creates a high-contrast, low-saturation look that offers photographs a moody vibe. It’s a cool new impact, even when you most likely received’t use it fairly often.
    Shot on Fujifilm X-T4 utilizing Eterna Bleach Bypass simulation Daven Mathies/Digital TrendsSony might not be identified for its in-camera JPEG colour fairly like Fujifilm is, however the A6600 does function up to date colour science and the outcomes are fairly good. At the top of the day, all of it comes down to non-public choice, so this can be a exhausting one to guage objectively.
    Shooting efficiency
    This is the place the X-T4 begins to distinguish itself as a higher-end digicam. Its shutter pace vary extends from a excessive of 1/8000 second to a low of 15 minutes. The A6600 can’t sustain at both finish, starting from 1/4000 to 30 seconds. (Bulb mode on each cameras can maintain the shutter open longer than these timed maximums). This offers the X-T4 an edge for each fast-moving topics (athletes, animals) and really slow-moving ones (like stars within the night time sky).
    The X-T4 additionally boasts a better burst price of 15 frames per second in comparison with the A6600’s 11 when utilizing the mechanical shutter. However, each cameras are restricted to “post view” at these speeds (which solely shows a picture after it’s been taken) and each must be diminished to 8 fps for true dwell view (which shows a real-time preview between exposures).
    The X-T4 may also shoot even sooner utilizing the digital shutter, at 20 fps for full-resolution recordsdata or 30 with a slight crop. There is not any viewfinder blackout in anyway on this mode.
    Each digicam options 425 phase-detection AF factors, however whereas the {hardware} is comparable, how data is analyzed and processed is totally different. We have repeatedly discovered that Sony’s Real-Time Tracking and Real-Time Eye AF applied sciences outperform the competitors, providing dependable, correct efficiency for each static and shifting topics.

    But the X-T4 is not any slouch. We discovered AF efficiency was typically snappy, though Fujifilm’s eye monitoring feels a bit extra finicky and inconsistent. In high-speed steady taking pictures conditions, we’d nonetheless take the Sony, however Fujifilm has completed a commendable job right here.
    Fujifilm X-T4The X-T4’s autofocus can be rated for lower-light situations, all the way down to a powerful -6 EV in comparison with simply -2 EV for the A6600. As all the time, although, the hole in real-world efficiency might not be that dramatic.
    This is the one key function that beforehand set Sony aside on this phase, however the X-T4 now matches — and maybe exceeds — Sony’s in-body picture stabilization (IBIS). (To be truthful, Fujifilm additionally had IBIS within the X-H1, however that higher-end digicam didn’t instantly compete with the A6000 sequence.)
    Both the A6600 and X-T4 use 5-axis sensor-shift stabilization that compensates for pitch, yaw, roll, and horizontal and vertical shift. On paper, the X-T4 gives as much as 6.5 stops of shake discount — that means you possibly can shoot a shutter pace 6.5 stops slower than with out stabilization — whereas the A6600 is rated for 5 stops. In the actual world, your outcomes might fluctuate, and efficiency is dependent upon the lens used.
    More than the specifics of efficiency, merely having IBIS is what units these cameras aside from a lot of the competitors. Stabilization isn’t only for low-light taking pictures if you want sluggish shutter speeds. It additionally helps you body your shot, particularly when utilizing telephoto lenses, by maintaining your preview picture rock-steady, and may even help autofocus efficiency by ensuring the main target level stays over your topic, quite than bouncing round due to your shaky fingers. It additionally gives enormous advantages for taking pictures handheld video.
    Sony has lengthy been a pacesetter in video, but it’s the Fujifilm that comes out forward right here.
    Just wanting on the fundamentals, the Sony A6600 tops out at 4K and 30 frames per second and a bitrate of 100 megabits per second, whereas the Fujifilm X-T4 can shoot 4K at 60 fps and 200Mbps. Slow the X-T4 all the way down to 30 fps (or 24), and the bitrate can double to 400Mbps.
    Beyond the upper bitrate, the X-T4 may also report 10-bit 4:2:0 colour internally or 10-bit 4:2:2 into an exterior HDMI recorder. The Sony is caught at 8-bit colour both means (see our 10-bit vs 8-bit explainer for why this issues).
    Sure, informal video shooters might not care concerning the distinction, however higher colour depth and a better bitrate give the X-T4 rather more flexibility in submit. For anybody with an curiosity in video enhancing and coloring, it’s a big benefit.
    Video can be the place the X-T4’s newer sensor comes into play. Because it reads pixels sooner, it causes much less rolling shutter distortion. Electronic shutters result in a phenomenon usually known as “jello cam,” the place vertical strains begin to look slanted or wavy if the digicam pans too rapidly (or, conversely, if the topic strikes too rapidly). The X-T4’s shorter readout time lessens this impact, though doesn’t erase it fully.
    There are a variety of subjective variations between how these cameras deal with. Photographers are likely to both love or hate Fujifilm’s retro management format, with its devoted bodily dials for ISO and shutter pace. Similarly, Sony’s menu system has been the goal of rage for a lot of (Fujifilm’s isn’t precisely good, both).
    Daven Mathies/Digital TrendsThe place the Sony clearly wins is on measurement and weight. It’s noticeably smaller and some ounces lighter, and with the digital viewfinder nested into the left nook as an alternative of sitting on high just like the Fujifilm’s, it might slip right into a smaller bag.
    However, the X-T4 seems, feels, and behaves very very like a conventional digicam (and it’s actually the prettier one). Its center-mounted EVF feels extra pure and is bigger and higher-resolution than the A6600’s. It additionally has a bit extra in the best way of direct-access management, and we admire the stable tactile suggestions of the dials. Being capable of see the place your publicity settings are set even when the digicam is off can be a pleasant contact.
    Both cameras function articulating displays that may flip 180-degrees into selfie or vlog mode. The Sony’s flips up, whereas the Fujifilm’s flips out to the facet.
    Battery life was a serious improve level in each the A6600 and the X-T4, as every digicam makes use of a higher-capacity battery than its predecessor. While the X-T4 almost doubled the X-T3’s battery life to 600 exposures, it nonetheless isn’t sufficient to catch the class-leading 810 photographs of the A6600. Real world efficiency might see numbers significantly better than this for each cameras, and each are ample for a full day of taking pictures for most individuals.
    The cameras additionally deal with media in another way. The X-T4 options twin UHS-II reminiscence card slots, the place the A6600 makes use of a sole UHS-I slot. While the need of a second card slot is debatable, it’s unusual for a contemporary digicam to not assist high-speed UHS-II reminiscence. This is probably going one purpose why the A6600 can’t shoot greater bitrates in video, and it additionally signifies that it’s going to take a very long time to jot down photos to the cardboard when taking pictures lengthy bursts. Although extra informal photographers are unlikely to note the distinction, that is undoubtedly one thing the X-T4 does higher.
    As an APS-C-only system, Fujifilm has a big assortment of lenses constructed particularly for the X-T4’s sensor measurement. This contains many compact, quick primes that assist the X sequence stand out from different APS-C programs.
    Sony makes tons of lenses, however its E-mount cameras span each APS-C and full-frame sensors. The drawback of that is that lots of the finest lenses are constructed for full body, and placing a full-frame lens on the A6600 means paying for further glass you’re not utilizing and ending up with a bulkier-than-needed system.
    Fujifilm XF 16mm F1.4 lens Daven Mathies/Digital TrendsHowever, this additionally creates a full-frame improve path, one thing that merely doesn’t exist on the Fujifilm facet. Sony A6600 homeowners can put money into good full-frame glass right this moment, and take it with them to a full-frame digicam down the highway.
    The reputation of Sony’s E-mount has additionally attracted third-party producers. Sigma, for instance, makes some nice lenses for Sony cameras that aren’t obtainable in Fujifilm X mount. (To be truthful, different producers, like Zeiss, provide lenses for each mounts.)
    Which is best for you?
    With little distinction in picture high quality and efficiency being so shut within the majority of conditions, selecting one in all these cameras comes down principally to your private preferences and funds. The Fujifilm X-T4 does appear to focus on a barely higher-end buyer than the A6600, with skilled specs like a 1/8000-second shutter pace, 15 fps burst taking pictures, 10-bit video, and twin high-speed card slots. It is a variety of digicam, and arguably essentially the most feature-complete mannequin beneath $2,000.
    But whereas these could also be make-or-break options for a couple of choose prospects, most individuals are going to work throughout the vary of efficiency that each cameras cowl equally. It is right here that the Sony’s easy autofocus, smaller bodily measurement, and considerably cheaper worth (a $500 distinction on the time of writing) make it look extra interesting.
    Subjectively, we predict the Fujifilm makes for a extra satisfying person expertise, however that is a type of issues that everybody has to guage for themselves.
    Bottom line
    Buy the Fujifilm X-T4 when you shoot a variety of video, desire a digicam with extra room to develop into, or just want its traditional styling and performance. Buy the Sony A6600 for the absolute best autofocus, or to avoid wasting cash to place towards a very good lens.
    And, once more, you possibly can’t go flawed with both one.

    Editors’ Recommendations

    Recent Articles

    Flying a Drone In a National Park? Read This First!

    When you concentrate on drones in nationwide parks, you could consider capturing stunning aerial photographs of a number of the most superb locations on...

    With fact-checks, Twitter takes on a new kind of task

    (Reuters) - In addition to disputing deceptive claims made by U.S. President Donald Trump about mail-in ballots this week, Twitter has added fact-checking labels...

    Related Stories

    Stay on op - Ge the daily news in your inbox