X-T4 versus X-T3
Fujifilm says the X-T4 is intended as a sister model to the X-T3 rather than a direct replacement, but there are enough differences between the two that some users might wish to upgrade. And there may be people looking at the X series afresh, wanting to know which is the better choice.
The more I`ve used the X-T4, the more I believe some stills-only photographers will appreciate it
Initially I wrote that the majority of benefits would be experienced by video shooters but the more I`ve used it, the more I believe some stills-only photographers will appreciate the newer model.
But, of course, the X-T3 has been on the market long enough that its price has dropped, so anyone looking to buy for the first time might be tempted to save a fair chunk of money by going for the unstabilized camera. So what are the differences that matter?
Stabilization
Image stabilization will be the decisive factor for some photographers, but not all. Given Fujifilm`s lens lineup is primarily built around stabilized zooms and fast primes (the same approach that`s worked well for Nikon and Canon`s DSLR systems), many photographers are likely to conclude they don`t need a stabilized camera body.
Some kinds of photography, such as macro work, could benefit from it but for many stills shooters it`s likely to be a feature that`s nice to have, but not necessarily essential.
For many stills shooters IS is likely to be a feature that`s nice to have, but not necessarily essential
Stabilization is probably a feature that offers the most benefit to videographers. Unlike lens IS, in-body IS can correct for camera roll, and in our experience so far, it`s sufficiently effective to allow the X-T4 to be used without a tripod or gimbal. This pairs nicely with the excellent video spec shared by both cameras.
For really ambitious video work, the X-T3 mounted on a gimbal is arguably the more powerful combination (especially now Fujifilm has added the abi ...
|
