Originally posted by howieb101 Well Zack Arias is paid for by Fujifilm so that is automatic bias on his part.
The watercolor effect is also well known and not made up by me. Have a Google search yourself. I am not making these things up.
Each to their own, I am only stating my own opinion.
By the way, I happen to own an X-E1. An old product now and I got it cheap, $300 Australian 2nd hand. Nice enough but certainly not making me think Fujifilm is fantastic and I'm still not convinced on X-trans.
So I have a personality that is about 180 degrees out from most of the mainstream population. Or to put it another way, people like me are maybe 10% of the population... So what I'm about to say some people will have a hard time processing.
You're right. I don't need a Google search. I had to see it for myself. And I did.
The key to understanding this is that I have found it is very much subject dependent. (Has nothing to do with Zack being paid by Fuji, has everything to do with the subject matter he shoots.) All the pros I mentioned don't shoot big landscapes with fine detail of foliage as an example. For that Fuji is pretty awful.
For weddings and portraits and street, no problem. For fine detail in landscapes, there are better choices...
I only discovered all this for myself in the past week or so. Remember, I have been using my Fuji's primarily for weddings, and my Pentax system for my landscape work. I have been thinking of transitioning over to Fuji for everything, but that aint gonna happen now.
You also said the EVF's let a lot of stray light in. That was diplomatic. they are almost unusable in bright sunlight and why I like the Xpro and X100 series with optical viewfinder options. Neither is even close to a DSLR in terms of outright usability though.
The AF is about as good as Pentax's.
So I apologize for saying you were wrong, when I was actually wrong.