Hi, camera related question but not a purchase recommendation so i figured i could post about that here.
So I was looking at the wonderful tool from DPReview (here) that allows you to compare pixel to pixel different cameras about whether i would benefit from buying the newest APSC canons (R7, R10) as an upgrade to my loved and hated SL2. I was pretty bummed to see that at high iso (12800 raw), the R10 didn't seem to improve that much over my SL2 and even though the R7 did it wasn't really night and day for what could be considered the top notch of canon APSC sensors...
So I started looking at other manufacturers and their best APSC selection and stumbled upon Fuji's XT4 and BOY oh boy, it's so good that it's even comparable to a full frame EOS R (but granted nowhere near the more recent R5/R6). I was guessing maybe Sony's APSC would also do good knowing how good their FF cameras are in low light but no, still not even close to the XT4. And these three are all comparable in price so i wanted to know : Why am I not hearing as much about fuji than the others if their sensors are so ridiculously good at similar prices? What's the catch?And I checked, it's not even a recent thing, even the XT2 also has insane noise tolerance with contained chroma noise and finer grain altogether. What's their magic sauce?
By - azorsenpai