fsociety

Haha. my thought exactly

I hadn't seen that video stills comparison tool before, very interesting to compare the video quality between cameras. The GX80/85 does seem to be quite soft compared to A6300 at 4K. The 6K to 4K oversampling of the A6300 does really produce some extremely detailed video. For me the GX80/85 is still sharp enough for my needs but if I was someone who makes a lot of architecture or landscape videos the A6300 is a very powerful tool. EDIT: I did some more research. The video still of the GX80/85 on the left was taken with the Olympus 45mm at f/5.6 and the video still of the A6300 on the right was taken with the Sony 55mm at f/5.6. I looked up the sharpness fieldmap of both those lenses on DXO at that aperture and there's definitely a difference in sharpness between these lenses at f/5.6. Could this explain the difference in sharpness in 4K from the video stills? Maybe, but I think the A6300 would still be a bit sharper is they both used the same lens (because of the 6K to 4K oversampling) but the difference wouldn't be as noticeable as the example above.

This camera stops recording after 10 minutes in 4K and 15 minutes in 1080p to prevent overheating? It seems this camera has the same weaknesses as the A6300: You can't use it for long continuous recordings and it will probably have the same bad rolling shutter if it does 6K to 4K oversampling (would surpise me if Fujifilm has improved RS where Sony couldn't). Although, even with those weaknesses it beats A6300 with much better ergonomics and lens selection. Wasn't the introduction price of the X-T1 $1299? $1599 seems a bit too pricey imo just like the A6300 which was also overpriced compared to A6000. GX80/85 seems to offer a lot more bang for the buck if you ask me.