The Fujifilm X-T5 is better—at least slightly—than the X-T4 in a many ways, but not every way. Perhaps you have an X-T4 and are considering upgrading to the latest iteration, or maybe you cannot decide between the X-T4 or X-T5—this article will point out some reasons why you might consider the X-T4 over the new model. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that the X-T4 is better, only that in some ways it is indeed better; however, overall, the X-T5 is, in my opinion, the superior camera, but only by a small margin (I’ll have a full review of the new camera soon, so keep an eye out for that). Below are five ways the Fujifilm X-T4 is actually better than the X-T5.
1. Heat Dispersion
There are a few true workhorses in the Fujifilm lineup. These cameras just go and go and go. They’re eager to work and don’t need a break. The X-H1 is probably the best. The X-T4 is not far behind.
I don’t usually have heat issues with Fujifilm cameras in my day-to-day photography, but when I do the monthly SOOC broadcast, I need a camera that will run 4K video for several hours. My X-H1 will do it. The X-T4 will do it, too. But, I found out that the X-T5 will only last for about 45 minutes before overheating. Interestingly enough, I accidentally forgot to turn off the X-T4, and it kept running for 24 hours straight, no overheating! Before you scoff, the camera was plugged into the wall with a faux battery power cord and it was tethered to my computer, so it is, in fact, possible for the camera to run 4K for hours and hours and hours, just so long as it doesn’t power down due to overheating.
After I discovered the X-T4 had been inadvertently running for a whole day, I powered it off and let it rest for 15 minutes, then I used it for a three-and-a-half hour broadcast. It worked like a champ! The X-T5 overheats much too quickly to even be considered for this use. If you will be video broadcasting or recording long clips, the X-T4 is the clear winner. The almost-five-year-old X-H1 is better than the X-T5 in this regard, too. I’m not surprised, because Fujifilm stuffed a high-resolution sensor and quick processor into a small body, and the consequence of that is heat, and there’s just not enough heat dispersion. For most people, this is no big deal at all, but for those videographers who need to record extended-length clips, the X-T5 should be avoided, and the X-T4 is a much better option.
2. Rear Screen
I like the X-T5’s three-way tilt screen better than the flippy screen on the X-T4, but not everyone agrees with me on that. For some, the X-T4’s screen is superior. You can do a lot more with it, and being able to see yourself while recording video of yourself is big plus for some. Personally, what I like best about the X-T4’s screen is that you can close it backwards, and it is sort of like shooting with an X-Pro3 (kinda, but not really)—no other X-T series camera can do that, only the X-T4. You might actually prefer the X-T4’s rear screen over the X-T5. Different strokes for different folks, right?
3. Vertical Battery Grip
I’ve never used a vertical battery grip on any camera ever, but some do use it, either for the extra battery power, the extra grip, or both. Every single camera in this series—including the X-T1—has had an optional vertical battery grip accessory for those who want one, except for the X-T5. In this way, the X-T5 is more like the X-T00 series, and it cheapens the line (not in cost, but in perceived quality). Most people don’t use the vertical battery grip, so for the majority this is no big deal whatsoever, but for some this is a dealbreaker.
4. Body Size
A lot of people (myself included) have applauded the smaller size of the X-T5, but some prefer the bigger X-T4 body. Those with big hands might prefer the grip on the X-T4, and those who frequently shoot with large, heavy lenses might prefer using them attached to the bulkier frame. For me, just doing some testing in preparation for the upcoming X-T5 review, the larger X-T4 body felt better when using the Fujinon 100-400mm lens than the smaller X-T5, but that was simply my experience and my preference. I would suggest that the shooting experience of the X-T4 might be slightly superior if you do use large lenses a lot, but it is a personal preference.
More is more, right? 40 is better than 26, right? If you crop deeply, print poster, or enjoy pixel-peeping, the higher resolution sensor of the X-T5 is probably for you. Otherwise, the X-T4 has more resolution than most people typically use or need. The disadvantage of more resolution is that it takes up more digital storage space (on your SD cards, phone, computer, external hard drive, and cloud storage), and it can take longer to process or upload files—an extra second here and there doesn’t seem like much, but if you add it up over ten thousand pictures (the course of a year for me), you’re talking about hours that the higher resolution sensor cost you. Sometimes less is more. Personally, I prefer the 26-megapixel resolution of the X-T4 over the X-T5’s 40-megapixels; some of you might even prefer the X-T1’s 16-megapixels.
But, but, but… the X-T5 has the new super-quick autofocus, that finally brings it up to par with Canikony! That alone makes it worthwhile, right? Outside of dim-light situations, I found the X-T1’s eight-year-old autofocus to be plenty quick for me, including for sports and wildlife photography. The X-T4’s autofocus, which is even better, is more than good enough for almost everyone.
It’s not the gear that’s incapable. People have been capturing amazing photographs for 150+ years, and whether for stills or motion pictures, the focus capability of the gear has never stood in the way. People have done so much more with so much less for so many decades. If you looked at photography forums and such lately, you’d wonder how anyone ever managed to capture an in-focus picture prior to the Sony A7 III. We must have imagined it all, because it’s just not possible without the quickest autofocus—and if you don’t have the quickest, you got nothing. That’s how it seems. The focus inability of camera gear is a very recent phenomena. With that said, if a camera offers a tool that makes photography a little easier for you, that’s a good thing. Certainly autofocus in general, and the gradual improvements in autofocus capabilities over the years, have opened up photography for people who don’t have the skill or experience or desire to get the shot otherwise—that’s not a dig, by the way, as I believe opening up photography to those who the door would otherwise be closed to is important. Film Simulation Recipes do that for those who don’t have the skill, time, desire, or access to computer/software to edit RAW files—for me, that’s time and desire; for you, it might be something else—and it has become an important tool for the visually impaired. So, yeah—bravo to better autofocus! But, if you do find the focus capabilities lacking on whatever gear you are using, know that you do have it within you to overcome that issue, and it doesn’t involve buying new gear.
Back to the cameras in question…. In AF-S, I didn’t hardly notice any difference between the X-T4 and the X-T5 (or even the X-T1 and X-T5 in normal light). I think the visual confirmation of focus is a hair quicker, but the actual focus isn’t (I hope that makes sense). The X-T5 recognizes faces a little further away, if that matters. In AF-C, I do think the X-T5 is just a tad better at finding and correctly focusing on the intended subject, but it’s not a night-and-day difference, only a small improvement (but an improvement nonetheless). Where I believe the X-T5 is indeed superior to the X-T4 with regard to autofocus is continuous subject-tracking. The X-T5 can recognize more various subjects to track (not just human face/eye), and does a better job of tracking. So if you do use continuous subject-tracking autofocus, you’ll find the X-T5 to be better than the X-T4; if you don’t, you’ll find the X-T5’s autofocus to be only marginally improved.
This post contains affiliate links, and if you make a purchase using my links I’ll be compensated a small amount for it.