Facebook Twitter Google+ YouTube Flickr 500px
See My Reviews


Dustin Abbott

July 5th, 2019

The Fuji X-T30 is Fujifilm’s fourth generation “bargain” mirrorless camera.  It has inherited a lot of trickle-down goodness from the X-T3 that I reviewed last year, including an improved sensor, better autofocus, 4K video, and more.  It has a lot packed into the compact little body that’s nearly 30% lighter than the X-T3.  This may be a very tempting option for photographers looking for a compact mirrorless camera packed with great features, as while Fuji has chosen to create market separation between the X-T30 and the more-premium X-T3, they’ve done so in what I consider to be a mostly fair fashion.  If you need more serious buffer depth for sports work, or value a higher resolution viewfinder along with a few more physical controls, the X-T3 might the camera for you.  But if your shooting style doesn’t desperately need deep buffers and you prefer a cheaper, smaller, and lighter camera body, then read on, as the Fujifilm X-T30 may just be the camera for you.

Follow Me @  Patreon  |  My Newsletter |  Instagram | Facebook | Twitter | Flickr | 500px

Prefer to watch your reviews?  Check out my full video review with a lot of visual support of my conclusions:

First of all, a few arguments for and against APS-C. After spending an extended period of time with the X-T3 and now with the X-T30, I feel like Fuji’s approach (along with Fuji’s robust catalog of lenses), may just be the right one if your idea of mirrorless is small, light, and compact. Sony, Canon, and Nikon have demonstrated that if you want full frame and wide aperture lenses, then mirrorless ultimately has few advantages over DSLRs when it comes to size. It seems that the reduced size of the bodies is quickly lost when you pair pro-grade lenses with them, and the proliferation of using lenses via adapters only adds to that. The size of the lenses often means that one feels the need to use a grip extender, a battery grip, or something similar to help the balance and ergonomics of using these larger lenses…which brings you right back to a larger body size.

But Fuji’s APS-C-centric focus has allowed them to both maximize the potential of an APS-C sensor and also develop lenses purposefully for that smaller sensor. And they have developed a lot of very good, very well received lenses with pro-grade features and apertures. For the most part, you can find an equivalent Fujinon APS-C lens for just about all the traditional DLSR focal length/aperture combinations. That’s simply not something you can say on every platform. Other brands focus primarily on full frame and, as a result, most of their APS-C lenses tend to be consumer-grade. If you want pro-grade lenses on, say, Sony (I own an a6500 APS-C body from them), you are often required to revert to full frame lenses, which, by nature, are larger and heavier because they have been designed to cover a full frame image circle. This quickly defeats the ideal of “smaller and lighter”. With most brands, you are buying lenses for the potential of using them on either APS-C or full frame, but Fuji’s approach is that “we are going to do APS-C”, and so they do it well. They’ve got an amazing selection of quality lenses (most at fairly reasonable price points).

For example, I reviewed the compact Fujinon XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 OIS “kit lens” along with the X-T30, and, while that lens carries a higher price tag than most other such kit lenses, it also comes with a more robust build, better autofocus, a significant maximum aperture advantage (most of these zooms are F3.5-5.6 over their zoom range), and a more sophisticated image stabilizer.  It’s not really a consumer grade lens so much as a compact premium lens (though not necessarily with pro-grade optics according to my tests).  Fuji has a wide lineup of well-built primes and zooms in their lineup, all specifically designed for APS-C.  That’s just not something that can be said for other companies, and it might be the single most compelling reason to go Fuji…particularly if you value small, compact, and light.

Since the release of the X-T3 last year, I’ve had a chance to compare it and then the X-T30 to a number of other cameras (some released since), including the new Canon EOS R and RP, the Sony a7R3, a6500, and the new a6400. While Fuji isn’t necessarily the clear winner in all of these tests (there are still some areas of advantage for other systems), I can safely say that Fuji has really closed the gap and maximized the potential of their 26MP X-Trans Cmos sensor. The advanced autofocus system is also exceptionally good now, giving one the ability to easily get excellent action shots. The advantages that the DSLR approach have traditionally had are slowly being eroded away by advancing mirrorless technologies. 

Let’s dive in a little deeper and see how this plays out.


Design and Features

I would recommend that you watch this video, as I carefully delineate all the areas that Fuji has either retained key elements from the more expensive X-T3 or chosen to differentiate the two lines.

I’ve taken the time to go through the specifications of the two cameras and compare/contrast them at a glance, highlight areas where one or the other stands out.

Note that the Fujifilm X-T30 is considerably smaller and lighter than the bigger X-T3.  It weighs only 13.51 oz (383g), making it lighter than most of the lenses I reviewed…and that’s with the memory card and battery inserted.  That’s significantly less than the 539g of the X-T3, and even undercuts the weight of the Sony a6400 (probably the most logical competitor) by about 20g.  The body is similarly smaller, though the tradeoff here is that while the X-T3 has weather sealing, the X-T30 does not.

The Fujifilm X-T30 has fewer physical controls on the camera than does the X-T3, but at the same time has a few more than a camera like a Sony a6000 series camera.  It has three dials along the top, including a mode dial, shutter dial, and exposure compensation.  Unlike the X-T3, none of these dials lock, so you will have to be a little more careful about not inadvertently moving them (I personally had few issues with this).

There is one less custom function button than the X-T3, but, unlike the Sony bodies, one also gets a control wheel both on front (below the shutter button) and back of the camera, giving you an easy way to map, say, shutter speed and aperture control.  I’ve always felt limited by Sony’s lack of a front wheel on the A6000 bodies, as that is nearly always the traditional spot for such a wheel.

There is one major misstep on the X-T30’s ergonomics, and that is the placement of the Q button (quick menu).  It is placed right on the thumb rest, which makes it easy to inadvertently hit it.  Fuji has already issued a firmware update that allows you to map the function of the Q button elsewhere to help solve this problem, though that would have been a problem better solved physically before release.

Fuji’s touchscreen performance lands in between Canon and Sony.  Canon is the winner, with all menus navigable via touchscreen and the most responsive screen to touch, and Sony is the definite loser, with the least responsive touchscreen and zero menu navigation options via touch.  Fuji gives you the ability to control the Q menu via touch, and, while there can be a slight input lag, it works fairly well.  The main menus will require using the tiny joystick on the back to navigate them.  All of these cameras give you the very beneficial option of using your thumb on the touchscreen while using the viewfinder to move an autofocus point around, which is very useful.  The X-T30 shares the resolution of the X-T3’s screen (1.04 million-dot), but it’s tilting only happens on two axis rather than three on the X-T3.  What this means is that while you have a good range of motion up or down, the X-T30’s screen cannot be tilted to the side, which is useful when shooting in portrait/vertical mode.  This is one of the areas Fuji chose to distinguish the two lines.

Another area of differentiation is in the viewfinder, which is both smaller and lower resolution than the X-T3’s.  The Fujifilm X-T30 has a 0.39″ 2.36 million-dot resolution viewfinder, which lags behind the 0.5″ 3.69 million-dot resolution of the viewfinder on the X-T3.  The viewfinder is still fairly good, though, and if you aren’t familiar with the higher resolution viewfinder you may not notice.

Both cameras share the NP-W126S battery pack, though the smaller demands of the X-T30 allow one to get a rated 10 extra shots (390) per charge according to CIPA.  I would estimate that I’ve beaten that estimate in my personal use.  Still, getting an additional battery pack is worth thinking about.  You can use USB-C to easily charge the battery in camera (even off things like power banks, which is a big bonus to me).

Another area of differentiation is in both the number of card slots and their placement.  I vastly prefer the side placement of the X-T3 (and it’s two slots), as the X-T30’s single memory card slot (SD UHS-II compatible) moves down to the bottom of the camera in the battery compartment.  My biggest beef with this kind of placement is that if one is videoing and using a quick release plate, it means that the compartment becomes inaccessible.  You have to remove the QR plate before getting the card out, which can be a pain if you are pulling footage off the camera but plan to shoot further.  Having a single card slot may also be a reason to consider the X-T3 instead, though having only a single card is standard for this class of camera.

Fuji allows one to choose whether to operate the camera in a more traditional fashion or to utilize the broader range of physical controls (including using the nifty little AF mode selector up front).  The amount of physical controls will be an asset to more experienced photographers, but may be a liability for less experienced photographers who feel overwhelmed by the number of physical controls.  That’s legitimate, and it might shape your perception as to whether or not the camera is for you.

I personally find this camera body a little small, and the grip is not nearly robust enough for me to feel like it fits well in my hand.  I vastly prefer the shape of, say, the Canon EOS RP, but your mileage may vary.  An inexpensive grip extender helps if you share this concern.  That’s par for the course with a small camera like this, though, and other than areas of preference I have no real concerns over the build and design of the camera.  I quickly learned how to make it do the things I wanted it to do.

FUJIFILM X-T30 Autofocus

The Fujifilm X-T30 inherits a lot of the autofocus improvements from the X-T3, which were a huge step forward for Fuji.  This includes an autofocus system with an incredible 2.16 million phase detect AF points.  This number is so large as to be ridiculous, but perhaps the 425 selectable AF points will make more sense to you.  These cover nearly the whole sensor with points:

That makes autofocus very easy with the X-T30.  Fuji says, “The number of AF phase detection pixels in the sensor have been increased to 2.16 million and now cover the entire frame (approx. 100%). This enables fast and accurate auto-focusing. Additionally, the low-light threshold for phase detection AF has been also expanded from +0.5EV in previous-generation camera systems to -3.0EV.”  So, better point spread, greater sensitivity, and also much better Eye AF performance.  Fuji says this, “Compared to previous models, Face and Eye Detection have had their accuracy and performance doubled. This is especially true when tracking subjects from the side or when they are coming towards the camera. For portrait photographers using shallow depths of field, Eye-detection AF can be configured to priority focus on individual eyes, or on the eye closest to the camera. Eye-detection AF is also supported in AF-C mode, which will assist in providing accurate focus for moving subjects.”  I particularly like the ability to prioritize which eye to focus on, as this can be a big deal when shooting portraits.  

I put the X-T3 through a more robust set of AF tests than the X-T30, mostly because of the lenses I had on hand for testing.  With the X-T30 I only had the XF 18-55mm plus a few MF options that I own, so it wasn’t the same as testing the high end XF 200mm F2 OIS that I put through the paces on the X-T3.  Still, this is supposed to be the same AF system, and, if that is true, I can vouch for the fact that you can do some serious tracking with this AF system and a good lens.  Here’s one example of a shot I took with that combination:

Though my focus tests were less extreme with the X-T30, I got consistently good focus results and love the flexible autofocus system.  

While the basic focus system is the same, there are a few differences in the execution between the two cameras.  Fuji limits the maximum sync speed (for flashes) to 1/180th second rather than 1/250th second, and the maximum shutter speed is 1/4000th rather than 1/8000th.  This is pretty standard for differentiating lines.

Also worth noting is that the FUJIFILM X-T30 can shoot continuously at up to 8.0fps in full resolution when using the mechanical shutter, but the X-T3 can shoot up to 11 FPS under the same conditions.  The difference in buffer depth is significant too, as the X-T3 can get 42 RAW | 145 JPEGs before the buffer fills, while the X-T30 is limited to 18 RAW | 90 JPEGs.  That’s not a big deal if your shooting style doesn’t involve a lot of bursts, but it is worth noting that you only have a couple of seconds of holding the shutter down before the buffer fills if you are shooting RAW with the X-T30.

You also have the option to switch to an electronic shutter where you can capture as many as 20 FPS at full resolution, though the buffer fills much faster (17 RAW | 32 JPEG).  That means you have less than a second if shooting RAW, and about 1 1/2 seconds if shooting JPEG. In Sports Finder Mode, the camera will capture 16.6 Mega-Pixel images with a 1.25x crop factor and use its electronic shutter. This makes it possible for the camera to have AF/ AE-tracking, blackout-free continuous shooting of up to 30fps, and silent mode.  In this case the RAW buffer stays at 17, but the JPEG buffer drops to just 26.  That means you had better start holding that shutter down at the RIGHT moment!

The X-T30 is designed to do a lot of things well, but if you need more specialized performance, you might want to consider the X-T3 instead.  For most photographers, however, the performance of the X-T30’s autofocus system will definitely be robust enough for everything they need to do.


Modern mirrorless cameras are amazing hybrid devices.  They are not only capable stills cameras, but they are often surprisingly robust video platforms.  The X-T30 packs a lot of punch in this tiny body, though, as in other areas, there are a few limiting factors that keep it from the level of the X-T3. Fuji says this, “Thanks to its advanced sensor and processor combination, the FUJIFILM X-T30 is capable of recording incredible 4K (3840×2160) video by down-sampling its 6K (6240×3510) capture. 

The camera also supports 4K DCI (17:9), an industry standard that gives videos an even more cinematic look. 

Finally, F-Log recording with 4:2:2 10-bit output can be captured through the HDMI port, giving professional filmmakers a wonderfully capable tool to use in achieving their creative visions.

My experience with the video is that the X-T30 is capable of producing beautiful footage either with the standard film emulations or with F-Log (minimum ISO for FLOG is 640). You can see some footage in the final video review.

The X-T30 has one significant differentiating factor from the X-T3:  4K capture is limited to 30FPS rather than the 60FPS option on the X-T3.  This will be a big deal for some, not so much for others.  It is worth noting that none of the competing Sony cameras offer 60FPS either to date. 

On a practical level, I have only one real criticism of Fuji’s video performance, and that actually has to do with continuous autofocus while capturing video.  I find that focus pulls from one subject to another are frequently not as smooth as what I see from either recent Sony bodies or Canon bodies with DPAF.  Can sometimes see a visible stepping instead of a smooth transition.

Those minor criticisms aside, however, this is an amazing little video camera. It’s got a LOT of tech packed into it, and so far I haven’t run into any overheating issues.


Since the X-T30 shares the same 26.1MP X-Trans CMOS 4 sensor and X-Processor 4 found in the X-T3, they behave fairly similarly.  I tested the two cameras and found their performance nearly identical in my standard tests.  I chose to focus my comparisons on what I consider the most logical competitor – the 24 MP sensor in the Sony a6000 series.  The a6400 and X-T30 are probably the most natural competitors in this space.

From Fuji, “[with] a newly developed sensor, the X-T30 features an APS-C-format 26.1MP X-Trans CMOS 4 sensor, which has a back-illuminated design to afford smooth tonal rendering, improved low-light performance, and a low native ISO 160 setting. As an X-Trans sensor, it still utilizes the randomized pixel array, too, which provides a high degree of image quality and sharpness due to the omission of an optical low-pass filter. Versus conventional pixel patterns, the X-Trans design more closely mimics the organic nature of film in order to produce nuanced colors and tonal transitions, while also reducing moiré and aliasing.”

All of this sounds very good, of course, but how does it play out in real life?  The best way to find out is by watching this head to head comparison video where I cover ISO, Dynamic Range, and Color Fidelity.


Here’s a quick look at ISO performance (with the X-T3 as the “stunt double”). At ISO 1600 there is virtually no difference from base ISO (160) on global examination of the image. There is no additional apparent noise, color fidelity remains the same, and global contrast looks identical.

If we zoom in to a pixel level, we see, well, pretty much the same thing. You might be able to find slightly more noise if you looked really hard, but without the two images side by side, I doubt you’d be able to spot it. This is still a very, very clean result.

If we advance two more ISO stops, to ISO 6400, we see pretty much the same thing on a global level. If I compare the ISO 1600 result (on the left) with the ISO 6400 result (on the right), they look essentially the same.

At a pixel level it is possible to see some increased noise now, though it tends to show up mostly on places that are smooth and have no texture of their own. Contrast and color fidelity remain strong, and I’m not seeing any real color banding or color casts.

At max ISO (normal range), I can’t objectively say I see much of a difference on a global level, though I know that there is additional roughness at a pixel level. Earlier cameras would often deliver a low contrast, color-tinted result at their ISO limits, but that’s not at all the case with the X-T3. The color and contrast at ISO 12,800 looks nearly identical to the ISO 6400 result.

At a pixel level we can primarily see additional roughness (noise). I would classify it as being noticeable but not destructive.

When I tested the X-T30 against the a6500, I found that up until ISO 12,800 I would call them very close but with the slightest edge for the X-T30:

Unlike the X-T3, Fuji elected to increase the limit to ISO 25,600 before going into the expanded range.  Here I found the situation reversed, and gave the edge to the Sony:

I would keep ISO at 12,800 or lower as much as possible to maximize your results.

Dynamic Range

I value dynamic range within a camera in two specific areas: the ability to cleanly lift shadows without introducing noise or color banding and the ability to recover highlights without introducing “hot spots” where information has been permanently lost. There are many scenes in nature where the variance between bright areas and shadows exceeds a camera’s ability to record the whole range of light (our eyes are extraordinarily good at this). The ability to recover highlights means that a blown out sky might be recovered and add a lot of visual interest to an image, or perhaps to eliminate “hot spots” on a person’s face that has gotten overexposed by a flash. The ability to recover shadows allows you to, for example, underexpose a bit so that the sky is not blown out while still safely recovering information in the shadows. It can also be a lifesaver if a flash doesn’t fire, for example, or settings are wrong, and a crucial image that could have been lost can be saved in post. This is the real-world value of dynamic range.

Fuji has an extra trick up its sleeve to help you maximize dynamic range performance in such scenes, which we’ll get to in just a moment.

In my tests, I found that the X-T30 did an excellent job of recovering shadows very cleanly. Here we have an image that I purposefully underexposed by four stops. As you can see in the original RAW image, there is very little information left there. In post I added those four stops back into the recovered image. What we find is an image that has been recovered with very little penalty. The X-T30 does excellent with shadow recovery; roughly equal to the excellent Sony sensor.  Even if we look in at a pixel level, we see very little noise introduced and no color casts or banding.

As is often the case, however, highlight recovery lags behind shadow recovery. A similar four stop overexposure and attempted recovery results in an unusable image.

Sony is about a half-stop better in this regard, but Fuji has one other trick that I previously mentioned.  If you move beyond the base ISO to either ISO 400 or 640 (and beyond), two new options open up in the menu.  These are DR200 and DR400.  What these do is essentially split the sensor readout so that the shadow information is gathered from the current ISO setting while the highlight information comes from base ISO.  At ISO 320 that gives you one additional stop in the highlights, while at ISO 640 you gain two.  This allows you to overexpose the image slightly so that you have plenty of information in the shadows, but since there is one or two stops less exposure in the highlights, you have plenty of ability to recover blown out areas in post.  Case in point:  here is an attempt to recover a heavily overexposed image at base ISO (160):

Not very credible, is it?  There are a lot of hots spots (blown out highlights), and the whole image looks…off.  But if I use this technique at ISO 640 (same shutter speed), the overexposed result looks similar but the recovered result looks much, much better. 

It becomes possible to actually get a slightly greater dynamic range out of these Fuji cameras by utilizing this built in “hack”.  

I’ve used extreme examples, but the right way to do this is to overexpose by only one or two stops (depending on the situation), which allows you to have very clean shadows (a lot of exposure there) while also having a lot of additional latitude in the highlights.  This shot, while perhaps still a little extreme, helps illustrate the point:

Very clean shadows and highlights are well managed in the end result.  This is definitely a more practical approach than HDR in many situations, as there is no concern about movement of your subject in between frames.


Color science is a fairly divisive topic. I’ve found that my work in comparing color science has been both popular and controversial. Here’s at least part of the reason why: people don’t all see color identically. This has become evident based on a number of photos that circulate around the Internet featuring a dress or sandals that people perceive to be very different colors. Part of this has to do with the way that people’s eyes process color (some have more red cones in the eye, others more green), but it also comes down to the reality that in the Internet age people view images on screens that vary widely in their color calibration and accuracy. Put simply: not everyone is seeing the same thing.

I use two displays in my personal desktop array. My primary display is a high-end BenQ SW271 (I reviewed it here), with my secondary display being an older Dell U2410. I calibrate both of them on a monthly basis using a Spyder5 Pro. I also view my photos regularly on the screen of my iPad Pro and my Dell XPS 13 laptop (which also has a high end 4K display). In short, I use a lot of high quality screens in my work, and, based on what I see on them (and from prints), I feel like Canon produces the best, most natural color.

A lot of people are big fans of Fuji’s color, however, particularly when it comes to the quality of the JPEGs and looks you can create in camera.  It starts with selecting a color profile in camera or in post. Fuji’s approach to this is a little different, as instead of basic color profiles they instead offer film simulations with names that evoke classic film stocks (the company is called FujiFILM after all!) This includes stocks like Provia, Velvia, Astia, Classic Chrome, and more. I’m still experimenting, but I most frequently reach for Classic Chrome. It’s a little less saturated but often has a tasteful look to it. I find Velvia (which is Vivid) too intense for me. Provia is the Standard, and it is fairly neutral. Astia is “Soft”, and it’s another one I like. Your mileage may vary, and what I like for one type of image is not necessarily what I like for another.

Still, here’s a look an image with a number of different profiles applied in Lightroom. First, Adobe Standard:

Now Astia (Soft)

Now Classic Chrome



Definitely a lot of control over how an image will look.

You’ve also got a lot of great options on the monochrome front, with classic film emulations but also the ability to go into the menus and tweak the look in several ways. For example, if I select Acros, I’ve got the added ability to select whether to apply a Yellow Filter (more contrast, darker skies), Red (slightly more extreme of yellow), or Green (for better skin tones). There is also an option to warm or cool the monochrome image in camera. You can move to near-sepia on the warm side and near-selenium on the cool side. I’ve included three different looks in this little gallery, including an Acros monochrome, an Eterna Cinema look, and a Provia Standard:

You can also control grain (if that’s your thing) in camera as well. Most of these tweaks in-camera will only matter if you are shooting JPEGs. If you are shooting RAWs you can do all of this in post. Many that have chosen Fuji have done so for their ability to shoot JPEGs and get what they like right out of camera. If that sounds like you, then the Fuji X-T30 might be a great choice. It’s certainly got a lot of customization available for influencing the output.

Here’s a few images I think show off Fuji’s colors very nicely.

I would recommend that you take a long look at the Image Galleries page to see if you like what is there – most of which has received minimal processing so you can make a fair determination.


The FUJIfilm X-T30 is a nice upgrade over previous cameras in the series, and provides a reasonably priced alternative to the more feature rich Fuji X-T3.  The X-T3 certainly has some real advantages, but Fuji has kept enough of the goodness in the X-T30 to make it a very compelling option for those looking for a smaller, lighter system.  I recently reviewed Sony’s a6400 and found it to also be an excellent camera with a lot of strengths.  There are certainly areas where one or the other does something a little better, but truthfully they both can produce excellent stills and video.

If you are trying to choose between the two cameras, I would encourage you to base your decision on the whole systems.  Sony is more open-source, with an increasing amount of third party development (including the excellent Sigma DN lenses).  Fuji has relatively little third-party support, but what it does have is the most robust catalog of APS-C lenses out there…many of which are genuinely excellent.  I don’t think there is a wrong choice here, but one system might be more “right” for you than the other.  Choose carefully!  If you choose the Fujifilm X-T30 (at $899 USD at the moment), you will be getting a lot of little camera for your money!


  • Robust focus system that does a great job
  • Well executed physical controls
  • 26MP X-Trans sensor produces nicely detail images
  • Great JPEGs with a lot of customization
  • Good burst speeds with a wide range of choice
  • Fuji’s DR modes give more creative options
  • Good video specs and quality footage
  • Fujifilm’s excellent catalog of lenses designed for APS-C


  • Buffers fill quickly when shooting bursts
  • Grip is really thin for large hands
  • Poor Q button placement
  • Very little third party development for Fuji

Purchase the FUJIFILM X-T30 @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay 
Purchase the Fujinon XF 18-55mm F2.8-F4 @ B&H Photo | Amazon | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK | Amazon Germany | Ebay 

Peak Design Slide Lite:  Peak Design StoreB&H Photo | Amazon | Amazon Canada | Amazon UK
Sony a6500: B&H Photo | Amazon | Amazon.ca | Amazon UK | Ebay
Peak Design Leash Strap:  Peak Design StoreB&H Photo | Amazon | Amazon Canada  | Amazon UK
BenQ SW271 4K Photo Editing Monitor – B&H Photo  | Amazon | Amazon.ca | Amazon UK
Adobe Photoshop Creative Cloud 1-Year Subscription
Alien Skin Exposure X4 (Use Code “dustinabbott” to get 10% anything and everything)
Visit Dustin’s Amazon Storefront and see his favorite gear

Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. You can also make a donation here if you would like.  Visit my Amazon page for some of my gear of choice! Thank you for your support.

B&H Logo

Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52018DA in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!

Check me out on:  My Patreon  | Sign Up for My Newsletter |  Instagram | Facebook | Twitter | Flickr | 500px |  Google+ |


Use Code “DUSTINHDR” to get $10 off ($15 CDN) any Skylum product:  Luminar, Aurora, or AirMagic


Keywords: Fujifilm, X-T30, Fuji X-T30, X-T30 Review, Fuji X-T30 Review, Fujinon, Fujinon 18-55mm, Fuji 18-55mm, Dustin Abbott, XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 Review, Hands On, Video Test, Sharpness, High ISO, Autofocus, Dynamic Range, XF 35mm F2, Lens, Comparison, Test, Dustinabbott.net, Sony a6400, Sony a600, Fuji X-T3

DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.