Hot Deals

[Camtec Photo] Fuji X-E2S: $585, $685 with 27mm f/2.8

  • Last Updated:
  • Nov 12th, 2017 12:01 am
[OP]
Newbie
Aug 22, 2015
24 posts
33 upvotes
Longueuil, qc

Fuji X-E2S: $585, $685 with 27mm f/2.8

Deal Link:
Price:
$585
Expiry:
November 30, 2017
Retailer:
Camtec Photo
For those who missed the Fuji X-T1 at $500 a few weeks back, here is one for the X-E2S. The deal is nowhere near as good (the X-E2S is a grade below the X-T1 and is notably without Weather Resistance). The price is fair: the camera is discontinued and is being discounted all over the place (generally around $700, according to photoprice).

The real deal is when you include the 27 mm lens for $685. It is a very small lens with good performance and a "normal" field of view (42mm equivalent). Perfect for a walking around combo IMHO. The lens is sold by itself for $500 CAD on "sale" at the moment, but I did buy mine for $199 USD a few years back on a February sale, so be warned that it is overpriced on its regular price.
6 replies
Member
Nov 12, 2009
280 posts
118 upvotes
Edmonton
Good price. Not sure how this compares to x-t10
Jr. Member
Nov 11, 2011
159 posts
67 upvotes
Calgary
crow13 wrote:
Oct 13th, 2017 6:17 pm
Good price. Not sure how this compares to x-t10
The two are pretty much similar. The X-T10 has faster continuous shooting speed (8fps vs 7fps), the X-E2S has slightly better view finder and LCD screen. All the differences are pretty subtle, all come down to the style, DSLR like or Rangefinder style.
Member
User avatar
Jul 20, 2016
464 posts
166 upvotes
Toronto
Jackhammer100 wrote:
Oct 19th, 2017 1:23 pm
Is this a better deal? Thanks in advance for any input. torn between the two. https://shop.camtecphoto.com/en/product ... ?cat_id=17
This 18-55mm is fairly expensive separated, 900 CAD on amazon, 700 USD on B&H

Depends on your use tho. I think would prefer have that 27mm and a cheapo 16-50mm ( you might be able to get used for cheap-cheap, as they come with X-A and X-M models) - for versatility sake

edit: just to make it clear (I was re-reading and sounds weird :P). That 18-55 probably is an excellent lens (and way better than 16-50), but on my amateur level, I thinks prefer having 27 + 16-50 over 18-55
Last edited by neonic on Oct 19th, 2017 1:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
huuuu! (¬'-')¬ C-('-'Q) straight!

Top