• expired

Fujifilm X-T4 Digital Camera Body Only $2284.80 Delivered @ Amazon AU


New low price and shipping and sold directly by Amazon AU and not Becextech so likely to not have any issues with grey stock. Enjoy.

Related Stores

Amazon AU
Amazon AU


  • Unless it’s co-mingled stock.

    Can’t trust Amazon these days to keep stock separate. If they share the same SKU and it’s fufilled by Amazon you may get grey stock.

    • I was going to mention comingled stock and decided not to open pandoras box in the OP πŸ˜‚

    • Manufacturer FUJIFILM Australia Pty Ltd

      • Pretty easy to find out and also easy to return.

        Plus I'd say amazon are addressing and improving these issues. So they're a lot better "these days" than previous days.

    • If you're worried it's coincidentally exactly the same price at Georges.

  • very good price indeed.

  • great camera and started at $2800 plus on launch this year which was way too expensive.

    • It's still relatively expensive. I really like the looks of it though and everything. But it sure is such a conundrum when you look at how competitive the Canon and Sony full frames are. The only thing that Fuji and Oly and Pana is is how much affordable lenses are compared to their full frame rivalries.

  • I do believe that it is a great camera but I am not ready to move to another eco system.

  • Whether or not you think this camera is worth the price, pricing regular hobbyist users and parents out of the camera market, then complaining that the market is dying is completely insane. But it is accepted practice for the camera companies over the last few years. It's certainly not just this camera, and the same goes for the lenses. The entry level was quite cheap for a while there but the last couple of years with the new mirrorless models have killed that.

    I'm sticking with my older gear till this plays out.

    • That's a valid point. I keep wondering has inflation really hit that hard, or has Apple and it's pricing schemes really spoilt every aspect of tech? But yes, I feel like alienating a larger part of the market is probably not a good idea. Just like how Olympus chose to go the pro route.

    • regular hobbyist users and parents

      Is this really for that market though? Fujifilm have a pretty good price range of aspc mirrorless.

      • How many pro photographers do you know that use a Fuji XT series camera? Mind you many graduate from being a hobbyist. And the rest grow up with a passion for it and start as starving students.Who is this camera for?

        • Frankly i don't know what cameras any particular pros use. Obviously some do, they have an extensive lens lineup that extends well past hobbyist level.

          the XT2 and XT3 take up spots 1 and 2 on flickr for average daily fuji users. The XT(x) line seems to be fairly popular.

          My point above was, i don't think they have priced the hobbyists out of the market. They have a heap of choices in Fujifilm alone. I just got an x-t30 myself. If i wanted to spend more i have that option, if i wanted to spend less there were several models cheaper.

          • @Duff5000: I personally know of at least 5 people who have bought the xt4 in the last month. 2 are pro photographers, 2 are hobbyist and moving into being pro and 1 would be just a hobbyist.

            There was another 2-3 who also bought the x100v and these were hobbyist.

            • @jasontravelstheworld: And that extrapolates to the general population how? I'm guessing you're in a photo community. Am I surprised that means you know pros and aspiring pros? Or that aspiring pros will spend more than even the average hobbyist?

              The X-T30 does seem more reasonably priced.

              • @syousef: I'm not a pro by any means and don't take my camera out other than when I travel. I do have an interest but def no pro. All I was saying was that even at current price, there's a demand still. If they're selling them, they will be no reason to make them any cheaper.

                Doubt the xt4 or the Sony a7 was aimed at amateurs or parents and thus priced accordingly..The budget camera market has been declining since mobile phone cameras have become more advanced.

                Do I wish that the xt4 or a7r IV was cheaper..heck yeah I do. But camera companies aren't making budget/entry level cameras anymore because they'll just be competing with mobile phones.

                • @jasontravelstheworld: Yet all you heard a year or so back was how cell phones are killing the camera market. The response? Raise prices. Insane. Won't end well.

                  • @syousef: The low end camera market has been killed. The interchangeable lens market is more stable. https://shotkit.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/camera-shipme...

                    I look at it more that they havent made cameras more expensive. There are just very few "entry level" cameras around.

                    • @Duff5000: The move from DSLR to mirrorless has come with a steep price hike. If you never get anyone hooked at the entry level, your business eventually fades away.

                      • @syousef: I guess the new breed of cameras are all focusing a lot on videos and capabilities for videos as a point of difference.

                        Guessing the jump now will be people using their mobile phones and realising they want something better/more powerful will then start looking at mid/high range cameras. Eg, Handheld AI night shots with a mobile phone will probably work out better for amateurs than a mirrorless camera esp if they don't have a tripod and don't have the knowledge or software to combine bracketing exposures etc. So the jump from a mobile phone to entry level may even be a step backwards for some beginners as most phones are now equipped with ai and processing that makes it look "nicer" for the amateur and a lot easier…

                        I will say that entry cameras are definitely useless in the current market because people are carrying a smarter, more portable and more functional camera in their 1-3k smartphone than a sub 1k entry level camera which would be the usual target market. If camera companies were selling entry level cameras like hot cakes, they will of course cater to that market. But I think right now, everyone is targettingmid/upper as they're the only ones willing to pay or upgrade.

                        • @jasontravelstheworld: Amateurs would have to be very keen to jump to a $2.5k camera, whereas a $400 entry level DSLR isn't a hard ask.

                          • @syousef: I don't get your argument. If you want to buy something around $500 that is available.


                            Plenty more in the sub $1000 bracket.

                            Every manufacturer has upper and lower models. You absolutely do not need 2.5k to get into a mirrorless.

                            Its a bit like saying you don't see why a car manufacturer makes a $100,000 car because your average buyer isn't going to buy it. Completely ignoring the fact they also make more affordable models.

                            • @Duff5000: I'm guessing he wants a lambo for geeky prices… But don't we all haha

                            • @Duff5000: Wait. You're pointing me at a 2 year old camera that's only available as a grey import as proof that manufacters are supplying at the entry level? And it still costs $600 and up body only.

                              The cheapest Aussie stock interchangeable lens Fuji cameras I'm seeing are X-T200 and old stock X-T20 with grey market prices starting at just over $900 and $800 delivered respectively. Aussie stock at just over $1300 and $1000.

                              If you think the smartphone is more capable than say a Canon 600D or Nikon D3500, I'd suggest you absolutely stick with the smartphone because clearly you're only interested in taking snapshots. Smart phones can't be used anywhere near as effectively for niches like astrophotography, or with off camera flash. (Sure people can bend their phones to almost any use but your'e much better off with a DSLR). And have fun telling a bridge you don't need a pro camera because you'll be shooting her wedding on a smart phone. But sure if you just want to take selfies and drunken party or your smartphone is good enough for your family snapshots in your eyes, it makes no sense to buy a DSLR or MILC at all. The only thing the smartphones have truly killed is the point and shoot pocket cam that casuals use.

                              • @syousef: I picked the first entry level camera on the first page that came to mind. $550 with a lens. Plenty of deals have been posted that would fit in the affordable range: eg https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/539256

                                My point, which i have made several times, is that entry mirrorless is far more affordable than you keep making out with your $2500 price. Age really isn't relevant these days. There isn't significant year on year leaps in cameras like there used to be. the 600d you just referenced is almost 10 years old.

                                Entry DSLR for the most part start at around $600 as well. Entry into either is normally going to be in the 600-1000 mark. Plenty of options in both for those that are interested under 1k. There are plenty of DSLR and MILC over $5k.

                                $2k + cameras have a market just like 5k+ ones, if that market isn't you, don't buy one.

                                • @Duff5000: You didn't notice that Fuji only sells the camera in China?

                                  Yes there are cheaper, older cameras. I don't dispute that and frankly I'm sick and tired of arguing rubbish straw men online with people who have far too much time on their hands. What I'm saying is that the average price for entry level cameras has increased disproportionately putting them out of the reach of the average beginner. I made that point all the way up higher.

                                  I've been a Nikon shooter for a long time and a few Christmases ago I was undecided about whether to try Canon as a 2nd s ystem. My wife bought me 600D with an 18-55 lens for under $400 - from BigW I believe. This was when the 700D had bee out for a little while and the 600D had been discontinued. The following Christmas I bought a 700D on special as Canon had some brilliant cashbacks and the AUD was high - that made them affordable. If I were buying today I'd be much more constrained. And no a camera sold only through the grey market isn't the same. Nor are Canon and Nikon's entry level anywhere near as affordable anymore.

                                  $1k is one point at which some people will consider jumping in. But that is generally too rich for most students and many parents. $400-$700 is a much sweeter spot if the camera companies want to keep getting new customers.Would be nice to be able to recommend a newer camera. If I was starting today I'd have to go 2nd hand.

                                  Personally, I don't have to worry about cameras for a while. I've got an 80D and a D7200 and I intend to run them into the ground before upgrading to MILC. Maybe in 3-5 years I'll think about it again, if I'm still in good health.

                                  • @syousef: Haha I'm not saying smart phones will be better but what I'm saying is that the small point and shoots which are your budget options are now superceded by the smartphone.

                                    The only camera thats probably worthwhile in that price range is an older Sony RX100 but that's not mirrorless or interchangeble and a likely first step for a beginner. Alternatively, there are heaps of micro 4/3 cameras out there in that price range.

                                    But we're arguing over nothing. You're whinging about two flagship cameras being too expensive for entry level xt4 and Sony a7…But these aren't entry level cameras and have specific focus on a segment of photographers band videographers. Would I love them to be cheaper ..yes but do I expect them to be $600?..no

                                    • @jasontravelstheworld: RX100 is good for one thing - low light when it has to be compact. Concert photography where they won't allow ILCs is an example.

                                      What about superzooms? You phone can't compete with a 40x optical zoom.

                                      • @syousef: Yeah but those are specialist roles and probably going into more than what an amateur or beginner would be looking for.i would say a beginner doesn't need a ILC.

                                        There are some good superzooms from Pana fz and Sony rx10(a lot more expensive) at relatively low prices for what would cost in apsc or full frame. If you want best low light, then Sony a7 but then would most amateurs be shooting concert or astro? If they want to play with videos, the rx100 is also a good choice.

                                        I guess going back to your original point, that cameras are overpriced, you're commenting on pro cameras or the top of the range stuff. There are a lot of non ILC cameras that amateurs can jump to and play with which fit that price range.

                                        • @jasontravelstheworld: I got into photography because I wanted to get into astro, found it hard, and had a cheap film DSLRs from the attempt.

                                          Plenty of people start with a passion for something like concerts. A work colleague's daughter got into professional band photography through her love of bands.

                                          Your own name implies travel as a catalyst for photography.

                                          Camera industry is making mistakes making it hard for beginners to get serious, and will pay for it.

                                        • @jasontravelstheworld: Ever felt like you are having a conversation with a brick wall?