I got into photography and specifically the Fuji system because of you Omar. It's refreshing to watch a content maker with your energy who is so informative and passionate about their craft without resorting to putting down other people or other content creators. Kudos sir.
But seriously. I really do think that the T4 and the Z6 are on a smart path with their ability to switch between video and photography. With my Olympus M1 Mark II. If you want to photography manual and video manual. You're stuck with your settings. Fuji and Nikon are onto something with their ability to save photography settings separate from video settings. Even though Fuji needs to save more information with their custom settings.
@@Smoothblue90 having separate settings for video and photography was one thing I really liked with the XT4. Granted I do own a Z6, but at the time of getting my XT4, I really didn’t shoot much video.
@@danielschmaderer I'm actually looking forward to what the Fuji H2 will be like. I really like the size of Fuji lenses. And a body with a proper grip and proper shutter position with a new sensor and better video autofocus could be outstanding.
@@jason4555 The colors out of camera are not as good, also editing in Lightroom is easier with Nikon. I also felt the colors on the EVF and LCD (A7R3) were pretty muted, and didn't give me a good impression of what the photo would look like.
@@jason4555 Sony needs a lot of post processing. It's not a bad system but really you shoot raw in Sony and edit. The Sony jpegs suck. And before you diss jpegs remember not everyone wants to sit at a computer monitor massaging an image when you could be out having fun with the camera. Fuji's have the best jpegs IMO and then of course you have all those film simulations to choose from.
The contrast with the Fuji glass seems better than the Z6 actually. And the Fuji colors are a little brighter. But really, there isn't much difference, not that you could see much difference on his monitor watching on your monitor.
@@nickbakis1553 I got the Z6ll and the 50mm. Never paid much attention to the Z prices on zooms and I'm not considering the possibility of selling it and getting an X camera because of the more affordable zooms. Would that be a good idea or am I'm better of sticking to my Nikon?
@@alfredconqueror4422Unless you want something smaller and lighter (and this mainly applies to the smaller Fuji bodies and lenses - not the XT4, for instance), my advise would be to stick with the Z6. If you find the Z6 and zoom options large, on the other hand, Fuji is a great option.
Keep these videos coming Omar they offer a good perspective on how photographers need to think both amateur and pro ....much appreciated..love your work.! Cheers Anthony
I was surprised... with almost every picture (purposefully not looking at which camera) I chose the Nikon color science. This really surprised me on the B/W as I love Acros. I'm loving my Z6ii! Would love to see an AF comparison between the Z and X.
Great and entertaining video as always Omar :) and since there seems to be a consensus on Nikon's colours and how fantastic JPEGs it produces, I highly recommend the Nikon Z50 with the kit lens for all your viewers thinking about adding a Fuji to their kit, just for travel and/or for smaller lenses. I've owned the Z50 for a little over a year now, and I enjoy using it. I take it with me everywhere, and the 16-50mm kit lens is super sharp and super compact (a pancake when closed). Even though there's a big difference in resolution between both cameras, I caught myself using the Z50 more than my D850 in the past year! That says a lot about how enjoyable it is to use this camera. And if you want to go for Fuji just for the retro look and tactile controls, well Nikon is going to announce its retro-styled Z fc APS-C body any moment now. So really, everything that you might want, Nikon has it now.
Very well done and entertaining! I am really surprised the small Fuji 2/35 holds up its own so well against the Nikon 1.8/50 mm Z which is not only a newer but also a much more complex and in turn expensive design and does not have to rely on in-camera optimization as the Fuji does. So I also do not think the difference in resolution is due to sensor-size but the lenses themself may be the biggest factor in the equation where the Fuji is optimized for size and the Nikon for performance.
The Fuji has 'better' resolution at 26MP over the Nikon at 24MP - the Nikon looks like it has higher resolution because the 50mm 1.8 S lens is out resolving the Fuji lens. That Nikon lens is one of the sharpest lenses around - as such the Fuji is not taking advantage of all 26MP so the Nikon image is likely a higher resolution even though it is lower MP due to the lenses resolving power. That is one of the reasons for having great lenses. Also, Nikon RAW files are the best in the business. Also, you can apply the actual Nikon profiles (Standard, Vivid, Neutral, Flat Portrait and all 20 creative picture profiles) to the Nikon RAW files in LR now - as of the latest update. This is a great update for LR and makes it even better with the Nikon files.
bigger pixels come with higher clarity in the image. So, same lens resolution and same megapixel will always look better on a bigger sensor. Also when shooting with "equivalents": 50 vs 35, because of the natural higher "power" of a longer focal lenght, the image will also look clearer. Its small 2% increments, but when they all sum together, the quality difference is noticeable. This is why there is still a reason to develop medium and large format digital sensors.
Thank you for doing this comparison! I have been a Nikon dslr shooter for years. I want to do the mirrorless jump but have been tied up in knots between staying in Nikon so I can use my current flashes and maybe a couple of my lenses with the converter, or jump to Fujifilm . Staying Nikon would also finally move me up to full frame, but the Fuji looks so much easier to carry around. This really helped.
Oh, how fun! I shot a family gathering with Fuji and a wedding with Nikon Z this weekend. Both were gorgeous. I would like to see skin tones -- and I mean a variety of skin tones, compared on the two. Perhaps zeroing out noise reduction on both to the degree it is possible.
I know this is now a 2 year old video, but thanks (belatedly) for doing it. My general frustration with the digital photography world is all manufacturers inability to make small full frame cameras WITH SMALL LENSES. There was no problem making small cameras and lenses during the film world (eg., Nikon FM or FE plus old series 50 mm f/1.8). Look at the Z6 and that huge 50 mm f/1.8. Seriously, it totally guts the whole selling point of "going mirrorless."
Don’t forget that is a no holds barred, exceptional quality lens. I wouldn’t be too surprised if a smaller one followed (the DSLR 50mm 1.8G is pretty small and light by comparison).
Nikon has no proper planning in designing lens. Now, they have the pancake 40mm. They should have released this during DSLRs era, even Canon had one back then.
Thanks for this comparison…it supports my feeling over time that the colors between Nikon and Fuji are not dramatically different. That One reason would not be the reason to go with one over the other. Well done.
For this kind of comparison, I just look at the tonal variation from the original or print and it works with another channel's 12 vs. 102 MP challenge from prints or Instagram. For example, the transition with Nikon is gradual, like Zone 4, 5 & 6 while Fuji is 4 & 6. Also, you highlighted something seems to be overlooked by photographers using fast aperture. While a fast lens can eliminate background distractions lazily, but attention to details will make us notice that it is replaced by a new out of focus distraction. Hence blobs of colors that appeared on the out of focus background still need to be composed nicely with good visual design and arrange the colors based on color theory. Think of Saul Leiter composition and colors. 🙂
It surely is a great time to have photography as a hobby. I mean really it is hard to buy a bad camera with all of the major brands. Yes there are differences in output but they really all look great. One of the things I love about Fuji is the ability to get a big variety of looks out of the camera jpegs. It is scary good to the point that I seldom even use the raw files anymore.
For my eyes... The Nikon was more pleasing on the opening shot (when you had not yet set the cameras to cloudy) and the jet ski shot. The Fuji was more pleasing on the luminence shot (blue tables). For everything else, the two were so close I'd be hard pressed to tell the difference.
Nikon used to be the main APS-C brand. They had rugged, fast pro APS-C cameras every wildlife photographer was using at one point, whereas Canon were plastic fantastic all the way up to their highest price points. Fujifilm took most of that market share away from them.
I started shooting Nikon, but I have been a fujifilm shooter for about two years now. I honestly felt like the colors were similar. It's nice to see someone else get similar results.
1st impression on the pier was that Fuji was punchier, and hence more appealing. But f/1.8 v. f/2.8 ffeq really made a big difference in pop, by improving foreground/background isolation. Nice demonstration!
I watched this in portrait orientation on my phone with low bandwidth. So they looked pretty similar to me 😆. The luminosity bit was something I learned today. Thanks.
Perfect example that Fujifilm’s APSC development is totally on point as at least at 100%, image quality is basically matching Full Frame, only when pixel pipping to 200% can you see negligible difference. As for bokehliciousness, If you use Fujifilm XF50mm F1.0 you can get matching bokehlicious half body portraits. With XF90mm F2 you can get full body portraits with excellent separation. Also, Omar is using Lightroom, which is not optimum for Fujifilm’s X Trans files. When use with Capture One, files will be much more delicious for Fuji
I thought all C1 did was just process images in a way without worms. It doesn't increase image quality. At least not in my experience. The worms don't show up easily either if the image is not pushed too far.
Using Fuji for 5 years now, C1 blow away Fuji files, and I used Lightroom too. Something in clarity and color redention that C1 does his magic. I am talking of C1 Fujifilm version.
I enjoyed the video because I also identify as a Fuji and Nikon shooter. For me if it's more prime oriented I go with Fuji. While the Nikon Z primes are great, they're gigantic. But with zooms, they're actually pretty close. The Nikon 14-30 and 24-70 F4 are comparable in size with the Fuji zooms. Would be interesting to look at the 24-70 F 2.8 or F 4 versus the Fuji 16-55.
Regarding blacks and shadows, I noticed the same when comparing the A7iii to Fujifilm. The larger sensor's better dynamic range produces brighter more punchy images without flattening or washing out the image. Often the images seem to 'breathe' more and are less contrasty and crushed (comparatively speaking) .
I love the humorous style of your presentations, keep it up! For a really fair comparison perhaps you shoudn't compare fullframe 50mm/1.8 vs. APS-C 35mm/2.0. Probably the look of the images would become even more alike if you would take the Fujinon XF 33mm F1.4 R LM WR, which will give you more background separation. Anyway, well done, and very interesting for me as a Nikon Z full frame shooter. The differences are smaller than I thought they were. And especially in the tele-range APS-C could be tempting for me.
one thing to correct: Lightroom's latest version are no longer able to process Canon's camera profiles for EOS R5/R6 anymore. You're left with LR's own presets. The raw files can no longer just apply a preset and look like the jpegs in terms of color. For serious shots I often have no choice but to go through the slow grind of Canon's DPP4 and convert those for the color processing baked into the raw then see if need local adjustments(DPP 4 does not have local adjustment tools.)
Great video. I think that the xf 35mm f1.4 would have been a better choice for comparison as it's a 50mm f2.1 ff equivalent vs the 35 f/2 being a 50mm f3 equivalent
I shoot with my good friend often. He has a Nikon Z5. I feel your comparason here is spot on. My friends leans toward landscape photography where there isn't a lot of difference between our two cameras, but his images are often just a little sharper perhaps due to the full-frame advantage. I have a pre-rental version of Lightroom (5.7) which doesn't handle direct inporting of my X-T3 files. So I use DxO's excellent PureRaw III. I usuually go for moody lighting which I achieve in post using DxO's NIK collection. After about a year of observation and experimentation, I've decided to stick with Fujifilm's crop sensor for its smaller bodys and lenses. Not only are the available lenses smaller, they are of high quality and less expensive than those made for the Z platform. I still remain envious of ease of bokeh effects, and increased sharpness that you get with full-frame. BTW, I was a Nikon shooter for years using both crop sensor and full-frame cameras and lenses. Nikon Z is considerably sharper than anything Nikon had in either crop sensor or full-frame DSLRs.
Omar, there have definitely been times I've preferred the in-camera Nikon rendering to what I got out of RAW processing from Lightroom. So much so, I dropped Lightroom for NX Studio so I could make my edits and keep that sweet Nikon magic. I'd love to see what you think of it.
Lately I process my RAWS in NX Studio, and bring the JPEGS into Lightroom for culling and fine adjustments. But my purpose is to preserve those stunning Nikon colors.
Thanks for this Omar! I have been shooting both Nikon full frame and Fuji for quite a while now. It’s good to see the strengths of both systems.. I actually purchased the Nikon (D600) first and quickly realised that I would need an smaller form factor system to complement the candid portrait doco style that is a lot
@@ktcool4660 If you used some Leica, Voigtlander, Zeiss , Schneider, or Hasselblad glass you would not ask such question.If you like sterile digital output in each photo and adore polycarbonate you have to buy Nikon Z lenses preferable zoom since you don't need to bother with primes they all look same.
@@eagleeyephoto8715 you are full of shit. Nikon noct blows away leica noctilux. The Nikon 50mm f1.2 is on another level compared to all the other 50mm f1.2s. The 50 & 80 1.8s have great optics. Stellar micro contrast, saturation & 3d separation.
Hi Omar. I gave up on trying to get nice colors from my A7III (as you can get) so I sold it. The Fujifilm X-T4 or a Nikon (can't decide between Z5 and Z6II) are my main options to replace it. I'd love if could compare one of your fujis vs the Z6II, especially skin tones in SOOC images and using AWB. Thanks for you videos!
Love your videos Omar. I switched from a Nikon D750 to Fuji 4 years ago and am not convinced it was a great move. I'm not gonna lie, I instantly preferred the Nikon images in this comparison and has helped me in the decision to switch back to Nikon. Now the dilemma Z6ii or Z7ii!
I felt the same. Not sure if fujifilm had a lot of hype of not but I didn't feel the images were superior to my d750. But I think fuji's convenience is the size, character of photos from film simulation (simplicity mindset, no editing required for some) and just how beautiful the cameras are which is more psychologically appealing which feels more inspiring and fun to always use. I think the best combo is fuji as everyday compact camera and nikon for more serious work in my opinion. Although you can easily do vise versa. I use a Nikon Z5 and Xpro2 (just picked up used).
Great video. I shoot side by side Fuji X-T3 and Nikon Z6 and your insight is spot on. Unless we pixel peep or have bokeh, it's hard to tell the difference.
late to the party but great video! It would be interesting to see a Z6 v Z7 or Z7 v Fuji X comparison. edit. Also, given a lot of your older photos seem to have been taken with a Canon DLSR, I'd be really interested to hear why you switched from Canon to Nikon
I’m currently a Nikon shooter and intrigued by Fuji’s film simulations and lighter kit. I’m reassured by seeing just how similar the two results are, Nikon going for a filmic look and not a digital one, despite not calling it a film simulation as such. I always thought this was an advantage of digital, being able to reprocess a Raw with different intentions, though more recently I want a more spontaneous experience. So it seems to me having a side Fuji (or other option) would suit me as the main problem with my full-frame DSLR Nikon gear is size, and Fuji still has an advantage over the Z full-frame gear when it comes to that. It’s just so hard to choose… so thanks so much for your input.
Thanks a lot Omar, that's an interesting Video since I have just moved from Nikon D750 to Fuji not just because of size and weight but for the Fuji colours SOOC. I find Fuji - mainly Provia, Auto WB, exposure -1/3 - being more aquarelistic vs. Nikon, but we like the look. I also love Fuji's Classic Chrome look and also Astia for Portrait but set colour +1 on these. Acros, yes I like to experiment more with it. It fosters creativity and I must admit I believe I never set my Nikon to monochrome although I shot Nikon DSLR for since 2005. APS-C vs Full frame: I have always used full frame lenses on my Nikon D70 APS-C, so bokeh and isolating objects has never been an issue. Since using Fuji X, I am sometimes still struggeling with the different viewing angle and I agree isokating objects is more difficult but still fine on both the f2/35 & 50 primes and f4 16-80 zoom lens. So why not Nikon Z - what really pissed me off is that Nikon's FTZ doesn't support autofocus with AF-D lenses. I understand they want to sell their Z-lenses offering better look, quality and autofocus and I am prepared to invest but only as part of a transition process since the good old glass isn't bad at all. And by the way, Fuji bodies are X-E3 and X-H1 since my wife doesn't even part from her X-E2s to let me take a single shot...
I switched from Fuji to Nikon, and have no regrets. That said, while Nikon does better when it comes to image quality (full frame vs APS-C), there are some things Fuji does better. When it comes to black and white and tonality, I feel Fuji really does a great job. I won't say that tonality is better with Fuji, but they do it really well. The compactness of the cameras is also something I'm missing (probably will get the Z Fc). And the tilt screen on cameras like the X-T2, X-T3, and X-H1 is simply genius. That one I really miss, and I feel that I does make a difference. I'm not going back, my Nikon Z5 performs amazingly, and as a person who does a lot of adapting and using manual focus, the Z5 is just better. But Fujifilm definitely has done some great things with their cameras.
Fun comparison, I’m sure it’s been mentioned by others but curious to see how the Fuji 35 f1.4 would look, probably not at sharp but better rendition. I love it on my X-T3.
Hello Brother Omar which one is better for photo & video shooting on human subject like wedding videography & wedding photography between Nikon Z 7ii and Fuji Film XT4 ? thanks 🙏
Enjoy your channel and your pleasant personality. Interesting comparison. What I’d like to see is a comparison using the same lens on these different camera bodies; for example, adapting the same Nikon lens onto the Fujifilm XT3, that way there is absolutely no bias regarding the lens. Cheers!
Nope. You need to try the 16mm1.4, the 18mm1.4, the 23mm1.4, the 35mm1.4, the 56mm1.2, the 80mmf2.8, the 90mmf2 and the 16-55f2.8 and the 50-140f2.8....those little f2 Fujicrons are very nice lenses just the same though, very good for their size and number of elements (the 50f2 is a very nice little lens). Oh and the 23mmf2 on the X100V is a dream lens, sharp even at f2.
Fantatsic video I find you so engaging I was surprised as a Nikon shooter to see how similar the colours were as Fuji is held in such high esteem for its colours many thanks for taking the time to make the video that Z 50mm is a lens for the ages truly spectacular
I'm a Nikon shooter, but recently I have bought Fuji XH2S. I use it with the Fringer and the Tamron 35mm 1.4. It's a great, sharp lens and gives you equivalent of 50mm f1.8-2.0. No need to wait for Fuji :)
They ask me "is that a film camera?" cause I have a thumb grip on the hot shoe. But really, if you take a stunning image nobody is gonna start nitpicking on resolution or pixel pitch or sensor size. People need to work on their skills and not just buy another camera (says the guy who has six Fujifilms lol).
Your videos are a joy to watch! After months of mental debating with myself I finally bought the Nikon Z6ii because of the grip. Fujis grip is a nightmare and so uncomfortable compared to the Nikon. What’s your thought on the Fuji grip?
There're a few things I saw come up in your image-comparisons that I feel are critical when comparing crop sensors to full-frame ones. The full-frame images consistently show more dynamic range. The glass buildings of the Nikon just popped out at me every time because they have more contrast between the various tones, for example. In the cedar trees on the dock amongst the umbrellas the shadows of a full-frame sensor look lighter, less contrasty than the crop; this is because there's more tonality rendered on a full-frame sensor due to the increased dynamic range. It would be easy to remove the tonality and drive it down into a contrasty black, but obviously you can't go the other way necessarily on a crop-sensor (from contrasty blacks up to a rich array of shadow tones). Also, white balance and color, so much of what makes Fuji images sing is the artistic brilliance of their simulations; maybe it's less about the sensor than it is the design and programming of the colors? Where this resonates for me is when I make the conscious decision to shoot RAW on either Nikon or Fuji systems, yes the files are unique in various ways but in the end I process in a look that I like that I can achieve from either brand. Obviously, if you prefer (and I do sometimes) to shoot jpeg casually, then Fujifim just simply makes it fun and easy to get nice images. One thing that I think should always be a discussion in a comparison between a crop sensor and full-frame is depth-of-field and approximately (just to educate those who believe it to be mysterious) the actual difference, for example, if a lens has an aperture of f/1.8 on a Nikon full-frame sensor the same lens will have an equivalent depth-of-field of (1.5 x f/1.8) f/2.7. Just to be clear, I like it when we're reminded of the math involved, it's relatively precise and now we have some fast lenses for crop cameras so it isn't always a worry not being able to achieve shallow depth of field. For me this was mysterious and difficult for a long time because it is too-often unmentioned. With that, the light-gathering of the f/1.8 lens is the same on full-frame vs crop. To conclude, yes there are interesting brand-related image characteristics, pros and cons between Nikon full-frame and Fujifilm crops but the real differences for image quality are objective, based on physics and very-much important to understand in any comparison of these cameras.
One of the biggest differences i saw between these two bodies is that the images out of nikon have a punchier feeling to them, their highlights are punchier and its making that zone stand out, it reduces the need of dodging. Nikon certainly has better resolution and i prefer nikon colours so i like the colours from nikon more. However i feel that using a nikon z 50mm f1.8 in the test gives nikon a clear edge. I wish you could have used 2 nikn z 50mm on both bodies, that would have been the ultimate test.
I think when it comes to skin tones, Nikon is better or more neutral. However, I can't see any significant difference as per this video when it comes to the colors overall. Actually, Fuji has more vibrant colors (which I do not like, I want myself to put more vibrance than the camera doing it for me).
It‘s fantastic to see that Nikon is doing a fantastic job. I used a Alpha 7R II and a X-T30 and the X-T30 outperformed the RII in every way. To see that the Nikon matches Fuji so well makes me happy. It seems like this is the perfect combo, because you got the same good feeling comparing the images. Thank you so much Omar for your fantastic work here on RU-vid. After watching your video about the pros of the X-T20 i bought the successor for my trip to D.C. and NYC and was overwhelmed by the quality. Greetings from germany
shooting in both brands I steel prefer Nikon for my pro stuff and fuji for my personal little personal projects but every time I work on that nef files I'm amazed by how much information they have!
interesting! I thought that 50mm fov lenses would be smaller than 75mm fov lenses, but for example the sigma 56 mm f1.4 is the smallest of the contemporary trio ...
