For me, it was a mistake. It doesn't matter if one agrees with me or not. There are features in both cameras that I would have wanted in only one body in order to stay with Fuji. I went elsewhere. 😁😉
The drawbacks you need to accept with the Nikon ZF. 1) It has no thumb grip in the back - HUGE mistake. 2) It has almost no finger grip on the front - even that bit more on the X-T5 would have helped the ZF Didn't realize how much the lack of these two features make it difficult to use the camera one-handed when shooting over your head - as in trying to locate your subject when they're surrounded by a crowd of people. 3) the flippy-tilty rear LCD screen. Great for vloggers, not great for photographers. Flipping the screen out, then rotating the screen back is extra clumsy step when you're trying to shoot quickly over your head. ...making "over your head shooting" doubley problematic. ...this flippy-tilty screen is also problematic when shooting low from the hip, or near the ground. The screen gets in the way of your left hand - or your arm gets in the way of seeing the rear LCD screen. I'm a pro shooter, and these three issues have become a total deal breaker for the ZF for me - and I really wanted one to replace my Z6 II. 4) Lens size. You showed the ZF with two of the most mundane lenses in Nikon's line-up. The 28/2.8, and the 40/2. Nikon's lens design solution for their "REALLY GOOD" lens options seems to be "go longer and narrow" vs. "shorter and fatter". I'd rather have shorter and fatter than longer. Fuji 33mm f/1.4 is 2.6 x 2.9" and 12.7 oz / 360 g Nikon 50mm f/1.8 S is 2.99 x 3.41" and 14.64 oz / 415 g If you want to go dreamy - then you have to accept "HUGE" and "Heavy". Nikon 50mm f/1.2 S is 3.5 x 5.9" and 2.4 lb / 1090 g To say the Fuji X system isn't for pro-shooters is big gaping hole in your commentary. Plenty of pros use the X system as their cameras of choice. ...You should check Chrisman Studios work...
@@jamesjackson4264 - f/1.2 has a different "cream factor" than f/1.8. f/1.2 is without question, smoother when comparing the two. But those f/1.2 lenses are HUGE. And I prefer a bit more definition in the out of focus rendering of the (thankfully) smaller f/1.8 lens. ...which is why I love my f/1.8 lenses. The definition and size.
@@jamesjackson4264 - That is true. But that also comes at a giant price - not only the price, but the size. LOL ...and I've gotten over the whole "smooth as butter" look with f/1.2 lenses. I do appreciate a bit more definition in the background rendering. ...even like the look of old-vintage manual focus lenses over the modern f/1.2 lenses.
1) get it for $5 from AliExpress 2) get it from Small rig if you want to use big lenses. The grip is fine with the small ones like 40/f2. 3) how often do you shoot over you head or from your hip compared to classic 'eye to the viewfinder'? If you are a pro shooter, why would you consider any of these two cameras the video is about - plenty of better alternatives from both brands. 4) I also showed size comparison between Fuji's 33/1.4 & 23/1.4 and Nikon's 50/1.8 & 35/1.8 to make exaclty the same point, lol 😀 Again, if you need very dreamy bokeh (e.g. wedding photography), you won't consider Zf at all. Where did I say that Fuji X system is not for pro-shooters? I even mentioned a pro-photographer who is using X-T5... 😂
Have it for few months. Changed from Nikon. First few shoots took time to adopt to new system, but now I am pleased with performance, funcionality and all in all great cammera I would recommend.
The zf imho needed two things: an "a" on the iso and shutter dials and a c1-c2 on the pasm selector. The other thing, they need more vintage lenses or a new adapter to make the older lenses fully readable and compatible. You can do it on a d200 why not on a Zf?
Have both, bought the Zf first. Then the X-T5 . Have to confess , the size of Fuji is really nice … but shooting with Nikon is something really great too . I’m sticking with small primes and both systems are excellent. Love the 40mm f2 on Nikon unbeatable…. Same with the 35f1.4 on x-t5
Not really. Bought Fujifilm for the out of camera jpegs. Need to throw out photos quickly after family events without needing to edit them in Lightroom.
The fujifilm's brilliant screen articulation would be the thing that keeps me with it. (Maybe!) Nikon didn't ask me, but I would not have put a ''blogging'' screen on it. Great video as always!
I was frustrated with the ZF at first, but now i simply cant put it down. I didnt have that feeling with the x-t5. No regrets now at all. Above all the 24mp ff beats the 40mp cs easily with image quality and raw editing.
the problem of both camera manufacturers is they made classical style body but reluctantly released classic style lenses situation of nikon is much worth cause they only released 2 so far (28 and 40m) i myself own zf and some fujis (not exactly x-t5, i got x-pro1, x-m1 and x-t1) now
The Zf is way heavier and bulkier than the XT5. For me the XT5 is perfect as an EDC camera paired with the 27mm pancake prime. I also had the XE4 but the smaller body didn't have any advantage for me cause the lens dictates the overall bulk of the kit. So thats IMO the biggest disadvantage of Fujifilm... There are to few modern compact primes. They should renew their 1.4 35mm and 23mm primes with better AF but with a few optical compromises (aka character)
@@PetrGardianTVYep, they could as least shrink down the 23&35 F2 lenses or make something like 1.6 or 1.8 primes... I always wonder why no one goes in between the usual f stops. Though I have to add that the 22&33mm LM WR lenses are truly gems for professionals... I wouldn't want to do any job with one of the older versions 😁
Fujifilm is smaller and lighter. If you want full frame there is a bulk penalty unless you really stick to slow primes. I moved away from full frame after over 10 years. I don't want the bulk anymore.
@@PetrGardianTV How do you define "fast"? Because speed of lens means that at the same ISO setting, lens with larger aperture needs shorter shutter speed - therefore is faster. F/2 lens is not as fast as f/1.4 lens. Regardless of sensor size. But because full frame sensor is twice as large as APS-C, it can handle twice the ISO with same amount of noise as APS-C. So FF camera with f/2 lens and APS-C camera with f/1.4 lens, taking pictures at the same shutter speed will result in the images with same amount of noise.
@@jankom.7783 Your definition is correct. f1.4 lens will get more light on the sensor than f2 lens, regardless of the sensor size. I was talking about depth of field, sorry!
I have the Zf and X-e4 and both those lenses too. Love both setups, but the 40mm is silent and fast to focus. Maybe the xf 35 f1.4 has very slightly nicer bokeh but largely irrelavant. Hopefully Nikon will release a compact 50mm and 85mm f2 in the same style. Regarding the title of this video, what problem specifically did Nikon solve? lol
Fuji's build quality is inferior to Nikon. You can point at number of things on the camera body and find something. No need for me to list them all out.
I picked up a Zf in Japan and my immediate thought was "this camera is too heavy for me to travel with". The Zf is also a lot more expensive where I live. So there are two problems Nikon didn't solve!
My daily driver is the Nikon Z9. For my holidays, I have the X-T5. Maybe I would've bought a Zf, but when I got my camera's, there was no Zf on the horizon, so I got what I think was the best for me.
I think Nikon dropped the ball not including aperture rings in some of the new vintage-looking lenses. It should also remove that flippy screen (not vintage at all).
I handled both, and bought the Fuji X-T5. No regrets. The Nikon looked great on paper but it's bigger and heavier in person, the grip is awful, and the compact primes have plastic mounts. Hard pass. And this is coming from someone who has owned half a dozen Nikon cameras - film and digital. Very happy with the X-T5 and the very high quality and well made compact primes.
Not criticising your decision but people need to get over the plastic lens mount. Those days when companies released lenses with plastic mount and they were all garbage are long gone. The Nikon 40/2 is fantastic and plastic mount helps to keep it's weight down.
same situations as many.. nikon zf does not have any discret grip and a flippy screen... which is a no go for me. Also the size is so huge comparing with any FM body from the past. To me only have sense if they use the size of the ZFc and use an A mode in the iso dial haha. Still going for the Fuji body. Wating for an Xpro4 pared with the 35 1.4 mm
I am a long time Nikon user and I have invest on the system (10 or more leneses). Even if a brand produces a better body than my Zf (I also own a Zfc), it is very expensive for me to change brands. So, my advice is to stay with what you already using, at least if you have invested on a system (eg having 2-3 lenses). There are exceptions of course, for instance if you need special lenses (eg Nikon has great long telephoto lenses) that do not exist on the system that you are using.
Zf is almost perfect, but they should have used the 45.7mp sensor. 24mp is not enough in 2024 IMHO. My dream is a Nikon S3 reborn rangefinder style mirrorless camera with EVF, flip screen and 45.7mp sensor.
Nikon and Fuji are owned by the exact same parent company Mitsubishi heavy industries. Nikon had to wait for Fuji to get a 40mp sensor to differentiate it from the Nikon Zf 24mp. Had there been only a 24mp or 26mp Fuji camera, then people would abandon Fuji for Nikon's Zf. Plus the Nikon Zf is not a professional camera, its a stripped down enthusiast model. The Fuji flagship cameras are now their professional lineup hybrid cameras. Mitsubishi has made a complete mess out of this situation between Fuji and Nikon opting to switch Fuji into a more dslr styled camera system while transitioning Nikon to retro styled cameras. Olympus was basically the first system doing retro styled cameras, and now Fuji copied that, and then Nikon, and now the Canon fanbois was Canon to make a retro styled camera. The only problem is is that none of them are actual retro cameras as they're all electronic and use fly-by-wire. A proper retro camera has mechanical coupling of auto focus rings and aperture rings and that is a dsrl. Mirrorless is not retro, its just stylized to look retro but is fully electronic, its Faux-retro.
I can take photos with one hand on my XT5 with a thumb grip. I get all the great shots I want, now that they have the new linear motors in the primes! My only two issues with Fuji are the build quality and the auto focus, which is by far better in the XT5, but still not up to the competition.
Sooo... a vintage looking camera but without aperture control on a lens (unless you are using actual vintage lenses), and having the PSAM dial on top, what's vintage about that?? I don't doubt the overall quality of that product, but still, sounds like a pariah to me...
If you compare Fuji x t 5 with A FULL FRAME CAMERA then even this means that Fujifilm APSC camera is good enough that we compare it with a full frame. Fujifilm has great lenses. I use 16 mm prime lens, it is a fantastic lens. Do street, architecture, low light shooting, and so on. I have 8 mm lens that is great. Photographers should stop comparing two cameras. I can compare medium format Fuji with the Nikon. İs this fare ? X T 5 İS GREAT CAMERA, AND THE BEST CAMERA İS YOUR BRAİN.
90% of the time Fujifilm is out of stock and back ordered. So far with x100vi no one can get one unless you are a reviewer or an influencer taking pictures of your butthole. So I’m going with Nikon.
"Full Frame look"?. In that case, the Fuji GFX series and Hasselblads are the best cameras ever made because they have medium format sensors. Its just senseless to say one camera system is better than the other because of sensor size and resolution. Photographers who use the Fuji system have their own reasons, I guess its the same for Nikon or Sony users. Its time to retire the absolutely meaningless type of content arguing why one system is better than the other. Plenty of amazing pictures were clicked before TH-cam or the internet came into existence, that's saying something about how meaningless these videos are
Where did I say that Nikon is better than Fuji because it has full frame sensor? I'm talking about advantages of full frame vs. APS-C, which is defined by physics. And yes, there is a 'full frame look' as well as 'medium format look' and it's the reason why some photographers prefer bigger sensors for their work. APS-C sensor doesn't make a camera 'bad' but it comes with it's own limitations (and advantages).
For me the Nikon Zf‘s always appeared as an afterthought of Nikon, and the APSC versions as entry level cameras with lower quality lenses. Fuji on the other hand is fully committed and more authentic, and offers the H2’s for hybrid shooters. The APSC sensor is slightly inferior to the full frame sensors and with regard to autofocus, Fuji plays an annoyingly lazy catch-up game. However, for most photographers it is still more than good enough. In my opinion the lenses are significantly smaller and lighter - just compare the Fuji 33mm to a 50mm on Nikon (I changed from a Nikon D850 to the XT-5 - it is a huge difference). You can‘t achieve a small depth of field on APSC as on full frame, but that is more often than not an advantage. One of the differences that is important to me is the aperture ring, which most Fuji lenses have, which makes the exposure triangle much more tactile for me.
"In my opinion the lenses are significantly smaller and lighter - just compare the Fuji 33mm to a 50mm on Nikon" It's not that big of a difference: Fuji XF 33mm f/1.4 = 360g - φ67mm - 74mm vs. Nikon Z 50mm f/1.8 = 415g - φ76mm - 87mm I have both - they are both top lenses in their class.
You have B&W switch on the Zf body and you can set up in-camera jpegs however you want. And call it 'film simulation' if it makes you feel better. It will still be a digital image processed by the camera, same as with Fuji.
The problem is you can't get fast glass like the 56 1.2 Viltrox 27 1.2, 85 1.2, and all the rest for the Nikon the Nikon versions are huge and mega expensive
Viltrox is coming in FF mount, can't wait to see what the new Pro & Lab lines will look like. I wonder if they ll make a GFX mount, their upcoming lens seems to have 46.5mm diagonal image like the Fujinon Premista...
The DOF of a f/1.2 on the Fujifilm will be equivalent to f/1.8 on the Nikon. Nikon had loads of those lenses (20, 24, 35, 50,85, 135), and even better ones like the 50mm and 85mm f/1.2, which would have to be f/0,8 on fujifilm APS-C.
@@mainmain5303 The Nikon mirrorless APS-C camera bodies are crippled. Fuji's $1,600 X-T2 body has an electronic shutter speed up to 1/32000s. Nikon doesn't offer this. And yes. This makes a significant imaging difference shooting outdoors on a bright sunny day at f/1.2 or f/1.4. Nikon also scalps their AF ability in their mirrorless APS-C camera bodies.
IMHO, Fuji made a mistake with releasing the X-H2 and X-T5 as 2 different cameras instead of ONE!
Disagree. Nikon is having their Zf for Fuji's X-T5, and Z7 or whatever for Fuji's X-H2...
For me, it was a mistake. It doesn't matter if one agrees with me or not. There are features in both cameras that I would have wanted in only one body in order to stay with Fuji. I went elsewhere. 😁😉
@@jean-philippeperetti8463 Fair enough. But just out of curiosity, what features are we talking about?
@@tomislavmiletic_ If you type X-T5 vs X-H2 in the Google search bar, you should get a few cues. 😁
No, they made the mistake of making X-T5's build quality inferior to X-H2.
The drawbacks you need to accept with the Nikon ZF.
1) It has no thumb grip in the back - HUGE mistake.
2) It has almost no finger grip on the front - even that bit more on the X-T5 would have helped the ZF
Didn't realize how much the lack of these two features make it difficult to use the camera one-handed when shooting over your head - as in trying to locate your subject when they're surrounded by a crowd of people.
3) the flippy-tilty rear LCD screen. Great for vloggers, not great for photographers. Flipping the screen out, then rotating the screen back is extra clumsy step when you're trying to shoot quickly over your head. ...making "over your head shooting" doubley problematic. ...this flippy-tilty screen is also problematic when shooting low from the hip, or near the ground. The screen gets in the way of your left hand - or your arm gets in the way of seeing the rear LCD screen.
I'm a pro shooter, and these three issues have become a total deal breaker for the ZF for me - and I really wanted one to replace my Z6 II.
4) Lens size. You showed the ZF with two of the most mundane lenses in Nikon's line-up. The 28/2.8, and the 40/2. Nikon's lens design solution for their "REALLY GOOD" lens options seems to be "go longer and narrow" vs. "shorter and fatter". I'd rather have shorter and fatter than longer.
Fuji 33mm f/1.4 is 2.6 x 2.9" and 12.7 oz / 360 g
Nikon 50mm f/1.8 S is 2.99 x 3.41" and 14.64 oz / 415 g
If you want to go dreamy - then you have to accept "HUGE" and "Heavy".
Nikon 50mm f/1.2 S is 3.5 x 5.9" and 2.4 lb / 1090 g
To say the Fuji X system isn't for pro-shooters is big gaping hole in your commentary. Plenty of pros use the X system as their cameras of choice. ...You should check Chrisman Studios work...
You don’t have to go big to get big and dreamy. 1.8 full frame is equivalent to 1.2 on apsc when regarding blurr.
@@jamesjackson4264 - f/1.2 has a different "cream factor" than f/1.8.
f/1.2 is without question, smoother when comparing the two. But those f/1.2 lenses are HUGE. And I prefer a bit more definition in the out of focus rendering of the (thankfully) smaller f/1.8 lens.
...which is why I love my f/1.8 lenses. The definition and size.
@@craigjohnchronicles2504 I agree they are different but when we talking full frame 1.2. That look is not even offered in apsc.
@@jamesjackson4264 - That is true. But that also comes at a giant price - not only the price, but the size. LOL ...and I've gotten over the whole "smooth as butter" look with f/1.2 lenses. I do appreciate a bit more definition in the background rendering. ...even like the look of old-vintage manual focus lenses over the modern f/1.2 lenses.
1) get it for $5 from AliExpress
2) get it from Small rig if you want to use big lenses. The grip is fine with the small ones like 40/f2.
3) how often do you shoot over you head or from your hip compared to classic 'eye to the viewfinder'? If you are a pro shooter, why would you consider any of these two cameras the video is about - plenty of better alternatives from both brands.
4) I also showed size comparison between Fuji's 33/1.4 & 23/1.4 and Nikon's 50/1.8 & 35/1.8 to make exaclty the same point, lol 😀
Again, if you need very dreamy bokeh (e.g. wedding photography), you won't consider Zf at all.
Where did I say that Fuji X system is not for pro-shooters? I even mentioned a pro-photographer who is using X-T5... 😂
Switched to a XT30 II for half the price of my nikon and I have no regret
Plan to buy this little beast, how's the performance
Have it for few months. Changed from Nikon. First few shoots took time to adopt to new system, but now I am pleased with performance, funcionality and all in all great cammera I would recommend.
It for sure is a good one and you can still buy it new.
The zf imho needed two things: an "a" on the iso and shutter dials and a c1-c2 on the pasm selector. The other thing, they need more vintage lenses or a new adapter to make the older lenses fully readable and compatible. You can do it on a d200 why not on a Zf?
There are definitely things to improve👍
Have both, bought the Zf first. Then the X-T5 . Have to confess , the size of Fuji is really nice … but shooting with Nikon is something really great too . I’m sticking with small primes and both systems are excellent. Love the 40mm f2 on Nikon unbeatable…. Same with the 35f1.4 on x-t5
Those are the two lenses of choice of me for both cameras 👍
I would choose XT5 over the Zf six days in a week: lighter, better handling, no flip out screen, color.
Zf for Sundays then, works for me 😀
Not really. Bought Fujifilm for the out of camera jpegs.
Need to throw out photos quickly after family events without needing to edit them in Lightroom.
Fair enough👍 Although Nikon files need very little editing most of the time.
Nikon jpeg also nice tho
The fujifilm's brilliant screen articulation would be the thing that keeps me with it. (Maybe!) Nikon didn't ask me, but I would not have put a ''blogging'' screen on it. Great video as always!
Thank you. The screen on Zf makes sense if you consider video capabilities but we all have different needs.
Not just for self video it's also good for portrait orientation. Best would be a GH7 display that both flips and tilts.
I was frustrated with the ZF at first, but now i simply cant put it down. I didnt have that feeling with the x-t5. No regrets now at all. Above all the 24mp ff beats the 40mp cs easily with image quality and raw editing.
IQ is on a different level with Zf.
And the sound of that shutter, so satisfying!@@PetrGardianTV
Considering weak arguments, this video is a Nikon commercial. I have several bodies of both brands and like them both a lot.
I wish Nikon would pay me, lol. Nohing wrong with liking both!
the problem of both camera manufacturers is they made classical style body but reluctantly released classic style lenses situation of nikon is much worth cause they only released 2 so far (28 and 40m) i myself own zf and some fujis (not exactly x-t5, i got x-pro1, x-m1 and x-t1) now
I completely agree. Companies don't focus on lenses as much as on the bodies - less money to make.
The Zf is way heavier and bulkier than the XT5. For me the XT5 is perfect as an EDC camera paired with the 27mm pancake prime. I also had the XE4 but the smaller body didn't have any advantage for me cause the lens dictates the overall bulk of the kit. So thats IMO the biggest disadvantage of Fujifilm... There are to few modern compact primes. They should renew their 1.4 35mm and 23mm primes with better AF but with a few optical compromises (aka character)
Agreed on the Fuji lenses. It's frustrating they went the route of issuing big 1.4 primes when their cameras need the exact opposite.
@@PetrGardianTVYep, they could as least shrink down the 23&35 F2 lenses or make something like 1.6 or 1.8 primes... I always wonder why no one goes in between the usual f stops. Though I have to add that the 22&33mm LM WR lenses are truly gems for professionals... I wouldn't want to do any job with one of the older versions 😁
@@andyphotoandfilm 👍
Fujifilm is smaller and lighter. If you want full frame there is a bulk penalty unless you really stick to slow primes. I moved away from full frame after over 10 years. I don't want the bulk anymore.
Same. I bought XT-3 and a bunch of F2 primes
Sure, but what is a 'slow' FF lens? 40/f2 on Nikon is as fast as much bigger 33/1.4 on Fuji.
slow primes?? there's plenty of fast prime lenses available that are sharp, light and quick.
@@PetrGardianTV How do you define "fast"? Because speed of lens means that at the same ISO setting, lens with larger aperture needs shorter shutter speed - therefore is faster. F/2 lens is not as fast as f/1.4 lens. Regardless of sensor size.
But because full frame sensor is twice as large as APS-C, it can handle twice the ISO with same amount of noise as APS-C. So FF camera with f/2 lens and APS-C camera with f/1.4 lens, taking pictures at the same shutter speed will result in the images with same amount of noise.
@@jankom.7783 Your definition is correct. f1.4 lens will get more light on the sensor than f2 lens, regardless of the sensor size. I was talking about depth of field, sorry!
I have the Zf and X-e4 and both those lenses too. Love both setups, but the 40mm is silent and fast to focus. Maybe the xf 35 f1.4 has very slightly nicer bokeh but largely irrelavant. Hopefully Nikon will release a compact 50mm and 85mm f2 in the same style.
Regarding the title of this video, what problem specifically did Nikon solve? lol
Nice combo, I'd get the 27/2.8 for Fuji and call it a day😀
@@PetrGardianTVI’m actually looking at the Voigtlander 18mm to add to the Xf
@@kjltube Nice one!
Scratches on XT-5? I´ll enter Nikon system... that was the argument I was waiting for- Nikon has round edges...
Fuji's build quality is inferior to Nikon. You can point at number of things on the camera body and find something. No need for me to list them all out.
I picked up a Zf in Japan and my immediate thought was "this camera is too heavy for me to travel with". The Zf is also a lot more expensive where I live. So there are two problems Nikon didn't solve!
Price will always be a factor...
My daily driver is the Nikon Z9. For my holidays, I have the X-T5. Maybe I would've bought a Zf, but when I got my camera's, there was no Zf on the horizon, so I got what I think was the best for me.
X-T5 is a great holiday camera👍
I think Nikon dropped the ball not including aperture rings in some of the new vintage-looking lenses. It should also remove that flippy screen (not vintage at all).
I handled both, and bought the Fuji X-T5. No regrets. The Nikon looked great on paper but it's bigger and heavier in person, the grip is awful, and the compact primes have plastic mounts. Hard pass. And this is coming from someone who has owned half a dozen Nikon cameras - film and digital. Very happy with the X-T5 and the very high quality and well made compact primes.
Auto focus of Xt-5 is garbage. Its like made in 2015 auto focus.
Not criticising your decision but people need to get over the plastic lens mount. Those days when companies released lenses with plastic mount and they were all garbage are long gone. The Nikon 40/2 is fantastic and plastic mount helps to keep it's weight down.
FUJIFILM has a headstart of about 12 years when it comes to this type of cameras. This is not to be underestimated.
Sure, but Nikon has a rich film camera heritage to get inspired by.
same situations as many.. nikon zf does not have any discret grip and a flippy screen... which is a no go for me. Also the size is so huge comparing with any FM body from the past. To me only have sense if they use the size of the ZFc and use an A mode in the iso dial haha. Still going for the Fuji body. Wating for an Xpro4 pared with the 35 1.4 mm
Grip can be added, screen can be completely hidden - which some may prefer. Nothing wrong with either camera but I'd prefer X-PRO 4 as well :)
@@PetrGardianTVagreed! we may have to dream with the xpro4 hahaha
I am a long time Nikon user and I have invest on the system (10 or more leneses). Even if a brand produces a better body than my Zf (I also own a Zfc), it is very expensive for me to change brands. So, my advice is to stay with what you already using, at least if you have invested on a system (eg having 2-3 lenses). There are exceptions of course, for instance if you need special lenses (eg Nikon has great long telephoto lenses) that do not exist on the system that you are using.
Agreed!👍
Or you use a speedbooster on the xt5. It would be more fair to compare the xt5 to the zfc.
I may try that 👍
Zf is almost perfect, but they should have used the 45.7mp sensor. 24mp is not enough in 2024 IMHO. My dream is a Nikon S3 reborn rangefinder style mirrorless camera with EVF, flip screen and 45.7mp sensor.
YOU TOOK THE WORDS OUT OF MY MOUTH! The 24MP is a deal breaker for me too! Why don’t camera manufacturers ever listen? Why?
Rangefinder styled Nikon FF is my dream 😀
Waiting for your Nikon Zf user review. Such a beauty camera.
I've got one out already, link is under this video.
I have never sought after the "perfect" camera. All cameras are different. All cameras are fun.
Agreed. Some more, some less, depending on the individual.
Nikon and Fuji are owned by the exact same parent company Mitsubishi heavy industries. Nikon had to wait for Fuji to get a 40mp sensor to differentiate it from the Nikon Zf 24mp. Had there been only a 24mp or 26mp Fuji camera, then people would abandon Fuji for Nikon's Zf. Plus the Nikon Zf is not a professional camera, its a stripped down enthusiast model. The Fuji flagship cameras are now their professional lineup hybrid cameras. Mitsubishi has made a complete mess out of this situation between Fuji and Nikon opting to switch Fuji into a more dslr styled camera system while transitioning Nikon to retro styled cameras.
Olympus was basically the first system doing retro styled cameras, and now Fuji copied that, and then Nikon, and now the Canon fanbois was Canon to make a retro styled camera. The only problem is is that none of them are actual retro cameras as they're all electronic and use fly-by-wire. A proper retro camera has mechanical coupling of auto focus rings and aperture rings and that is a dsrl. Mirrorless is not retro, its just stylized to look retro but is fully electronic, its Faux-retro.
Fujifilm is not owned by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries.
This is a wild conspiracy theory. Do you have anything to back this up?
I can take photos with one hand on my XT5 with a thumb grip. I get all the great shots I want, now that they have the new linear motors in the primes!
My only two issues with Fuji are the build quality and the auto focus, which is by far better in the XT5, but still not up to the competition.
Canon R8 + RF 28mm f2.8
Grip helps with handling of almost every retro-styled camera.
Sooo... a vintage looking camera but without aperture control on a lens (unless you are using actual vintage lenses), and having the PSAM dial on top, what's vintage about that?? I don't doubt the overall quality of that product, but still, sounds like a pariah to me...
You get both of the two worlds.
@@PetrGardianTV Fair enough, but I'm not convinced...
I prefer Nikon Df than Zf.
Hmm, DSLRs have their benefits👍
If you compare Fuji x t 5 with A FULL FRAME CAMERA then even this means that Fujifilm APSC camera is good enough that we compare it with a full frame. Fujifilm has great lenses. I use 16 mm prime lens, it is a fantastic lens. Do street, architecture, low light shooting, and so on. I have 8 mm lens that is great. Photographers should stop comparing two cameras. I can compare medium format Fuji with the Nikon. İs this fare ? X T 5 İS GREAT CAMERA, AND THE BEST CAMERA İS YOUR BRAİN.
Agreed but my brain cannot print photos (unless Musk moves ahead with Neuralink, lol).
Pointless video, for some it could be “how Fujifilm solved Nikon problem”, to each his own 🤡
I'm working on that video, stay tuned 😀
The grip on the ZF is horrible!
It's ok with the small lenses.
@@PetrGardianTV Yes, but why limit yourself to small lenses?
@@Daniel_Zalman Then don't, lol :)
@@PetrGardianTV Of course. I'm just playing devil's advocate. It's a really pretty looking camera.
90% of the time Fujifilm is out of stock and back ordered. So far with x100vi no one can get one unless you are a reviewer or an influencer taking pictures of your butthole. So I’m going with Nikon.
Yeah, Fujifilm's supply chain is a wor of 'art'.
"Full Frame look"?. In that case, the Fuji GFX series and Hasselblads are the best cameras ever made because they have medium format sensors. Its just senseless to say one camera system is better than the other because of sensor size and resolution. Photographers who use the Fuji system have their own reasons, I guess its the same for Nikon or Sony users. Its time to retire the absolutely meaningless type of content arguing why one system is better than the other. Plenty of amazing pictures were clicked before TH-cam or the internet came into existence, that's saying something about how meaningless these videos are
Where did I say that Nikon is better than Fuji because it has full frame sensor? I'm talking about advantages of full frame vs. APS-C, which is defined by physics. And yes, there is a 'full frame look' as well as 'medium format look' and it's the reason why some photographers prefer bigger sensors for their work. APS-C sensor doesn't make a camera 'bad' but it comes with it's own limitations (and advantages).
For me the Nikon Zf‘s always appeared as an afterthought of Nikon, and the APSC versions as entry level cameras with lower quality lenses. Fuji on the other hand is fully committed and more authentic, and offers the H2’s for hybrid shooters. The APSC sensor is slightly inferior to the full frame sensors and with regard to autofocus, Fuji plays an annoyingly lazy catch-up game. However, for most photographers it is still more than good enough. In my opinion the lenses are significantly smaller and lighter - just compare the Fuji 33mm to a 50mm on Nikon (I changed from a Nikon D850 to the XT-5 - it is a huge difference). You can‘t achieve a small depth of field on APSC as on full frame, but that is more often than not an advantage. One of the differences that is important to me is the aperture ring, which most Fuji lenses have, which makes the exposure triangle much more tactile for me.
"In my opinion the lenses are significantly smaller and lighter - just compare the Fuji 33mm to a 50mm on Nikon"
It's not that big of a difference: Fuji XF 33mm f/1.4 = 360g - φ67mm - 74mm vs. Nikon Z 50mm f/1.8 = 415g - φ76mm - 87mm
I have both - they are both top lenses in their class.
This👆
Props for the Brixton pics!… Dats my Enz!… ✊🏿
It's a cool area, loved taking pics there!
nikon zf is so heavy, no film simulation and too few lens
So i choose xt5 😅
You have B&W switch on the Zf body and you can set up in-camera jpegs however you want. And call it 'film simulation' if it makes you feel better. It will still be a digital image processed by the camera, same as with Fuji.
Nikon lenses are not at all good in terms of quality..plastic mount. Less third party lenses.
Plastic mount has nothing to do with IQ, which is very good. There's more and more third party AF lenses coming out.
Fujifilm has no problem!!
Supply chain? 😀
The problem is you can't get fast glass like the 56 1.2 Viltrox 27 1.2, 85 1.2, and all the rest for the Nikon the Nikon versions are huge and mega expensive
Viltrox 1.2 lenses are there for Z mount. Also apsc 1.2 = FF f1.8.
Viltrox is coming in FF mount, can't wait to see what the new Pro & Lab lines will look like. I wonder if they ll make a GFX mount, their upcoming lens seems to have 46.5mm diagonal image like the Fujinon Premista...
The DOF of a f/1.2 on the Fujifilm will be equivalent to f/1.8 on the Nikon. Nikon had loads of those lenses (20, 24, 35, 50,85, 135), and even better ones like the 50mm and 85mm f/1.2, which would have to be f/0,8 on fujifilm APS-C.
@@El-Rico Yes, true DoF is different, but they let in less light, so to get the equivalent with Nikon would cost a fortune
@@mainmain5303 The Nikon mirrorless APS-C camera bodies are crippled. Fuji's $1,600 X-T2 body has an electronic shutter speed up to 1/32000s. Nikon doesn't offer this. And yes. This makes a significant imaging difference shooting outdoors on a bright sunny day at f/1.2 or f/1.4.
Nikon also scalps their AF ability in their mirrorless APS-C camera bodies.