I shoot two systems: Fuji & Nikon... should I condense to just one?

[MatthewK]

For the past 6 years, I've shot Fuji for my family/travel/casual stuff, and Nikon for birding. The systems remain totally separate, I've never mounted a standard length lens on any Nikon camera, nor has my Fuji ever seen a telephoto. It's been a great setup, I have no problem switching between them. However, as of late, I've been considering condensing down to a single system in order to eliminate the need to bring two different systems on travel. Being able to shoot birds in the morning and my kids on the beach in the afternoon with the same camera, sounds reasonable. So, it got me thinking...



On the left is my current Fuji kit, and the right is the comparable Nikon kit. The size increase is rather substantial, and that's the main issue I have with such a move (and the reason I left Canon for Fuji), along with Fuji being an absolute blast to shoot with. The tradeoff is that I get better lenses and a streamlined kit. One exception though, is the Fuji 35 f/1.4: it's my absolute favorite lens, and I won't ever sell. The other two, the 18 f/2 and 16-80, meh, I have no love for them.

So, I lied a bit when I said my Nikon hasn't seen a standard lens: the other day I brought home the Nikkor Z 50 f/1.8, just to see how I liked using my Z8 as a general camera... way too big and heavy, no way in hell I'd ever use it for casual use. However, someday I'd add a Z6III (rumored at this point) in order to get the size down to a reasonable point where it isn't laborious. But then that begs the question: aren't I back in the same spot again, needing a separate camera for casual use and another for birding? All that shuffling about, and I wouldn't be any better off than I am now, right?



How does my Fuji X-T5 + 35 f/1.4 compare to the Nikon Z8 + 50 f/1.8 S Straight off, the Nikon trounces the Fuji in AF accuracy and snappiness, and the lens performance is a good step up from the venerable Fuji in terms of sharpness and background blur, but I knew that going in, so no surprises there. The thing is though, the X-T5 + 35 f/1.4 is no slouch, it performs more than well enough for anything I need, and it takes some of the best looking photos I've ever seen in terms of look and feel; coupled with the X-T5 and the Nostalgic Negative film sim, it's a pretty special thing (examples in next post below).

At this point, I think I'm at least going to stick with the X-T5 + 35 f/1.4 and 18 f/2, and sell my zoom lenses that don't see any use. On the Nikon side, probably pick up the 28 f/2.8 and 24-120. The good thing is, these lenses aren't all that costly when bought used, so it'll allow me to see what's what without breaking the bank.

What would you all do were you in my shoes?

Matt

 

[MatthewK]

Here's some comparison shots. Right OOC, the Fuji is sublimely perfect (to me, at least). The Nikon has its own look, but I feel it's not as compelling as the Fuji. Which one do you all prefer?

 

[West Coast Birder]

Is there a viable option for birding with the Fuji? Not familiar with long lenses in the Fuji ecosystem.

PS I’ve also thought about this. I’m all Canon right now but I’ve always been tempted to dip my toes into the micro 4:3 field. OM-1 or the new Lumix. But I’m just lazy and the thought of switching seems like a lot of work.

 

[Bobtographer]

Is there a viable option for birding with the Fuji? Not familiar with long lenses in the Fuji ecosystem.

PS I’ve also thought about this. I’m all Canon right now but I’ve always been tempted to dip my toes into the micro 4:3 field. OM-1 or the new Lumix. But I’m just lazy and the thought of switching seems like a lot of work.

Put a Finger on the Fuji and you can use any system you want

I don't do a lot of bird photography, but H2S with Sigma 150-600C seems to cope well
First time using H2S with 150-600C - Bird subject detect was on

 

[MatthewK]

Is there a viable option for birding with the Fuji? Not familiar with long lenses in the Fuji ecosystem.

PS I’ve also thought about this. I’m all Canon right now but I’ve always been tempted to dip my toes into the micro 4:3 field. OM-1 or the new Lumix. But I’m just lazy and the thought of switching seems like a lot of work.

That's a hurdle as well, the thought of selling stuff kinda throws cold water on the whole idea If only Fuji would release a pro-level 500 f/4 or 5.6 even.

Put a Finger on the Fuji and you can use any system you want

I don't do a lot of bird photography, but H2S with Sigma 150-600C seems to cope well
First time using H2S with 150-600C - Bird subject detect was on

Nice shots!!! Hadn't thought of the Fringer route, but it doesn't look like there's a Z to XF adapter. There is an adapter that allows XF use on Z cameras though...

 

[Bobtographer]

No, but using a Fringer and Sigma 150-600C is cheaper than buying the Fujifilm 150-600... and it lets in more light

 

[ImageMaker]

35mm wise, I’ve been a Nikon guy forever.

IMHO, I’ve always admired Fujifilm cameras as the best for people as it’s production of skin tones is unmatched among manufacturers.

When I head back to medium format, it will definitely be a Fujifilm GFX.

Nikon D850 70-200 f2.8E FL


Nikon D850, Sigma 85 ART

 

[Daffodil Hunter]

Keep both.

I once used 3 systems, Canon, Sony (both FF and APS-C), & u43. Now just Canon and u43. Keeps it interesting.

 

[Russ Becker]

Don't see any compelling reason to only use one system; if nothing else going back/forth between Nikon and Fuji will keep your brain active.

I use a D500 + 500mm PF for birding and a GFX100S with a couple of GF lenses (45-100 and 50 f/3.5) and a bunch of adapted EF glass for everything else. Use an X-H1 with adapted EF glass for when I want something smaller/lighter when I am out cycling.

Fuji doesn't have any serious wildlife glass; most people adapt the 500PF to an X-H2S for birding.

-Russ

 

[Nick5]

Would it be easier to use one system?…
Picking the one system is a lot harder….
Why change?

 

[MatthewK]

Yeah, I’ve firmly decided to keep with the two systems. Both are perfect for each of my use cases, and my muscle memory is already baked in with each. It just feels weird using Nikon for family snaps, and I didn’t realize how much extra work it’d be processing the NEF files, whereas Fuji JPEGs are perfect out of camera. Finally, the size and bulk of the Nikon kit is ridiculous for casual snaps and travel.

It was a fun experiment, but I’m happy sticking with what I got.

 

[FarmerTed1971]

Ditch the Nikon.

 

[MatthewK]

Ditch the Nikon.

I would, but Nikon’s lineup is where it’s at for birding. Fuji can’t really compete in that space at the moment.

 

[MatthewK]

Weird, but for some reason I'm not able to edit my previous posts.

Anyways, for trivial purposes, I did a side-by-side between the Nikon Z8 + Nikkor 50 1.8 S vs. X-T5 + Fuji 35 f/1.4, just to see how they compare. The lighting was terrible, but that allows us to see how each camera/lens handles it. The Fuji I shoot with the Nostalgic Negative film sim, and the Nikon is the Flat Profile (I think), both cameras outputting in JPEG.

The difference in sharpness and clarity is apparent, the Nikkor lens is very high performing. It also handles CA much better than the Fuji, but that's not present in this shot to exhibit. Here's the thing though: none of that matters to me because A) the Fuji lens is more than plenty sharp, and B) I'm not after technical perfection for my family captures, the final look is what's most important. I feel that the Fuji system delivers utterly gorgeous, memorable, atmospheric shots without even trying (i.e. no post processing required!), and that's what I love about it most. However, I'm certain that with more time with the Nikon I could get it to where I wanted it and be totally happy; you really can't go wrong with any of these systems these days.

 

[stevejack]

I use a mix of Sony, Leica, Hasselblad, Fuji and Rolleiflex. They all do different things well.

When I do portrait work I have my Sony mounted to a stand and a Leica around my neck when I need a different angle. No-one can ever tell which camera I used for which shot. Even I have to check the exif data.
The Sony has autofocus and is handy for some things, but the rangefinder is fun to use and slows me down which I like.

I would say use what you enjoy and forget the technical stuff altogether. Unless you have a specific need that only one camera can fill, go with what makes you feel the best when you pick it up and use it. Make your decision based on that rather than how the actual image files look.

 

[Stathunter]

Jumping in to share my two cents.

Use what works for you - don't feel the need to change, unless you are compelled to do it for your reasons.
Personally, I use Sony for weddings/corporate work - and Canon for wildlife, etc.

All the best!

 

[MatthewK]

I use a mix of Sony, Leica, Hasselblad, Fuji and Rolleiflex. They all do different things well.

When I do portrait work I have my Sony mounted to a stand and a Leica around my neck when I need a different angle. No-one can ever tell which camera I used for which shot. Even I have to check the exif data.
The Sony has autofocus and is handy for some things, but the rangefinder is fun to use and slows me down which I like.

I would say use what you enjoy and forget the technical stuff altogether. Unless you have a specific need that only one camera can fill, go with what makes you feel the best when you pick it up and use it. Make your decision based on that rather than how the actual image files look.

Not sure if it's just the muscle memory factor, but the Fuji kit is so much easier for me to use than the Nikon. Fuji is also a ton more fun, there's a certain joy derived from using it which the Nikon lacks for me, and I think that ultimately has an effect on my photography. For birding though, the Nikon is fluid and effortless to use, wouldn't change a thing there.

As for the final output, how the image looks... well, because I choose to only shoot in jpeg, I want the files to look a certain way. That mostly comes down to the lens and film sim selection, and the lighting of course. If you're referring to the actual IQ of the image, then 100% agree, it doesn't mean nearly as much as it's made out to on the interwebs. My Fuji 18mm f/2 lens is atrocious at shooting test charts and brick walls, it's the most reviled of the Fuji primes, yet I absolutely love it. IQ isn't as important to me for this endeavor, whereas for birding IQ is paramount.

So yeah, I'm keeping both systems, very happy with both