I got my 7dii a few weeks ago used in like new condition with 14k shutter count and i love it! It is amazing! Definitely a camera that will be great for me gor years to come! Now just lenses...

@Alam12 .... disagree. Nikon made a 400 f/4.5 relatively affordable. Fuji could do it too and with a camera like the X-H2S it would go to the top of my recommendations for a lightweight birding setup with serious reach!

400mm f4.5 that can resolve 50 mpix
Fuji need to make 300 mm that can resolve 90mpix at f3.6 something

Double the sharpness and double the brightness, it's harder to make lens sharp when it's open wider, if you want to compare take 50 1.2 fuji with FF 85 1.8 to take rough estimation

Fuji 50 1.2 is pricier than any FF 85 1.8, because fuji need to resolve higher pixel at wider aperture albeit at shorter focal length

Fujifilm has neither any legacy, experience or significant customer base in these areas,so they won't sell a lot or enough lenses. Their 200mm lens was and is probably a finacial nightmare for the company. Fast focusing lenses aren't part of their DNA (their latest 56/1.2 has- again - a slow AF motor, no LM).
And Fujifilm XF customers are much more price sensitive. Nobody would buy a lens similiar to Nikons NIKKOR Z 400mm f/2.8 TC VR S, even if it would cost half the price.

Background separation is a very real consideration for wildlife photographers.

If you had bothered to check Fujifilm's website, you'd have found that they have a 200mm f/2, which is a 300mm f/2.8 equivalent. They also have a 150-600mm f/5.6-8 (225-750mm eqv.) and an older 100-400mm (150-600mm eqv.).

Maybe the OP didn't mean "euqivalent".
As wildlife APS-C shooters, we're used to non-equivalent optics, meaning that a 200mm lens is a 200mm lens, not a 300mm lens.

This is such nonsense you say.

In all honesty how many people own 400mm F4’s.
Its a specialty lens and I dare to bet that the number of people owning those lenses on DPR can be counted on two hands out of the tens of thousands of users.

You are talking as if everybody has the money to spend 8000 to 12.000 dollars for a single lens. Yet at the same time thousands of people are still willing to spen 2K for a lens. Seems you don’t understand how rhis market works. Yet complain for the bragging rights.

At the same time Fuji already has a 300mm f.2.8 and a 400mm F4.
It comes in the form of the 200mm f2.0 and you get the 1.4x teleconverter for free with is lens. If the reach is not enough you only need to buy the 2x teleconverter and there you have your 400mm f4 you missed from the lineup.

@Name That Camera:
Judging from your comments, you are obviously not into wildlife photography. (Hint: Converters degrade image quality, as do smaller sensors at higher iso's ;-)

Oh, and the Fuji 200mm f2 is around 1kg heavier (not including teleconverters) than the Nikon 400mm f4.5, will have worse IQ with a 2x converter than the Nikon without, and costs about two thousand bucks more. So, where was your advantage there?

The 200mm is also a stop faster or still 1/3rd of a stop faster with 1.4x converter and yet still cheaper than the Nikon 400mm F4.5. You are just trolling along while you don't even own any of the lenses you say Fujifilm needs, nor do you have such lenses for any of the cameras you own. Yet you are full of jealousy to see Fujifilm competing. Now just F.O and go back to kindergarten which exactly fits your mental age. Goodbye my friend!

I'm using Canon, considered Sony in the past but voted Fuji and for the Z prime lens(es) in the recent polls.

There are of course brand loyals out there thus the Sony got such a high vote despite being very similar to its predecessor showing no innovation and just an incremental upgrade of which some things could have been a firmware update. Words these people told about being bad with other manufactures yet hailing if their beloved does it as well. Pretty expensive firmware upgrade, huh? ;-)

Predators DP review staff disagrees with your assessment.
Also the fact that Nikon and Canon had no real compelling body in 2022 and many canon and Nikon people continue to refuse to acknowledge and actually reject Sony’s contribution to the modern mirrorless camera throw their votes to anyone but Sony. This year Fuji was the beneficiary.

The A7RV is a fantastic camera for anyone that doesn’t hate Sony. It’s actually a fantastic camera for those haters too, but they will never know or acknowledge it.

The Fuji is also an absolutely worthy winner. It’s a great camera, no doubt.

It's not like winning this poll grants any rewards like winning an election, so I think a lot of people also vote like "hey $myBrand I love ya, but I really like what $otherBrand is doing here can't you make something like that?"

Because they already know what you like of the products they have made, they can just look at their sales statistics for that. They don't always know what it is their customers are missing.

What's the problem with the X-T5?

No VG meaning the main feature (to me) fpr the X-T series is gone. Previous model have the ability to be pro tools (using the VG) and travel/casual camera (small without).

Also the sensor of the X-T5 is just slower, meaning less good ES. The X-T5 is a big disappointement..

@NTC: I have that special feeling that MANY Canon and Nikon owners voted for Fuji. This might happen when too much is too much… and voila, this is the end result that you get. ;-)

Still a fair competition.
I am absolutely convinced that the Sony is a great camera, but at the same time Fuji did, what Nikon should have done and where Canon failed with its R7.

This year most likely will be between Nikon and Canon and how the Z8 will compete against Canon R5 MKII.

I think the OP was just being sarcastic and joking...

That being said, I do agree with the analysis that many owners of other brands voted for the Fuji.

I can say I voted for the Fuji first then the Sony. And I don't shoot either brand. In December I bought a Mk II version of a camera that was on the initial list list but I didn't vote for it. All are strong cameras. Fuji did more to raise the bar in APS-C performance than the other cameras did for their respective sectors, hence why it got my vote.

It's more sad how high the slight incremental upgrade and expensive firmware upgrade got voted on instead of real innovation. There you have it, still a lot hailing everything their "god" does, even if it is what was called out a no no about others in the past.

Dedus check out the Tamron 150-500 for Fujifilm X mount released recently.

@DrewRick the Tamron looks awesome, thank you! Just one question - does Fuji limit AF-C FPS for 3rd party glass like Sony does? If not - the H2S + this lens look like a no-brainer...

Dedus - Though I am not a Fujifilm user. They don't limit you in anything.
You get full compatibility including IBIS and Optical Image Stabilisation in lenses. They are 100% compatible.

Same here, one reason I went with Fujifilm is the lack of arbitrary limitations. Coming from Canon, where entry level cameras don't even get Kelvin white balance (when internally the "tungsten/daylight/shade" settings are of course using the Kelvin scale), that was a breath of fresh air.

Even the cheapest Fuji X-A2 camera I've ever had was equipped with all the functionality they could reasonably pack in there out of the box, and if you set your mind to it, you can still shoot amazing 24mp raw images with a five year old X-T20 for a few hundred $ (outdated AF speed but AF accuracy is still there). Great "why not" price point for a second body btw.

I'm trying to follow OPs logic here - he was using Fujifilm "until X-H1 and X-T4", which were released two years apart. Ok.

Then I took a visit to camera size to follow the next statements.

Apparently, the X-H2 is to large for him but he used the X-H1, which is exactly the same size, and the X-T4, which is known for its thickness and only marginally smaller.

Then he recommends the OM1, which is about the same size as the X-H2 but with a smaller sensor. Hmm.

As well as the R7, which has a slightly smaller and significantly less capable sensor and is significantly larger than the X-H2, which is allegedly too large.

LOL - Obviously most people on DPR thought differently. The Nikon 400mm deserves a place in this list no doubt.

The thougher choice was to choose between the X-H2s and the Sony A7R V. Both indeed were stronger contenders to each other than this Nikon lens.

But honestly.... How many 900mm lenses (FOV) do you own that have an maximum open aperture of F4 or even F5.6?.

Oh, wait even a 400mm F4 with a 2x extender is F8 and not even has the reach of this lens. Besides, if you would rather stick such lens on your camera you still can, there are plenty of adapters available to make a Canon/Nikon and even a Sony lens work on the X-Series system.

So diss whatever you want.
Fujifilm made an affordable lens that everybody can buy. This in contrary to that 600mm F5.6 you may want to refer to.

True, but Fuji isn't mainly focused on wildlife.

Yes, it would be interesting reading stuff about the other 1% of the market.

Not on Amazon 👀

@Archied

FX30 isn't a hybrid.

Agree, these voting surveys really mean nothing much.

That Fuji won with the larger User base of Sony, Nikon, and Canon whom can vote which ever way they like makes this Win, even that more impressive. So I hardly find the final results suspect at all.

@ Kavu
Storm the DPreview offices then.

A lot of users who are completely happy with their equipment and have never had any problems do not bother to vote. Statistically speaking the number of votes vs happy people that do not vote, really means very little.

@searching
Only if you don't agree with the result.

But why fuji? Their af might be good, especially with the latest fw, but the af on the a7rv is far better! Although, RS is really bad on the sony.

For those who are sense of humor impaired: I was joking. See “parody”.