Reading mode: Light Dark

Nikon Z6 vs Fuji picture quality (low light)

Go to last post
C

Chris_84

Active member
Messages
62
Reaction score
80
Hey,

I own a Fuji x-t30 and in general I'm very happy with the camera. I use it for everyday shots and i like, that it is small and the picture quality is great in good lighting conditions. I like the controls and the shooting experience.

What the camera lacks, is the ability to shoot good pictures in low light conditions. I own some fast lenses (xf 35 1,4; xf 18-55; 100-400mm doing some wildlife) but i still think, that the low light quality is just ok. I thought about buying a x-t4 (->ibis), but it is very expensive (body only 1800€).

Because of the Nikon-Germany-deals you can get the Nikon Z6 with FTZ-Adapter (Body) for 1450€. Because of the tax lowering in july it could get even cheaper. Even with a lens (50mm 1,8) it would be cheaper to buy a Nikon Z6. Is it smart to buy a Nikon? I am very tempted by the price. For a full frame camera it is realy cheap. But on the other side i have a "good enough" camera with some nice lenses. I would have to invest in two systems, which is perhaps not smart. If i sell my Fuji-gear, I am afraid that the Nikon is too big for me and that I will not take it with me so often.

How big is the difference in image quality between an xt3 (35 1,4) and a z6 (50mm 1,8) in low light conditions (like on a party or in a dimm lit living room)? Can provide some examples? Has anyone changed the system and can report their experiences here?

Thank you very much!!
 
Last edited:
I don't have the Fuji, nor have I ever used it, but specs alone would suggest that the Z6 would have better low noise because it is full-frame, and therefore would have a lower pixel density than an APS-C size sensor....
 
I switched from an X-T3 with an assortment of lenses to a Z7 kit.

Event with the high pixel density, the Z7 images are better in low light even with noise reduction (anecdotal!). However, it is bigger and I do miss the Fuji at times (especially that 35 1.4). But the resolution of the Z7 is amazing.

With that said, and not necessarily answering your question with regards to the Z6 - have you tried shooting black/white when the light gets really low? I think monochrome images are more aesthetically forgiving of high ISO noise.
 
Chris_84 said:
Hey,

I own a Fuji x-t30 and in general I'm very happy with the camera. I use it for everyday shots and i like, that it is small and the picture quality is great in good lighting conditions. I like the controls and the shooting experience.

What the camera lacks, is the ability to shoot good pictures in low light conditions. I own some fast lenses (xf 35 1,4; xf 18-55; 100-400mm doing some wildlife) but i still think, that the low light quality is just ok. I thought about buying a x-t4 (->ibis), but it is very expensive (body only 1800€).

Because of the Nikon-Germany-deals you can get the Nikon Z6 with FTZ-Adapter (Body) for 1450€. Because of the tax lowering in july it could get even cheaper. Even with a lens (50mm 1,8) it would be cheaper to buy a Nikon Z6. Is it smart to buy a Nikon? I am very tempted by the price. For a full frame camera it is realy cheap. But on the other side i have a "good enough" camera with some nice lenses. I would have to invest in two systems, which is perhaps not smart. If i sell my Fuji-gear, I am afraid that the Nikon is too big for me and that I will not take it with me so often.

How big is the difference in image quality between an xt3 (35 1,4) and a z6 (50mm 1,8) in low light conditions (like on a party or in a dimm lit living room)? Can provide some examples? Has anyone changed the system and can report their experiences here?

Thank you very much!!
Click to expand...
The z6 has about 1EV advantage vs the x-t3 and of course there is the pretty decent IBIS too easily allowing for 1/2sec shots with <100mm lenses.
 
Indoor low light images with my Z6 are far cleaner than my XH1, which is why I got the Z6. Even with Fuji's 35 f2 I had to boost the ISO to capture the grandkids, and museums, etc, and the images were too noisy (for me). Nikon's 35 1.8 is really good indoors. I simply get better images with the Z6, and that also includes outdoors.
 
Last edited:
Thank you for all the answers!

Can you perhaps provide some low light sample picture comparisons (xh1 vs z6 for examples?).

Best regards
 
SteveCooper said:
I don't have the Fuji, nor have I ever used it, but specs alone would suggest that the Z6 would have better low noise because it is full-frame, and therefore would have a lower pixel density than an APS-C size sensor....
Click to expand...
My Z7 is full-frame but its pixel density is almost identical to the APSC Z50 because it has more pixels. The MF Hasselblad H6C-100 has almost the same pixel density. In theory all of these will have similar low-light performance.

It isn’t the form factor but the pixel size that lets more photons hit a pixel.
 
I found the noise of my Z7 to be roughly equivalent to my D7200 at the time when shooting in jazz clubs. I was really quite disappointed and when I got my Z6, there was a big improvement at higher ISO's in low light. The Z7 focused easily enough, it was just the noise level I objected to in comparing the images....
 
As a former Fuji owner, I can say the Z6 is much much better in low light. Much.
 
Chris_84 said:
  1. Chris_84 wrote:
Hey,

I own a Fuji x-t30 and in general I'm very happy with the camera. I use it for everyday shots and i like, that it is small and the picture quality is great in good lighting conditions. I like the controls and the shooting experience.

What the camera lacks, is the ability to shoot good pictures in low light conditions. I own some fast lenses (xf 35 1,4; xf 18-55; 100-400mm doing some wildlife) but i still think, that the low light quality is just ok. I thought about buying a x-t4 (->ibis), but it is very expensive (body only 1800€).

Because of the Nikon-Germany-deals you can get the Nikon Z6 with FTZ-Adapter (Body) for 1450€. Because of the tax lowering in july it could get even cheaper. Even with a lens (50mm 1,8) it would be cheaper to buy a Nikon Z6. Is it smart to buy a Nikon? I am very tempted by the price. For a full frame camera it is realy cheap. But on the other side i have a "good enough" camera with some nice lenses. I would have to invest in two systems, which is perhaps not smart. If i sell my Fuji-gear, I am afraid that the Nikon is too big for me and that I will not take it with me so often.

How big is the difference in image quality between an xt3 (35 1,4) and a z6 (50mm 1,8) in low light conditions (like on a party or in a dimm lit living room)? Can provide some examples? Has anyone changed the system and can report their experiences here?

Thank you very much!!
Click to expand...
I had an x-t3 for a year with a fast 16mm f1.4 now I have the Z6 with 24-70 f4 so I am obliged to cranck up iso for low light (while waiting for my 35mm f1.8 order)

First thing first Fuji iso is a tad darker than nikon's. Plus with FF iso can go further without too much noise, with the x-t3 I could barely use iso 4000, with the Z6 I can use iso 10000 with acceptable noise, iso 12800 is usable full size but noise will appear in shadows, I could even use iso 25600 but I resized to 10mp

All iso under 3200 are nearly noise free even at 100% pixel peeping, that was not the case with the x-t3 at all
 
The Z6 has IBIS, which allows for much lower shutter speeds = more time for light to hit the sensor = less noise
 
I previously had the X-T2 and the XF 35mm f1.4 and now I am using the Z6 and have the Z 50mm f1.8.

At base ISO (good light), the Z6 will have better dynamic range and in anything higher, you'd probably get similar noise levels using the lenses wide open as the XF lens is one stop faster and the Z6 performs about 1 to 1.5 stops better.

Optically though, the Z-mount lens is noticeably sharper across the frame with better correction for aberrations. It is also faster focusing and fully weather sealed.

On the other hand, the XF lens is considerably smaller and still produces nice images.
 
So, do you regret switching to the Nikon z6 because of the size?
 
Oldwino said:
As a former Fuji owner, I can say the Z6 is much much better in low light. Much.
Click to expand...
If its pixels are larger then everything else being considered, it would be. My point is that it is not merely the sensor size but the size of individual pixels that really matters.
 
Chris_84 said:
So, do you regret switching to the Nikon z6 because of the size?
Click to expand...
The grip on the Z cameras is much better than that on the X-T cameras, which makes up for the bigger lenses.

I don't regret switching. The Z system as a whole is just a lot more polished. Everything is weather sealed and the ergonomics are spot on, while Fuji was a fun but quirky camera to use.

The grip on the X-T2 in comparison was awkward to hold and the button placements were not quite right for me. It also bugged me that their better lenses were not weather sealed, and some of the lenses, especially the 35mm f1.4, made a lot of noise while focusing, while my Z 50mm is virtually silent.
 
PLShutterbug said:
Oldwino said:
As a former Fuji owner, I can say the Z6 is much much better in low light. Much.
Click to expand...
If its pixels are larger then everything else being considered, it would be. My point is that it is not merely the sensor size but the size of individual pixels that really matters.
Click to expand...
I agree.
 
Chris_84 said:
So, do you regret switching to the Nikon z6 because of the size?
Click to expand...
The z6 and x-t4 are the same size and weight give or take a hair or 2
 
I had a X-T3 and it was completely outclasssed at almost everything, by the Z6 that replaced it. I found Fuji colours pretty murky at the best of times and in low light things don't improve.

I'm vaguely embarrassed to admit I ever owned a Fuji. Gimmick wrapped in retro chic.
 
Last edited:
As a previous X-T3 owner who has moved to the Nikon Z6 I do believe there is a massive difference in the RAW files when doing low light photos. In strong sun light the differences are hard to see imo but I have zero regrets moving to the Z6 as it’s easily the best camera on the market for the price.
 
The Body of the z6 is not much bigger than an x-t3. But the lenses are a lot bigger & heavier. I'm afraid that I won't take the camera with me very often, if the lenses are to big.

As I can see from the numerous answers, the image quality of the Z6 seems to be significantly better. can someone possibly post Low light comparison pictures? Thank you so much!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Z6III - Worse Low Light AF Than Z6?
2
Replies
36
Views
16K
sirhawkeye64
S
A
Nikon Z6 III Timelapse - No Auto Exposure?
Replies
12
Views
2K
Aleks7
A
L
Z6 III build quality
2 3 4
Replies
72
Views
3K
arniebook
arniebook
H
Panasonic did something special with the Z6 III sensor
4 5 6
Replies
118
Views
23K
Leonard Shepherd
L
FujLiver
Z6 iii over R6 Mark ii due to lenses ?
2
Replies
28
Views
350
Pierre Lagarde
Pierre Lagarde

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top