Did i made a mistake?

Jonjonfr wrote:

Hi All,

I usually shoot with XE2s and Pentax K3II are my main camera's. I decided i want a newer camera but i decided to go for Nikon z FC. I only took it one time for a hike but I'm just not feeling it.

Im thinking of exchanging it for XE-4, XT30 II, XT3/4. How is everyone's experience with the DR and AF of these cameras?

Most of my cameras are old (leica X2, xv, m8, sigma sdq, panny G85, k3II, X100, Xe2s) etc.

Thanks

J

The effective DR, in practice, is AMAZING depending on your settings. I believe the DR is decent anyway but Fuji have a setting (i think in every Fuji body) called DR100, DR200 and DR400. HERE is a good video explaining how it works but it really does improve DR, especially in the HL side. In short it reduces analog gain to preserve HL DR, then uses digital gain (with increased ISO setting) to boost darker tones back to normal. The result is, IMO, a better effective DR in actual use, than even FF.

As for AF Fuji is very good. Not class leading but very good. Jack of all trades master of none type. Eye AF has been improved greatly in newer models. But there is a lot that is different between Fuji and that Nikon besides those two attributes, you will get plenty of help here if you need more info on the comparison.

Below is an example of how the DR setting changes the look of the shots, specifically how HL are rendered. Pay close attention to specular highlights on the nose. Both shot just minutes apart with identical lighting, one ceiling bulb and on-camera flash. Only difference was ISO and of course flash duration to match exposure. Both are OOC jpegs, Eterna film sim if i remember.

DR100, default

DR400 with an ISO 640 minimum