Your precious and honest opinions about differences between Fujifilm and others (Sony, Canon, Nikon)

Jose Rocha wrote:

BeatX wrote:

Can You give me link to FM forum with thread you mentioned? Thx in advice, and sorry for OT!

Sure, I found the thread, it's huge. But I've read it all back then! It's worth it, it's full of great photos.

https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1253369

Thank You Jose
I'm lookin at this thread, currently Im only on page 4.
But still, even on beginning of this thread, I allready pick up some cherrys, like:

or this:

Not to mention, about this picture which is simply jaw dropping. Best 3D pop I've seen from long, long time. I do allready has this picture as a wallpaper on my laptop and Im about to write PM via flicker to ask if I can buy this shot in full res (artist: this lady: https://www.flickr.com/photos/liltuki/ )

Sorry for completly offtopic, but I just simply cannot resist.
I mean.. There is no way, to replicate such organic/three dimensional pictures from any Fujifilm glass (medium format included, too modern rendering, to clinical).
Even so called "magical" XF 35/1.4 even dont stand close compared to Nikkor 58/1.4 in terms to create such deep 3D pop.
To be honest, Im not sure if there is glass on any system who can match Nikkor 58/1.4 in terms of such way of rendering.
Moderns top lenses are corrected in every way, simply optical perfection - what in final result gives flat, lifeless image (vide Fujifilm XF 18/1.4, Sony GM 24-70/2.8 II, Canon RF 50/1.2 L etc)
So yeah, couple of my 3 cents about diffirances in camera systems