Did i made a mistake?

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

Hello,

Nothing wrong with old cameras. I still have a Nikon D300. It takes superb photos in good light.

My main camera is a Fuji X-T3. I highly recommend this camera. I also have a Fuji X-E2S which I use with a Samyang 12mm lens for sunrise and sunset photos. It takes great photos and is easy to use.  The X-T3 requires some study to get the best photos. For example DR Auto is not engaged at ISO 200 but it is at ISO 320. DR Auto works very well.

Good luck.

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.

What is it that you're not feeling - what is the problem?

Is one use sufficient for you to feel you've given the camera a chance?

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

Can’t tell you whether the Zfc is a mistake or not, but as to the current Fuji’s, the sensor is absolutely the best APS-C chip out at the moment, so dynamic range is excellent. AF is very good, though not up to the standards set by Sony and Canon in their full frame cameras. Still, it’s quite good, especially with linear focus motor lenses.

The biggest differentiator is likely Fuji’s commitment to the format. They don’t have a full frame camera, so they put a lot of R&D into crop factor lenses. Take a look at the lens offerings for Fuji vs Nikon for APS-C.

Jared Willson wrote:

Can’t tell you whether the Zfc is a mistake or not, but as to the current Fuji’s, the sensor is absolutely the best APS-C chip out at the moment, so dynamic range is excellent. AF is very good, though not up to the standards set by Sony and Canon in their full frame cameras. Still, it’s quite good, especially with linear focus motor lenses.

The biggest differentiator is likely Fuji’s commitment to the format. They don’t have a full frame camera, so they put a lot of R&D into crop factor lenses. Take a look at the lens offerings for Fuji vs Nikon for APS-C.

I agree with this, I was a longtime Nikon guy but switched to Fuji primarily for the lenses, specifically the small f/2 primes to use with an X-T4.

Maybe because the zfc doesn't have proper lens selection yet, because for me lens is part of the equation and that's why i hold on to my fuji

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

Well, we'll give our opinions, but they are little substitute for your own analysis, requirements or feelings.

I came to Fuji (XT10) from Nikon (D300s & D5100) for the handling experience and its ergonomics, the Fuji colours, their commitment to the format, and the array of dedicated lenses (as opposed to larger lenses designed for FF but useable on APS-C).

I have not been disappointed. After upgrading last year to the XT4, I remain very satisfied with the cameras (XT4 and XE4) and lenses (I have some of their zooms and primes) and their performance and image quality.

Regarding the two points you seek advice eon, DR and AF.  On DR, all I can say is that for me, shooting RAW and using Capture 1/21 I feel there is sufficient DR to make my landscape images pop  through adjusting the sky and lift shadows without noticeable noise either on a base layer or using layers.

On AF, in my opinion it is fine for static and moving subjects, being accurate and fast. I am becoming a bit of a lone voice on AF for moving subjects against a chorus saying it is inadequate. It is not. It may not be up there (yet) with Sony or Canon, but with the proper camera set up, good shooting technique and practice it is fine. I use the XT4 (and have used the XT10 and XT3) on running dogs, galloping polo horses, my daughter's road cycle racing and my son's kite surfing. It nails focus well in my opinion when I get the placement of the focus point right. There are two dog related posts, a current one on big dogs, and an older one on dog Frisbee, which both show better than I that with good technique the AF is more than able to cope with fast moving subjects.

Hope that helps. Good luck with your decision.

I would use the Nikon for a longer period before making a decision. One outing for me would be insufficient to decide.

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

Maybe, coming from Z50 system which I sold recently because for me, the Fujifilm colours come out much nicer than Nikon's so I'm using it only OC Jepg.

With Nikon, the images have to be shot in RAW and need to be worked more to bring them out but they even do not get near Fujifilm's.

Agreed, the x-T4's C-AF is well able to deal with not just BIFs but also much smaller and relatively faster flying insects, as well as tracking fast moving rally cars.

www.flickr.com/photos/hectorpatrick

Jonjonfr wrote:

Raticus wrote:

Jared Willson wrote:

Can’t tell you whether the Zfc is a mistake or not, but as to the current Fuji’s, the sensor is absolutely the best APS-C chip out at the moment, so dynamic range is excellent. AF is very good, though not up to the standards set by Sony and Canon in their full frame cameras. Still, it’s quite good, especially with linear focus motor lenses.

The biggest differentiator is likely Fuji’s commitment to the format. They don’t have a full frame camera, so they put a lot of R&D into crop factor lenses. Take a look at the lens offerings for Fuji vs Nikon for APS-C.

I agree with this, I was a longtime Nikon guy but switched to Fuji primarily for the lenses, specifically the small f/2 primes to use with an X-T4.

Oh yea, as of now the Z DX lenses only have 2. This is probably another reason i guess why im feeling like i made a mistake going for Nikon Z FC. Anyways, i already ordered a return order. I might just have to wait what fuji will do with its new stacked sensor. If that time comes, surely XE4 will be more affordable.

I wouldn’t expect the release of the stacked sensor to have any effect on the price of the X-E4. The primary advantage to the stacked sensor will be readout speed, though it may have a higher megapixel count as well. That means it will be targeted for a future X-H2 and an eventual X-T5, but I wouldn’t expect it to make it into anything else for at least a couple years. Honestly, while the advantages of a stacked sensor are real, they mostly won’t be relevant for X-E4 shooters.

Interesting, what didn't you like about the Zfc, it seems like a pretty nice camera. To me, it reminds me of the original X-T1 a bit, which was a better size IMO than the current X-T4.

It's definitely a camera I've considered (paired with the 28 2.8) ... you can't even get them though.

I like Nikon and Fuji and comfortable shooting both, both have their pros and cons.