Upgrading from XT-20 to ?? X-T5/Z6iii or third option?

[Maagge]

Hi all,

I've been lurking these forums on and off for more than a decade. Thanks for all the insights, knowledge and inspiration being shared across the board.

I'm an amateur/enthusiast photographer and my primary subjects are landscapes and documenting my family (incl. casual portraits) with the occasional wildlife. I have a wish to try macro and astro, but must admit I have not gotten around to it yet. I don't really do any sports/action, but could be relevant casually down the line when kids grow up. Architecture and video has practically zero interest.

Over the past couple of years I have been wanting to upgrade my camera from my X-T20 which I have had for around 8 years or so, but I have held back the decision as I have been in doubt on what path to take (system etc.). But I am now beyond the tipping point and want to move ahead. The X-T20 has served me fairly well and I have gotten a lot of amazing pictures over the years, but these days more often than not I see myself not bringing it with me as I'm not generally getting the results I want.

My primary quarrel with the X-T20 is autofocus (there are just way too many shots either completely out of focus or every so slightly soft/out of focus resulting in a picture that looks okay'ish, but in the end I'll never like). Some of it is for sure user error but I feel like I have decent grip on it, generally. An issue is also whenever someone else borrows my camera to take pictures (e.g. with me in a family setting or similar), nailing focus is an absolute nightmare. And my wife needs to be able to use the camera and get good results (at least photos that are properly focused) without a ph.d. in focus systems. On my old Canon 550D it seemed other's were getting much better results when giving a hand, than with the X-T20. Besides autofocus, I also do find pictures quite noisy as soon as ISO is cranked up, which is bound to happen with a lot of indoor shots of kids etc. I appreciate the Fuji retro look and dials to control the exposure triangle, and their JPEG's, but at the same time I do not love the cumbersome PP process with the X-trans files, so I'm not married to Fuji by any means, but also not actively looking to get away from Fuji.

I do edit RAW files in Lightroom, but my time is limited these days, so I highly appreciate having good SOOC JPEG's as well. Film simulation with Fuji is nice and I'm not sure what competitors have in that regard, but as a starting point, I generally don't see myself exploring 20 different profiles depending on the shot, but rather a few that gives good fairly natural results for portrait, landscape and such. RAW's will mostly be for some specific pictures or difficult scenes, realistically 10-20% of my shots at most.

To sum up and attempted order of priority:

1. Autofocus: It does not need to be the absolute best on the market or within my budget, but I want something that is consistent in autofocus including eye/face tracking and giving good overall hit rates. I have small kids (0 and 3) growing up, and one of the key uses will be to take pictures of them. Occasional birds and wildlife is a plus but not decisive factor for me.
2. SOOC JPEG's, imagine quality, low light performance, dynamic range, EVF and resolution are difficult to rank for me and a balanced profile on these parameters is fine. I mention resolution because I do crop at times and I also like to print my favourite pictures up to like 30" for home decoration. That said, most of the time I do feel my current 24mp is fine
3. Size/weight: I will use the camera for hiking as well, but have so far not been concerned with weight even bringing multiple lenses. So I'm open to going up a little in size/weight from my current setup, but of course I would prefer to keep it as small as I can given above are in place
4. Dual card slots and weather sealing is definitely a plus, but I mostly do not use the camera is exposed conditions. But would be nice to have so I wouldn't have to worry about it, when the circumstances are there
5. Video: I almost never shoot video, but I could see myself using it a bit more with the kids. But I'm sure any camera on the market more than satisfies my needs in that regard, should I start doing it.

Budget wise, I'm looking for something for up to around 3,500 USD for body+high quality every day zoom. While I don't have to spend all that money, I would rather overinvest than underinvest at this point, so even if that budget gives me more camera than I need, I'm okay with that. I really do not want to sit in 1, 2 or 3 years time regretting my purchase, and the second hand market in Denmark is not great.

I have looked at the X-T5 since it was released as a natural upgrade from my X-T20. I have been hesitant to pull the trigger as I've been concerned with the countless reports of autofocus, but also acknowledge it is probably to some extent blown out of proportions. But it really does make me hesitate, as autofocus is my key pain point today being in the Fuji ecosystem, and I want a consistent AF-C performance for moving kids etc. The latest patch 4.10 seems to have helped though as far as I can read online. The Nikon Z6iii seems like a very solid alternative, and I have very little negative to say for my use cases on that given the reviews and information I have read. Sony I am not a great fan of, and I don't find Canon's lens portfolio great for my use case (seems like it's either the budget path or astronomically expensive lenses). I have also looked at the X-T50, but I'm not amused with the trade-offs made vs. the X-T5. I also considered the Zf and have not completely disregarded it, however the lower resolution EVF is a bummer and I'm not sure how balanced it feels with a 24-120 attached. I also appreciate the, as I understand, better autofocus in Z6iii, but not sure if it's a big deal for my use cases. The improved video in Z6iii vs. Zf means nothing to me. The Zf is around $250 cheaper, so price difference is not huge.

Looking at X-T5 and Z6iii alternatives and combined cost, the Nikon actually comes out cheaper given the lenses I'm interested in, which was quite a surprise to me. DK prices (with current discounts) converted to USD:

Z6iii $2,400 + 24-120 F4 $850 = $3,250 (with 24-70 F4 $2,900)

X-T5 $1,850 + 16-55 F2.8 II $1,500 = $3,350 (with 16-50 F2.8-4.8 $2,200)

Adding a solid ultra wide is around the same price (Z 14-30 F4 vs. 10-24 F4) and a portrait lens cheaper with Nikon (Z 85 F1.8 S $720 vs. 56 F1.2 WR $1,230).

While the X-T5 seems like the natural upgrade path, I can't help but think that the Z6iii is better value and a safer choice. And the size does not seem to be significantly different (except the 24-120, but that trade-off I can accept as it also gives a longer range which I find amazing). Am I completely off here, or what would you suggest?

 

[Ruedon]

Sounds to me (as Nikon user) that the Z6III is your camera. I have the Z8 with an increasing number of lenses since a year. The 24-120/4 is my hiking/travel lens. Just great. When buying a Nikon camera, it is always worthwhile to look for a kit, including discounted lens like 24-120.

I don't like the collapsing/extending mechanism of the 24-70/4 (and the 14-30/4). Got the 17-28/2.8 instead that also gathers more light indoors. Moreover, the Tamron 35-150/2-2.8 is phenomenal, also towards portraits; too heavy as every day lens though; better suited for events -- it replaces a 70-200 for me. The 50/1.8S would be my first prime recommendation. Optically excellent, versatile -- a bit of everything -- and the least expensive S lens.

Autofocus is a no brainer. I'm using 3D tracking with AF-C or, when being lazy or handing the camera to someone else, then Auto area mode. Subject and eye recognition work very well and clearly increase the keeper rate, compared to my previous D500.

Zf sounds reasonable when also looking at X-T5. I would not want to miss the hand grip though. It glues the camera to my right hand -- the camera can just hang on my fingertips arrested with the thumb on its backside, additionally protected with a Peak Design clutch. In the case of Z6III vs Zf it also makes the camera smaller, providing space for the battery and a larger second card slot. Last but not least, the Zf lacks an AF joystick -- for placing the focus point with 3D tracking.

 

[ernest56]

I have looked at the X-T5 since it was released as a natural upgrade from my X-T20. I have been hesitant to pull the trigger as I've been concerned with the countless reports of autofocus, but also acknowledge it is probably to some extent blown out of proportions. But it really does make me hesitate, as autofocus is my key pain point today being in the Fuji ecosystem, and I want a consistent AF-C performance for moving kids etc. The latest patch 4.10 seems to have helped though as far as I can read online. The Nikon Z6iii seems like a very solid alternative, and I have very little negative to say for my use cases on that given the reviews and information I have read. Sony I am not a great fan of, and I don't find Canon's lens portfolio great for my use case (seems like it's either the budget path or astronomically expensive lenses). I have also looked at the X-T50, but I'm not amused with the trade-offs made vs. the X-T5. I also considered the Zf and have not completely disregarded it, however the lower resolution EVF is a bummer and I'm not sure how balanced it feels with a 24-120 attached. I also appreciate the, as I understand, better autofocus in Z6iii, but not sure if it's a big deal for my use cases. The improved video in Z6iii vs. Zf means nothing to me. The Zf is around $250 cheaper, so price difference is not huge.

While the X-T5 seems like the natural upgrade path, I can't help but think that the Z6iii is better value and a safer choice. And the size does not seem to be significantly different (except the 24-120, but that trade-off I can accept as it also gives a longer range which I find amazing). Am I completely off here, or what would you suggest?

I just switched to a Z6iii from Fuji X-T2. Went with the 24-120 f4 and 20mm f1.8. I like the handling of the z6iii with a deep hand grip. There is a learning curve moving to Nikon and learning their menu system.

I still have my X-T2 with 50-140mm and 100-400mm lenses.

Both the X-T5 and Z6iii will produce excellent images. So, do you want to stay with APS-C or jump to FF?

Fuji has fixed their auto focus issues with af-c with their latest firmware release.

Pro's for X-T5

1. You are familiar with the Fuji menu system.
2. 2 SD card slots.
3. Weight 967 grams (x-t5 + 16-55 f2.8 mkii).
4. Existing Fuji lenses you already own.

Pro's for Z6iii

1. Better for astro (full frame sensor).
2. EVF

Con's for Z6iii

1. 2 card slots (SD and CFexpress) CFexpress type B card more expensive than SD card.
2. Weight 1390 grams (z6iii + 24-120).

Are you able to go to a camera store and handle both bodies?

 

[Ruedon]

...

Pro's for Z6iii

1. Better for astro (full frame sensor).
2. EVF

Con's for Z6iii

1. 2 card slots (SD and CFexpress) CFexpress type B card more expensive than SD card.

...

I'm primarily using SD cards, as they also fit into my laptop and into printing machines at the drug store. I have one CFexpress card that stays permanently in the camera for backup. From time to time I reformat the CFexpress card to make space for new photos.

 

[Nazpharoz]

May I introduce you to rake a look at the Oanasonic Lumix S5ii. This camera has the ability to use luts for photography, so you can upload a color profile into your camera to use for sooc jpegs.

Also this camera is an L-mount, a lens-mount Leica, Panasonic and Sigma use. Maybe there are some lenses you will like too.

The autofocus is not as good as Canon, Nikon or Sony. But still a lof better than the X-T20. I went from a x-pro2 to the S5ii, and back then the autofocus was better than the x-pro2. After several firmware updates it got boosted a lot.

the dual card slots ate both SD-cards, so no need to get a CF-express card.

I still would suggest to go to a brick-and-mortar shop to handle the cameras before making the jump. Maybe your camera of choice might not fit your handling, and a camera which you scrapped earlier might be the camera for you.

Good luck with choosing and finding the right one for you.

 

[MJ_Photo38]

Okay, so from your list of things you want in a camera, it seems like the Zf is pretty much the ideal choice for you :

- great low light performance

- great AF

- weather sealed

- good video if you wanted to dabble with it

- great IBIS, and dual card slots.

Your only concern seems to be the "low res EVF". This one made me laugh a little bit : the Zf's EVF is 3.69M dot, and though it's not as good as the 5.76M dots in the Z6III, this is still considered to be very good.

I personally cannot see a huge differnece from a large 2.36M dot EVF with a large 3.69M dot EVF. Not that there isn't any sharpness improvement, but its not as drastic as you might think, and generally it doesn't make much of a difference. What matters most is the magnification and the brightness, and the Zf is more than good enough in those metrics as well (and leagues better than your current X-T20).

The Z6III is an excellent camera sa well, and I would recommend it, but a lot of what you're paying for with that camera (the pro video specs, the 20fps shooting etc) might be lost on you if you mostly use it for moderate action stills. To me the Zf would already be much more than good enough in those regards.

Of course, I cannot recommend the Zf without suggesting you try one in a store. If you're okay with the ergonomics (or lack there of) of the X-T20, you might find the Zf decent, I personally find it a bit of a slab to hold, and not super pleasant (but that's just my personal opinion). I would highly suggest you try one (without buying it) before making your mind.

If you can't be arsed to do that, the Z6III has a very good grip and handles extremely well, it's just larger and heavier (as well as using a completely different control layout)

 

[Maagge]

Sounds to me (as Nikon user) that the Z6III is your camera. I have the Z8 with an increasing number of lenses since a year. The 24-120/4 is my hiking/travel lens. Just great. When buying a Nikon camera, it is always worthwhile to look for a kit, including discounted lens like 24-120.

I don't like the collapsing/extending mechanism of the 24-70/4 (and the 14-30/4). Got the 17-28/2.8 instead that also gathers more light indoors. Moreover, the Tamron 35-150/2-2.8 is phenomenal, also towards portraits; too heavy as every day lens though; better suited for events -- it replaces a 70-200 for me. The 50/1.8S would be my first prime recommendation. Optically excellent, versatile -- a bit of everything -- and the least expensive S lens.

Autofocus is a no brainer. I'm using 3D tracking with AF-C or, when being lazy or handing the camera to someone else, then Auto area mode. Subject and eye recognition work very well and clearly increase the keeper rate, compared to my previous D500.

Zf sounds reasonable when also looking at X-T5. I would not want to miss the hand grip though. It glues the camera to my right hand -- the camera can just hang on my fingertips arrested with the thumb on its backside, additionally protected with a Peak Design clutch. In the case of Z6III vs Zf it also makes the camera smaller, providing space for the battery and a larger second card slot. Last but not least, the Zf lacks an AF joystick -- for placing the focus point with 3D tracking.

Thanks! That sounds great. The prices I mentioned was the kit price (lens price as difference between body and kit price), so for sure I will cash in on the kit savings.

Zf I think I'm on same page as you, the tradeoffs are not worth it. And size gain is rather small. I would rather have the better grip (given large lenses etc.) and joystick.

 

[Maagge]

I have looked at the X-T5 since it was released as a natural upgrade from my X-T20. I have been hesitant to pull the trigger as I've been concerned with the countless reports of autofocus, but also acknowledge it is probably to some extent blown out of proportions. But it really does make me hesitate, as autofocus is my key pain point today being in the Fuji ecosystem, and I want a consistent AF-C performance for moving kids etc. The latest patch 4.10 seems to have helped though as far as I can read online. The Nikon Z6iii seems like a very solid alternative, and I have very little negative to say for my use cases on that given the reviews and information I have read. Sony I am not a great fan of, and I don't find Canon's lens portfolio great for my use case (seems like it's either the budget path or astronomically expensive lenses). I have also looked at the X-T50, but I'm not amused with the trade-offs made vs. the X-T5. I also considered the Zf and have not completely disregarded it, however the lower resolution EVF is a bummer and I'm not sure how balanced it feels with a 24-120 attached. I also appreciate the, as I understand, better autofocus in Z6iii, but not sure if it's a big deal for my use cases. The improved video in Z6iii vs. Zf means nothing to me. The Zf is around $250 cheaper, so price difference is not huge.

While the X-T5 seems like the natural upgrade path, I can't help but think that the Z6iii is better value and a safer choice. And the size does not seem to be significantly different (except the 24-120, but that trade-off I can accept as it also gives a longer range which I find amazing). Am I completely off here, or what would you suggest?

I just switched to a Z6iii from Fuji X-T2. Went with the 24-120 f4 and 20mm f1.8. I like the handling of the z6iii with a deep hand grip. There is a learning curve moving to Nikon and learning their menu system.

I still have my X-T2 with 50-140mm and 100-400mm lenses.

Both the X-T5 and Z6iii will produce excellent images. So, do you want to stay with APS-C or jump to FF?

Fuji has fixed their auto focus issues with af-c with their latest firmware release.

Pro's for X-T5

1. You are familiar with the Fuji menu system.
2. 2 SD card slots.
3. Weight 967 grams (x-t5 + 16-55 f2.8 mkii).
4. Existing Fuji lenses you already own.

Pro's for Z6iii

1. Better for astro (full frame sensor).
2. EVF

Con's for Z6iii

1. 2 card slots (SD and CFexpress) CFexpress type B card more expensive than SD card.
2. Weight 1390 grams (z6iii + 24-120).

Are you able to go to a camera store and handle both bodies?

Very good points. What was your reasoning for choosing the Z6iii over e.g. going to X-T5 or X-H2? Curious to understand, as we are (almost) coming from the same starting point.

Regarding FF vs APS-C, I have tried to not think too much of that (beyond size/cost and comparing like for like on focal lengths etc.), as most people seem to argue there is not much difference in the image quality at the end of the day (I have no experience myself). However, I do think the FF would benefit my indoors shots of kids (and astro, if I ever get to it) etc. when ISO will inevitably be cranked up. Not a dealbreaker, but a nice plus.

I have a store nearby where I can see them. I was by last week, and was not immediately scared of the size, although it is bigger. But I must admit 15-30mins in a store is not nearly sufficient to get a proper feeling for it. I do like the larger grip on the Z6iii though, it's just very natural and convenient to hold.

 

[ernest56]

I have looked at the X-T5 since it was released as a natural upgrade from my X-T20. I have been hesitant to pull the trigger as I've been concerned with the countless reports of autofocus, but also acknowledge it is probably to some extent blown out of proportions. But it really does make me hesitate, as autofocus is my key pain point today being in the Fuji ecosystem, and I want a consistent AF-C performance for moving kids etc. The latest patch 4.10 seems to have helped though as far as I can read online. The Nikon Z6iii seems like a very solid alternative, and I have very little negative to say for my use cases on that given the reviews and information I have read. Sony I am not a great fan of, and I don't find Canon's lens portfolio great for my use case (seems like it's either the budget path or astronomically expensive lenses). I have also looked at the X-T50, but I'm not amused with the trade-offs made vs. the X-T5. I also considered the Zf and have not completely disregarded it, however the lower resolution EVF is a bummer and I'm not sure how balanced it feels with a 24-120 attached. I also appreciate the, as I understand, better autofocus in Z6iii, but not sure if it's a big deal for my use cases. The improved video in Z6iii vs. Zf means nothing to me. The Zf is around $250 cheaper, so price difference is not huge.

While the X-T5 seems like the natural upgrade path, I can't help but think that the Z6iii is better value and a safer choice. And the size does not seem to be significantly different (except the 24-120, but that trade-off I can accept as it also gives a longer range which I find amazing). Am I completely off here, or what would you suggest?

I just switched to a Z6iii from Fuji X-T2. Went with the 24-120 f4 and 20mm f1.8. I like the handling of the z6iii with a deep hand grip. There is a learning curve moving to Nikon and learning their menu system.

I still have my X-T2 with 50-140mm and 100-400mm lenses.

Both the X-T5 and Z6iii will produce excellent images. So, do you want to stay with APS-C or jump to FF?

Fuji has fixed their auto focus issues with af-c with their latest firmware release.

Pro's for X-T5

1. You are familiar with the Fuji menu system.
2. 2 SD card slots.
3. Weight 967 grams (x-t5 + 16-55 f2.8 mkii).
4. Existing Fuji lenses you already own.

Pro's for Z6iii

1. Better for astro (full frame sensor).
2. EVF

Con's for Z6iii

1. 2 card slots (SD and CFexpress) CFexpress type B card more expensive than SD card.
2. Weight 1390 grams (z6iii + 24-120).

Are you able to go to a camera store and handle both bodies?

Very good points. What was your reasoning for choosing the Z6iii over e.g. going to X-T5 or X-H2? Curious to understand, as we are (almost) coming from the same starting point.

I had a couple of reasons.

1. I decided against the X-T5 due to its sensor size. The 40mp resulted in a smaller pixel pitch over a 26mp sensor. I like to shoot the milky way, full moon and streetscapes at night. I looked at the X-H2S with its 26mp sensor but the cost was the same as the Z6 III.
2. I wanted to only carry one lens (for landscape and travel) and wanted more reach over the 16-55mm. I was not happy with the XF 16-80mm. The Z 24-120mm covered this reach for me.
3. If I wanted to go FF and I was buying a new body now would be the time to do it. I sold my 16-55 f2.8 to help cover the cost of the 24-120 f4.

Regarding FF vs APS-C, I have tried to not think too much of that (beyond size/cost and comparing like for like on focal lengths etc.), as most people seem to argue there is not much difference in the image quality at the end of the day (I have no experience myself). However, I do think the FF would benefit my indoors shots of kids (and astro, if I ever get to it) etc. when ISO will inevitably be cranked up. Not a dealbreaker, but a nice plus.

The size/weight difference between the X-T5 with 16-55mm and Z6 III with 24-120mm is only 178 grams. For sure noise is less on FF compared to APS-C when ISO is cranked. Even a cell phone can take good images in good light.

I have a store nearby where I can see them. I was by last week, and was not immediately scared of the size, although it is bigger. But I must admit 15-30mins in a store is not nearly sufficient to get a proper feeling for it. I do like the larger grip on the Z6iii though, it's just very natural and convenient to hold.

I would suggest you take a couple of SD cards with you to the store and take several test shots with each camera and compare the results at home. Hopefully they have a 24-70 f4 lens you can try with the Z6 III.

 

[Ruedon]

...

Regarding FF vs APS-C, I have tried to not think too much of that (beyond size/cost and comparing like for like on focal lengths etc.), as most people seem to argue there is not much difference in the image quality at the end of the day (I have no experience myself). However, I do think the FF would benefit my indoors shots of kids (and astro, if I ever get to it) etc. when ISO will inevitably be cranked up. Not a dealbreaker, but a nice plus.

I had Nikon APS-C DSLRs (D70s, D90). 8 years ago I went for the D500 as it offered significantly more performance and a better body than a full frame DSLR at the same price, e.g. D750. IQ is comparable if you have equivalent lenses. I got the Sigma 18-35/1.8 that gives similar results as full frame with f/2.8 zoom. Then you have half the ISO number with APS-C, resulting in about the same noise level for the overall image. This will be similar for e.g. APS-C 16-55mm f/2.8 vs FF 24-70mm f/4. Fuji has crazy prices for such lenses, resulting in a quite bad price/performance ratio for the overall package in my mind.

Things changed since 8 years ago. Lenses like the Sigma f/1.8 zooms have not been renewed for mirrorless. Instead a lot of new options came out for full frame, like the Tamron 28-75/2.8 G2 that looks like a successor of the Sigma 18-35/1.8 to me, providing more reach. Primes never made much sense on APS-C for me, as I had the f/1.8 zooms. Today, my 50mm f/1.8S and 35mm f/1.4 make a clear difference. The inexpensive 40mm f/2 is equivalent to an f/1.4 lens for APS-C. You save weight and money with full frame in this case.

I have a store nearby where I can see them. I was by last week, and was not immediately scared of the size, although it is bigger. But I must admit 15-30mins in a store is not nearly sufficient to get a proper feeling for it. I do like the larger grip on the Z6iii though, it's just very natural and convenient to hold.

The mirrorless Z cameras are smaller than previous DSLRs. The Z5/6/7 are more of the size of the former APS-C D7xxx, D90, D70s. The Z8 has about the size of the D500.

 

[Maagge]

Yes I was by a store yesterday again. Zf really did not feel good for me, so while you are completely right it fits most technical needs I have, it's not a viable option for me. I think the combination of retro ergonomics and full frame lenses just didn't work for me.

Certainly Z6iii is too much of a camera for what I need, especially in the video department. A refreshed Z5ii would likely be quite interesting for me, but who knows when that will happen.

 

[Maagge]

Thanks for chipping in! I'm not very inclined to change systems unless there is an AF benefit over the X-T5, so in that respect I don't think I'll take such a jump. I will nevertheless check it out next time I run by a store.

 

[Mountaingrapher]

Over the past couple of years I have been wanting to upgrade my camera from my X-T20 which I have had for around 8 years or so, but I have held back the decision as I have been in doubt on what path to take (system etc.). But I am now beyond the tipping point and want to move ahead. The X-T20 has served me fairly well and I have gotten a lot of amazing pictures over the years, but these days more often than not I see myself not bringing it with me as I'm not generally getting the results I want.

I was in a very similar situation, and considered every options available on the market a couple of months ago. I then upgraded to the Fuji X-T5: my full analysis here: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4791259

TL;DR: Fuji X-T5 is best Image Quality - Portability - Usability tradeoff on the market. Full Frame systems are 50% heavier and 30% more expensive than APS-C.

 

[MJ_Photo38]

Yes I was by a store yesterday again. Zf really did not feel good for me, so while you are completely right it fits most technical needs I have, it's not a viable option for me. I think the combination of retro ergonomics and full frame lenses just didn't work for me.

Certainly Z6iii is too much of a camera for what I need, especially in the video department. A refreshed Z5ii would likely be quite interesting for me, but who knows when that will happen.

You might wait a good while before a Z5ii actually gets released. Nikon likes to keep those entry level products as an entry point for customers to later upgrade their gear : that's the reason the D610 was kept in productin for so long, even when the replacements came in.

In my opinion, the Z6III is a great camera for pretty much everyone of your requirements. Sure, it's more expensive than a Zf, but it's also equipped with a better autofocus system, way better viewfinder and great ergonomics. Think of it as a camera you'll keep for a long time, so even if it might be overkill today, it doesn't really matter as that just means you'll keep it longer.

An alternative option from Nikon is the Z6II. While it's not as good for autofocus as the Zf or the Z6III, it's still a huge step forward compared to your X-T20, you can still buy it new for around $1500 and in my opinion it's a pretty good value at that price.

I myself use a Z6 (the first one), and moving from an X-H1 to a Z6 was by far the most impactful decision to my actual photographic capabilities when it comes to autofocus and tracking subjects. People like to trash on that camera, but it's really not that bad at all, especially after the firmware updates.

NOw, if I'm being honest, if all you want is a nice enthusiast camera with bulletproof low light autofocus that you can carry around easily and won't be a burden to use, even for people that don't know much in cameras...

... well I'd suggest taking a good look at the A7CII. It's small, there are plenty of small and good lenses for it, the sensor is very good and the autofocusis truly foolproof. Sony colors are not my favorite, but they got better over the years, and you can always apply JPEG profiles to tweak things to taste and make those files look the same as any other camera anyway.

I'm a Nikon / Fuji user, so I'll be more knowledgeable about those systems than let's say Canon or Sony, but for the average Joe that just want a camera delivering good image quality, good autofocus in a package that doesn't look too serious, the A7CII is a bit of a no brainer to me.

Now if I'm being honest, any modern-ish camera from Canon / Nikon / Sony will provide a pretty tremendous upgrade in AF performance compared to the X-T20. Even the Z6II.

 

[aagirlz]

Hi all,

I've been lurking these forums on and off for more than a decade. Thanks for all the insights, knowledge and inspiration being shared across the board.

I'm an amateur/enthusiast photographer and my primary subjects are landscapes and documenting my family (incl. casual portraits) with the occasional wildlife. I have a wish to try macro and astro, but must admit I have not gotten around to it yet. I don't really do any sports/action, but could be relevant casually down the line when kids grow up. Architecture and video has practically zero interest.

Over the past couple of years I have been wanting to upgrade my camera from my X-T20 which I have had for around 8 years or so, but I have held back the decision as I have been in doubt on what path to take (system etc.). But I am now beyond the tipping point and want to move ahead. The X-T20 has served me fairly well and I have gotten a lot of amazing pictures over the years, but these days more often than not I see myself not bringing it with me as I'm not generally getting the results I want.

My primary quarrel with the X-T20 is autofocus (there are just way too many shots either completely out of focus or every so slightly soft/out of focus resulting in a picture that looks okay'ish, but in the end I'll never like). Some of it is for sure user error but I feel like I have decent grip on it, generally. An issue is also whenever someone else borrows my camera to take pictures (e.g. with me in a family setting or similar), nailing focus is an absolute nightmare. And my wife needs to be able to use the camera and get good results (at least photos that are properly focused) without a ph.d. in focus systems. On my old Canon 550D it seemed other's were getting much better results when giving a hand, than with the X-T20. Besides autofocus, I also do find pictures quite noisy as soon as ISO is cranked up, which is bound to happen with a lot of indoor shots of kids etc. I appreciate the Fuji retro look and dials to control the exposure triangle, and their JPEG's, but at the same time I do not love the cumbersome PP process with the X-trans files, so I'm not married to Fuji by any means, but also not actively looking to get away from Fuji.

I do edit RAW files in Lightroom, but my time is limited these days, so I highly appreciate having good SOOC JPEG's as well. Film simulation with Fuji is nice and I'm not sure what competitors have in that regard, but as a starting point, I generally don't see myself exploring 20 different profiles depending on the shot, but rather a few that gives good fairly natural results for portrait, landscape and such. RAW's will mostly be for some specific pictures or difficult scenes, realistically 10-20% of my shots at most.

To sum up and attempted order of priority:

1. Autofocus: It does not need to be the absolute best on the market or within my budget, but I want something that is consistent in autofocus including eye/face tracking and giving good overall hit rates. I have small kids (0 and 3) growing up, and one of the key uses will be to take pictures of them. Occasional birds and wildlife is a plus but not decisive factor for me.
2. SOOC JPEG's, imagine quality, low light performance, dynamic range, EVF and resolution are difficult to rank for me and a balanced profile on these parameters is fine. I mention resolution because I do crop at times and I also like to print my favourite pictures up to like 30" for home decoration. That said, most of the time I do feel my current 24mp is fine
3. Size/weight: I will use the camera for hiking as well, but have so far not been concerned with weight even bringing multiple lenses. So I'm open to going up a little in size/weight from my current setup, but of course I would prefer to keep it as small as I can given above are in place
4. Dual card slots and weather sealing is definitely a plus, but I mostly do not use the camera is exposed conditions. But would be nice to have so I wouldn't have to worry about it, when the circumstances are there
5. Video: I almost never shoot video, but I could see myself using it a bit more with the kids. But I'm sure any camera on the market more than satisfies my needs in that regard, should I start doing it.

Budget wise, I'm looking for something for up to around 3,500 USD for body+high quality every day zoom. While I don't have to spend all that money, I would rather overinvest than underinvest at this point, so even if that budget gives me more camera than I need, I'm okay with that. I really do not want to sit in 1, 2 or 3 years time regretting my purchase, and the second hand market in Denmark is not great.

I have looked at the X-T5 since it was released as a natural upgrade from my X-T20. I have been hesitant to pull the trigger as I've been concerned with the countless reports of autofocus, but also acknowledge it is probably to some extent blown out of proportions. But it really does make me hesitate, as autofocus is my key pain point today being in the Fuji ecosystem, and I want a consistent AF-C performance for moving kids etc. The latest patch 4.10 seems to have helped though as far as I can read online. The Nikon Z6iii seems like a very solid alternative, and I have very little negative to say for my use cases on that given the reviews and information I have read. Sony I am not a great fan of, and I don't find Canon's lens portfolio great for my use case (seems like it's either the budget path or astronomically expensive lenses). I have also looked at the X-T50, but I'm not amused with the trade-offs made vs. the X-T5. I also considered the Zf and have not completely disregarded it, however the lower resolution EVF is a bummer and I'm not sure how balanced it feels with a 24-120 attached. I also appreciate the, as I understand, better autofocus in Z6iii, but not sure if it's a big deal for my use cases. The improved video in Z6iii vs. Zf means nothing to me. The Zf is around $250 cheaper, so price difference is not huge.

Looking at X-T5 and Z6iii alternatives and combined cost, the Nikon actually comes out cheaper given the lenses I'm interested in, which was quite a surprise to me. DK prices (with current discounts) converted to USD:

Z6iii $2,400 + 24-120 F4 $850 = $3,250 (with 24-70 F4 $2,900)

X-T5 $1,850 + 16-55 F2.8 II $1,500 = $3,350 (with 16-50 F2.8-4.8 $2,200)

Adding a solid ultra wide is around the same price (Z 14-30 F4 vs. 10-24 F4) and a portrait lens cheaper with Nikon (Z 85 F1.8 S $720 vs. 56 F1.2 WR $1,230).

While the X-T5 seems like the natural upgrade path, I can't help but think that the Z6iii is better value and a safer choice. And the size does not seem to be significantly different (except the 24-120, but that trade-off I can accept as it also gives a longer range which I find amazing). Am I completely off here, or what would you suggest?

As someone who owns both - the Nikon is significantly bigger if that matters to you and the Zf not really smaller than the 6iii

i prefer the size and ergonomics of the Fuji, i have small hands, for me this is the perfect size.
the autofocus of the Nikon is better but the autofocus of the xt5 is significantly better than the xe4 I had so much so that when I couldn’t get a photo with the xe4 I switch to the xt5 and easily got it.

i don’t have either of those lenses so can’t comment.

the low light performance (and autofocus) on the Nikon seems better to me if that matters.

Both are lovely cameras you can’t go wrong with. Personally I think the 16-55 it is way over priced where I live (and also less available).
I keep thinking I should sell my xt5 since I hardly use it since I got the 6iii but in good lighting, I love the photos and the more compact size

 

[Maagge]

Thanks for all the input and perspectives. Very much appreciated. I have decided to give the Z6iii a try and have ordered that - looking forward to receiving it in a few days!

At the end of the day, for me, I think the performance upsides on the Z6iii outweighs the size difference to the X-T5. Finger's crossed, we shall see. I will try to give an update down the road after I have familiarised myself with the camera, in case other's end in a similar conundrum.

 

[Ruedon]

Thanks for all the input and perspectives. Very much appreciated. I have decided to give the Z6iii a try and have ordered that - looking forward to receiving it in a few days!

At the end of the day, for me, I think the performance upsides on the Z6iii outweighs the size difference to the X-T5. Finger's crossed, we shall see. I will try to give an update down the road after I have familiarised myself with the camera, in case other's end in a similar conundrum.

Congratulation! The Z6III should have a perfect ergonomics. All three fingers (middle, ring, little) fit well on the grip. The grip is very deep and formed such that the camera can even hang on your fingertips. No cramping. This is why I attached a Peak Design Clutch to the right side of my D500 and my Z8, hindering them from slipping down accidentally when just holding them loosely with my right hand. This works well even with larger lenses, like the Tamron 35-150/2-2.8.

Here you see the clutch in the background. A lens like the 26/2.8 turns even a comparably large Z8 into my little street cam.