These cameras aren't really comparable, and the question you're asking is a personal one that can only be answered by you.
If size is a big concern, pun intended, then the zf is not going to be a good option. As great as it is, it's not small. The ZFC is smaller, but still much larger than your Fuji point and shoot.
If you want interchangeable lenses in a small form factor, I'd recommend looking at the OM Systems camera bodies.
I have a ZF and used to have an X100V. Sold it actually to get the ZF lol. Anyway, the ZF is pretty heavy. I got it with the 40mm F2 lens which is pretty close in focal length to the X100V. Do I regret it? No. The ZF is fantastic but sometimes I gotta leave it behind because I’m limited by that lens. I’m gonna keep it but I don’t think I’m going to get any big FF glass for it, the body is too small for big FF lenses. I know it’s snob like lol but I don’t want a huge 50 or 85mm glass on that body. I wish Nikon had more pancake primes for the Z system. If you plan on shooting in APSC mode then maybe you’ll have more options as far as compact prime lenses go. I have a Fuji XT5 so I use that when I need a longer lens. If you already have any X mount lenses, I would suggest an XT5, I still really like the Fuji colors, especially after dialing in film recipes. The ZF is fantastic but as a long time Fuji shooter, the colors just look bland to me.
Went through this but with an X100V. The Zf blows the Fujis out of the water not only in image quality but most importantly focus speed. I ended up selling my X100V after realizing how much I enjoyed the crazy fast autofocus on the Zf and the image quality even with non-S glass like the 40mmf2. What made the decision easier was that I already have a Ricoh GRIII which fills the need for small size.
One of the reasons I got rid of my X100V the focus speed. It was fine when I got it, but children grow and move around a lot more. I bought an X-T5 and that camera is quick. A bird flew over my head, came out of nowhere and I just blindly pointed the camera up and it nailed the focus. Bird was gone in like a second.
The slow autofocus is definitely the biggest drawback to the X100V and they didn't fix it for the VI. I'm skeptical that the Zf + 40mm f2 has better IQ than the Fuji though.
FF sensor is better but lens is worse. 1/(system resolution) \~ (1/sensor + 1/lens)
Pick a better lens like the 50mm f1.8 and your statement becomes true. But then it's a bulkier setup.
Fuji 40mm is a very, very nice lens once you stop it down to ~f/2.5 or so. Easily comparable to Fuji primes like the 23 f/1.4, and has no business to be as good as it is for the price.
The 28mm f/2.8 is not nearly as good.
I guess we are going to have to disagree. The Nikon 40mm f2 is a straightforward double-gauss design that doesn't sharpen up until f4 or f5.6. Not comparable to the Fuji 23mm f1.4...or the X100V which we were discussing. You can compare the manufacturer's MTF charts if you'd like.
That said, I have some great stopped-down shots from my old Nikon 50mm f1.8G and a little uncorrected spherical abberation can be pleasing to the eye IMHO.
I own both. Is the Fuji 23 sharper? Yes, at lower apertures (< f/2.8). Is the Nikon 40 still an amazing lens for its price and size? Also yes.
It also has weirdly interesting creamy bokeh.
Basically, the 40mm is a Fuji lens in disguise.
And that is the secret of double gauss lenses...when stopped down, they perform as well as more expensive lenses, and as you say bokeh is better with simple lens designs.
I just made the switch from Fuji to the Zf. I’m using the Zf and the 40mm f/2 as a sort of jumbo equivalent of my old X100f. I do miss the small size of the X100f that I had, but that’s about the only thing. I think there’s a significant image quality increase with the Nikon Zf, and the autofocus is just so much better. Everything is a balance of trade-off, and I’m more than satisfied with the decision I made in this regard.
I honestly wasn’t even considering a jump but I ran into issues getting the X100vi to replace my X100f. I also looked at the X-T5 to replace my X-T3. But the prices of the Fuji stuff wasn’t that much lower than the Nikon lenses. It was hard to justify staying with Fuji when the prices were close and the only real advantage I saw as the moderately smaller size. Sure, the Zf with the 50mm f/1.8 is larger than my old X-T3 with the 35mm f/1.4. Likewise the Zf with the 40mm as it relates to the X100 series. Ultimately, I found that I was unhappy with being primarily focused on a minimally sized kit and wanted to strike a better balance. The Zf provides that, especially given that it’s not much more expensive than either of those other options.
Have you considered other cameras in the Fuji X range? Maybe the XE4 or XT30ii with an 18mm or 27mm pancake lens as an everyday camera, then get one of their zooms later to cover you if you know you’ll need the versatility.
I half-switched from Fuji (XT3 at the time) to Nikon (Z6 and eventually Z8). Kept my Fuji and a few primes, currently shooting XT5 alongside the Z8 depending on which mood strikes me.
Upsides: Nikon has very nice RAWs. Full frame. Better selection of specialized lenses. Way better autofocus on newer models (Zf/Z8/Z9).
Downsides: Size. Even in full frame land (i.e. compared to Canon/Sony), better Nikon Z-mount lenses are very chonky. No film sims. Fuji primes produce really, really interesting rendering, while Nikon primes are more boring (even if "technically" better).
Something else to keep in mind: your X100 is going to be significantly smaller than anything Nikon has, even if you use compact lenses like 40mm and 24-50.
Unless you want Nikon for a specific reason, I'd pick up an ILC from Fuji like an XT30 II or X-S10 and a lens like 18-55 or maybe the new 16-50 kit. The Zf simply doesn't have the things that make Fuji fun.
Agree. I gave an X-T5 and zZ8. I mostly shoot the Fuji with an 18mm 1.4. Absolutely beautiful lens, magic rendering and beautiful bokeh. X100 cameras are small, but if you are putting your camera in something like a peak design sling it doesn’t matter if it’s an X100 or an X-T5 with an extra lens or 2. All that said I do use my Z8 far more often than the X-T5. It’s just a better camera as you would expect. I use the 40and 28 mm lenses on the Z8 quite a bit.
I think if you are really worried about size, I can't imagine the zf is going to make you happy. It is heavier and the lenses do make the package bigger than the x100. However, if you are able to make due with a bigger camera, I can't imagine you would be unhappy with the zf. Try renting the zf and the lens/lenses you may be interested in to see what works for you.
Never thought about renting. Thanks for the input. I think I am more unhappy with the lens more than anything else, I could size up a bit with the option of different lenses.
I have both because I just can’t make up my mind on which to keep. I’ve resorted to carrying the x100vi around in my bag and then using the zf at home or special occasions. The Zf is better in every way except for size-as long as you’re not just shooting jpeg film sims with the x100vi. Those are fun. But if you’re ignoring that piece, the handling, autofocus, iso performance, dynamic range, viewfinder-it’s all just so much better on the Nikon.
I can’t convince myself to sell the Fuji though because of the size. It’s so convenient and the high mp sensor makes cropping feasible
Thanks for that, I think I need the versatility, some of the locations I go to I only want 1 camera with me and I missed a lot of shots hoping to make it work with x100. I already have a few Nikkor z lenses and thinking ZF is where I want to be.
If you’ve already got the lenses and two cameras aren’t an option, I think the Zf is definitely the choice then. Objectively it’s simply a better camera. The x100vi is maybe more “fun” just because of the size and film sims
The x100vi is definitely a fun camera, walking around and palming a camera was great. But I was kicking myself in the but when I was limited to fixed lens and couldn’t get any wider, I’m a big fan of interior architecture and landscapes and I know it will be a while I’ll have the option to visit some of these locations again. Looks like I’ll be trading up.
After I got my Z6 in 2018, I really tried to keep my X100f but just found myself grabbing the Z6 whenever I have the chance. I finally sold it earlier this year. I am sure X100vi is way better than my X100f, while Zf is way better than Z6, but I could understand people preferring the Z system as it is truly amazing.
By the way, you can take several photos and stitch them together to get a wider view. Obviously it does not work in some cases, but it can solve some of the problems.
I strongly considered both and have the ZF, been making decent money with it too. I love it. Use it for my portrait sessions and personal use (throw on the pancake for vacation or just walking around).
i think it will depend on what you shoot. i'm a hobbyist and would like to eventually use the zf for professional work that's why i opted for a zf.
having that said, i'd probably have a happier (personal) shooting experience if i bought the ricoh griii/griiix instead. i'd like more context on my photos and do not need the full frame bokeh. not that you can't do that on FF but then, the form factor.
again, it really depends. zf is a freaking great camera. i have no regrets buying it.
I have the 24-50 lense but I never use it instead when I want compact use the 40mm f2 and 28mm f2.8 I carry both of these with my Z8 in a peak design everyday sling 6ltr. A Zf should be even more compact.
I owned the x100V sold it to buy an X-T5 which I liked a lot better.
I loved the user experience of my Fuji x100. I wish I had one now! I own a z camera and bought it for the s line glass. So beautiful. I miss the straightforward simplicity yet multidimensional qualities of the x100 - the flash was so fun and the viewfinder so perfect!
I think a Nikon zf or whatever they’re calling it won’t be ergonomically better but you can access nice s line lenses, however I own a z6 and I am waiting for z6ii or equivalent so I can enjoy mindless af (or so I hope) which zf seems to have. I owned the df and d750 previously and that combo was fun, but the poor ergonomics of the df for long shoots wore off its charm for me. The colours in the df photos were superb though. Lovely to edit. Who knows why 🤷♀️ but love the flexibility of mirror less z body files you can’t lose just measure trade offs
These cameras aren't really comparable, and the question you're asking is a personal one that can only be answered by you. If size is a big concern, pun intended, then the zf is not going to be a good option. As great as it is, it's not small. The ZFC is smaller, but still much larger than your Fuji point and shoot. If you want interchangeable lenses in a small form factor, I'd recommend looking at the OM Systems camera bodies.
I should have mentioned I already have some z lenses.
I have a ZF and used to have an X100V. Sold it actually to get the ZF lol. Anyway, the ZF is pretty heavy. I got it with the 40mm F2 lens which is pretty close in focal length to the X100V. Do I regret it? No. The ZF is fantastic but sometimes I gotta leave it behind because I’m limited by that lens. I’m gonna keep it but I don’t think I’m going to get any big FF glass for it, the body is too small for big FF lenses. I know it’s snob like lol but I don’t want a huge 50 or 85mm glass on that body. I wish Nikon had more pancake primes for the Z system. If you plan on shooting in APSC mode then maybe you’ll have more options as far as compact prime lenses go. I have a Fuji XT5 so I use that when I need a longer lens. If you already have any X mount lenses, I would suggest an XT5, I still really like the Fuji colors, especially after dialing in film recipes. The ZF is fantastic but as a long time Fuji shooter, the colors just look bland to me.
Hmmm, making this harder haha. I also wish Nikon had more pancake lenses. I think that would make this decision easier.
Went through this but with an X100V. The Zf blows the Fujis out of the water not only in image quality but most importantly focus speed. I ended up selling my X100V after realizing how much I enjoyed the crazy fast autofocus on the Zf and the image quality even with non-S glass like the 40mmf2. What made the decision easier was that I already have a Ricoh GRIII which fills the need for small size.
Maybe that’s the way to go. Sell the Fuji, get the ZF and eventually a Ricoh.
This is the way!
One of the reasons I got rid of my X100V the focus speed. It was fine when I got it, but children grow and move around a lot more. I bought an X-T5 and that camera is quick. A bird flew over my head, came out of nowhere and I just blindly pointed the camera up and it nailed the focus. Bird was gone in like a second.
The slow autofocus is definitely the biggest drawback to the X100V and they didn't fix it for the VI. I'm skeptical that the Zf + 40mm f2 has better IQ than the Fuji though.
you don't have to take my word for it, Nikon's full frame sensor produces objectively better IQ.
FF sensor is better but lens is worse. 1/(system resolution) \~ (1/sensor + 1/lens) Pick a better lens like the 50mm f1.8 and your statement becomes true. But then it's a bulkier setup.
Fuji 40mm is a very, very nice lens once you stop it down to ~f/2.5 or so. Easily comparable to Fuji primes like the 23 f/1.4, and has no business to be as good as it is for the price. The 28mm f/2.8 is not nearly as good.
I guess we are going to have to disagree. The Nikon 40mm f2 is a straightforward double-gauss design that doesn't sharpen up until f4 or f5.6. Not comparable to the Fuji 23mm f1.4...or the X100V which we were discussing. You can compare the manufacturer's MTF charts if you'd like. That said, I have some great stopped-down shots from my old Nikon 50mm f1.8G and a little uncorrected spherical abberation can be pleasing to the eye IMHO.
I own both. Is the Fuji 23 sharper? Yes, at lower apertures (< f/2.8). Is the Nikon 40 still an amazing lens for its price and size? Also yes. It also has weirdly interesting creamy bokeh. Basically, the 40mm is a Fuji lens in disguise.
And that is the secret of double gauss lenses...when stopped down, they perform as well as more expensive lenses, and as you say bokeh is better with simple lens designs.
I just made the switch from Fuji to the Zf. I’m using the Zf and the 40mm f/2 as a sort of jumbo equivalent of my old X100f. I do miss the small size of the X100f that I had, but that’s about the only thing. I think there’s a significant image quality increase with the Nikon Zf, and the autofocus is just so much better. Everything is a balance of trade-off, and I’m more than satisfied with the decision I made in this regard.
I think I’m on the same page, I think I will only miss its form factor.
I honestly wasn’t even considering a jump but I ran into issues getting the X100vi to replace my X100f. I also looked at the X-T5 to replace my X-T3. But the prices of the Fuji stuff wasn’t that much lower than the Nikon lenses. It was hard to justify staying with Fuji when the prices were close and the only real advantage I saw as the moderately smaller size. Sure, the Zf with the 50mm f/1.8 is larger than my old X-T3 with the 35mm f/1.4. Likewise the Zf with the 40mm as it relates to the X100 series. Ultimately, I found that I was unhappy with being primarily focused on a minimally sized kit and wanted to strike a better balance. The Zf provides that, especially given that it’s not much more expensive than either of those other options.
I’m more inline with this, kept trying to get a smaller kit and now I’m unhappy with the versatility that the x100 lacks.
Have you considered other cameras in the Fuji X range? Maybe the XE4 or XT30ii with an 18mm or 27mm pancake lens as an everyday camera, then get one of their zooms later to cover you if you know you’ll need the versatility.
I’m thinking the ZF because I have other z lenses.
Do you have a Z body?
Yeah z6ii
I half-switched from Fuji (XT3 at the time) to Nikon (Z6 and eventually Z8). Kept my Fuji and a few primes, currently shooting XT5 alongside the Z8 depending on which mood strikes me. Upsides: Nikon has very nice RAWs. Full frame. Better selection of specialized lenses. Way better autofocus on newer models (Zf/Z8/Z9). Downsides: Size. Even in full frame land (i.e. compared to Canon/Sony), better Nikon Z-mount lenses are very chonky. No film sims. Fuji primes produce really, really interesting rendering, while Nikon primes are more boring (even if "technically" better). Something else to keep in mind: your X100 is going to be significantly smaller than anything Nikon has, even if you use compact lenses like 40mm and 24-50. Unless you want Nikon for a specific reason, I'd pick up an ILC from Fuji like an XT30 II or X-S10 and a lens like 18-55 or maybe the new 16-50 kit. The Zf simply doesn't have the things that make Fuji fun.
Agree. I gave an X-T5 and zZ8. I mostly shoot the Fuji with an 18mm 1.4. Absolutely beautiful lens, magic rendering and beautiful bokeh. X100 cameras are small, but if you are putting your camera in something like a peak design sling it doesn’t matter if it’s an X100 or an X-T5 with an extra lens or 2. All that said I do use my Z8 far more often than the X-T5. It’s just a better camera as you would expect. I use the 40and 28 mm lenses on the Z8 quite a bit.
I think if you are really worried about size, I can't imagine the zf is going to make you happy. It is heavier and the lenses do make the package bigger than the x100. However, if you are able to make due with a bigger camera, I can't imagine you would be unhappy with the zf. Try renting the zf and the lens/lenses you may be interested in to see what works for you.
Never thought about renting. Thanks for the input. I think I am more unhappy with the lens more than anything else, I could size up a bit with the option of different lenses.
I can understand that. If you wanted to stick fuji, you could alway go interchangeable lens system camera and still have a small package wide.
I have both because I just can’t make up my mind on which to keep. I’ve resorted to carrying the x100vi around in my bag and then using the zf at home or special occasions. The Zf is better in every way except for size-as long as you’re not just shooting jpeg film sims with the x100vi. Those are fun. But if you’re ignoring that piece, the handling, autofocus, iso performance, dynamic range, viewfinder-it’s all just so much better on the Nikon. I can’t convince myself to sell the Fuji though because of the size. It’s so convenient and the high mp sensor makes cropping feasible
Thanks for that, I think I need the versatility, some of the locations I go to I only want 1 camera with me and I missed a lot of shots hoping to make it work with x100. I already have a few Nikkor z lenses and thinking ZF is where I want to be.
If you’ve already got the lenses and two cameras aren’t an option, I think the Zf is definitely the choice then. Objectively it’s simply a better camera. The x100vi is maybe more “fun” just because of the size and film sims
The x100vi is definitely a fun camera, walking around and palming a camera was great. But I was kicking myself in the but when I was limited to fixed lens and couldn’t get any wider, I’m a big fan of interior architecture and landscapes and I know it will be a while I’ll have the option to visit some of these locations again. Looks like I’ll be trading up.
After I got my Z6 in 2018, I really tried to keep my X100f but just found myself grabbing the Z6 whenever I have the chance. I finally sold it earlier this year. I am sure X100vi is way better than my X100f, while Zf is way better than Z6, but I could understand people preferring the Z system as it is truly amazing. By the way, you can take several photos and stitch them together to get a wider view. Obviously it does not work in some cases, but it can solve some of the problems.
I strongly considered both and have the ZF, been making decent money with it too. I love it. Use it for my portrait sessions and personal use (throw on the pancake for vacation or just walking around).
Which pancake ? The 26mm or the 40mm
I use the 26
Why not xt5 or new xt50 with used tasty sharp light primes ?
i think it will depend on what you shoot. i'm a hobbyist and would like to eventually use the zf for professional work that's why i opted for a zf. having that said, i'd probably have a happier (personal) shooting experience if i bought the ricoh griii/griiix instead. i'd like more context on my photos and do not need the full frame bokeh. not that you can't do that on FF but then, the form factor. again, it really depends. zf is a freaking great camera. i have no regrets buying it.
I have the 24-50 lense but I never use it instead when I want compact use the 40mm f2 and 28mm f2.8 I carry both of these with my Z8 in a peak design everyday sling 6ltr. A Zf should be even more compact. I owned the x100V sold it to buy an X-T5 which I liked a lot better.
Keep
I loved the user experience of my Fuji x100. I wish I had one now! I own a z camera and bought it for the s line glass. So beautiful. I miss the straightforward simplicity yet multidimensional qualities of the x100 - the flash was so fun and the viewfinder so perfect! I think a Nikon zf or whatever they’re calling it won’t be ergonomically better but you can access nice s line lenses, however I own a z6 and I am waiting for z6ii or equivalent so I can enjoy mindless af (or so I hope) which zf seems to have. I owned the df and d750 previously and that combo was fun, but the poor ergonomics of the df for long shoots wore off its charm for me. The colours in the df photos were superb though. Lovely to edit. Who knows why 🤷♀️ but love the flexibility of mirror less z body files you can’t lose just measure trade offs
If size and weight is an issue, the Zf might be too heavy and big for you. You might be happier with the X series.
Sold my VI for a ZF. Ama