bushwick1234
Well-known
Today I grabbed again my old Nikon D700 with the cheap AF Nikkor 50mm 1.8D and what an overall difference with the Fuji X-T1, X-Pro2, X100S and X100F! Anyone else had the same - or similar experience?
I went from Fuji to a Nikon Df and then back to Fuji. If I go Nikon again, it would be for the Z. I think I'm done with DSLRs. I like seeing my exact metering in my VF.
Range-rover
Mentor
I've done that, used Fuji and went back to the Nikon D700, it's a great
camera and flash system.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
I don't need to buy X, Z, R, A and so on. It's easy. Every time I just play with one in the store, I'm back to DSLR as most confident image taker. 
Ccoppola82
Well-known
My canon kit is for shooting events or concerts. The Leica can’t keep up with a fast paced event, and the Xpro2 didn’t live up to what I wanted in low light. The canon with the “holy trinity” L lenses have never disappointed me. They are just too damned heavy and bulky to carry around as a daily camera.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I have a D4 that I bought used a few years ago that I thought about selling until I realised that aside from it's bulk it is more capable than any other camera I own. I'll use it until it breaks ... which could be a while I suspect!
Darthfeeble
But you can call me Steve
My Canon kit is gone, but I already had pretty much become just a fuji shooter already. I did go up the scale with fuji from X to G.
narsuitus
Well-known
No !
Just like I did not vacillate between 35mm film rangefinders and 35mm SLR film cameras, I do not vacillate between Fuji digital mirrorless and DSLR cameras. I just use them both.
kxl
Social Documentary
No... at least not yet... maybe not switch back but shoot both systems.
Had a D800e and D500 and last year, I decided to give the Fuji X-T2 a try. I liked it (still do), but it was just not fulfilling. I don't know how else to describe it. Finally, I got a D850 a few weeks ago and everything is right with the world.
I don't know if I'll give up the X-T2; it's nice to have a lightweight system. But I somehow feel happier when shooting the D850.
Had a D800e and D500 and last year, I decided to give the Fuji X-T2 a try. I liked it (still do), but it was just not fulfilling. I don't know how else to describe it. Finally, I got a D850 a few weeks ago and everything is right with the world.
I don't know if I'll give up the X-T2; it's nice to have a lightweight system. But I somehow feel happier when shooting the D850.
DwF
Well-known
I haven't shot with DSLR since the Pentax Ist and was never big on SLRs. I doid have a Leica R6 that was beautiful camera. Recently I helped my son trade away an X E2 and cash for a D800. He loves the Nikon, and I have to say I really enjoy shooting that camera and have considered maybe looking at one for myself......would be the D850. I have more cameras than time so it won't be anytime soon.
Out to Lunch
Menteur
I recently scrolled down some of my DSLR pics from about 10 years ago, and they look nice. This said, I'll stick with Fuji for a variety of reasons, weight/size of the DSLR and lenses included.
Dogman
Mentor
I still have my Canon gear. But its days in my possession are numbered. There's no denying how good the pictures were that I made with it. And I still like optical viewfinders over electronic ones. But the XPro2 has now become familiar and second nature for me.
I tried using the Canon recently and I still have the muscle memory after all those years using various models but it's too much like a boat anchor compared to the Fuji XPro and XT bodies. And when the doctors talk about my spine with terms like scoliosis, stenosis, spondylosis and disc herniations, it's time to stop dragging around anchors.
I tried using the Canon recently and I still have the muscle memory after all those years using various models but it's too much like a boat anchor compared to the Fuji XPro and XT bodies. And when the doctors talk about my spine with terms like scoliosis, stenosis, spondylosis and disc herniations, it's time to stop dragging around anchors.
Axel
singleshooter
Everytime I take one of my old DSLRs with optical viewfinder I have the same
thoughts: "is it really switched on?" and "how bulky and loud".
So I wouldn´t switch back. No way.
Fascinations from the old gear like the Leica R3 or EOS5D give me a kind of retro-feeling which is really enjoyable.
But for my everyday photography the Fuji X and Sonys do the best job. Even with a simple AF 1,8/50 from time to time
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
I don't need to buy X, Z, R, A and so on. It's easy. Every time I just play with one in the store, I'm back to DSLR as most confident image taker.
That's how I feel. I've been very happy with my D700. Except for trying a different lens every so often, I'm staying with the D700. And I keep a D300 around for the crop factor, which I find useful at times.
Faintandfuzzy
Well-known
I enjoyed using the D700 for weddings and lifestyle shooting. That said, the image quality out of an X-Pro2 beats it in every way.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
On top of it all of those complains about weight and size are not really relevant. X-Pro is huge. And it can't do much better than digital Canon Rebel, which is same size if not more compact. Pancake lens and small kit lens, which is very capable. Plus, Rebels battery will last much longer.
And if not Fuij OVF, then every time I put any EVF to my eye, crap..., I wont see the world as human, but like terminator.
shimokita
白黒
I shoot RF, x100t, & full frame (d)SLR... the subject matter usually determines what system I select... sometimes I wonder about my decision making process.
willie_901
Mentor
Honestly, my experience was just the opposite.
In the spring of 2014 I used a D700 and X-T1 side-by-side. The cameras were switched on a tripod using Arca Swiss mounts for a Golden Hour commercial shoot of a luxury home exterior. The X-T1 and D700 raw files rendered with essentially identical perceived resolution and shadow region detail. So, I purchased the FUJINON 10-24/4 lens and compared results from an interiors photography gig to the D700 with a Nikon AF-S 16-35mm f/4G ED VR lens. The FUJIFILM files rendered with significantly lower levels of moiré artifacts. Otherwise the results were similar. Again, the camera locations were on a tripod (essentially identical) as were the external flash placements. I decided to switch to FUJIFILM for all my commercial work and carried the D700 as a back up.
After a few weeks I realized the FUJINON 10-24/4 lens was superior to the Nikon 16-35. When I had to shoot a residence exterior facing the sun, the Fujinon exhibited much lower levels of ghosting and flare. I also noticed the interior images required much less work to minimize perceived distortions common with very wide angles of view. For a ~100 degree field-of-view (12mm and 18mm respectively for APSC and FX) this difference was significant.
I also realized with .RAF raw total post-production time required deliver 20-24 photos to clients was about 20% shorter compared to D700 .NEFs.
I sold all my Nikon gear (2 D700s, about 10 lenses) and picked up a second X-T1 and the XF 14/2.8 as a back up system. Instead of carrying two rolling suitcases and a tripod bag for every gig I could use just a medium size backpack, one rolling suitcase (lighting gear) an a tripod bag. This was a welcome change (especially when I worked on the third floor of walk-up condo units).
The only circumstance where I would have keep the D700 would be if I was doing action photography. The D700 AF (when properly set up) is excellent for action photography.
Of course the D700 was four years older than the X-T1. Sensor technologies improved a lot during that period. My X-Pro 2 raw files are significantly superior to the X-T1's.
On a purely subjective level, the longitudinal chromatic aberration levels of all my Nikon lenses (primes, old and new) always annoyed me. Back then you had to buy Nikon's Capture NX software to correct LCA (transverse CA was an easy to fix with any decent raw rendering platform). This doubled my annoyance. By comparison all my Fujinon lenses exhibited relatively low levels of LCA. I much prefer the using FUJINON glass.
In the spring of 2014 I used a D700 and X-T1 side-by-side. The cameras were switched on a tripod using Arca Swiss mounts for a Golden Hour commercial shoot of a luxury home exterior. The X-T1 and D700 raw files rendered with essentially identical perceived resolution and shadow region detail. So, I purchased the FUJINON 10-24/4 lens and compared results from an interiors photography gig to the D700 with a Nikon AF-S 16-35mm f/4G ED VR lens. The FUJIFILM files rendered with significantly lower levels of moiré artifacts. Otherwise the results were similar. Again, the camera locations were on a tripod (essentially identical) as were the external flash placements. I decided to switch to FUJIFILM for all my commercial work and carried the D700 as a back up.
After a few weeks I realized the FUJINON 10-24/4 lens was superior to the Nikon 16-35. When I had to shoot a residence exterior facing the sun, the Fujinon exhibited much lower levels of ghosting and flare. I also noticed the interior images required much less work to minimize perceived distortions common with very wide angles of view. For a ~100 degree field-of-view (12mm and 18mm respectively for APSC and FX) this difference was significant.
I also realized with .RAF raw total post-production time required deliver 20-24 photos to clients was about 20% shorter compared to D700 .NEFs.
I sold all my Nikon gear (2 D700s, about 10 lenses) and picked up a second X-T1 and the XF 14/2.8 as a back up system. Instead of carrying two rolling suitcases and a tripod bag for every gig I could use just a medium size backpack, one rolling suitcase (lighting gear) an a tripod bag. This was a welcome change (especially when I worked on the third floor of walk-up condo units).
The only circumstance where I would have keep the D700 would be if I was doing action photography. The D700 AF (when properly set up) is excellent for action photography.
Of course the D700 was four years older than the X-T1. Sensor technologies improved a lot during that period. My X-Pro 2 raw files are significantly superior to the X-T1's.
On a purely subjective level, the longitudinal chromatic aberration levels of all my Nikon lenses (primes, old and new) always annoyed me. Back then you had to buy Nikon's Capture NX software to correct LCA (transverse CA was an easy to fix with any decent raw rendering platform). This doubled my annoyance. By comparison all my Fujinon lenses exhibited relatively low levels of LCA. I much prefer the using FUJINON glass.
shawn
Mentor
When I had the XP1 I hung onto my D700 for action work. With the XP2 there was no need, its AF-C was faster/better than the D700. Esp. with the Fuji 100-400. Battery life with that lens in AF-C with continuous shooting was less than an hour though.
Shawn
twopointeight
Well-known
Timely discussion for me. I went from a full Canon system to an all Fuji about 6 years ago mainly to save weight. At the time, and for 20+ years prior, I was doing a lot of editorial travel work, mostly for airline mags. That has changed. I now shoot architectire and group portraits which would benefit from a larger than APS-C sensor. I tried Sony, an A7II and didn't really like it. In fact, I don't like any of the mirrorless full frame options. Only Sony is ready for prime time. Now, I notice that the Nikon D750 is well discounted. I would need 2 bodies, a zoom, and 2 fast primes, much less than I used to travel with. One drawback I could use opinions on, is the D750 flipdown LCD useable for focusing reasonably fast? Any others considering going from Fuji X to D750?