Considering the move from Fuji to Nikon as a pro photographer
Hey Nikon gang. First time posting here. I'm sure many similar posts have been made in the past, but I'd love to hear your thoughts, particularly from those who have experience on both the APS-C and Full Frame systems.
I have been a pro Fuji shooter for about six years, (X-T2 -> X-H1 -> X-T4 -> X-H2S) and my main professional work involves, event, portrait, editorial, concert and documentary photography. I also do video work - mostly promotional for small companies and schools. I'd say a fair share of the photography work involves low lighting where I often don't have lots of control over lighting sources. I primarily use the 16-55mm f2.8, 50-140mm f2.8, 16mm 1.4, 35mm 1.4 and 56mm 1.2.
I have been tempted by the full frame system (looking at the Z8 and Z6iii in particular) for quite some time, particularly when I shoot in low light scenarios. It baffles me when I see how high my fellow full frame shooter friends can bump their ISO in given situations, when I feel like I seldom want to push past 1600. Granted, there are the de-noising tools which are fabulous, but it also adds more time to the workflow, and if I could avoid it, I would.
The common fact shared is that full frame users get about a full stop of light in return, but from what I witness it feels more substantial than that. Granted, I can switch my zoom 2.8's to my primes which let in much more light, but in paid event-based scenarios I would appreciate the luxury of having zoom lenses always attached and not having to switch out of necessity.
As much as I harp on the low light factor (which is the biggest concern to note), I also can't help but feel full frame images have more dynamic range and depth that my X-H2S just can't quite meet, whether in low light or daylight.
I know full well that we can be our own worst critics, and that the clients rarely nitpick in the ways that we do, but I also still believe in leveling up when it comes to ones craft and tools. I'm certain I can keep things flowing business-wise with where I'm at currently, but I don't want to get caught in the same loop and never branch out.
Naturally, the price tag of switching systems has been a factor since I'd basically be starting from scratch and easing into it, but I'm all about the investment if it is indeed worth it.
I'd appreciate any thoughts or wisdom y'all have on the matter. Thanks for reading and responding!
EDIT: Can't believe I didn't mention autofocus! The X-H2S af is night and day better compared to any other Fuji I had prior, but it sounds like that still isn't saying much when compred to Nikon/Canon/Sony.
https://redd.it/1pdim44
@NikonBackup
Hey Nikon gang. First time posting here. I'm sure many similar posts have been made in the past, but I'd love to hear your thoughts, particularly from those who have experience on both the APS-C and Full Frame systems.
I have been a pro Fuji shooter for about six years, (X-T2 -> X-H1 -> X-T4 -> X-H2S) and my main professional work involves, event, portrait, editorial, concert and documentary photography. I also do video work - mostly promotional for small companies and schools. I'd say a fair share of the photography work involves low lighting where I often don't have lots of control over lighting sources. I primarily use the 16-55mm f2.8, 50-140mm f2.8, 16mm 1.4, 35mm 1.4 and 56mm 1.2.
I have been tempted by the full frame system (looking at the Z8 and Z6iii in particular) for quite some time, particularly when I shoot in low light scenarios. It baffles me when I see how high my fellow full frame shooter friends can bump their ISO in given situations, when I feel like I seldom want to push past 1600. Granted, there are the de-noising tools which are fabulous, but it also adds more time to the workflow, and if I could avoid it, I would.
The common fact shared is that full frame users get about a full stop of light in return, but from what I witness it feels more substantial than that. Granted, I can switch my zoom 2.8's to my primes which let in much more light, but in paid event-based scenarios I would appreciate the luxury of having zoom lenses always attached and not having to switch out of necessity.
As much as I harp on the low light factor (which is the biggest concern to note), I also can't help but feel full frame images have more dynamic range and depth that my X-H2S just can't quite meet, whether in low light or daylight.
I know full well that we can be our own worst critics, and that the clients rarely nitpick in the ways that we do, but I also still believe in leveling up when it comes to ones craft and tools. I'm certain I can keep things flowing business-wise with where I'm at currently, but I don't want to get caught in the same loop and never branch out.
Naturally, the price tag of switching systems has been a factor since I'd basically be starting from scratch and easing into it, but I'm all about the investment if it is indeed worth it.
I'd appreciate any thoughts or wisdom y'all have on the matter. Thanks for reading and responding!
EDIT: Can't believe I didn't mention autofocus! The X-H2S af is night and day better compared to any other Fuji I had prior, but it sounds like that still isn't saying much when compred to Nikon/Canon/Sony.
https://redd.it/1pdim44
@NikonBackup
Reddit
From the Nikon community on Reddit
Explore this post and more from the Nikon community
Nikon Z6 III + Tamron 28-75 mm f/2.8 G2 (shot at 75 mm, f/8)
https://www.reddit.com/gallery/1pccunf
https://redd.it/1pdz7ak
@NikonBackup
https://www.reddit.com/gallery/1pccunf
https://redd.it/1pdz7ak
@NikonBackup
Reddit
From the postprocessing community on Reddit: Sunrise in fairyland. What do you think?
Explore this post and more from the postprocessing community