Fuji X-T2 vs Nikon D5; Real world portrait comparisons with Raw sample downloads
Sep 16, 2016
John Aldred
John Aldred is a photographer with over 25 years of experience in the portrait and commercial worlds. He is based in Scotland and has been an early adopter – and occasional beta tester – of almost every digital imaging technology in that time. As well as his creative visual work, John uses 3D printing, electronics and programming to create his own photography and filmmaking tools and consults for a number of brands across the industry.
Share:
Ok, it might be a little unfair to put a $2,400 camera and lens against a $8,100 camera and lens. One would expect a camera rig costing more than three times as much to produce better results. But are those results at least three times better? And if the Fuji can keep up, doesn’t that just make it even more impressive given the cost gap?
This video from photographer Taylor Jackson hopes to answer those questions. Yes, there’s a little pixel peeping involved, but Taylor has also made the raw files available for us to check out for ourselves. If nothing else, for those considering purchasing a Nikon D5 or Fuji X-T2, this lets us see some samples straight from the camera.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XlgVtnjyxk
Taylor tests several different scenarios throughout the video. So, here’s a handy list for those who want to skip ahead.
- 2:15 Portraits & Bokeh
- 4:52 Witches
- 5:43 Landscapes at f/2.8
- 6:31 Night Bokeh
- 7:40 Backlit Portraits
- 9:28 Random Image Samples
- 12:03 More Backlit Portraits
Obviously the D5 will have features that the X-T2 doesn’t, and give you more shooting options. Quality wise, though, both cameras seem to perform excellently.
To get the same field of view on each camera requires a different focal length lens. For the X-T2, Taylor chose the Fuji 56mm f/1.2. On the D5 he used the Nikon 85mm f/1.4G.
This difference, means that the smaller sensor of the X-T2 offers a little more depth of field at a given aperture than the Nikon. Whether one produces results “better” than the other in this respect is purely subjective.
An interesting observation Taylor made was how much more cinematic and vibrant everything looked through the X-T2’s EVF. The optical viewfinder of the D5 made real life look quite dull by comparison. He did say that once the raw files came onto the computer, though, the opposite seemed to happen.
But, as mentioned, Taylor has made the raw files available to download for us to check out and make up our own minds.
Taylor’s conclusion was that “the the Fuji is great, the Nikon’s just a little bit better”. Ultimately, it’s all going to boil down to personal preference and needs vs cost. Every camera and lens has limitations. As long as you’re happy to live within those limitations, go for it.
Have you got your hands on the X-T2 yet? Or are you sat playing the waiting game with delayed deliveries? What do you think of the results you’re getting from it? Are they similar to Taylors? What are your thoughts on the sample raw files? Let us know in the comments.
[via ISO1200]
John Aldred
John Aldred is a photographer with over 25 years of experience in the portrait and commercial worlds. He is based in Scotland and has been an early adopter – and occasional beta tester – of almost every digital imaging technology in that time. As well as his creative visual work, John uses 3D printing, electronics and programming to create his own photography and filmmaking tools and consults for a number of brands across the industry.
Join the Discussion
DIYP Comment Policy
Be nice, be on-topic, no personal information or flames.
9 responses to “Fuji X-T2 vs Nikon D5; Real world portrait comparisons with Raw sample downloads”
If it was comparing the D500 to X-T2, it would be a good comparison. This is more of an apples to pears comparison.
“The optical viewfinder of the D5 made real life look quite dull by comparison.” – might I suggest visiting somewhere like Syria where the D5’s optical viewfinder wouldn’t be quite so dull.
Stupidest Statement Ever !
Useless comparison. Hey, in case you didn’t know, it’s not the camera, it’s the photographer.
“There is only you and your camera. The limitations in your photography are in yourself, for what we see is what we are.” – Ernst Haas
You lost me at “Landscapes at f/2.8”
The kind of tests that tells real life differenses. Makes you want the Fuji, its very close to “some kind of the best”(Nikon D5) but much cheaper and what Taylor forgot much smaler and lighter. Not to forget less scary, that can make better pictures to.
So even a cell phone can take really good photos if nothing moves and you have perfect control of lighting. Got it.
What about night photos, sunsets, or less than perfect lighting?
What if you want to take photos in a school gym of a basketball or volleyball game? What if you are shooting a high school football game and Friday Night Lights aren’t that bright? How does the Fuji do at f/5.6, 1/1000, and ISO 52,000?
Surely if you crop an image then zoom in that image will loose some sharpness.
These types of comparisons are rather difficult so I don’t take everything I “see” here as gospel or perhaps I should say, conclusive.
1) Lightroom – not the best choice for Fuji Raw. Perhaps going to another software such as Capture 1 Pro or Photo Ninja etc. might have proven better.
2) How much is the result of the camera verses the lens. Of the latter – lens quality, type of aperture blade arrangement, etc.
3) Ideal would be to use one neutral lens that is on both cameras and to properly match for DoF, T/F Stop etc. Though that is not a real world scenario it does measure more about the sensors and also their limitations.
I could go on but for me, there are two tests to be done – the real world and the lab test. This video doesn’t quite do either but does give me a better understanding about the photographer himself and how he sees things. (Not a positive or a negative just observation.)
I like how Nikon tones looks like, picture is smoother, more beautiful and high quality, almost like film. But Fuji version seems to be a little more “digital”. This is what full format all about in compare with crop-format. Thank you for this real-world review! It is valuable.