What Fuji Delivers

 X-T2, XC 35mm f2

So, if I do make the jump to Fuji, what does it give me?

1. Truly wide selection of APS-C Lenses. Pretty much every non-Nikon DX lens is available also in XF mount, and quite a few 3rd party options are available in XF mount but not in Z mount. Stuff also tends to release in E, XF then Nikon later (like the new 7Artisans 18mm f2, which is out for E, announced for XF and unknown for Z). Note that Fuji has at least 3 higher-end UWA zoom options plus numerous UWA primes vs Nikon's no good UWA zoom options and a handful of UWA primes. 

2. High-end body options. Between the X-Tx line and the X-Hx line, Fuji offers high-end bodies with APS-C sensors, Nikon does not. 

3. A proven commitment to the system. This is Fuji's main focus in digital, not an afterthought as Z DX is for Nikon. 

What does it cost me?

1. Loss of investment. Trading always costs me value. 

2. 1 consistent system (unless I go all in and ditch the Z7). I lose battery compatibility to some extent (not an issue with the Zfc, but the D7500 shares batteries with the Z7), mount compatibility, the ability to AF and control aperture with AF-S G lenses (and AF on my sole AF-S D lens). 

3. Probable fail of my 1 system/10k shots in 1 year goal. 

4. Telezoom options. Nikon simply has more/better thanks to their F and Z FX options. Replacing my 80-400G is costly, my 300/4 essentially impossible. 

And what are the options:

1. The light switch. Trade the Zfc/28SE kit, one FTZII and my 3 7Artisans lens in, get a used X-T2, or maybe pay the extra and get a used X-T3. Buy replacements for the 7Artisan lenses over the next few weeks. This is pretty much the same experience, better viewfinder but older body option. 

2. The Heavy switch. Trade the D7500, 10-20VR, 17-50/2.8 and 80-400G for an X-T2. This probably doesn't get me to an X-T3 due to the locked in value of the newer Zfc/28SE kit. 

3. The DX drop. Trade the full DX setup for an X-T3 and some glass. This adds the D7500, 10-20VR and 17-50/2.8 to option 1 gear traded in combines options 1 and 2, but leaves the 80-400G in my Z7 kit, enough to hopefully get at least a kit zoom on top of the X-T3 and be investment neutral. 

4. DX++ Drop. As #3, but also trade in the Z 40/2, 80-400 and the 24-85VR for some more glass budget. This leaves the Z7 system as being essentially manual focus aside from the 300/4 AF-S (which I want to keep as it's a great manual 300 in addition to being AF, plus it's low value due to the squeaky AF motor). 

5. Dump (almost) everything modern. Add the Z7, the other FTZII and possibly the 3 remaining modern lenses that aren't M mount (CV 90/3.5 EF, Tamron 90/2.8, Nikkor 300/4) to the list, might stretch to an X-T4+ 2 lenses this way, or buy more lenses for the X-T3. 

6. Dump the big stuff, this is an alternative to #5 where I focus on size/weight over classic glass. Essentially here I dump set 3 aside from the Z 40/2, and all the old SLR glass except the 55/3.5 AI and the 300/4 (the latter to give me a tele/AF option in the short term), also keeping the M lenses. I honestly don't shoot a lot of the manual SLR lenses due to handling & size. This keeps an AF lens on the Z7 and the M glass, but sell off all the big stuff. Alternatively I could do a variation of this but keep the Z bodies and glass entirely, essentially dumping my DSLR & SLR kit aside from the 55 and 300 to get a Fuji body and then slowly move from Nikon to Fuji in the future.

7. Dump almost everything from the bag. I keep the Nikkor-s.c 50mm, the 55/3.5 AI and maybe the two 7 Artisans M lenses and 105/2.5, dump all the other manual glass as well. This 'clears the ways' of a lot of stuff I've collected over the years. Could even include my F2a in this potentially. I have a bunch of stuff I simply do not use much, this turns all of that into lens budget aside from a handful of 'cold dead hands' lenses, all of which work fine on Fuji (and I have adapters for). The flip side is this really only adds a fairly small amount of value, and might be worth more dropping at DC towards a used 10-24 than as part of a trade-in at Henrys for the body itself.

Thoughts on Volume

D7500, AF-S Nikkor 10-20mm VR G DX

 

I tend to track my annual shooting volume, and set (and recently fail to achieve) goals based on said volume.

It's not because Volume matters in any real regard, but rather that it's a proxy for two things, the first and most important is simply 'Am I making images', the second is a general attempt to increase volume by camera body as part of my ongoing attempts to quit Chasing the Dragon with regards to gear. Note in 2021 I switched my tracking to focus on per-body goals.

Since I started tracking volume, this is how much I've shot:

• 2012 - 10233 images
• 2013 - 7220 images
• 2014 - 5224 images
• 2015 - 1789 images
• 2016 - 1640 images
• 2017 - 2653 images
• 2018 - 5491 images
• 2019 - 11526 images
• 2020 - 12053 images
• 2021 - >10000 images
• 2022 - 4093 images
• 2023 - >8100 images
• 2024 - 3827 images
• 2025 - <5,000 images

These days I am focusing more on body longevity and images per body, just in an attempt to actually use bodies more and buy bodies less. I spend WAY too much time changing systems/bodies and I need to quit and focus on what actually matters. That also drives shooting volume, the main reason why my current bodies all have low shot counts is just an overall lack of shooting, the bodies themselves have been in the bag for reasonable amounts of time (including over 18 months for the Z7).

Quick Z5IIC Thoughts

D7500, AF-S Nikkor 10-20mm VR G DX

 

In short, it's not really the light carry camera I wanted, but it's an OK effort. Users aren't going to be unhappy with it in reality aside from 1 item Nikon definitely got wrong.

The item is the LCD. It shares the 3" 1.04m dot unit that the Z DX bodies all have. This is adequate, but not really what you want on an EVF-less body that isn't at the bottom of the price range like the Z30 (which has the exact same LCD). Nikon should have priced it $50 higher and re-used the much better 2.1m dot unit from the Z5II. 

Otherwise the only real complaints are the name and the size, this is the Z3 in all but name, it is exactly to the Z5II as the Z30 is to the OG Z50. Same basic camera, no EVF (the Z30 had a couple other changes, but that's just because the Z50 had a couple bad decisions in terms of USB port and LCD articulation that were corrected on the Z30 and Zfc). Nikon unwisely chose to ape Sony's naming convention instead of sticking to their own and got designation salad as a result. 

In terms of size, while the smallest FX stills camera in the Z line, this is still a chonky boi at 600g, compare to its closest competitor, the Panasonic S9, and it's well over 100g heavier and notably larger (but with a MUCH better grip). You can actually get an S9+40/2 lens within 30g of the Z5IIC's bare weight. 

And yes, this is 100% a shovelware camera, it's a Z5II with the EVF chopped off, a cheaper LCD, one card slot and a lower spec shutter (1/4000 max). But the shovel contents are damned good aside from the bargain-bin LCD, so while entirely a low-effort release, it is actually a pretty excellent camera. Anyone who ends up with one won't be disappointed in anything except the high weight and size for its class and Nikon's poor and overly clustered selection of small 1st party lenses, but adding the Viltrox 14mm and 20mm at the wide end and the 7Artisans 75mm or Viltrox 85mm f2 EVO at the long end to the 26, 28 and 40 from Nikon will give a solid small prime selection for it. I'd skip the zooms, there are enough smallish zooms, but aside from the 24-50 (which I do not recommend, poor handling & reliability) nothing truly tiny to fit this body. 

I'd consider this if I was still willing to go in for small low-MP FX EDC options. As it is, I'd have preferred any refresh to the current Z DX line (Z30II or ZfcII) or either the rumoured Z70 or a Z5IIx shovelware camera (Z5II with Z7II sensor).

More Gear Musings

Zfc, AF-S Nikkor 85mm f1.8 G

Here's a few scattered thoughts on gear and my future plans.

First off, the D7500 is getting the most use, but it's definitely the only one of my 3 current bodies I'd consider parting with. That's because it's neither a viable EDC (Zfc is that, Z7 can sorta do it with the right lenses) nor does it have compatibility with most of my lenses (no metering with manual lenses, can't mount Z or adapt anything I own). It's just fun within its limits and while actually the slowest of my 3 bodies at 8fps max (the other two are capable of 9-11fps) it's the fastest no-limits bodies (8fps with no gotchas vs 5fps with no gotchas). If I had to pick just one body, the Z7 would win (most compromises, but also the most flexible), with the Zfc second. 

I do enjoy the D7500 and don't see parting with it anytime soon as it is fun to shoot with and I like the results. Like the Z7, it's also not really worth enough on a trade-in to bother parting with. 

What I'd like to see from Nikon is an indication that they are committed to support Z DX for the long term before I invest further in that direction. I'm not confident I'll see that from them though (and few are). Having more than 1 EXPEED7 body would go a long way here, as would a couple more lens releases that aren't consumer shovelware or a 'why would I pay that much for that little' lenses like the Z DX 35/1.7 MC (which is a very good macro/normal, but at the cost that I can buy a lot of 3rd party glass for the same cost). 

The reality is that I don't actually need more than is already available. My bodies mostly cover my needs and where I hit limits, they remain limits that a Z8 would solve. In terms of glass, as long as I'm willing to adapt (and I mostly am), I have what I need already or it is available. I simply don't want to invest in a dead-end system, even if it's one that actually does meet my needs. 

I did get out and do some city shooting with the Zfc over the weekend, both with the 7Artisans 35mm f1.4 II and the 85/1.8G, mostly bugging with the latter, we still have flowers and bees around. Had a fair bit of fun with it and I'm enjoying both lenses. Still need to get some time with the Z7, I've been ignoring it of late. 

Regarding future system options, I'm looking for two things really. A system with a future, I do not want to spend some years investing in a system just to have it killed off (as we've seen this year for Pentax DSLR's and effectively for Panasonic m43) and which delivers reasonably compact, reasonably priced and reasonably good IQ, plus the combo of a solid set of zooms for my hiking needs and some weird, interesting and cheap glass for playing around with. Fuji delivers all of that, Sony does technically, but I dislike their APS-C bodies, Nikon fails on system with a future for DX right now, while Canon fails the weird, interesting & cheap glass test and their APS-C is also on life support (although it is expected they will actually get 2-3 new APS-C bodies next year). OM System is also technically an option, but their stuff is hard to get these days and overly expensive, especially since used gear is hard to find now. A pity since the new Pen is finally a light carry option at a reasonable price for its spec (the OM-5's are way too expensive for what they deliver and the OM-3 suffers from barely adequate viewfinder in expensive body syndrome). OM System does have the nice computational features the others lack though, 

So the play now becomes stick with Nikon and hope they continue to support DX in an adequate manner, and consider switching to Fuji in 2027 if Nikon continues to ignore DX entirely. 

The reality is my current gear largely suffices for my needs, and I can address the real gaps mostly by buying glass and if I need to push the edges of capability, there's still the Z8. 

Fall Updates

D7500, 10-20VR

It's now Fall Colour season, and I'm pretty stuck indoors. This kinda sucks, although I did get a bit of a taste a couple weeks ago up in the Algonquin Highlands, where I got up around Haliburton with fall colour just starting to come in. 

Shooting has been slow, in part because I skipped the Canadian International Air Show on the Labour Day Weekend. I have gotten out a couple times with the D7500 though, and it's now approaching 1000 shots on the clock. 

I't's been interesting shooting a DSLR again. I do miss IBIS, USB-C charging and on occasion Live View composing, but the excellent ergonomics, more efficient control layout and great battery life have been nice to have. 

Need to get out with the Zfc some more, I did pick up the 7Artisans 35mm f1.4 II manual APS-C lens, which in silver is a nice match for my Silver Zfc, but I've barely used it. Got to take it for some lunchtime walks (which I need to do more of anyways). I've been so busy with work of late that my lunchtimes have been constrained. Same for the Z7, which hasn't been used in a while, but if I'm not going out, I'm not shooting which is the basic issue at hand. 

I've also been having yet another round of system existentialism. Fuji-focused again and largely because we're still not seeing any real commitment from Nikon on DX. A Z70 is rumoured with the sort of specs that put it in the X-H2 killer slot, but so far the sum total of Nikon camera announcements in the last year is the Z5IIC, which is little more than a Z5II with the EVF chopped off, single card slot and low-end screen. 

Now everyone else is slow on the releases, supply constraints are causing all sorts of issues, but those should not have affected lenses as well, and Nikon has done minimal there too. Not surprising that Nikon's financials are showing lots of red this year. 

I'm not asking for Nikon to go all-in on DX, just give me a half-decent body with IBIS and a decent UWA zoom. Otherwise at some point I am going to end up having to either buy a Z8 as a DX body or switch to Fuji as my primary system (I'll no doubt keep the Z7 for legacy glass). The issue with Z8 as DX remains no UWA zoom without adapting (the 12-28PZ is not wide enough and PowerZoom). 

Going to hold off for now, but if we don't see some movement from Nikon I'll need to make some hard decisions about whether or not Z makes sense for me long-term or if I need to make one last system jump. 

The DX Kit is Complete - For Now

 

Nikon D7500, Nikkor 24-85mm f3.5-4.5 VR G

I picked up a couple more F mount lenses on Friday, which leaves me with an essentially complete hiking kit for my D7500, and a mostly complete one for the Z7.

What were the lenses?

The 10-20mm f4-5.6 DX VR AF-P and the 80-400mm f4-5.6 VR G AF-S

That gives me a solid 3/4 lens kit for the D7500 covering 15-600mm effective, with the 24-85VR subbing for my Tamron 17-50 in this case as it fills the gap between the 10-20 and 80-400 better, and a 3/4 lens kit for the Z7 covering 21-400mm (the Zeiss 21, 24-85VR and 80-400). In both cases the fourth optional lens is the Tamron 90mm Macro, although for regular close focus work (flowers, some bugging) the 80-400 does just fine. 

The 10-20 is tiny, surprisingly good optically and has VR, making it a good alternative to my go-to lens for years in this space, the Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 HSM, which I've owned multiple copies of over the years. The Nikkor is the better of the two optically, and noticeably so, which I'd hope for being a 10+ year newer design, plus significantly smaller and lighter, but less well built. I'm impressed so far, and it's small enough to handle well on the Zfc. 

The 80-400G is everything I'd hoped the Sigma 100-400 would be on my A7IV last year, but without the disappointment I got from the Sigma. Both are sharp lenses, but the Nikkor is sharper, handles better, has better AF and the stabilization works well (which the Sigma didn't).

Collectively I spend slightly less for both lenses than that Sigma cost me last year. Shooting modern DSLR glass has a clear value advantage these days, especially if you choose lenses which adapt easily to mirrorless as I am currently doing (AF-S and AF-P lenses for Nikon, AF-I Nikkors also adapt well but generally only includes lenses I don't have a huge need for, while AF Nikkors lose AF). 

I still need a decent UWA zoom for the Z7, but I'm leaning towards the 16-35VR here. It's decent but unexceptional optically, but handles well, has VR and sells for very reasonable pricing. 

I'm currently planning to continue to build up my modern F mount collection. Great class, great prices. Sure, Z glass is almost always better, but it's also usually far more expensive than it is better (the 50's excepted, Nikon didn't really design an exceptional 50mm offering between the 50/1.2 AI-S and the Z 50/1.8 S, I'll probably skip the Nikkor 50's and just get a 58G if I find one for the right price), plus I'm really enjoying shooting the D7500, so I may add some more late-model DSLR's to the kit if I continue to enjoy the D7500 long-term. Notably a D850 and maybe a D500, the latter I've long wanted because of my longstanding love for the D200 and D300.

Why Buy a DSLR in 2026?

D7500, AF-S Nikkor 85mm f1.8

Why would somebody buy a DSLR in 2026? Especially a new or nearly new one. My D7500 was technically used, but as recent production and less than 1000 shots on it, it was functionally new. 

There's pretty much 3 reasons why you'd do so.

1. The Optical Viewfinder. Some people simply prefer this experience to an EVF, and there are advantages in some conditions, especially very bright conditions. 

2. The 'DSLR Experience'. Mirror slap, OVF blackout, nice chonky grips and amazing battery life even with tiny batteries. Shooting a DSLR is not quite the same as mirrorless and some folks just like the DSLR experience better.

3. Value. Simply put there are very few cases today where you get more value for the dollars spent from mirrorless than from DSLR's, especially if you want more than 5-6fps or a high performance APS-C body from somebody other than Fuji. The real exception here is high-MP but low speed landscape cameras, there are some real steals on 40+MP low-speed bodies in the A7RII and OG Z7, which cost similar to a used D800 or D810, but deliver Z8/A1 level resolution and even more DR, at the cost of mediocre AF and low practical FPS (neither of which is really a landscape camera need). 

For me it was really #3 driving things, and mostly because I wanted a faster body (7-8fps minimum without compromises) with APS-C level pixel density and at a cost similar to or lower than my Z5ii's sale value. 

Note this brings up that SLR mount lenses are even more of a value than the bodies these days, since many of them are fully functional on mirrorless via adapter (and arguably more functional given you can get IBIS with lenses whose SLR mounts did not offer that feature). I'm still primarily using and buying SLR mount lenses (mostly F mount) because of this. Great glass, now cheap. Yeah, often the native mirrorless lens is better technically than the older SLR mount lens, but the price difference and performance are also often at odds with each other. 

For the value driven photographer, there's often real benefits to staying in the DSLR ecosystems rather than moving to the latest and greatest mirrorless system.