Nikon D7100 Vs Fujifilm X-E2, Quality Lens

[gryffinwings]

I am looking for some information to compare these to cameras in regard to Image Quality. I've noticed that there aren't a lot of lens specifically made for the Nikon DX system except a lot of kit type lens, I've seen some stuff relating to the fact that there isn't a lot that can match the output of the 24 MP sensor except some really expensive lens. So at the moment, I am unsure of what I would get for my D7100.

The other idea is to get a Fujifilm X-E2, which I have tried, found it to be pretty good from what I could tell. From what I've been reading is that the lens that Fujifilm make are pretty darn good and have been developed from the ground up with excellent optics, making me think that the Fujinon lens might be superior, however I haven't seen much data on this, however the lens I see are pretty good price compared to the supposed performance you get out of the lens.

Can anyone provide me some additional information?

 

[robbins.photo]

I am looking for some information to compare these to cameras in regard to Image Quality. I've noticed that there aren't a lot of lens specifically made for the Nikon DX system except a lot of kit type lens, I've seen some stuff relating to the fact that there isn't a lot that can match the output of the 24 MP sensor except some really expensive lens. So at the moment, I am unsure of what I would get for my D7100.

The other idea is to get a Fujifilm X-E2, which I have tried, found it to be pretty good from what I could tell. From what I've been reading is that the lens that Fujifilm make are pretty darn good and have been developed from the ground up with excellent optics, making me think that the Fujinon lens might be superior, however I haven't seen much data on this, however the lens I see are pretty good price compared to the supposed performance you get out of the lens.

Can anyone provide me some additional information?

Really wondering where your getting your info on the lenses available for the D7100. To put it bluntly.. there are a crap ton of lenses that the 7100 can use. It will use any FX or DX lens that is compatible with Nikon, including the older models that don't have built in focus motors. As far as lens quality is concerned, they run the gambit from the inexpensive kit style lenses all the way up to pro glass - and everything in between.

It is actually an advantage using an FX lens on a DX body in many ways, because the best part of the glass is in the center, which is what the DX uses when your mounting an FX lens. So as far as lens selection, sorry but the Fujifilm X-E2 can't even begin to hold a candle to the D7100.

As to image quality, well a lot of that is going to be more dependent on your skill than it will which camera you select.

 

[jaomul]

I can't think of any gaps in lens selection for Nikon dx. To be fair some options are third party, but no gaps. In fact you can go from 11-200 at f2.8 or less with 4 lenses. Tokina 11-20 f2.8, sigma 18-35 f1.8, a few 24-70 and 70-200 f2.8 options, there's also a sigma 120-300 f2.8, and hundreds of non f2.8 options

 

[Ido]

Nikon, in its long and rich history, has always developed lenses for its 35mm cameras with the F mount. When Nikon started making digital SLR cameras, they all had the DX sensor size format, but Nikon didn't really make any lenses specifically for it for quite a long time—photographers with existing F-mount lens collections used those lenses. I think some of the first DX-specific lenses—apart from the cheap kit lenses—were the 12-24mm f/4 and 17-55mm f/2.8. Until then, no rectilinear lens gave an actual ultra-wide angle of view on DX, so the 12-24 filled that void.
Since then, a lot of quality lenses have been released for DX, both from Nikon and third-party manufacturers. While Nikon still probably tries to push the high-end towards the FX format, DX still offers quite a usable selection for demanding photographers. Take, for example, a kit that consists of the Tokina 11-20mm f/2.8 and Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 or the new Nikon 16-80mm f/2.8-4, add an FX telephoto (70-200mm f/2.8 or f/4, or 80-400mm AF-S) or a Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8, and you've got a kit that covers all the bases really, really well. Of course, that will be more than many will actually need—not everyone needs complete coverage from ultra-wide to super-telephoto.

However, Fujifilm has a far easier job of creating quality lenses for APS-C, as it is Fuji’s only format. They’re not trying to sell anyone on any other format, so the XF lenses are unashamedly high-end glass, with many in the lineup priced around a grand. I’d say the Fuji lens system is really the best lens system for anyone who doesn't need a super-telephoto (though one should come next year). That’s mostly on-paper, though—whether or not the lenses are fast enough at autofocus, or that the body they’re mounted on gives the necessary autofocus capabilities for whatever it is you shoot, is another topic. And for most photographers it probably is plenty good enough, but the rest would currently be better served with a camera like the D7100.

The question that has to be asked is, are your current lenses letting you down in image quality in any way? Do you see a lack of sharpness, that isn’t due to missed focus, motion blur or camera shake, a defected lens, or a lens that needs AF adjustment? Do you see any problem with color due to necessary color fringing / chromatic aberration removal? Do you have any noise issue in the corners of the image, due to correction of unwanted vignetting?
If you do, get a new lens.
If you don’t, stop thinking about gear and try to have more fun shooting.

It is actually an advantage using an FX lens on a DX body in many ways, because the best part of the glass is in the center, which is what the DX uses when your mounting an FX lens.

While it’s true that you’re effectively “masking out” the weaker parts of the lens, you’re also magnifying its flaws, and demand more resolution out of that portion of the lens (if the pixel density is higher on the DX sensor, which it usually is).

So as far as lens selection, sorry but the Fujifilm X-E2 can't even begin to hold a candle to the D7100.

That depends. If you’re looking at super-telephoto lenses, then absolutely, Nikon reigns supreme there—Fuji doesn’t even have one lens to compete on that front. Nikon also has better options for macro, though Fuji has announced development of a 120mm f/2.8 lens capable of 1:1 magnification, that sounds promising. But if you look anywhere else in the lens range, I’d say Fuji is at least as good, and often better.

 

[sashbar]

I am looking for some information to compare these to cameras in regard to Image Quality. I've noticed that there aren't a lot of lens specifically made for the Nikon DX system except a lot of kit type lens, I've seen some stuff relating to the fact that there isn't a lot that can match the output of the 24 MP sensor except some really expensive lens. So at the moment, I am unsure of what I would get for my D7100.

The other idea is to get a Fujifilm X-E2, which I have tried, found it to be pretty good from what I could tell. From what I've been reading is that the lens that Fujifilm make are pretty darn good and have been developed from the ground up with excellent optics, making me think that the Fujinon lens might be superior, however I haven't seen much data on this, however the lens I see are pretty good price compared to the supposed performance you get out of the lens.

Can anyone provide me some additional information?

I have switched from Nikon APS-C to FUJI X system a year ago and never looked back.

FUJI X is an exiting glass, modern Nikon DX consumer range is just boring slow and plastic dull compared to FUJI, with an exception of maybe one or two really good DX lenses.

Nikon, of course, has lots and lots of excellent FX glass, both new and old, but I was reluctant to invest in it due to the size and weight of FX zooms. More or less compact size is important to me, and FUJI fits the bill perfectly. I also think it is a dubious idea to pay high dollar for the glass that you will never be using. A big part of FX glass on a DX body is just redundant. Never mind awkward zoom range.

I am still tempted sometimes to buy some good used old Nikon glass on eBay, like a mint 20-800 mm f/2,8 ED or some exotic Voigtlander 58 mm f/1,4 just for the sake of it, because it is just sucj a good glass and it is not expensive. But 80-200 is as heavy as a machine gun and it would probably never ever leave my house. And when it comes to that famous Voigt, I already have a beautiful FUJI 56 mm f/1,2 ...

So FUJI X system has a rather limited range of FUJINON / Carl Zeuss glass, but it covers my needs completely, and each lense is a gem. (I have just 6)

Oh, and FUJI X cameras can use all Nikon lenses that D7100 can, but you will need an adapter. And most probably you will not be bothered.

 

[goodguy]

One little nugget of thought, Will you always stick to APS-C ?
Fuji will probably never go FF.
By getting Fuji you will lock yourself to APS-C, this might be just fine for you but if you ever will hunger to that FF goodness stick with Nikon.

 

[gryffinwings]

Thanks all, you've given me some things to consider, certainly I think one or 2 of the lens I have was failing me, however I have reverted to using a Nikkor 17-55mm f2.8 that I acquired a while ago, however it's condition is questionable in regards to autofocus problems, but currently it is working without issues, however I will most likely send it in for repair. Anyways I am considering sticking with Nikon due to the fact that I may see longer telephoto lens in my future, which fuji doesn't offer. So right now I am considering for my next purchase the Nikkor 70-200mm ED-IF AF-S VR I or the Nikkor 70-200mm f4, can't make up my mind, but I have plenty of time to decide. After that I would probably get the Nikkor 200-500mm f5.6e due to the fact that I might be heading to Hawaii next year pending I get orders I want (US Navy).

 

[robbins.photo]

Thanks all, you've given me some things to consider, certainly I think one or 2 of the lens I have was failing me, however I have reverted to using a Nikkor 17-55mm f2.8 that I acquired a while ago, however it's condition is questionable in regards to autofocus problems, but currently it is working without issues, however I will most likely send it in for repair. Anyways I am considering sticking with Nikon due to the fact that I may see longer telephoto lens in my future, which fuji doesn't offer. So right now I am considering for my next purchase the Nikkor 70-200mm ED-IF AF-S VR I or the Nikkor 70-200mm f4, can't make up my mind, but I have plenty of time to decide. After that I would probably get the Nikkor 200-500mm f5.6e due to the fact that I might be heading to Hawaii next year pending I get orders I want (US Navy).

If your planning on upgrading to a full frame at some point you might want to consider the 70 200 mm VRII instead, either that or if budget is an issue maybe the tamron or sigma.

As far as IQ is concerned, in situations where the two cameras perform equally I doubt you'd be able to see much difference. You would probably have any easier time getting certain shots with the Nikon when the situation calls for a better AF system, etc. Nothing against Fuji mind you, it's a fine camera and I can see why people buy them and use them. There have been days when I really wish my rig was lighter, believe me.



Sent from my 306SH using Tapatalk

 

[gryffinwings]

Thanks all, you've given me some things to consider, certainly I think one or 2 of the lens I have was failing me, however I have reverted to using a Nikkor 17-55mm f2.8 that I acquired a while ago, however it's condition is questionable in regards to autofocus problems, but currently it is working without issues, however I will most likely send it in for repair. Anyways I am considering sticking with Nikon due to the fact that I may see longer telephoto lens in my future, which fuji doesn't offer. So right now I am considering for my next purchase the Nikkor 70-200mm ED-IF AF-S VR I or the Nikkor 70-200mm f4, can't make up my mind, but I have plenty of time to decide. After that I would probably get the Nikkor 200-500mm f5.6e due to the fact that I might be heading to Hawaii next year pending I get orders I want (US Navy).

If your planning on upgrading to a full frame at some point you might want to consider the 70 200 mm VRII instead, either that or if budget is an issue maybe the tamron or sigma.

As far as IQ is concerned, in situations where the two cameras perform equally I doubt you'd be able to see much difference. You would probably have any easier time getting certain shots with the Nikon when the situation calls for a better AF system, etc. Nothing against Fuji mind you, it's a fine camera and I can see why people buy them and use them. There have been days when I really wish my rig was lighter, believe me.

Sent from my 306SH using Tapatalk

I don't think I will be going to Full Frame anytime soon or ever, If I due it won't be anytime soon, for now I'm appreciating the distance that the APS-C sized sensor gives me with the narrower view.

 

[robbins.photo]

Thanks all, you've given me some things to consider, certainly I think one or 2 of the lens I have was failing me, however I have reverted to using a Nikkor 17-55mm f2.8 that I acquired a while ago, however it's condition is questionable in regards to autofocus problems, but currently it is working without issues, however I will most likely send it in for repair. Anyways I am considering sticking with Nikon due to the fact that I may see longer telephoto lens in my future, which fuji doesn't offer. So right now I am considering for my next purchase the Nikkor 70-200mm ED-IF AF-S VR I or the Nikkor 70-200mm f4, can't make up my mind, but I have plenty of time to decide. After that I would probably get the Nikkor 200-500mm f5.6e due to the fact that I might be heading to Hawaii next year pending I get orders I want (US Navy).

If your planning on upgrading to a full frame at some point you might want to consider the 70 200 mm VRII instead, either that or if budget is an issue maybe the tamron or sigma.

As far as IQ is concerned, in situations where the two cameras perform equally I doubt you'd be able to see much difference. You would probably have any easier time getting certain shots with the Nikon when the situation calls for a better AF system, etc. Nothing against Fuji mind you, it's a fine camera and I can see why people buy them and use them. There have been days when I really wish my rig was lighter, believe me.

Sent from my 306SH using Tapatalk

I don't think I will be going to Full Frame anytime soon or ever, If I due it won't be anytime soon, for now I'm appreciating the distance that the APS-C sized sensor gives me with the narrower view.

Well the vr1 would work fine for that then. I bought a used sigma myself, been very happy with it.

Sent from my 306SH using Tapatalk