My opinion: probably.

When I decided to switch camera brands from Nikon to Fujifilm, the decision was predicated on a variety of factors, with cost being high among them. It was clear to me, after more than a decade with the brand, that Nikon’s system (and Canon’s, and Sony’s) is structured to push you to spend more money (not just for features that you want–but features that you NEED). Any new camera under $2000 from any of the “big three” manufacturers will be crippled for professional use in either autofocus performance, resolution, lens support, or interface, while the significantly more expensive options tout features that are well beyond the needs of the vast majority of professional photographers. Aside from some elite photojournalists, wildlife photographers or professional sports photographers, no one needs the performance that these astronomically expensive systems provide (and many of those don’t either).

It may be an uncomfortable truth, but it is very, very likely that you simply do not need a $3000-5000+ camera body with >$2400 lenses. Your output does not demand it and your clients do not demand it. These are high end products similar to those crazy audiophile systems or luxury sports cars. Let me put it this way, Nikon, Canon and Sony each have a $2000 50mm prime lens. $2000! One of my most published and most exhibited images (below) was shot with a $100 Nikon 50mm lens. Fuji has a kit with three prime lenses (23mm, 35mm and 50mm) for $1300. Before I hear you retort, “Yeah, but the N/C/S lenses are faster!”, Fuji offers a 50mm that’s faster than all of them for $1500. Sure, Nikon does make a marginally faster 50ish (f/.95 vs f/1), but that one costs almost $8000!

Does Fujifilm have the highest resolution cameras, or the cameras with the most advanced autofocus features, or lenses with the most refined optics? No. But they do at a given (sane) price point. Let’s compare for a moment cameras in the ballpark of the Fuji X-T5 ($1500-2000). These would include: from Canon, the EOS R8 ($1499) and EOS R7 ($1499); from Nikon, the Z6II ($1996.95); from Sony, the A7C ($1798)–comparison below (blue=best, red=worst, orange=best with caveat).

———————

Fuji X-T5: 40.2 megapixels; Sensor shift, 5-axis; 1/8000 to 60 minutes; Metering-5 to 5 EV; 15fps up to 119 frames.

———————

Canon EOS R8: 24.2 megapixels; No IBIS for photo; 1/16000 to 30 seconds; Metering -3 to 20 EV; 40fps up to 56 frames.

———————

Canon EOS R7: 32.5 megapixels; Sensor-shift, 5-axis IBIS; 1/8000 to 30 seconds; -2 to 20 EV; 15fps up to 51 frames.

———————

Nikon Z6II: 24.5 megapixels; Sensor-shift, 5-axis IBIS; 1/8000 to 15 minutes shutter range; Metering -4 to 17 EV; 14fps up to 124 frames.

———————

Sony A7C: 24.2 megapixels; Sensor shift, 5-axis IBIS; 1/4000 to 30 seconds; Metering -3 to 20 EV; 10fps up to 115 frames.

Caveats: 1. An ability to meter in very dark conditions is prioritized by me. 2. The EOS R8 is electronic shutter only (the X-T5 actually bests this in its electronic shutter mode by going up to 1/180,000). That said, disregarding the Nikon Z9, I still feel that a mechanical shutter is best for most shooting.

As you can see, the Fujifilm X-T5 beats all of its peers in every category except for frames per second, which is won by the more expensive Nikon Z6II–though if one were to include the Fuji X-H2 (same price as the Z6 II), the Fuji would come out on top with 15fps up to 1000 frames (all figures in RAW). And this is not even to mention that, for all but the Sony camera, Fuji’s lineup of available first and third party lenses offers more options, except for the very long end (though the Fuji lenses are still more affordable).