tjwilczek

I've owned both, and I no longer own any Nikon gear. It was fantastic gear don't get me wrong, but it was the shooting experience and how much more enjoyable it is with Fuji that made me jump. But more do the OP's question about image quality and which is better; it's Nikon but with a red asterisk. The thing that I've found in most of my more challenging environments (churches, dance recitals, indoor sports), the difference is negligible. The reason why it's negligible is because you don't pay a penalty shooting wide open with Fuji lenses. I can shoot any of my 1.4 primes wide open, bring down my ISO, and have an image that is absolutely fantastic. Whereas with the Nikon gear I always had to stop down a little to get critical sharpness, but I knew that the files were so good that it didn't bother me to let the ISO ride up. So in real life for me, image quality out of both systems is stellar. So the question really is, which do you enjoy shooting with more and which experience is better. For me, electronic leveling in the EVF, having a histogram in the EVF so you don't inadvertently blow highlights, having exposure preview with an EVF, and being able to have all of your three main exposure components right on top of the camera as dials were what swayed me to go Fuji. The size and weight thing was nice, but not key as I never minded hauling around a FF camera with primes or even a 70-200. Also, the af on the X-T2 is fantastic and I trust it completely to get what I need. The gap in af has closed. Having said all of that, the things I miss about Nikon: 1) 70-200's bokeh is soooo much better than the 50-140. 50-140 is nice and sharp, but I hate how jittery the bokeh is with specular highlights in the background. 2) Some long fast glass. It doesn't exist on the Fuji side yet and makes shooting field sport less than fun. The 100-400 just doesn't do it for me as I'm only really interested in the long end of the lens at 5.6. That being said, you're basically paying nearly $2000 for a 400mm 5.6. That doesnt' work for me, and I truly miss the 300mm f4 from Nikon. That was wicked sharp (almost as good as the 300 2.8 VR), and had lovely bokeh and compression on a FF body. If I had it to do all over again I'd still be shooting Fuji as my main rig, but I would've kept one Nikon body and never let go of the 300mm f4 and 1.4 TC until I had something proven from Fuji on the telephoto side of things. My two cents, and hope it helps.