The AI image generator landscape shifts fast. Blink fast, and you'll miss a huge version update or model shift. As we head into 2026, the heavy hitters have settled into their corners. I’ve spent the last month running four major generators through the wringer: Nano Banana Pro (Google’s Gemini 3), Midjourney v7, ChatGPT (DALL·E 3), and Adobe Firefly 5.

It's easy to get caught up in the hype, the branding, and the online discourse. But let's break them down by use case and test them across 3 prompt types; Graphic Design, Photography, and concept moodboarding.

The Contenders

01. Nano Banana (Gemini 3)

As of time of writing this article, Nano Banana Pro is the king of image gen, and it's not particularly close.

Google’s rebranding to "Nano Banana" might sound quirky, but the tech is serious. Powered by the MMDIT architecture, it prioritizes speed and logic It is currently the best all-rounder. It doesn’t have the effortless vibe/style of something like Midjourney, but it is functional, precise, and actually nails text and complex layouts2.

Verdict: The best all-arounder.

02. Midjourney (v7)

The Aesthetic King.

Midjourney remains the king of style. It is just unbeatable if you are looking to quickly generate moodboard items or concept art. However, it still falls apart under the stress of specificity. If you need a vibe, go here. If you need specific text or a complex layout, look elsewhere.

Verdict: Best for concepts/moodboards, not so good at the other stuff.

03. ChatGPT (DALL·E 3)

The Jack of All Trades.

Conversational and obedient. It usually understands what you want, but the results often feel "glossy" and lifeless, with that distinct "AI stop" sheen. It’s a solid fallback, but the ceiling is low compared to Nano Banana.

Verdict:  Good, but rarely great.

04. Adobe Firefly 5

The Adobe Native.

If you are married to the Adobe ecosystem, it’s serviceable. But in a head-to-head test? It’s inconsistent and often messy.

Verdict:  Not my cup of tea. I'd look elsewhere unless you are a bigtime Adobe truther.

Round 1: Graphic Design (Text & Vector Style)

For our first test, we wanted to stress test specificity, accuracy and text capabilities. We stress-tested the models with a logo design prompt requiring specific text handling. It featured a specific style, text, font, and character design. The results are below.

Prompt: “Create a vintage 1950s rubber-hose style mascot illustration of the 'Richmond Rats' featuring a scrappy anthropomorphic rat sprinting with a brown leather football, legs spinning in a classic motion blur wheel effect. The rat wears a leather chin-strap helmet, oversized cleats. The text "RICHMOND RATS" arches over the character in a bold, authentic 1950s hand-lettered cursive script. Dark grey rat, green accent color. The aesthetic mimics a cheap mid-century sports logo with heavy black ink outlines, coarse halftone textures, slight misregistered colors. White background. --ar 1:1”

The Results

• Nano Banana: Winner. It nailed the text perfectly. The letters are legible, the spacing is logical, and the vector style is clean. It understood the assignment immediately. It also was the only model to accurately nail our font description. 10/10

• Midjourney: Failed in almost all categories. Didn't understand the style, font, text or anything else. 3/10‍
  ‍
• ChatGPT: It gets the spelling right, but the style often feels too "clip-art" generic rather than a curated vintage aesthetic. It got the retro vibe right adn gave us a good image, but ultimately missed the mark in some of the specific requested details. 7/10

• Firefly: Literally, what the hell is that?! 0/10

Verdict: Nano Banana crushes, ChatGPT does ok, and the other two fail.

Round 2: Photography (Realism & Consistency)

Next, we tested photorealism. We wanted a fitness shot that didn't look like a plastic doll. We wanted a very specific editorial/advertising look.

Prompt: “Full body studio photography of a fit female athlete stretching arms overhead, wearing a matching olive green ports bra and biker shorts set with white crew socks and white sneakers. Hyper-realistic skin texture with visible sheen and sweat. Dramatic moody lighting, chiaroscuro effect, single overhead softbox highlighting the shoulders and legs. Background is a seamless dark grey to dark gradient studio backdrop. Shot on 85mm lens, low angle, sharp focus, high contrast, cinematic color grading, commercial sportswear editorial style, 8k resolution. Aspect Ratio 1:1”

The Results

• Nano Banana: Winner. The skin texture is gritty and real. It captures the sweat and the muscle definition without over-polishing. It looks like a photograph taken by a humam. It has the most cretive composition and looks like something you could imagine on a billboard. 09/10

• ChatGPT: The "AI Gloss" is heavy here. The skin looks waxy, and the lighting feels artificial. It looks like a bad stock photo. Look at the face and it's immedietely evident that something is off. 03/10

• Firefly: Serviceable, but often struggles with anatomical correctness in dynamic poses. The face is also a bit too perfcet, but this probably is the second best image. 06/10
  ‍
• Midjourney: Close but upon close examination there's some AI oddities (especially in the face.) 4/10

Verdict: For pure realism and creative shots, Nano Banana takes the gold again.

Round 3: Orc Warrior (Fantasy & Concept Art Test)

Finally, we let the models run wild with a creative concept.

Prompt: “Create an image of a cinematic render of an Orc warrior. A shirtless green-skin with tusks coming from his lower jaw. He's wearing shoulder pauldrons made of bone and carrying a crudely made two handed war axe. The setting is a bleak desert environment at night with a red torn banner flowing out of focus in the background. Cinematic trailer style.”

The Results

• Midjourney: Winner. This is where MJ shines. The armor texture, the atmospheric lighting, and the sheer "weight" of the image are incredible. It creates a world you want to step into. Even if it doesn't quite nail the prompt details. 09/10
  ‍‍
• Nano Banana: It produced a very sharp, accurate image of an Orc, but it lacked that "cinematic soul" that Midjourney adds effortlessly. It was a bit too literal. 06/10
  ‍‍
• ChatGPT: It followed the prompt, but the Orc looked like a cartoon or a video game character rather than a cinematic film still. 04/10
  ‍
• Firefly: Struggled with the dark atmosphere, often blowing out the lighting or losing detail in the shadows. 03/10

Verdict: If you are building a moodboard or need concept art, Midjourney is still the king.

The Breakdown: Cost & Use Case

Prompting Tips for 2026

To get the most out of these tools, you have to speak their language.

• Nano Banana: Be Detailed. It responds to logic. Tell it exactly where to place things. Use "step-by-step" logic in your prompt (e.g., "Text 'HELLO' in the top left, blue font").

• Midjourney: Be Abstract. It loves adjectives. Use words like "cinematic," "ethereal," "gritty," and "atmospheric." Don't obsess over placement; focus on the vibe.

• ChatGPT: Talk to it. If the result is wrong, just tell it. "Make it darker" or "Remove the hat." It works best as a conversation.

Conclusion

It’s 2026, and the dust has settled.

If I can only pick one tool to be my design/creative assistant, it’s Nano Banana. It bridges the gap between creativity and utility. It’s the only one I trust to spell a client’s name right on a mock-up while keeping the photo realistic.

Midjourney is still my go-to for creative inspiration and moodboarding. When I need to sell a feeling, nothing beats it.

ChatGPT is fine for quick tasks, and Firefly is there if you’re already in Photoshop. But for serious work? Stick to the top two.

What’s your go-to in 2026? Email us and let us know.

‍