2026-09-29 · Comparisons · 9 min read

“Which model should I use?” is really three questions: which model fits your prompting style, which fits your editing workflow, and which fits your budget shape — heavy monthly usage vs occasional bursts. Let's take them one at a time, then do the per-image math at the end.

Prompting style differs more than quality does

In 2026 the raw quality gap between top models has narrowed a lot. What hasn't narrowed is the interaction model. Midjourney rewards prompt-craft — dense style descriptors, artist references, parameter flags — and its community has built fifteen thousand style pages around that. Seedream 5.0 and Nano Banana are more literal: you describe the scene plainly, and reference images carry more of the stylistic weight. If your prompts are short and your workflow is “upload, adjust, done”, the newer models feel faster. If you enjoy prompt engineering as a craft, Midjourney remains delightful.

Editing: where Nano Banana and Seedream pull ahead

Multi-turn editing is the biggest practical difference of this generation. With Nano Banana you say “put her in a red jacket, keep everything else” and it works. Seedream 5.0 does the same class of reference-guided edit and is notably good at keeping faces stable across edits — which matters for product photography and consistent characters. Midjourney's editor has improved but remains the third pillar of its workflow rather than the first.

What each actually costs

The honest summary: if you generate hundreds of images every month and love the Midjourney look, the $10 subscription is great value. If your usage is spiky — twenty images this week, none for two weeks — a pay-per-credit model is cheaper because unused credits simply wait for you. That's the whole argument for per-image billing, and it's why Slloy prices everything in credits instead of months.

The one-dimension nobody prices: iteration speed

Quality comparisons skip a variable that decides daily satisfaction: how fast the model closes the loop between your idea and a usable image. Seedream 5.0 and Nano Banana return in seconds, which makes editing feel conversational — you describe, it adjusts, you refine. Midjourney at relaxation-mode speeds asks for a batch-and-review rhythm instead. Neither rhythm is wrong, but switching between them mid-project is friction nobody mentions in comparisons. When you trial models, generate the same twenty images on each and notice which rhythm you stopped noticing — that one is your tool.

Verdicts by use case

• Product & marketing imagery: Seedream 5.0. Literal prompt compliance, reliable label text, reference-based staging — the workflow in our product-photo guide is built on it.
• Artistic one-off masterpieces: Midjourney. Its aesthetic ceiling and style ecosystem remain unmatched when you want a look nobody else has.
• Conversational photo editing: Nano Banana. Multi-turn “change the jacket, keep everything else” editing is the smoothest in class via the Gemini apps.
• Consistent characters across many images: Seedream 5.0 or Nano Banana — both hold identity through reference edits; Midjourney needs more workarounds (character reference, style codes).
• Occasional users: the per-credit route. Five images this month shouldn't cost a monthly plan.

Same brief, three prompts

Style differences show up fastest when all three models get the same job. Brief: a cozy reading nook by a rainy window. On Midjourney you'd lean into its strengths: “cozy reading nook, rain-streaked window, warm lamp glow, angora blanket, victorian detailing --ar 3:2 --style raw” — parameter flags and dense mood words are the house dialect. On Seedream 5.0 the same brief reads like a shot description: “Photorealistic interior photo of a cozy reading nook beside a rain-streaked window, warm lamp light, angora throw blanket, shallow depth of field, evening atmosphere.” On Nano Banana you'd start from a photo of your actual nook and prompt the change: “make it evening, add rain on the window, keep the furniture exactly the same.” Three dialects, three different strengths — pick the one that matches how you think.

Switching costs are lower than you think

A practical point people underestimate: these models are cheap to try side by side, and prompt libraries port over about 80%. The parts that don't port are parameter flags (Midjourney-specific) and platform features. If you're mid-project on one platform, finish there; if you're starting fresh, spend an evening running the same five prompts through all three with free or signup credits, and let your own eyes settle it. Our cost guide covers the billing math in depth.