QF or EK first class
 

(I can't believe this hasn't been asked here before, but haven't found much with searching)

I'm planning a trip to Australia from Europe in F. It's pretty much the same cost for QF or EK metal (albeit needs to be QF flight number for FF purposes). I've done both in F previously but having difficulty deciding if I should do EK / QF both ways or one each way etc.

As I see it:
EK hard product is probably better, but QF bedding always struck me as especially good
EK catering is excellent, but so is QF and it may even be better
EK IFE screens are much larger and selection maybe better? But not sure...
EK gives me the shorter leg first (ie Europe Dubai Australia) whereas it's the other way round with QF (Europe Singapore Australia) which may support better rest going out EK and home QF...but again not sure
Any benefit or disadvantage departing Australia in EK rather than QF metal?

All thoughts welcome :)

If having to choose between only those 2, I would take Emirates every time over Qantas

It has been asked before, but mostly a decade ago when A380 was introduced by EK, SQ and QF with quite different F cabin layout and approach. Probably archived in FT by now. It boils down to a matter of taste (personal preference) and over the years the A380 F product has converged (each airline has rectified their weak points, though QF lags SQ and EK now). To your points:
1. Hard product advantage to EK on the showers in A380 (but not in 777 F which is some of their Oz service). That shower is worth its weight in gold and is a unique ambiance. The EK seat has improved, as has the suite in their last refurb. QF is years behind in cabin refurb and only a few of their A380 are redone, which is a big negative. Of course some of EK fleet is also showing age but better odds.
2. QF catering slightly beats EK ex-SYD but not ex-LHR and EK wins ex-DXB over the mediocre ex-SIN catering. Always wondered if SQ had done a deal with SIN catering to downgrade QF meal quality there :) Also QF is prone to running out of their good wines in F, esp. ex-LHR, whereas EK seems to stock more bottles than are ever used (maybe their pax dont drink as much :) ).
3. EK has worse IFE selection than QF as it is censored, but on a better (newer) screen.
4. Personally I much prefer long leg first and find the LHR-DXB sector to be very awkward timing as not long enough to both eat and sleep.
5. SYD/MEL departure experience is identical. SIN new F lounge is a great improvement over a few months ago but DXB is better. LHR lounge is the same. So not really a factor in deciding.

Fwiw, I used to fly QF F a lot and have mostly switched over to EK F and SQ F. Still the QF F product is good -- better than average amongst the few airlines still having F.

Wi-Fi on EK.

Thanks for replies so far. I'm erring towards EK but not booked yet.

The WiFi actually would put me off a bit - despite being a very frequent user of all things social media etc I secretly quite enjoy being forced to go offline for hours!!

Am I correct in thinking I could still use the QF F lounge in SYD if departing on EK metal in F? (Oneworld Emerald if that matters)

Yes, you get class of travel access to the SYD F lounge; Oneworld Emerald gets you nothing (not even J lounge access as EK is not Oneworld). You are also allowed 1 guest traveling on same EK flight not in F. You also get LHR QF lounge access, though the EK lounge at LHR is arguably better (at SYD it is not as EK has no separate F lounges anywhere in Oz, and the QF F lounges in SYD/MEL are quite good). .

You are not required to use the internet access

EK F any day over QF F!!!

SIN-AU sector is too short to get any meaningful sleep. The long sectors too/from DXB will allow fun, food and sleep, getting you back home refreshed.

QF F has never excited me, however the food on EK has declined drastically.

On my last trip with 4 long haul sectors on EK F, I was shocked at how inedible they good was. Even the Mezze was terrible. Much discussion has occurred on the EK forum.

I have not used QF F on any sector, but have flown QF J many times, but you are not interested in this class, so I won't say on it.
But I would go EK.
I have flown EK F with a QF flight number, and on the QF flight eligible sectors, Au - NZ and vv, I liked the EK F suite, if travelling alone, you can press do not disturb, and have the suite all t yourself.
Food wise, in the lounge, EK was good in SYD, better than the QF F/J lounge, as it had salmon, sliced in cold servery, they als had prawn salad in the cups with drsssing on the plane, they ply you with alcy, until you tell them to stop, or you can let them keep pouring...
EK J was also good, no suite, but still nice.
As above have mentioed, its up to personal preferences.
Not saying its a sleight, but sometimes a many multicultural crew is good on a flight.
They (crew) are very well trained, and I have not had a surly one on the many EK flights trans Tasman that I have flown on, but now that there is only one flight Au - NZ with EK, I have to go back to choosing QF.
Go EK, and QF only if they (EK) don't fly the sector you need to get from/to.

Oooo, thanks for that note #9 , didn't realise this.
Pity.

EK - Caviar and Dom Perignon.

Don’t forget the Hennessy Paradis!
On a recent flight I even copped the elusive Imperial which I happily indulged in.

For me QF wins on food but EK on everything else (better seat/suite, shower, IFE (size of screen and variety/selection), private suite).

I find the censorship of the IFE to be objectionable and a big negative compared to QF. Sure it is a bigger screen but selection is not an EK strength. Also the shower isn't on the many EK 777 services into Oz, less than half the flights are A380.