Nikon’s lens lineup keeps diverting my attention to them from my R5. Really wished there were some step-up lenses from the 100-500mm that doesn’t take me to the $12-$16k price range. Not crazy about spending $6k for a used EF and then have to use an adapter as well. I feel canon emphasized portability a little too much on the 100-500 and 70-200
I tell you what. I use now the Nikkor Z 600mm 4.0 TC on a Z9 and this is simply absolutely a stellar combo for Wildlife. It is not necessarily the Z9 but definitely the Nikkor Z 600mm 4.0 TC. This integrated TC is lifting your wildlife work from pure convenience perspective on a different level. Not to talk about the quality this integrated TC is delivering, it is totally different thing when you use a separate TC. I am blown away about what Nikon delivered here. And even in case you cannot or don't want the Nikkor Z 600mm 4.0 TC because of its price, the Nikkor Z 800mm 6.3 is another game changer from Nikon for us Wildlife fans. I used the R5 before and its a great camera. But again, Nikon blows Canon out of the water due to these two exquisite lenses, the Nikkor Z 600mm 4.0 TC and the Nikkor Z 800mm 6.3 PF.
It’s very nice for sure, but both of those lens lack versatility, so they are basically one trick ponies, but killer if that is the lane you live in 24/7. And they are very expensive. And late.
@@zephxiii Those primes aren't that versatile at all and they weigh a ton. You put a TC on the end of an 800mm lens and you get crazy reach, but also more issues with heat haze. Big heavy lenses with built in TCs are nothing new, Canon has the EF 200-400 mm f/4 with a 1.4x built-in TC for years. It didn't set the world on fire in all those years, and these won't now. Only a handful of people will own then and even fewer will carry them around. Olympus has one that has a 1.25x TC that is pretty lightweight, so that may make some difference. You guys need to quit dreaming. :)
@@RogerZoul Those primes are lighter than older ones and heat haze is factor for all lenses even at 300-400mm. Yes they are expensive but serious wild life photographers tend to use them all the time. That's also why Nikon came out with more affordable and lighter 180-600. Still don't get your point as those lenses are incredible.
The main reason I stayed with Nikon after testing the Sony and Canon systems is for the Z8 and the Nikon 400 f4.5 S lens. I love the 400 mm range for bigger wildlife in Africa and adding the 1.4 TC gives me a fantastic 560 f6.3 lens. I can work around the AF system and as I am not so much a bird photographer, the AF System works fantastic. The new 180-600 will be added for situations or trips where flexibility is needed. Again the Z8 balance well with the 400 and 180-600. Canon unfortunately only have the 400 DO f4 lens and Sony has nothing that competes with that lens. The 200-600 is a great lens and a great combination on the A9ii. I also have the Fuji XH2s with the Fuji 100-400, another system that offers great value, again a complex AF system that is somewhat behind the others, but personally I have had fantastic results. Subject detection is like the canon system, picks up very fast but the accuracy is lacking. Then OM systems same situation, very good system but many question the M34 sensor. We are spoiled for choice. And a great balanced review and advice.
Hi Jan, that's indeed a very balanced comparison! And given the age of the R5 it's impressive it's still up there winning some areas. When the rumors about the R5ii getting a stacked sensor and dual CFxB cards are true, then I'd expect it to come out on top in nearly every aspect .. on the condition they fix the wobble ;-) Right now, it's correct Canon has more affordable birding bodies, and Nikon has more (nearly) affordable birding lenses. It remains to be seen to what extend Nikon will share the good tech with the smaller bodies. Giving the Z7iii a stacked sensor with great AF would simply make it an Z8, nope ? And the Z6iii is likely too cheap to get stacked sensor. On the Canon side, we were told to expect about 10 lenses in the next half year .. out of them the 200-500 cannot be the only long glass .. And maybe the TC1/1.4/2 could also be game-changer
Very interesting comparison, thank you. I recently went with a Z8 because of the availabily of great glass at a reasonable price. I have a 180 to 600mm on preorder. I found Canon's strategy of not offering a middle range of performance/price offputting and switched back to Nikon after many years of being away. One thing I immediately appreciated with the Z8 is the similarity of major button layout back to my D750 days. Canon doesn't have the same similarity between models. which I found particularly annoying on the R7 vs R6.
Nikon is very tempting with their image stabilisation especially for video. I'm really struggling with my Sony A1 in that regard, it doesn't have eye tracking in video and handheld video is very shaky, but I would definitely miss their amazing tracking capabitilies for photos. So I still haven't found that one camera that can do it all yet. Wish Sony came with some firmware updates for the A1
Agree with Jan's assessment (and yours). Sony A1 is on par or better with lock-on tracking in stills. Video, Nikon (surprisingly) is, for the moment, the industry leader in these type of cameras. If you shoot lots of video, tough choice. Stills, that is another story. My Sony friends and Canon friends are all happy with their gear (I shoot Nikon). Jan's assessment is spot on. I wish (and hope) that Nikon's AF modes get simpler and better and will with firmware updates (December anyone?). As a Nikon shooter, I do get the feeling that Nikon is devoted to keeping the Z9 relevant for the near future - and plans to improve and increase the number of features available. It's been an interesting time - but as much as I enjoyed shooting with a DSLR, my Z9 experience is on another level. Nearly always exposures, white balance, and composition where I want it in camera. 90 percent in focus shots. Silent shooting. No rolling shutter. The list is extensive. So, while I feel your argument - i.e. Sony hasn't updated that much - it's a good time to complain about what we want. For me, it's zebras in stills.
I just found this in dpreview in their analysis of the video capabilities. "The Sony a1 is also only the second full-frame alpha camera (along with the a7S III) to offer 'Active Steadyshot' stabilization, which means the camera uses digital stabilization (and a slight 1.1x crop) on top of in-body and in-lens stabilization to further smooth out handheld footage. "
Upgraded my Z7II to the Z8 - it’s a game changer. Sticking with my F mount 500mm f5.6 PF which performs fabulously with the Z8. I’m a very happy bunny.
I have been a Nikon shooter for some time now. I was getting frustrated waiting for a good body. I shopped Sony and Canon and came very close to switching to the R5 and 100-500. I do love the feel of the R5. I stuck with Nikon and bought the Z8. Kept my 500pf and purchased the 100-400. For me, it was getting a blackout free experience. I will be struggling with my next long lens purchase. The 800pf would be nice in many scenarios but still somewhat limited. The 400 and 600 TC's are very attractive but pricey and heavy. I don't think the 180-600 will give me better image quality than cropping from my 500pf. Nikon has some great lenses, but I would love to see a lightweight 600 similar to the 400 4.5.
To me, it's really up to what ecosystem you are invested in. Personally, I notice very little trouble with rolling shutter artifacts in the R5. I wonder why these stacked sensors seem to have WORSE noise than the non-stacked ones? The R5mki noise is somehow better than the mkii, and the Nikon z8 seems to indeed also have issues.
Hi Jan, I agree with others that you’ve provided a very balanced comparison. Would you consider giving a review focused on action photography? I’m personally concerned about Canon’s rolling shutter in pretty much all their bodies and those impacts on action photography. Cheers!
Interesting observations especially regarding bird photography and bird identification. In terms of motorsport photography, after switching from the R5 to the Z9, I have a significantly higher keeper rate (using comparable lenses) with the 3D tracking AF than with any of the settings I had on the R5 at the time. However, I also know photographers who report just the opposite. The settings on today's cameras are so complex that there is probably a lot of weal and woe to be found here. But even in DSLR times, I was able to achieve good results in motorsport pictures with the Nikon D2X and D300, although the tolerances at that time were also significantly lower at 12MP.
For me the Canon RF 100-500 is the perfect lens : very sharp, quite small, amazing macro capabilities and a decent reach ! And the R5 is still very good :-)
Good but not perfect. It frustrates me when I move into the darker rainforest and my R5 will no longer focus. I need that brighter lens that I can carry.
Hi Jan ! You made a fair review on each brand. For me autofocus is key. Also the 100-500 lens is hard to beat. Sometimes my combo R5 + RF 100-500 is so sharp that I have to reduce sharpness. No joke here. Canon as an amazing cameras line up. They have cameras for every budget. I am confident that new lenses will come with time. We just have to be patient. I am loyal to Canon because they never disappointed me. I have loved every camera that I have owned. It's amazing how a camera made in 2020 can compete with newer bodies. I am convinced that the R5 II and R1 will be excellent. I am so glad that Nikon is back because competition is good and Nikon came back with 2 excellent cameras. Their new lenses are superb and I am glad for those who owns them. Switching system is costly and will bring deception in the long end. I have to go for companies that give you the best for your money and I consider Canon and Nikon to be no 1 at this with their regular outstanding free firmwares. The R5 I own now is really improved with all these excellent firmwares. Same thing for Z9 owners. These days it is hard to buy a bad camera.
Canon R5 user and Canon user for over 40 years (yes over 40). No compelling reason to switch because it's a tool I'm familiar with and the company has continued to innovate for decades. Switching to mirrorless from the Mark IV and EF to RF lenses was very expensive. Switching to another system makes no sense to me. Maybe Nikon, or Sony are better in certain areas but so far any potential limitations have not prevented me from taking quality landscapes, portraits, and bird photos. A long time Nikon user and a Sony user would make the same argument for their brands. My advice- Get to know your camera really well and then get to know Lightroom and Photoshop even better- that's where you'll see the difference.
I'm a long-time shooter like you. Camera equipment lust has always been a thing, but in the hypermarket we've been in the last eight years or so it is just nuts. Yes, competition and advancements are great but The Next Big Thing from Brand X, Y and/or Z is always right around the corner and the frenzy kicks up all over again. I agree with your points.
In real terms, how much "better" would any of the two cameras be against each other, not that much! Where the one gains the other looses. Minimal differences..
When you showed the r5 tracking the bird against the was, both the wave and the bird were fairly close to being in focus. On the z9, the DOF seemed much shallower and when it was focussed on the wave, the bird disappeared. I am not sure that is a fair comparison.
Good video Jan. Nikon definitely have a very appealing lens line up. Especially now with the Z 180-600, 400 f/4.5, 800 f/6.3. The TC lenses are a bit out of my price range and I prefer portability and hand-hold capability. I am waiting for Nikon's 2nd Gen versions of the Z9 and Z8 to see if they match the Canon and Sony performance in AF. The ergonomics of the Nikon is a minus for me though. Their lack large rotary back wheel irks me. Canon's lack of a reasonable lens line up (sub $8K Primes) and flagship camera had me switch to Sony for the A1 and 200-600mm. I also think a lot of your concerns with the R5 will be addressed in the next release too.
I first a Canon user and absolutely love the layout of the Canon. Then I switched to Nikon for lens price point, specifically for 500mm PF lens. I would love Nikon to put 3 wheels and also 3 back-buttons for more customise the setting and quick use it. Over I love the feel of solid body build of Nikon since my D810 and my current Z9. For my Z9's buffer is super.
The VR/stabilisation is far behind Nikon but the bird AF of Canon is still the best. Every brand has its great and bad sides... EDIT: Wrote the comment before watching the whole video so yeah, he said the same thing 😅
Hmm, I wonder what Canon will end up doing with the R5 mk.2. I've been most impressed with the Nikon Z8 and Fuji's GFX line. The Z8 is just such a good all-around-camera with an excellent lens selection, it is hard to ignore.
Nikon lenses are great but, what good are they on an inferior autofocus system? Do you really think Nikon has caught up to Canon & Sony when it comes to autofocus, deep learning and AI? Sorry, for me the answer is painfully clear. I don't even know any Nikon users now under 45 years of age.
If only we can have Nikon sensor and Canon AF combined, that would make resulting AF even more better and reliable. As excellent as Canon AF algorithms are, they are ruined by slow sensor readout speeds, making AF struggling at high frame-rates in low light.
I'm fortunate to have a Z9, R3 and R5...While the AF on the Canon's does seem easier and at times better, at the end of the day, the images that come out of the Z9 just have a depth, pop, color and certain magic that the Canon's just don't quite have. I mean, all three produce fantastic files, but there is just something about Nikon files that no other brand has(I used to shoot and A1/A9 but sold them). But yeah, the torture of having Nikon and Canon and having to decide which system should I keep and commit to, lol.
If you're shooting raw, they can both be processed to look identical - ignoring iso performance that is. The extra 'pop' isn't a thing - that will just be how the raw is processed. Out of the box in Lightroom, for example, I would agree Nikon looks better. But it's easy to get a canon/sony image to the same place.
Tienes toda la razón, los archivos raw de nikon se perciben de una manera increíble. Recuerdo la nikon d800, por ejemplo. Es algo que no puedo explicar. Lo que sí es cierto, como dice el colega de más abajo, es que con ambos puedes llegar al mismo resultado final. Saludos.
It’s very good and I liked it. The main thing about it is the lack of eye tracking and the worst IS of the three brands that make it less attractive for my style of work
Great video, thanks. I am switching from Fuji x-t2 and still can't decide where to go. Really like what Nikon has to offer from lens perspective, but I think I prefer more R5 over z8 or 9 because of its autofocus. Maybe I should just and see what R5ii will look like and also maybe they will come out with lens similar to RF100-500 with slightly higher reach and a bit faster.
I started to shoot with Nikon since 2012 using a DSLR and purchased several F-Mount Nikkor lenses since then. It would be foolish to switch systems and throw away all my lenses (from 14 mm to 600 mm), external flash units, commanders and accessories. I don't have money to burn and i have simply added a Nikon mirrorless camera as second body to my tools. Creativity, great execution, great projects and fun in photography is not about brands or the most expensive gear. Actually brand wars are only for armchair photographers who don't have any real use for photo equipment.
This is a great video Jan, and a question I have been asking myself for weeks, as a Canon shooter heavily invested in high end gear, I could quite easily swap to a Z8 the 800mm PF and 180-600mm and still have money to spare, as much as I love my 600mm F4 and the quality of the photos it is a lump to carry round on a tripod, and as I mainly shoot wildlife and small birds I love the fact of a light set up for walking, the RF100-500 is amazing, but a little short. But like you I am not ready to give up Canon, the autofocus definitely keeps me where I am.
I have similar thoughts, I have Sony gear but the 800mm PF is a tempting option, I would use that for tripod work then the 400mm F4.5 or 180-600mm for handheld photography. I know the weight of the 800mm is good but I still think it would be a struggle to carry around because of the physical size of it so I don't think you would gain much changing systems. In terms of handheld photography I think the 100-500mm has perfect parameters, I find my Sony 200-600mm in dense rainforests can be a little large to rapidly swing around, also the 100-500mm being lighter and shorter focal length would for slower shutter speeds handheld compared a 180-600mm.
@@KurtisPape I think we can swap and change systems and still never be happy, there will always be a system that will have something we want. At the moment Nikon I think have the edge of glass for wildlife, but the cameras a lacking in autofocus, but the Nikon technicians will have the Sony and Canon cameras in bits and will soon have a system to compete. But will Sony and Canon listen and give us the glass we crave, I am from the UK and shoot wildlife and small birds sometimes in bad light, the 800mm PF would be a dream especially as it would cost the same price as my used 600mm F4, I was upset when Canon released the 100-500mm why not 200-600mm like everybody else, and why F7.1 and not 6.3, but saying that I do a lot of travel and the 100-500 is small and light, not only this on Safari I know I will be more grateful for the 100mm end not something that starts at 200mm, like I said we will never be happy 🙂
@@tonyesposito9602 At least the 100-500mm is very sharp at F7.1, my Sony 200-600mm is 'sharp enough' at F6.3 but to match the sharpness of the canon lens I need to stop down to F7.1 possibly F8 anyway. I know 1/3rd of a stop isn't much but I shoot my lens at F7.1 most of the time now, it for sure gives me more consistent results even helps with colour fringing, then I use F8 in strong light. Hope that makes you feel better about your lens being F7.1 🙂haha
@@KurtisPape 🤣🤣🤣 thanks for that, I have always been quite envious of that Sony 200-600, I see a review on the new Nikon 180-600mm while it's a stunning lens for the money, they did say sharpness falls a little at the 600mm end, as you said the 100-500 is very sharp at 500mm and I have even used the 1.4 extender while F10 is not great unless you have a ton of light the sharpness is still there. I also have the RF 800mm (I said I was heavily invested in Canon 😂) this lens is incredible for the money, but F11 needs even more light, it's a good job the R3 can handle very high ISO 🙂
As an R5 user that Stabilization on the Nikon is just mindblowing. If I could have that on the R5II that alone would be reason enough to upgrade. This and hopefuly faster tracking with teleconverters. I find the EF 400 2.8 II to be quite slow with the 2X.
Great comparison video. I have friends who shoot with the Nikon Z9 and Z8. There images seem realy nice. I will be staying with Canon R5 and R7, RF100-500 and RF800 lenses for birds.
Hello and thanks for all your great content! Are you able to do a review of the z9 with the firmware update which added specific Bird detection ? Apparently it's game changer but you advice could be very helpful ;)
Nikon cameras have been used by NASA and space agencies extensively, most recently with the arrival of unmodified Z 9 camera to the crew of the International Space Station. Since the Apollo 15 mission more than 50 years ago, Nikon cameras and lenses have been used by NASA for space exploration.
Great comparison of 2 great brands!! I was originally a Nikon Shooter (way back) before I switched to Canon and mirrorless. I was out shooting diving Kingfishers the other day with the R5 and it was doing a great job staying on that fast moving bird with a confused background and I just can't imagine another brand doing better. I have to believe an R5 ii will be a step up in what is already a great AF (just based on the R6 MK ii). I am assuming they will position the camera to compete in all the new features Sony and Nikon have introduced. I am eager to get my hands on the R5 MK ii or an R1. I too would love better stabilization while shooting video and a faster sensor. I occasionally find myself with the r5 the 600 mm and the 1.4 doing hand held stills and want to switch to video and it's always difficult. As far as switching goes well I am too deep in RF glass to consider it but if I did it would be Nikon.
I was wondering for a while about switching my gear from Canon to Nikon, so far I'm staying with Canon. Thank You for your insight about this topic. As usual Great Video and very helpful
I would not consider switching based on the camera body alone. All of the major manufactures are constantly leapfrogging each other on their camera bodies. If you start becoming envious of a feature in another manufacturer's line, just wait. It'll show up in your favorite system within several years. Typically each model gets replaced with more advanced features every 3-4 years. However, lens selection is a much slower moving target. If you only own lens or two, then perhaps switching is easy. But if you invested in a variety of lenses, especially the supertelephotos, then switching is expensive. Lens upgrades tend to evolve on a much slower pace, so one particular lens from one manufacture may be unmatched by other manufactures for many years because of the slower development process and availability when it is finally released. Nikon arguably has the best selection of wildlife lenses now and it's going to take a long time before other manufactures will catch up. They will eventually, and maybe even exceed what Nikon has to offer, but that could be a decade or more from now.
Hi Jan, thanks for this great video, will you bee updating it to reflect the Z9 4.10 firmware release, which has significantly improved the bird focus system?
I love my R5 with 100-500mm and 300mm f2.8 + 1.4X or 2X, awesome combos but those new Nikon telephoto lenses are so attempting to switch, Canon L lenses are OVER PRICED. Competition is good, Canon has a lot of pressure now.
If you are shooting specifically birds, humans, cars etc you can specify specifically and get even faster subject acquisition ... just get close with the 3D box
I don't shoot birds with my Nikon, but from what I've heard, 3D tracking isn't recommended when shooting birds in flight. It's best to just choose your box size and let the camera find the subject.
I don’t know how I missed this video. This has been on my mind for a while. Stay or go! The R5 with the RF 100-500 is hard to beat for weight, versatility, and quality. I wish it were 600. Weight is very important for me. I do wish Canon would make an amateur zoom in the 100-600 range. Or give us a better crop range in a full frame camera. The R5ii is out now and it’s still a 1.6 crop. I wonder if the crop mode is a physical spec, or something that could be changed via firmware? It has a ton of other standout features, but I will not be upgrading just yet. I may just end up with an R7 ii as a second body. Hoping Canon gets their mid priced lens lineup expanded soon!
A controversial topic to be sure and I can detect your hesitancy in taking it on. Nonetheless, it was a fair evaluation, and you nailed the single reason to consider switching, namely lenses. As a former Canon CPS WL shooter, I switched to Nikon because of the glass. Though I miss a lot of things about my Canon gear, they have failed to deliver high quality, mid-priced, lightweight WL lenses apart from the 100-500 (sorry, I don't find the 600/800 f/11 practical). Also, still shooters seem to be neglected (in terms of features) compared to video. The Nikon 800 f/6.3 is a game changer for me as it is lightweight enough to handhold the IQ and IS is tremendous, and I didn't need to take out a second mortgage to buy one. Likewise, the 180-600 fills the short end gap at a reasonable price. As you observed, the Canon AF system is easier to manage though one does not necessarily need to perform a 3d handoff unless the subject is moving out of the original tracking box. Also, I differ with your assessment of the "buttons". Nikon offers tons of buttons (better tactile) in the front/back and all of them are programable unlike the R5. The lack of a ISO wheel is easily and effectively obviated by assigning the function to the programable lens ring. I find that the battery life in the R5 and Z8 are similar (I place both in airplane mode and tend to chimp a lot). The R5's EVF is better though that is offset by the lack of real time display and blackout. Other advantages of the include Z8/Z9 is the ability to program a button which toggles between current and a preset setting which I find essential when quickly switching between a perched subject and say a BIF, shooting/custom banks, and I think the Nikon images are comparatively sharper (low pass filter or better IS). Great analysis.
Despite comments saying this is a balanced review, I have looked at the DPreview image comparison and I can see that the Z7ii is less noisy than the R5 when comparing all iso settings. The Z8/9 looks slightly noisier but not noisier than the R5. At 6400 all 4 cameras look ok in low light mode. Maybe Adobe hasn’t fixed its Nef raw conversion... Matt Irwin did a whole video on how much better Z8/9 images look in Capture One! I always shoot raw and I only convert with Cap1...
I think when it comes to Z8 vs Z9 it really depends on whether you want the grip or not. Because a refurbished Z9 from Nikon costs less than a Z8 with grip :)
some good thoughts - I personally think there are plenty of lenses to choose from on the Canon side, EF will work with R line up - I currently use an EF 600MM F4 V2 on my R5 - at half the price of a new RF 600 F4 - The difference can't be double (in my mind) or better in the RF Lens, although I've heard some say there is night and day difference between them. Now I do think Nikon Colors blow Canon away, my friends that shoot Nikon do produce better color images when we shoot side x side, when comparing the JPEG images on the back of our Cameras. Post processing changes the game here though. IF, I were buying a new body today, it would most likely be the Z8 - But I wouldn't get rid of my R5 and I'd use that 600mm f4 on the Z8.
I am in the same boat as you, I have the 600mm F4 V2 I have the R5 but I prefer my R3 my EF 1.4 extender MK3 lives on my lens and there is no loss of sharpness. I have actually read the 600mm V2 is the sharpest of all the Canon 600mm I won't sell it for the RF version as the cost is just not worth the upgrade, I too have read people saying night and day difference between EF and RF, these are people who never had their EF lenses calibrated, all my DSLR's and EF lenses were calibrated by Canon UK and I see no difference in sharpness. RF does not need calibrating hence people think it's sharper.
Hi, great comparison, IMO you really nailed the main strengths and limitations of each system. To me, I'm sticking with Canon. Their cameras really perform: AF, speed, user interface. Canon has a shorter lens lineup but is also the younger system. However, Nikon, even though they have good lenses, they only have 2 cameras that really perform. And, if we think about it, the Z9 and the Z8 are essentially the same cameras in different bodies. So, they seem out of creativity and I don't trust them to take many chances... Even though I think that eventually there will come out an Z7 iii and a Z6 iii, Nikon is taking to long and their camera lineup is getting very dated. I have an R6 I and, boy, does that camera perform! I shoot pets in action and use mostly the EF 24-105 F4 L lens, it nails focus almost every time, I feel very at ease, confident that the camera will nail the shot in focus. So far, so good! Can't wait for the R5 ii, so I can buy the R5 I cheaper! :P All best!
I shoot a little bit of everything but am not a professional. The stabilization and longer zooms at all price points made me really consider moving to a Z8, but it's not enough to make me want to put everything up for sale. Nikon has a trinity of zooms that look similar in terms of size, weight and performance to the RF trinity, but if I'm going to move, I want to move to a system that has some smaller high quality primes for travel & street photography. Sony is starting to look VERY attractive - an A1 or A7RV for landscape & wildlife, and a smaller A7cR for street and travel. They have some excellent, more compact 1.4s and even 2.5 primes that are super compact with great IQ. If Nikon does release the zf with the rumoured specs it might become more compelling for me. I think I'm waiting until the new year to see third party RF lenses and what Canon decides to do with 1.4 primes before I make a decision. I'm hoping the 1.4s are much more compact and we see Sigma, Tamron and Voigtlander releasing RF lenses.
Initially when i started i had to use Canon because i was totallly broke and had to use reverse macro for macro photography and only canon had dof preview button that i could use to lock aperture. When i started wedding photography i switched to Nikon, but i missed the ergonomics, layout, and colors. But nikon was value for money. Now i am on a Z9 as i see Nikon lenses be more valuenfor money. But i feel nikon autofocus for action is bit dissapointing. They have the best hardware but not the best software or firmware
Switching from Canon to Nikon will not improve my photography. I will get better images if I go out more, shoot more, and continue to grow as a photographer. Some of my best images are with an almost 20-year old Canon 1D Mk II. My R5 will do, at least until the R5 II or the R1 comes out. If I were starting out, I’d probably go with Nikon because of their lens line-up. I’ve spent more money on lenses than bodies.
Whatever camp you are in, competition is good for value and price. You mentioned hardware user friendliness which definitely is important, but sometimes we overlook software user friendliness which I think Canon also does well.
I find these "SHould I switch systems?" videos a little tiresome. Most people aren't switching brands because of the sunk costs. The reality is, most current full frame cameras are pretty good. Unless you're a professional sports photographer, almost any newer mirrorless kit will be just fine. Yes, some systems have more glass and others have better video features, but for the vast majority of photographers, brand matters very little. I think most photographers would enjoy trying every brand and lens, but it's just not possible for 99% of us.
Thinking it this way. A lot of people are coming from dslr cameras still and basically enter a new system. So it’s very valid for them. If you’re set in your system, it’s obviously a much bigger thing to do and often not feasible
Steve has a point. I like Nikon Vs Nikon videos or Canon Vs Canon etc... It's helpful if you're thinking of expanding your investment or collection. Nikon Vs Canon Vs Sony.... Fun to get viewers but ultimately pointless for most people. For most of us we can't afford to own multiple systems and lens families. Speaking for myself I used to shoot Canon and switched in 2008 to Nikon and haven't looked back. I still think Canon's handle better. That extra wheel and the two thumb buttons on the right are better than Nikon's offering still and I used to have that on my old 7D! But two things hooked me to Nikon; low noise and low ISO performance for landscapes and their toughness. I work on mountains and live in Scotland so it's always wet somewhere. And Nikon just kept going where I had issues before. But I really liked my Canons. Very much. I'd love to have both but like most people I'm all in the one system now and have just taken delivery of a Z8. Can't wait!
Sold my d500 and 500 mm pf and bought the canon r6ii and 100-500mm to photograph swallows and swifts This is all on UA-camrs recommendations And oh boy I am pretty disappointed!
Jan, I think you are right depending on the system you are using you can customise it to how you want and I feel the Nikon Z9 is very customisable and I have it exactly as I want it now - With regards to the Nikon AF buttons I have my DISP button next to the AF-ON button set to a different AF. I also have the toggle switch below the AF-ON set to another AF point and all 3 FN buttons at the front, I have got used to the system and can trigger any one of them instantly if needed, this is ONLY for BIF. Mostly I usually switch from AF-ON wide-L to 3D tracking set on the FN1 button most of the time. I also have my REC button set to switch my FPS / Continuous/single and pre capture in an instance.
As always, a great video Jan. The lens lineup to Nikon is just amazing. Hope that Canon comes after in that regard. I am tempted about the Nikon lineup, but have to many Canon lenses to switch now. Really wish that Canon could come with a 500mm 5.6. Think that could be a very attractive budget lens for many wildlife photographers that don't want to spend 10-15000$ on a lens. I have a friend that have the Nikon 500mm PF lens, and one other that have the 800mm PF. Just amazing value for the money. Have a great week, and enjoy life. Cheers, Bjoern
I love the Z8 with the 400 f4.5 it's so lightweight. The AF does more than enough for my needs. I am really looking forward to an updated Z50 with 10bit video.
Very good analysis Jan. If money was no issue the Nikon's lens line up would be extremely tempting but I have too much invested in Canon at this point to make a switch. Furthermore, I would not make a switch before Canon release the R5 mark ii and the R1 and the rumoured 10 lens they are supposed to release between now and 2024. Thanks for sharing your Nikon experience and comparing it to Canon. It helps cooling my regrets of not being a Nikon shooter :)
Date the camera, marry the lens(es). Very good review, Jan. I have the Z8 and while it’s light years ahead of my Z6ii, the AF is still a step behind the competition. I know firsthand, I also have an OM1/150-400mm 4.5 TC combo with simply amazing AF and tracking. I think the reason is Nikon doesn’t have high enough AF points on their sensors, a little less than 500 compared to more than double on the Canons and Sonys. The new AI detect algorithms need to have the sensor completely “painted” with AF points to identify, lock on and keep up with subjects. That said, I think my Nikon lenses beat Canon hands down in two respects. Firstly the light pf lenses - the 300, 500 and 800 - allowing handholding up to the longest range. Secondly, the built in TCs on the big telephotos. I’m pretty sure the next gen Z8/Z9 will solve the AF issue. But it’s plenty good as it stands today on my Z8 - and kinda fun, not boring. FYI, I use the lens function button to engage 3D tracking. It’s much easier to switch buttons without moving my thumbs or fingers on either hand. Tried the front buttons and others but they just feel more awkward. Using the lens button feels natural; and the “handoff” between custom area and 3D is instantaneous.
All these cameras have way more af points than what is listed in specs…the spec is af points that are able to be selected by the user. A marketing spec. Algorithms matter. Canon has been working on this since DSLR days and their superior live view focusing.
What is left out of the Nikon-canon comparison of canons advantage in auto focus is how canon autofocus tracks with the bird that is far away in the distance better than the Nikon auto focus. who takes pictures of birds in the distance that are barely recognizable? not me.
Totally see the same issues with Z9 AF, even with latest 4.1 firmware or whatever it is. It's definitely gotten better, but.... R5 still seems easier to use like you said, and just finds the bird/knows where to go. Sometimes I'm not sure how it does it. Kinda crazy. Z9 definitely was useable/getting shots, but I am certain, R5 would have been better in some situations. At mid/higher ISO, I am not personally noticing any different in image quality vs R5, or looks very very similar in noise and detail to me.
I definitely got strings of images all in focus on the z9 for sure. But then, opposite of that. It WAS in focus, then out of no where/for no reason I can tell, like 10 in a row out of focus. Nothing changed in the background or lighting/etc. If the focus was more consistent, I'd probably buy it. Maybe firmware will improve it to that point, or unless i come across another method/setttings. But if Canon has a R5II soon, with similar specs to Z9, but with R3 AF, then would be no reason to get it either, haha.
A fair comparison Jan and I applaud you on your unbiased reviews. IMO, switching brands does not give way to one’s ability to recognise, compose and post process an image worthy of print. I still shoot on my old D850 and even older D4s with remarkable results, it’s all about use case! Switching brands will not likely turn you into an award winning photographer over night.
No, switching brands does not make a huge change. For me the main draw is the far superior Image Stabilisation tat would allow me to consistently to handheld super stable video, something I cannot do atm.
My R5 AF bounces around my subjects periodically. Jan are your suggested utube video setups for AF still viable or have you tweaked them in the last two years?
Great video. I’m a Nikon shooter and I like your review. Nikon is getting better but still have a little way to go to catch Canon and Sony. Also, I wish you did a setup guide for the Nikon Z6 II. 😊
Wise decision not to swop brands I think. The age difference between the Z9/8 and the R5 is a large one and I don’t think Nikon have improved over the R5 that much in most areas. I’m holding for the R5 mk2. Then decision time.
Hi Jan, what’s your views on the Sony a9III. I am in a dilemma over that or the canon r3. / r6II. Any suggestions, views and advise would be very much appreciated. Thanks.
I simply use the 3D tracking on small birds and the z8/Z9 just locks on. I think the dual system you have setup for autofocus is causing you to have more misses in focusing
I find the tiny box you have to use and move around for 3D tracking too difficult to move around all the time. That costs a lot of time. With the best AF systems I don’t have to live any AF fields anymore
@@jan_wegener I just “drop” the box on the subject and it moves on its own. I don’t have to manually move it. Works even better if there are multiple subjects in frame and I need to focus on just one. Each brand has their own way of locking focus.. just like how a Tesla does braking vs other automobiles.. it’s different but it works the same once you are used to it
Great comparison, Jan. I’m surprised that you find image stabilization to be better on the Z8/9 than the R5. I used to have an R5 and I found that the IS was much better on it than my Z7ii. I haven’t had a chance to test it out compared to a Z8 so maybe it’s the difference between the Z7ii and the Z8/9.
Hi Jan, great review! It was a bit surprise to hear about Z8/9's AF deficit for photos, since I have been struggling with R5 in low light conditions, where the AF doesn't seem to work at all. Having switched to R5 from D850, I was looking forward to experiencing the Z8 with 180-600, so the AF issues are a huge letdown. I am now curious how Sony Alpha 1 with 200-600 would stack up in your comparison.
@@jan_wegener Hi Jan, I am shooting active birds (tanagers and the like) in rainforest and similar settings with 100-500 and ISO 3200. Short perching durations.
The Canon's eye AF is so much more intuitive than Nikon's system. To me that's the biggest difference. I shoot Canon and love my R5 for birding. For other subjects like portraits and landscape, there's no real difference. I'm jealous of that Nikon 180-600 lens, though.
I have a question regarding the autofocus/subject recognition on the R5. Does it have dedicated bird detection setting? Or does it have like Nikon, an animal detection, where the sensor/CPU must start to recognize what kind of animal it is seeing. Like, is it an elephant, horse, lion, dog, cat or a bird?. This should take some time to figure out. Once the desision is made it is searching the head and eventually the eye. I do beleive that a dedicated bird choise setting would make the autofocus more accurate and faster. Just my throughs how to improve the autofocus to same level as Canon and Sony.
We shot a wedding in June with two Canon R5's. My wife's back and shoulders hurt for five days later. We decided to switch all our Canon gear for Nikon, including my beloved R3. Now, I am pondering a return to Canon, stay with Nikon, or migrate to Sony. Before we do anything, I thought I would reach out to you and ask which manufacturer produces the sharpest and lightest lenses. My wife will likely just use primes. I will use primes, 24-70, 70-200, and something longer for bird photography. Currently, we are using a 50MM, 85MM, 24-70, 70-200, and a 600 PF. They are all Z-mount lenses. Like you, I am disappointed in firmware 4.10 for the Nikon Z9. Even when I think the camera focused directly on the eye in post processing I find that that is not always the case. What are your thoughts on sharp and lighter lenses? Which lens manufacturer would you recommend? Would a Sony produce more accurate eye-AF? We place very high marks on image quality followed by ergonomics, fast and accurate eye-AF, and low-light performance. I will likely explore Leica after the new SL3 is released because we like the dynamic range and colors straight out of camera on the SL2.
Let's see, my Z8 fires EF glass. It works with my E-mount lenses too. The internal RAW codec is light and loads right into Resolve. And my entire manual glass collection has autofocus via the Techart TZM-02. The Canon R5 (or R5 II) will work with EF glass and that's about it, no advantage. The playing field is equal for color too. I've owned both brands and I can tell you that. Canon cameras are unfortunately limited in what they do.
Thanks for the review. Although I use my RF 100-500 primarily at 500mm (or 800mm with the 1.4x TC) I just can't ditch the RF 100-500 since it also covers pseudo macro (0.3x), flat portraits, and close birds. If Canon had a single semi-compact supertele with f/4.5-6.3 it'd be much easier to stick with Canon. If Nikon's 180-600 wasn't so large, it'd be hard to stick with Canon. I suspected that the stacked censor of the z8 would blow away the R5 with noise, but they're closer in quality than I expected, and the R5 was less noisy?? It'll be interesting what they improve with an R5II. And the rumored patent for a Canon switchable TC could change the picture again.
I've got a Nikon D750 with 18-35, 24-120/4 and 70-300 (AF-P), plus a few primes. I'm sometimes tempted by the Z8, but I can't justify it. I think, if I'd buy it, I wouldn't feel comfortable taking it with me when traveling because it's so expensive. I know it's relatively cheap but still. Also I'm not sure what telezoom I'd get. I can't see myself get the 100-400 because of price, weight and size. I'm not sure about the Tamron 70-300 because it seems to not be asa good as my current 70-300. The new Takkor 70-180/2.8 seems interesting, but I want something longer. I do want to move, because of the IBIS, wider AF coverage, exposure preview, smarter AF (even with a plain old Z6 I think), and SnapBridge integration (I currently have a Foolography Unleashed plugged into my D750 for geotagging, but it compromises the weather sealing). I could use my existing lenses with an FTZ, but then my 16mm fisheye would not AF. Maybe if Nikon releases a Z6 III with higher resolution, that will be enough to get me over the line, at least body-wise. In the hope that more telezoom alternatives will appear. The rumoured specs of the ZF seem promising, as it will be Expeed 7 based (so expecting quite good AF) at a much lower price than a Z8/9. Not sure a retro body is for me though.
If only Nikon made big glass. I’ve been waiting for over 2 years for the privilege to buy a 600f4. Been using the Sony a1 while I wait - and I was able to buy the 800mm and the 400f2.8 for the z8 and z9.
I think for most people the Nikon Z system is the better system. Why? Well what do you want to do in general, take landscape pictures and animal pictures. For normal people the AF system of any brand is miles ahead of the DSLR camera's if used correctly. I do however would like to see a Z8C(crop) and a cheap (ca 500 euro) APC camera. In general i choose nikon in the past because i liked the colours and dynamic range better. And i do believe it is still at least on par.
I REALLY appreciate this review. I'm in the Pentax world and am about to make the switch over, at least for long lenses. I was definitely gaga over the Z8, but the bird autofocus tracking, weight, lower noise, cheaper price, and easy of use all seem to favor the R5. Video is not my main concern . I got to play with both at Roberts including the 100-500 Canon and 100-400 Nikon and 600mm f6.3. I wish the Canon lenses was not white, but I guess I can get covering for it.
Sir,I am a subscriber of your channel and watch your videos in utmost concentration.I have a Canon EOS 1500D and want to achieve my goals in life but in a poor country like India I am not getting any good guide and I also I don't have any computer to post process my photos.I have tried to make a field in photography long before but was stopped forcefully by my father.I need someone to guide me.I hope honesty that you will understand my situation and if anything can be done from your side then you will do that.Anyway, more and more thanks for teaching the persons like me and I pray to God that you continue your work and have a beautiful and colourful family life.
If you think about switching, I would wait for the A1 ll. SONY has the most advanced sensor and AF technology today as well as a much biger R&D budget than Canon and Nikon. Canon's R&D budget in the camera and sensor space has been constantly cut back since 2019 and diverted to more lukrative areas. It clearly shows in developement of competitve sensors for high end cameras.
And all three of these but no Sony or Panasonic? I don't have any camera yet so my inquiry is speculative. I appreciate such high quality videos done by a working professional.
Nikon’s lens lineup keeps diverting my attention to them from my R5. Really wished there were some step-up lenses from the 100-500mm that doesn’t take me to the $12-$16k price range. Not crazy about spending $6k for a used EF and then have to use an adapter as well.
I feel canon emphasized portability a little too much on the 100-500 and 70-200
I tell you what. I use now the Nikkor Z 600mm 4.0 TC on a Z9 and this is simply absolutely a stellar combo for Wildlife. It is not necessarily the Z9 but definitely the Nikkor Z 600mm 4.0 TC. This integrated TC is lifting your wildlife work from pure convenience perspective on a different level. Not to talk about the quality this integrated TC is delivering, it is totally different thing when you use a separate TC. I am blown away about what Nikon delivered here. And even in case you cannot or don't want the Nikkor Z 600mm 4.0 TC because of its price, the Nikkor Z 800mm 6.3 is another game changer from Nikon for us Wildlife fans. I used the R5 before and its a great camera. But again, Nikon blows Canon out of the water due to these two exquisite lenses, the Nikkor Z 600mm 4.0 TC and the Nikkor Z 800mm 6.3 PF.
It’s very nice for sure, but both of those lens lack versatility, so they are basically one trick ponies, but killer if that is the lane you live in 24/7. And they are very expensive. And late.
@@RogerZoul...is saying someone who never tried any of them :) LOL
@@RogerZoul none of that makes sense. The built in TC makes it versatile, they also have the 400 with 1.4x TC.
@@zephxiii Those primes aren't that versatile at all and they weigh a ton. You put a TC on the end of an 800mm lens and you get crazy reach, but also more issues with heat haze. Big heavy lenses with built in TCs are nothing new, Canon has the EF 200-400 mm f/4 with a 1.4x built-in TC for years. It didn't set the world on fire in all those years, and these won't now. Only a handful of people will own then and even fewer will carry them around. Olympus has one that has a 1.25x TC that is pretty lightweight, so that may make some difference. You guys need to quit dreaming. :)
@@RogerZoul Those primes are lighter than older ones and heat haze is factor for all lenses even at 300-400mm. Yes they are expensive but serious wild life photographers tend to use them all the time. That's also why Nikon came out with more affordable and lighter 180-600. Still don't get your point as those lenses are incredible.
I sold all my canon stuff when nikon announced the 180-600mm. Nikon is embracing 3rd party and their files can't be beat straight out of camera.
Which 3rd party lenses they are embracing? They have close to 0.
@@vitaminb4869tamron. Like sony, tamron lenses are growing in z mounts. I think you meantCanon has zero😂
If 180-600mm is enough for you, you're probably not the most experienced photographer.
@@prokremelskidezolati1426lmao why tf you crying so much, did he hurt your feelings bc canon is hurting themselves
The main reason I stayed with Nikon after testing the Sony and Canon systems is for the Z8 and the Nikon 400 f4.5 S lens. I love the 400 mm range for bigger wildlife in Africa and adding the 1.4 TC gives me a fantastic 560 f6.3 lens. I can work around the AF system and as I am not so much a bird photographer, the AF System works fantastic. The new 180-600 will be added for situations or trips where flexibility is needed. Again the Z8 balance well with the 400 and 180-600. Canon unfortunately only have the 400 DO f4 lens and Sony has nothing that competes with that lens. The 200-600 is a great lens and a great combination on the A9ii. I also have the Fuji XH2s with the Fuji 100-400, another system that offers great value, again a complex AF system that is somewhat behind the others, but personally I have had fantastic results. Subject detection is like the canon system, picks up very fast but the accuracy is lacking. Then OM systems same situation, very good system but many question the M34 sensor. We are spoiled for choice. And a great balanced review and advice.
Hi Jan, that's indeed a very balanced comparison! And given the age of the R5 it's impressive it's still up there winning some areas. When the rumors about the R5ii getting a stacked sensor and dual CFxB cards are true, then I'd expect it to come out on top in nearly every aspect .. on the condition they fix the wobble ;-)
Right now, it's correct Canon has more affordable birding bodies, and Nikon has more (nearly) affordable birding lenses.
It remains to be seen to what extend Nikon will share the good tech with the smaller bodies. Giving the Z7iii a stacked sensor with great AF would simply make it an Z8, nope ? And the Z6iii is likely too cheap to get stacked sensor.
On the Canon side, we were told to expect about 10 lenses in the next half year .. out of them the 200-500 cannot be the only long glass .. And maybe the TC1/1.4/2 could also be game-changer
What is the wobble issue?
Very interesting comparison, thank you. I recently went with a Z8 because of the availabily of great glass at a reasonable price. I have a 180 to 600mm on preorder. I found Canon's strategy of not offering a middle range of performance/price offputting and switched back to Nikon after many years of being away. One thing I immediately appreciated with the Z8 is the similarity of major button layout back to my D750 days. Canon doesn't have the same similarity between models. which I found particularly annoying on the R7 vs R6.
Nikon is very tempting with their image stabilisation especially for video. I'm really struggling with my Sony A1 in that regard, it doesn't have eye tracking in video and handheld video is very shaky, but I would definitely miss their amazing tracking capabitilies for photos. So I still haven't found that one camera that can do it all yet. Wish Sony came with some firmware updates for the A1
Yes, it’s a tricky one. The Sony IS is so shaky that I’m not very tempted by them atm, photo tracking is a different story
Agree with Jan's assessment (and yours). Sony A1 is on par or better with lock-on tracking in stills. Video, Nikon (surprisingly) is, for the moment, the industry leader in these type of cameras. If you shoot lots of video, tough choice. Stills, that is another story. My Sony friends and Canon friends are all happy with their gear (I shoot Nikon). Jan's assessment is spot on. I wish (and hope) that Nikon's AF modes get simpler and better and will with firmware updates (December anyone?). As a Nikon shooter, I do get the feeling that Nikon is devoted to keeping the Z9 relevant for the near future - and plans to improve and increase the number of features available. It's been an interesting time - but as much as I enjoyed shooting with a DSLR, my Z9 experience is on another level. Nearly always exposures, white balance, and composition where I want it in camera. 90 percent in focus shots. Silent shooting. No rolling shutter. The list is extensive. So, while I feel your argument - i.e. Sony hasn't updated that much - it's a good time to complain about what we want. For me, it's zebras in stills.
The A1 has no stablization in video??? Is that true? And no eye tracking?
I just found this in dpreview in their analysis of the video capabilities. "The Sony a1 is also only the second full-frame alpha camera (along with the a7S III) to offer 'Active Steadyshot' stabilization, which means the camera uses digital stabilization (and a slight 1.1x crop) on top of in-body and in-lens stabilization to further smooth out handheld footage. "
I use the EF lenses with an adapter for my r6 and r5. I really can't see the difference between the EF L lenses and the RF L lenses to be honest.
In terms of IQ they’re all very close. Main difference is AF speed at times, fps and IS
Upgraded my Z7II to the Z8 - it’s a game changer. Sticking with my F mount 500mm f5.6 PF which performs fabulously with the Z8. I’m a very happy bunny.
I have been a Nikon shooter for some time now. I was getting frustrated waiting for a good body. I shopped Sony and Canon and came very close to switching to the R5 and 100-500. I do love the feel of the R5. I stuck with Nikon and bought the Z8. Kept my 500pf and purchased the 100-400. For me, it was getting a blackout free experience. I will be struggling with my next long lens purchase. The 800pf would be nice in many scenarios but still somewhat limited. The 400 and 600 TC's are very attractive but pricey and heavy. I don't think the 180-600 will give me better image quality than cropping from my 500pf. Nikon has some great lenses, but I would love to see a lightweight 600 similar to the 400 4.5.
There is a rumored 600mm 6.3 lens from Nikon! Hopefully it will be released soon.
To me, it's really up to what ecosystem you are invested in. Personally, I notice very little trouble with rolling shutter artifacts in the R5. I wonder why these stacked sensors seem to have WORSE noise than the non-stacked ones? The R5mki noise is somehow better than the mkii, and the Nikon z8 seems to indeed also have issues.
Hi Jan, I agree with others that you’ve provided a very balanced comparison. Would you consider giving a review focused on action photography? I’m personally concerned about Canon’s rolling shutter in pretty much all their bodies and those impacts on action photography. Cheers!
if u need electronic shutter simply choose stacked sensor
Interesting observations especially regarding bird photography and bird identification. In terms of motorsport photography, after switching from the R5 to the Z9, I have a significantly higher keeper rate (using comparable lenses) with the 3D tracking AF than with any of the settings I had on the R5 at the time. However, I also know photographers who report just the opposite. The settings on today's cameras are so complex that there is probably a lot of weal and woe to be found here. But even in DSLR times, I was able to achieve good results in motorsport pictures with the Nikon D2X and D300, although the tolerances at that time were also significantly lower at 12MP.
For me the Canon RF 100-500 is the perfect lens : very sharp, quite small, amazing macro capabilities and a decent reach ! And the R5 is still very good :-)
Agreed
Agreed!
Good but not perfect. It frustrates me when I move into the darker rainforest and my R5 will no longer focus. I need that brighter lens that I can carry.
Hi Jan ! You made a fair review on each brand. For me autofocus is key. Also the 100-500 lens is hard to beat. Sometimes my combo R5 + RF 100-500 is so sharp that I have to reduce sharpness. No joke here. Canon as an amazing cameras line up. They have cameras for every budget. I am confident that new lenses will come with time. We just have to be patient. I am loyal to Canon because they never disappointed me. I have loved every camera that I have owned. It's amazing how a camera made in 2020 can compete with newer bodies. I am convinced that the R5 II and R1 will be excellent. I am so glad that Nikon is back because competition is good and Nikon came back with 2 excellent cameras. Their new lenses are superb and I am glad for those who owns them. Switching system is costly and will bring deception in the long end. I have to go for companies that give you the best for your money and I consider Canon and Nikon to be no 1 at this with their regular outstanding free firmwares. The R5 I own now is really improved with all these excellent firmwares. Same thing for Z9 owners. These days it is hard to buy a bad camera.
Thanks Jan for this great videos ! Will you make a review of the Nikon 800mm F6.3 PF lens ?
Now after the firmware 4.00 for z9 and firmware 2.0 for the z8, what do you think about the focusing and subject detection compare against canon?
Quite similar to R5
Canon R5 user and Canon user for over 40 years (yes over 40). No compelling reason to switch because it's a tool I'm familiar with and the company has continued to innovate for decades. Switching to mirrorless from the Mark IV and EF to RF lenses was very expensive. Switching to another system makes no sense to me. Maybe Nikon, or Sony are better in certain areas but so far any potential limitations have not prevented me from taking quality landscapes, portraits, and bird photos. A long time Nikon user and a Sony user would make the same argument for their brands. My advice- Get to know your camera really well and then get to know Lightroom and Photoshop even better- that's where you'll see the difference.
I'm a long-time shooter like you. Camera equipment lust has always been a thing, but in the hypermarket we've been in the last eight years or so it is just nuts. Yes, competition and advancements are great but The Next Big Thing from Brand X, Y and/or Z is always right around the corner and the frenzy kicks up all over again. I agree with your points.
In real terms, how much "better" would any of the two cameras be against each other, not that much! Where the one gains the other looses. Minimal differences..
When you showed the r5 tracking the bird against the was, both the wave and the bird were fairly close to being in focus. On the z9, the DOF seemed much shallower and when it was focussed on the wave, the bird disappeared. I am not sure that is a fair comparison.
Good video Jan. Nikon definitely have a very appealing lens line up. Especially now with the Z 180-600, 400 f/4.5, 800 f/6.3. The TC lenses are a bit out of my price range and I prefer portability and hand-hold capability. I am waiting for Nikon's 2nd Gen versions of the Z9 and Z8 to see if they match the Canon and Sony performance in AF. The ergonomics of the Nikon is a minus for me though. Their lack large rotary back wheel irks me. Canon's lack of a reasonable lens line up (sub $8K Primes) and flagship camera had me switch to Sony for the A1 and 200-600mm. I also think a lot of your concerns with the R5 will be addressed in the next release too.
The secret sauce in the Nikon stabilization seems to be the OIS. In video stabilization with no OIS lenses the video is very shaky
I first a Canon user and absolutely love the layout of the Canon. Then I switched to Nikon for lens price point, specifically for 500mm PF lens. I would love Nikon to put 3 wheels and also 3 back-buttons for more customise the setting and quick use it. Over I love the feel of solid body build of Nikon since my D810 and my current Z9. For my Z9's buffer is super.
Thanks for sharing!
@@jan_wegenerI’ve heard continuously that Nikon has superior colors with less work. I would love to see comparisons there
Nikon have much more appealing lenses like the 600 prime that’s why I’m so tempted to buy Nikon.
The Canon R5, which was released in 2020 and still has up-to-date technology, deserves respect. Next up is the Canon R5 Mark II.
The mark ii better have dual digic X processors
Time for Digic XI already. Dual XI on R1 then.
The VR/stabilisation is far behind Nikon but the bird AF of Canon is still the best. Every brand has its great and bad sides...
EDIT: Wrote the comment before watching the whole video so yeah, he said the same thing 😅
Totally! I have 2 of them and enjoy them a lot
@@jan_wegeneryou are soft. the z8 is not heavy. 50 push ups a day and less soy based food will get your strength up.
Hmm, I wonder what Canon will end up doing with the R5 mk.2. I've been most impressed with the Nikon Z8 and Fuji's GFX line. The Z8 is just such a good all-around-camera with an excellent lens selection, it is hard to ignore.
Nikon lenses are great but, what good are they on an inferior autofocus system? Do you really think Nikon has caught up to Canon & Sony when it comes to autofocus, deep learning and AI? Sorry, for me the answer is painfully clear. I don't even know any Nikon users now under 45 years of age.
If only we can have Nikon sensor and Canon AF combined, that would make resulting AF even more better and reliable. As excellent as Canon AF algorithms are, they are ruined by slow sensor readout speeds, making AF struggling at high frame-rates in low light.
I'm fortunate to have a Z9, R3 and R5...While the AF on the Canon's does seem easier and at times better, at the end of the day, the images that come out of the Z9 just have a depth, pop, color and certain magic that the Canon's just don't quite have. I mean, all three produce fantastic files, but there is just something about Nikon files that no other brand has(I used to shoot and A1/A9 but sold them). But yeah, the torture of having Nikon and Canon and having to decide which system should I keep and commit to, lol.
If you're shooting raw, they can both be processed to look identical - ignoring iso performance that is. The extra 'pop' isn't a thing - that will just be how the raw is processed. Out of the box in Lightroom, for example, I would agree Nikon looks better. But it's easy to get a canon/sony image to the same place.
Tienes toda la razón, los archivos raw de nikon se perciben de una manera increíble. Recuerdo la nikon d800, por ejemplo. Es algo que no puedo explicar. Lo que sí es cierto, como dice el colega de más abajo, es que con ambos puedes llegar al mismo resultado final. Saludos.
Do you tried OM-1 with 300 F4 Pro or with 150-400 Pro? Intrested in your opinion compare to Z or R systems
@@UnluckyNewbie I haven't, sorry
All I wish is for Canon to release similar lenses to Nikon's 600/6.3 and 800/6.3. Is it too much to ask, Canon??
How about Sony - The A1 still be comparable if not better than these cameras 😊
It’s very good and I liked it. The main thing about it is the lack of eye tracking and the worst IS of the three brands that make it less attractive for my style of work
Great video, thanks. I am switching from Fuji x-t2 and still can't decide where to go. Really like what Nikon has to offer from lens perspective, but I think I prefer more R5 over z8 or 9 because of its autofocus. Maybe I should just and see what R5ii will look like and also maybe they will come out with lens similar to RF100-500 with slightly higher reach and a bit faster.
I started to shoot with Nikon since 2012 using a DSLR and purchased several F-Mount Nikkor lenses since then. It would be foolish to switch systems and throw away all my lenses (from 14 mm to 600 mm), external flash units, commanders and accessories. I don't have money to burn and i have simply added a Nikon mirrorless camera as second body to my tools. Creativity, great execution, great projects and fun in photography is not about brands or the most expensive gear. Actually brand wars are only for armchair photographers who don't have any real use for photo equipment.
This is a great video Jan, and a question I have been asking myself for weeks, as a Canon shooter heavily invested in high end gear, I could quite easily swap to a Z8 the 800mm PF and 180-600mm and still have money to spare, as much as I love my 600mm F4 and the quality of the photos it is a lump to carry round on a tripod, and as I mainly shoot wildlife and small birds I love the fact of a light set up for walking, the RF100-500 is amazing, but a little short.
But like you I am not ready to give up Canon, the autofocus definitely keeps me where I am.
I have similar thoughts, I have Sony gear but the 800mm PF is a tempting option, I would use that for tripod work then the 400mm F4.5 or 180-600mm for handheld photography. I know the weight of the 800mm is good but I still think it would be a struggle to carry around because of the physical size of it so I don't think you would gain much changing systems.
In terms of handheld photography I think the 100-500mm has perfect parameters, I find my Sony 200-600mm in dense rainforests can be a little large to rapidly swing around, also the 100-500mm being lighter and shorter focal length would for slower shutter speeds handheld compared a 180-600mm.
@@KurtisPape I think we can swap and change systems and still never be happy, there will always be a system that will have something we want.
At the moment Nikon I think have the edge of glass for wildlife, but the cameras a lacking in autofocus, but the Nikon technicians will have the Sony and Canon cameras in bits and will soon have a system to compete.
But will Sony and Canon listen and give us the glass we crave, I am from the UK and shoot wildlife and small birds sometimes in bad light, the 800mm PF would be a dream especially as it would cost the same price as my used 600mm F4, I was upset when Canon released the 100-500mm why not 200-600mm like everybody else, and why F7.1 and not 6.3, but saying that I do a lot of travel and the 100-500 is small and light, not only this on Safari I know I will be more grateful for the 100mm end not something that starts at 200mm, like I said we will never be happy 🙂
@@tonyesposito9602 At least the 100-500mm is very sharp at F7.1, my Sony 200-600mm is 'sharp enough' at F6.3 but to match the sharpness of the canon lens I need to stop down to F7.1 possibly F8 anyway. I know 1/3rd of a stop isn't much but I shoot my lens at F7.1 most of the time now, it for sure gives me more consistent results even helps with colour fringing, then I use F8 in strong light. Hope that makes you feel better about your lens being F7.1 🙂haha
@@KurtisPape 🤣🤣🤣 thanks for that, I have always been quite envious of that Sony 200-600, I see a review on the new Nikon 180-600mm while it's a stunning lens for the money, they did say sharpness falls a little at the 600mm end, as you said the 100-500 is very sharp at 500mm and I have even used the 1.4 extender while F10 is not great unless you have a ton of light the sharpness is still there.
I also have the RF 800mm (I said I was heavily invested in Canon 😂) this lens is incredible for the money, but F11 needs even more light, it's a good job the R3 can handle very high ISO 🙂
Z8 & Z9 for the win 🥇
As an R5 user that Stabilization on the Nikon is just mindblowing. If I could have that on the R5II that alone would be reason enough to upgrade. This and hopefuly faster tracking with teleconverters. I find the EF 400 2.8 II to be quite slow with the 2X.
Agreed! I don’t know what Nikon is doing but it’s amazing
Great comparison video. I have friends who shoot with the Nikon Z9 and Z8. There images seem realy nice. I will be staying with Canon R5 and R7, RF100-500 and RF800 lenses for birds.
Hello and thanks for all your great content! Are you able to do a review of the z9 with the firmware update which added specific Bird detection ? Apparently it's game changer but you advice could be very helpful ;)
I need a tough camera that won't stop working in the rain or snow, Hot or cold , That is why i use Nikon.
It’s a fair pint for the z9
Pretty much any camera from Canon won't stop working in these conditions. I had the 300D 20 years ago that did just fine in all kinds of weather.
Nikon cameras have been used by NASA and space agencies extensively, most recently with the arrival of unmodified Z 9 camera to the crew of the International Space Station. Since the Apollo 15 mission more than 50 years ago, Nikon cameras and lenses have been used by NASA for space exploration.
Great comparison of 2 great brands!! I was originally a Nikon Shooter (way back) before I switched to Canon and mirrorless. I was out shooting diving Kingfishers the other day with the R5 and it was doing a great job staying on that fast moving bird with a confused background and I just can't imagine another brand doing better. I have to believe an R5 ii will be a step up in what is already a great AF (just based on the R6 MK ii). I am assuming they will position the camera to compete in all the new features Sony and Nikon have introduced. I am eager to get my hands on the R5 MK ii or an R1. I too would love better stabilization while shooting video and a faster sensor. I occasionally find myself with the r5 the 600 mm and the 1.4 doing hand held stills and want to switch to video and it's always difficult. As far as switching goes well I am too deep in RF glass to consider it but if I did it would be Nikon.
You should switch to Nikon!
A great users comparison! 👏🏾👍🏾🙏🏾. 🇬🇧🇸🇪🇹🇹
Does the Nikon Z8 firmware update change your thoughts at all on the focus issues of the Z8 when compared to R5?
They have moved much closer together. I made a video about the Z8 with the new firmware and a side by side with R5
Please Nikon make an apsc camera like the r10!!!
And price bellow 1200 euros!
Or a R50, even a R100. Nikon need a very cheap camera with EVF and up to date specs.
I was wondering for a while about switching my gear from Canon to Nikon, so far I'm staying with Canon. Thank You for your insight about this topic. As usual Great Video and very helpful
I would not consider switching based on the camera body alone. All of the major manufactures are constantly leapfrogging each other on their camera bodies. If you start becoming envious of a feature in another manufacturer's line, just wait. It'll show up in your favorite system within several years. Typically each model gets replaced with more advanced features every 3-4 years. However, lens selection is a much slower moving target. If you only own lens or two, then perhaps switching is easy. But if you invested in a variety of lenses, especially the supertelephotos, then switching is expensive. Lens upgrades tend to evolve on a much slower pace, so one particular lens from one manufacture may be unmatched by other manufactures for many years because of the slower development process and availability when it is finally released. Nikon arguably has the best selection of wildlife lenses now and it's going to take a long time before other manufactures will catch up. They will eventually, and maybe even exceed what Nikon has to offer, but that could be a decade or more from now.
interresting... thx for that. I'm a Z8 Photographer. Think your video brings it on the point.
Thanks for watching!
Hi Jan, thanks for this great video, will you bee updating it to reflect the Z9 4.10 firmware release, which has significantly improved the bird focus system?
I love my R5 with 100-500mm and 300mm f2.8 + 1.4X or 2X, awesome combos but those new Nikon telephoto lenses are so attempting to switch, Canon L lenses are OVER PRICED. Competition is good, Canon has a lot of pressure now.
If you are shooting specifically birds, humans, cars etc you can specify specifically and get even faster subject acquisition ... just get close with the 3D box
I don't shoot birds with my Nikon, but from what I've heard, 3D tracking isn't recommended when shooting birds in flight. It's best to just choose your box size and let the camera find the subject.
I don’t know how I missed this video. This has been on my mind for a while. Stay or go! The R5 with the RF 100-500 is hard to beat for weight, versatility, and quality. I wish it were 600. Weight is very important for me. I do wish Canon would make an amateur zoom in the 100-600 range. Or give us a better crop range in a full frame camera. The R5ii is out now and it’s still a 1.6 crop. I wonder if the crop mode is a physical spec, or something that could be changed via firmware? It has a ton of other standout features, but I will not be upgrading just yet. I may just end up with an R7 ii as a second body. Hoping Canon gets their mid priced lens lineup expanded soon!
A controversial topic to be sure and I can detect your hesitancy in taking it on. Nonetheless, it was a fair evaluation, and you nailed the single reason to consider switching, namely lenses. As a former Canon CPS WL shooter, I switched to Nikon because of the glass. Though I miss a lot of things about my Canon gear, they have failed to deliver high quality, mid-priced, lightweight WL lenses apart from the 100-500 (sorry, I don't find the 600/800 f/11 practical). Also, still shooters seem to be neglected (in terms of features) compared to video. The Nikon 800 f/6.3 is a game changer for me as it is lightweight enough to handhold the IQ and IS is tremendous, and I didn't need to take out a second mortgage to buy one. Likewise, the 180-600 fills the short end gap at a reasonable price. As you observed, the Canon AF system is easier to manage though one does not necessarily need to perform a 3d handoff unless the subject is moving out of the original tracking box. Also, I differ with your assessment of the "buttons". Nikon offers tons of buttons (better tactile) in the front/back and all of them are programable unlike the R5. The lack of a ISO wheel is easily and effectively obviated by assigning the function to the programable lens ring. I find that the battery life in the R5 and Z8 are similar (I place both in airplane mode and tend to chimp a lot). The R5's EVF is better though that is offset by the lack of real time display and blackout. Other advantages of the include Z8/Z9 is the ability to program a button which toggles between current and a preset setting which I find essential when quickly switching between a perched subject and say a BIF, shooting/custom banks, and I think the Nikon images are comparatively sharper (low pass filter or better IS). Great analysis.
Despite comments saying this is a balanced review, I have looked at the DPreview image comparison and I can see that the Z7ii is less noisy than the R5 when comparing all iso settings. The Z8/9 looks slightly noisier but not noisier than the R5. At 6400 all 4 cameras look ok in low light mode. Maybe Adobe hasn’t fixed its Nef raw conversion... Matt Irwin did a whole video on how much better Z8/9 images look in Capture One! I always shoot raw and I only convert with Cap1...
I think when it comes to Z8 vs Z9 it really depends on whether you want the grip or not. Because a refurbished Z9 from Nikon costs less than a Z8 with grip :)
in France, the Z9 used, in shops, with 6 months warranty, is cheaper than a new Z8 : less than 4k for the Z9 and 4.6k for the Z8 !
@@PaulBienvenu1 Just 6 months of warranty are kind of a deal breaker for me... But if you don't mind about that then sure, that's a very good price!
some good thoughts - I personally think there are plenty of lenses to choose from on the Canon side, EF will work with R line up - I currently use an EF 600MM F4 V2 on my R5 - at half the price of a new RF 600 F4 - The difference can't be double (in my mind) or better in the RF Lens, although I've heard some say there is night and day difference between them. Now I do think Nikon Colors blow Canon away, my friends that shoot Nikon do produce better color images when we shoot side x side, when comparing the JPEG images on the back of our Cameras. Post processing changes the game here though. IF, I were buying a new body today, it would most likely be the Z8 - But I wouldn't get rid of my R5 and I'd use that 600mm f4 on the Z8.
I am in the same boat as you, I have the 600mm F4 V2 I have the R5 but I prefer my R3 my EF 1.4 extender MK3 lives on my lens and there is no loss of sharpness.
I have actually read the 600mm V2 is the sharpest of all the Canon 600mm I won't sell it for the RF version as the cost is just not worth the upgrade, I too have read people saying night and day difference between EF and RF, these are people who never had their EF lenses calibrated, all my DSLR's and EF lenses were calibrated by Canon UK and I see no difference in sharpness.
RF does not need calibrating hence people think it's sharper.
Hi, great comparison, IMO you really nailed the main strengths and limitations of each system.
To me, I'm sticking with Canon. Their cameras really perform: AF, speed, user interface. Canon has a shorter lens lineup but is also the younger system. However, Nikon, even though they have good lenses, they only have 2 cameras that really perform. And, if we think about it, the Z9 and the Z8 are essentially the same cameras in different bodies. So, they seem out of creativity and I don't trust them to take many chances...
Even though I think that eventually there will come out an Z7 iii and a Z6 iii, Nikon is taking to long and their camera lineup is getting very dated.
I have an R6 I and, boy, does that camera perform! I shoot pets in action and use mostly the EF 24-105 F4 L lens, it nails focus almost every time, I feel very at ease, confident that the camera will nail the shot in focus. So far, so good!
Can't wait for the R5 ii, so I can buy the R5 I cheaper! :P
All best!
I shoot a little bit of everything but am not a professional. The stabilization and longer zooms at all price points made me really consider moving to a Z8, but it's not enough to make me want to put everything up for sale. Nikon has a trinity of zooms that look similar in terms of size, weight and performance to the RF trinity, but if I'm going to move, I want to move to a system that has some smaller high quality primes for travel & street photography. Sony is starting to look VERY attractive - an A1 or A7RV for landscape & wildlife, and a smaller A7cR for street and travel. They have some excellent, more compact 1.4s and even 2.5 primes that are super compact with great IQ. If Nikon does release the zf with the rumoured specs it might become more compelling for me. I think I'm waiting until the new year to see third party RF lenses and what Canon decides to do with 1.4 primes before I make a decision. I'm hoping the 1.4s are much more compact and we see Sigma, Tamron and Voigtlander releasing RF lenses.
Initially when i started i had to use Canon because i was totallly broke and had to use reverse macro for macro photography and only canon had dof preview button that i could use to lock aperture.
When i started wedding photography i switched to Nikon, but i missed the ergonomics, layout, and colors. But nikon was value for money.
Now i am on a Z9 as i see Nikon lenses be more valuenfor money. But i feel nikon autofocus for action is bit dissapointing. They have the best hardware but not the best software or firmware
Switching from Canon to Nikon will not improve my photography. I will get better images if I go out more, shoot more, and continue to grow as a photographer. Some of my best images are with an almost 20-year old Canon 1D Mk II. My R5 will do, at least until the R5 II or the R1 comes out. If I were starting out, I’d probably go with Nikon because of their lens line-up. I’ve spent more money on lenses than bodies.
Whatever camp you are in, competition is good for value and price. You mentioned hardware user friendliness which definitely is important, but sometimes we overlook software user friendliness which I think Canon also does well.
I find these "SHould I switch systems?" videos a little tiresome. Most people aren't switching brands because of the sunk costs. The reality is, most current full frame cameras are pretty good. Unless you're a professional sports photographer, almost any newer mirrorless kit will be just fine. Yes, some systems have more glass and others have better video features, but for the vast majority of photographers, brand matters very little. I think most photographers would enjoy trying every brand and lens, but it's just not possible for 99% of us.
Thinking it this way. A lot of people are coming from dslr cameras still and basically enter a new system. So it’s very valid for them. If you’re set in your system, it’s obviously a much bigger thing to do and often not feasible
Steve has a point. I like Nikon Vs Nikon videos or Canon Vs Canon etc... It's helpful if you're thinking of expanding your investment or collection.
Nikon Vs Canon Vs Sony.... Fun to get viewers but ultimately pointless for most people. For most of us we can't afford to own multiple systems and lens families. Speaking for myself I used to shoot Canon and switched in 2008 to Nikon and haven't looked back.
I still think Canon's handle better. That extra wheel and the two thumb buttons on the right are better than Nikon's offering still and I used to have that on my old 7D! But two things hooked me to Nikon; low noise and low ISO performance for landscapes and their toughness. I work on mountains and live in Scotland so it's always wet somewhere. And Nikon just kept going where I had issues before.
But I really liked my Canons. Very much. I'd love to have both but like most people I'm all in the one system now and have just taken delivery of a Z8. Can't wait!
@@jan_wegener 100% right about switching from DSLR to ML. You're basically adopting a whole new ecosystem.
@@typhoon-7 If I ever switch systems, it will be a major undertaking for me, both financially and in terms of system knowledge.
Sold my d500 and 500 mm pf and bought the canon r6ii and 100-500mm to photograph swallows and swifts
This is all on UA-camrs recommendations
And oh boy I am pretty disappointed!
Jan, I think you are right depending on the system you are using you can customise it to how you want and I feel the Nikon Z9 is very customisable and I have it exactly as I want it now - With regards to the Nikon AF buttons I have my DISP button next to the AF-ON button set to a different AF. I also have the toggle switch below the AF-ON set to another AF point and all 3 FN buttons at the front, I have got used to the system and can trigger any one of them instantly if needed, this is ONLY for BIF. Mostly I usually switch from AF-ON wide-L to 3D tracking set on the FN1 button most of the time. I also have my REC button set to switch my FPS / Continuous/single and pre capture in an instance.
As always, a great video Jan. The lens lineup to Nikon is just amazing. Hope that Canon comes after in that regard. I am tempted about the Nikon lineup, but have to many Canon lenses to switch now. Really wish that Canon could come with a 500mm 5.6. Think that could be a very attractive budget lens for many wildlife photographers that don't want to spend 10-15000$ on a lens. I have a friend that have the Nikon 500mm PF lens, and one other that have the 800mm PF. Just amazing value for the money.
Have a great week, and enjoy life.
Cheers, Bjoern
I mean, I nvr hold the shutter button down long enough to fill the buffer...
I love the Z8 with the 400 f4.5 it's so lightweight. The AF does more than enough for my needs. I am really looking forward to an updated Z50 with 10bit video.
Very good analysis Jan. If money was no issue the Nikon's lens line up would be extremely tempting but I have too much invested in Canon at this point to make a switch. Furthermore, I would not make a switch before Canon release the R5 mark ii and the R1 and the rumoured 10 lens they are supposed to release between now and 2024. Thanks for sharing your Nikon experience and comparing it to Canon. It helps cooling my regrets of not being a Nikon shooter :)
Date the camera, marry the lens(es).
Very good review, Jan. I have the Z8 and while it’s light years ahead of my Z6ii, the AF is still a step behind the competition. I know firsthand, I also have an OM1/150-400mm 4.5 TC combo with simply amazing AF and tracking.
I think the reason is Nikon doesn’t have high enough AF points on their sensors, a little less than 500 compared to more than double on the Canons and Sonys. The new AI detect algorithms need to have the sensor completely “painted” with AF points to identify, lock on and keep up with subjects.
That said, I think my Nikon lenses beat Canon hands down in two respects. Firstly the light pf lenses - the 300, 500 and 800 - allowing handholding up to the longest range. Secondly, the built in TCs on the big telephotos.
I’m pretty sure the next gen Z8/Z9 will solve the AF issue. But it’s plenty good as it stands today on my Z8 - and kinda fun, not boring. FYI, I use the lens function button to engage 3D tracking. It’s much easier to switch buttons without moving my thumbs or fingers on either hand. Tried the front buttons and others but they just feel more awkward. Using the lens button feels natural; and the “handoff” between custom area and 3D is instantaneous.
All these cameras have way more af points than what is listed in specs…the spec is af points that are able to be selected by the user. A marketing spec. Algorithms matter. Canon has been working on this since DSLR days and their superior live view focusing.
It will be ideal if Canon can offer a stacked R7 Mark2, perfect for 100-500mm
What is left out of the Nikon-canon comparison of canons advantage in auto focus is how canon autofocus tracks with the bird that is far away in the distance better than the Nikon auto focus. who takes pictures of birds in the distance that are barely recognizable? not me.
I'd love to hear your position now that you've shot with the R1 and R5mk2
I have not used the R1 yet
Totally see the same issues with Z9 AF, even with latest 4.1 firmware or whatever it is. It's definitely gotten better, but.... R5 still seems easier to use like you said, and just finds the bird/knows where to go. Sometimes I'm not sure how it does it. Kinda crazy.
Z9 definitely was useable/getting shots, but I am certain, R5 would have been better in some situations.
At mid/higher ISO, I am not personally noticing any different in image quality vs R5, or looks very very similar in noise and detail to me.
I definitely got strings of images all in focus on the z9 for sure.
But then, opposite of that. It WAS in focus, then out of no where/for no reason I can tell, like 10 in a row out of focus. Nothing changed in the background or lighting/etc.
If the focus was more consistent, I'd probably buy it. Maybe firmware will improve it to that point, or unless i come across another method/setttings.
But if Canon has a R5II soon, with similar specs to Z9, but with R3 AF, then would be no reason to get it either, haha.
I have owned the Z8 and have used the R5, None compares to the Sony Auto Focus!
sorry my friend but the iso performance in canon system is soooo poor in this section nikon have no competition . auto wb canon suffer a lot .
it depends on how much you have invested in a camera system,doesn't make much sense to switch
A fair comparison Jan and I applaud you on your unbiased reviews. IMO, switching brands does not give way to one’s ability to recognise, compose and post process an image worthy of print. I still shoot on my old D850 and even older D4s with remarkable results, it’s all about use case! Switching brands will not likely turn you into an award winning photographer over night.
No, switching brands does not make a huge change.
For me the main draw is the far superior Image Stabilisation tat would allow me to consistently to handheld super stable video, something I cannot do atm.
My R5 AF bounces around my subjects periodically. Jan are your suggested utube video setups for AF still viable or have you tweaked them in the last two years?
Pretty much the same still
Great video. I’m a Nikon shooter and I like your review. Nikon is getting better but still have a little way to go to catch Canon and Sony. Also, I wish you did a setup guide for the Nikon Z6 II. 😊
I would, but never used that camera, but there will be guides for all the new cameras going forward :)
Nikon has never fixed their focus issues.
Wise decision not to swop brands I think. The age difference between the Z9/8 and the R5 is a large one and I don’t think Nikon have improved over the R5 that much in most areas. I’m holding for the R5 mk2. Then decision time.
Hi Jan, what’s your views on the Sony a9III. I am in a dilemma over that or the canon r3. / r6II. Any suggestions, views and advise would be very much appreciated. Thanks.
This has become the gears show comparison 😅
I simply use the 3D tracking on small birds and the z8/Z9 just locks on. I think the dual system you have setup for autofocus is causing you to have more misses in focusing
I find the tiny box you have to use and move around for 3D tracking too difficult to move around all the time. That costs a lot of time. With the best AF systems I don’t have to live any AF fields anymore
@@jan_wegener I just “drop” the box on the subject and it moves on its own. I don’t have to manually move it. Works even better if there are multiple subjects in frame and I need to focus on just one.
Each brand has their own way of locking focus.. just like how a Tesla does braking vs other automobiles.. it’s different but it works the same once you are used to it
Great comparison, Jan. I’m surprised that you find image stabilization to be better on the Z8/9 than the R5. I used to have an R5 and I found that the IS was much better on it than my Z7ii. I haven’t had a chance to test it out compared to a Z8 so maybe it’s the difference between the Z7ii and the Z8/9.
I assume it's the new VR's with the new lenses that make it so amazing
Z& has syncro vr which I think is more advanced ibis/vr than what the Z7ii is capable of.
Nikon never can quite do it like canon
Hi Jan, great review! It was a bit surprise to hear about Z8/9's AF deficit for photos, since I have been struggling with R5 in low light conditions, where the AF doesn't seem to work at all. Having switched to R5 from D850, I was looking forward to experiencing the Z8 with 180-600, so the AF issues are a huge letdown. I am now curious how Sony Alpha 1 with 200-600 would stack up in your comparison.
What sort of low light are you shooting in? The biggest difference in AF is with action, not as much for perched birds etc
Z8/9 have better low light af. Canon’s af advantage is with bird recognition/detection. Outside of birds Z8/9 have an advantage from my experience.
@@jan_wegener Hi Jan, I am shooting active birds (tanagers and the like) in rainforest and similar settings with 100-500 and ISO 3200. Short perching durations.
Don’t throw away money switching. R5 II will leapfrog everyone.
I'm waiting on the R5 MKII!
That’s the hope
The Canon's eye AF is so much more intuitive than Nikon's system. To me that's the biggest difference. I shoot Canon and love my R5 for birding. For other subjects like portraits and landscape, there's no real difference. I'm jealous of that Nikon 180-600 lens, though.
I have a question regarding the autofocus/subject recognition on the R5. Does it have dedicated bird detection setting? Or does it have like Nikon, an animal detection, where the sensor/CPU must start to recognize what kind of animal it is seeing. Like, is it an elephant, horse, lion, dog, cat or a bird?. This should take some time to figure out. Once the desision is made it is searching the head and eventually the eye. I do beleive that a dedicated bird choise setting would make the autofocus more accurate and faster. Just my throughs how to improve the autofocus to same level as Canon and Sony.
We shot a wedding in June with two Canon R5's. My wife's back and shoulders hurt for five days later. We decided to switch all our Canon gear for Nikon, including my beloved R3. Now, I am pondering a return to Canon, stay with Nikon, or migrate to Sony. Before we do anything, I thought I would reach out to you and ask which manufacturer produces the sharpest and lightest lenses. My wife will likely just use primes. I will use primes, 24-70, 70-200, and something longer for bird photography. Currently, we are using a 50MM, 85MM, 24-70, 70-200, and a 600 PF. They are all Z-mount lenses.
Like you, I am disappointed in firmware 4.10 for the Nikon Z9. Even when I think the camera focused directly on the eye in post processing I find that that is not always the case.
What are your thoughts on sharp and lighter lenses? Which lens manufacturer would you recommend? Would a Sony produce more accurate eye-AF?
We place very high marks on image quality followed by ergonomics, fast and accurate eye-AF, and low-light performance. I will likely explore Leica after the new SL3 is released because we like the dynamic range and colors straight out of camera on the SL2.
So many great options whichever brand you use these days!
Agreed!
Let's see, my Z8 fires EF glass. It works with my E-mount lenses too. The internal RAW codec is light and loads right into Resolve. And my entire manual glass collection has autofocus via the Techart TZM-02. The Canon R5 (or R5 II) will work with EF glass and that's about it, no advantage. The playing field is equal for color too. I've owned both brands and I can tell you that. Canon cameras are unfortunately limited in what they do.
wich adapter do you use for e-mount glass on nikon z?
Meike, saves money, works great.@@Carlos-mw5rw
@@Carlos-mw5rwMegadap ETZ21
Agree with Jan....Z9 after more than one year, its AF for bird still inferior
maybe you need a bigger bird(s) :)))
Thanks for the review. Although I use my RF 100-500 primarily at 500mm (or 800mm with the 1.4x TC) I just can't ditch the RF 100-500 since it also covers pseudo macro (0.3x), flat portraits, and close birds. If Canon had a single semi-compact supertele with f/4.5-6.3 it'd be much easier to stick with Canon. If Nikon's 180-600 wasn't so large, it'd be hard to stick with Canon.
I suspected that the stacked censor of the z8 would blow away the R5 with noise, but they're closer in quality than I expected, and the R5 was less noisy?? It'll be interesting what they improve with an R5II. And the rumored patent for a Canon switchable TC could change the picture again.
I've got a Nikon D750 with 18-35, 24-120/4 and 70-300 (AF-P), plus a few primes. I'm sometimes tempted by the Z8, but I can't justify it. I think, if I'd buy it, I wouldn't feel comfortable taking it with me when traveling because it's so expensive. I know it's relatively cheap but still.
Also I'm not sure what telezoom I'd get. I can't see myself get the 100-400 because of price, weight and size. I'm not sure about the Tamron 70-300 because it seems to not be asa good as my current 70-300. The new Takkor 70-180/2.8 seems interesting, but I want something longer.
I do want to move, because of the IBIS, wider AF coverage, exposure preview, smarter AF (even with a plain old Z6 I think), and SnapBridge integration (I currently have a Foolography Unleashed plugged into my D750 for geotagging, but it compromises the weather sealing). I could use my existing lenses with an FTZ, but then my 16mm fisheye would not AF.
Maybe if Nikon releases a Z6 III with higher resolution, that will be enough to get me over the line, at least body-wise. In the hope that more telezoom alternatives will appear.
The rumoured specs of the ZF seem promising, as it will be Expeed 7 based (so expecting quite good AF) at a much lower price than a Z8/9. Not sure a retro body is for me though.
If only Nikon made big glass. I’ve been waiting for over 2 years for the privilege to buy a 600f4. Been using the Sony a1 while I wait - and I was able to buy the 800mm and the 400f2.8 for the z8 and z9.
I think for most people the Nikon Z system is the better system. Why? Well what do you want to do in general, take landscape pictures and animal pictures. For normal people the AF system of any brand is miles ahead of the DSLR camera's if used correctly. I do however would like to see a Z8C(crop) and a cheap (ca 500 euro) APC camera. In general i choose nikon in the past because i liked the colours and dynamic range better. And i do believe it is still at least on par.
I REALLY appreciate this review. I'm in the Pentax world and am about to make the switch over, at least for long lenses. I was definitely gaga over the Z8, but the bird autofocus tracking, weight, lower noise, cheaper price, and easy of use all seem to favor the R5. Video is not my main concern . I got to play with both at Roberts including the 100-500 Canon and 100-400 Nikon and 600mm f6.3. I wish the Canon lenses was not white, but I guess I can get covering for it.
Sir,I am a subscriber of your channel and watch your videos in utmost concentration.I have a Canon EOS 1500D and want to achieve my goals in life but in a poor country like India I am not getting any good guide and I also I don't have any computer to post process my photos.I have tried to make a field in photography long before but was stopped forcefully by my father.I need someone to guide me.I hope honesty that you will understand my situation and if anything can be done from your side then you will do that.Anyway, more and more thanks for teaching the persons like me and I pray to God that you continue your work and have a beautiful and colourful family life.
If you think about switching, I would wait for the A1 ll. SONY has the most advanced sensor and AF technology today as well as a much biger R&D budget than Canon and Nikon. Canon's R&D budget in the camera and sensor space has been constantly cut back since 2019 and diverted to more lukrative areas. It clearly shows in developement of competitve sensors for high end cameras.
And all three of these but no Sony or Panasonic? I don't have any camera yet so my inquiry is speculative. I appreciate such high quality videos done by a working professional.