From the D500 to the Z9 and, unfortunately, back again; some Qs for Sony shooters

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

Member's gallery
StefanSC said:
Not a Sony user but a D500 user with some Sony experience here ...

A while back I rented the Sony A9 and 100-400mm and shot a few thousand frames with it (portraits, landscape, wildlife). In parallel, I had with me the Panasonic G9 (m43 camera) with the Leica 50-200mm f2.8/4 (equivalent to FF 100-400 f5.6/8) and the D500 with the Sigma 150-600mm C.

These are my impressions of the A9 and 100-400mm combo:

- build quality is very good. As good if not better than the G9 and the D500.
- ergonomics are a bit meh... Body is too cramped and the center of mass is a bit too forward due to the light body and the heavy lens. It's way too easy to push the wrong button.
- AF is impressive. Real time tracking is sticky and doesn't seem to be fooled easily by multiple subjects flying around (seagulls in a feeding frenzy). In use it's different than a DSLR (you can trust the A9 RTT to follow the subject in the frame) and I could get roughly the same ratio of in focus subjects as with the D500, just that it was at 20fps and it gives the user more confidence. BUT...
- AF has a few issues: it tends to grab backgrounds when shooting birds on branches with a busy environment and it sometimes lies in the EVF (I had a number of shots that the AF confirmed they were in focus but when viewed on the computer screen, they were just slightly out of focus).
- while it does have Animal Eye AF, it rarely found it on birds and even on things like cats it seemed to struggle (firmware version 6).
- Image quality is a mixed bag. It's not bad by any stretch of the imagination, quite the contrary, but, between the AA filter on the A9 sensor and the quality of the rented 100-400mm, I would constantly get sharper and more detailed images from the 20Mpx G9/50-200mm combo up to ISO 3200. The difference was enough that I would take the small sensor m43 kit over the FF one if I was basing my choice only on the image quality and ergonomics.

Overall, I'd say it's a nice camera and with what I've seen from the Sony 200-600mm, it would make a good setup for those who want a black-out free EVF, 20 FPS and solid AF. It's just that I'm not sure I would pick a Sony A9 and 200-600mm over an Olympus OM-1 and 300mm f4. Image quality in real life would be close enough as to make no difference and the Olympus system is lighter, better balanced and has much more functionality (as well as dedicated bird AF).

P.S: regarding A7IV, keep in mind that this is 10fps max camera whose read speed si 1/15s ( 15 times slower than a Z9 or A1 I think), meaning shooting electronic shutter means distorsions on moving subjects...
Click to expand...
Thank you for your detailed observations of the A9! I’ll be physically exploring various bodies/lenses at my ‘local’ camera store 70 miles away to get a better idea of feel in the hand (& shoulder!) next week. And i do have a soft spot in my heart for Olympus, as my first SLR way back when was a no-automatic-anything OM-1, and I’ve been hearing positive reviews of this latest version and may have a look at Oly, too. Re: AF slipping off a subject onto the background—that’s been frustrating with the Z9 and i wonder if it’s a characteristic of most if not all mirrorless cameras.
 
Member's gallery
Bluetail said:
There’s a lot I like about the Z9—it’s an incredible upgrade from my D500—but it’s killing my already-problematic shoulder, and as a woman with smaller hands, the Z9’s bulk and weight make it a camera I just don’t enjoy shooting with, especially with the 500mm PF lens attached to it. So, after a couple of weeks of yes/no/yes/no, I’ve decided to sell it. In the meantime, I’ve gone back to using the D500 for BIF while I cast about for a smaller, lighter high-resolution mirrorless option.

Since the elusive unicorn Z8 is nowhere on the horizon, not even rumored, it may be time to look at offerings from Sony. I have a few questions for Sony shooters: What are the A7iv and A9 like for tracking BIF and other fast-moving wildlife if the A1 isn’t completely off the table, but would be a real stretch for me financially? I like what I’m learning about the A7iv, and wonder about your experiences with its AF system for BIF, its eye AF stickiness and overall user-friendliness, especially compared with the Z9 if you’ve used both. I appreciate your input!
Click to expand...
You are simply early expecting a Z9 enthusiast camera with a smaller format. Nikon's intermediate term plan says their strategy is to deploy new technologies across multiple bodies. The normal rumors and announcements for enthusiast cameras has always been late third quarter or fourth quarter of the calendar year. That timing is likely to align with the 200-600 lens for the same audience.

The Z7ii and A7riv are very similar cameras with an edge to the Z7ii in several areas. AF for birds in flight depends on technique and the birds you are trying to photograph. The issue is more the real time viewfinder than the ability to focus. With the Z7ii you can use mechanical shutter for a faster EVF view but a slower frame rate. The Sony camera that provides what you are describing is the A9ii - not the A7riv which is a high resolution camera rather than an action camera. The cameras are quite different. Both of those cameras are good, but the performance you want is found in the A1.

The catch on all this is the 500 PF works on the Nikon cameras and the Sony 200-600 is a lot bigger. So an A1 or A9ii and 200-600 is not going to save you much weight.
 
Member's gallery
sh1209 said:
Unfortunately I just did the same thing for the same reason. Just too big and heavy for me. I am shooting the A1 which is very small and light as well as the lenses. The 200-600mm lens is a little hefty but easier for me to manage than the Z9/500PF combo.
Click to expand...
I saw your post a couple weeks ago, just as I was having similar issues with Z9 size and weight; held off with my own post —didn’t want to steal your thunder! Glad you found something that works, but for a ‘starter’ lens I’ve been thinking that the 100-400 may be a better, lighter option than the 200-600.
 
John Navitsky said:
agree, although i’m a bit unsure i dig the nr applied to the raws.
Click to expand...

That was discussed extensively at dpreview by Bill Claff of photonstophotos.com, linked below. While some of it was beyond me the conclusion seems to be that about 2/3 stop nr is applied to iso 100-400 in the raw but nothing after 400. The bottom line in my view would be one might have dialed in a slight nr in Lightroom as a default anyway, so one would be aware of the baked in amount and do less or none at all for iso 100-400. Doesn't seem to be a showstopper.


Some Technical Details on the Canon EOS R5 Low ISO Noise Reduction: Canon EOS R Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

Expert news, reviews and videos of the latest digital cameras, lenses, accessories, and phones. Get answers to your questions in our photography forums.
www.dpreview.com www.dpreview.com
 
Member's gallery
FB101 said:
I will get killed, but as a Sony shooter, if the A1 is off the table, your best option is the canon R5 + 100-500 zoom. It is much lighter, great IS, excellent AF. It’s not as good as the A1 and that canon zoom has its own weirdness but for weight / size / performance ratio I don’t think you can do better today.
otherwise the Sony A9ii with 200-600 but you will lose resolution and the zoom is a bit heavier than the 500pf.
‘I can’t comment on the A7iv, I have not tried it.
Click to expand...
I was out shooting at a local park the other day and met a woman with this same setup—R5 & 100-500–and she’s quite happy with it, and it looked to be the ideal size for carrying around for long stretches! Will be looking at Canon, too.
 
Member's gallery
EricBowles said:
You are simply early expecting a Z9 enthusiast camera with a smaller format. Nikon's intermediate term plan says their strategy is to deploy new technologies across multiple bodies. The normal rumors and announcements for enthusiast cameras has always been late third quarter or fourth quarter of the calendar year. That timing is likely to align with the 200-600 lens for the same audience.

The Z7ii and A7riv are very similar cameras with an edge to the Z7ii in several areas. AF for birds in flight depends on technique and the birds you are trying to photograph. The issue is more the real time viewfinder than the ability to focus. With the Z7ii you can use mechanical shutter for a faster EVF view but a slower frame rate. The Sony camera that provides what you are describing is the A9ii - not the A7riv which is a high resolution camera rather than an action camera. The cameras are quite different. Both of those cameras are good, but the performance you want is found in the A1.

The catch on all this is the 500 PF works on the Nikon cameras and the Sony 200-600 is a lot bigger. So an A1 or A9ii and 200-600 is not going to save you much weight.
Click to expand...
You’re touching on just why I’ve been going back and forth re: keeping the Z9 and moving on, because inevitably there will be a Z8 (or whatever) in time; when I think of moving to Sony or Canon, two compelling factors bring me back to sticking with Niikon: the 500mm PF, and, especially, the 300mm PF, which is my favorite lens for closer-in work. Certainly, one of my options is to continue to use the D500–absolutely nothing wrong with this camera—& wait for what’s next from Nikon. Thanks for your input!
 
Bluetail said:
You’re touching on just why I’ve been going back and forth re: keeping the Z9 and moving on, because inevitably there will be a Z8 (or whatever) in time; when I think of moving to Sony or Canon, two compelling factors bring me back to sticking with Niikon: the 500mm PF, and, especially, the 300mm PF, which is my favorite lens for closer-in work. Certainly, one of my options is to continue to use the D500–absolutely nothing wrong with this camera—& wait for what’s next from Nikon. Thanks for your input!
Click to expand...

Maybe figure out some ways to reduce arm fatigue and adapt to the z9. A tall monopod with a quick release plate? A small monopod supported on a wearable harness? More curls at the gym?
 
Member's gallery
Bluetail said:
Yes, I’m now also open to Canon options!
Click to expand...

I think your options for mirrorless are

Sony (insert body here) + 200-600 (I have a feeling this will be too heavy based on your original post)
Sony (insert body here) + 100-400 + 1.4xTC
Sony (insert body here) + Tamron 150-500 which is .5lbs lighter then the 200-600
Sony (insert body here) + Tamron/Sigma 100-400 (probably the lightest setup possible in Sony)

Canon R5 + 100-500

OM Systems OM1 + 300mm f4
OM Systems OM1 + OM 100-400

For Sony the best option is the A1. If the A1 is too expensive you'll have to decide what are the important reasons for you to move to mirrorless. For example if it's silent shutter then the A9/A9II would be the way to go. If that isn't as important as Bird Eye AF then you may want the A7IV. If "reach" is the most important then the a7RIV etc.

I mentioned the OM1 if going full frame isn't a requirement for your photography. It would also give you the lightest setups (especially if the 100-400 would meet your needs).
 
Member's gallery
Bluetail said:
There’s a lot I like about the Z9—it’s an incredible upgrade from my D500—but it’s killing my already-problematic shoulder, and as a woman with smaller hands, the Z9’s bulk and weight make it a camera I just don’t enjoy shooting with, especially with the 500mm PF lens attached to it. So, after a couple of weeks of yes/no/yes/no, I’ve decided to sell it. In the meantime, I’ve gone back to using the D500 for BIF while I cast about for a smaller, lighter high-resolution mirrorless option.

Since the elusive unicorn Z8 is nowhere on the horizon, not even rumored, it may be time to look at offerings from Sony. I have a few questions for Sony shooters: What are the A7iv and A9 like for tracking BIF and other fast-moving wildlife if the A1 isn’t completely off the table, but would be a real stretch for me financially? I like what I’m learning about the A7iv, and wonder about your experiences with its AF system for BIF, its eye AF stickiness and overall user-friendliness, especially compared with the Z9 if you’ve used both. I appreciate your input!
Click to expand...
I went from the D500 to the a9ii & 200 -600 combo and am happy with it.
 
Member's gallery
bleirer said:
Maybe figure out some ways to reduce arm fatigue and adapt to the z9. A tall monopod with a quick release plate? A small monopod supported on a wearable harness? More curls at the gym?
Click to expand...
I’ve tried the tripod option but had 2 issues with it: first, additional weight. I have an iFootage tripod (the one with the 3 stabilizing feet at the base) which weighs sbout 3 pounds, bringing the camera-500mm lens-tripod combo close to 9 pounds. Ugh. And second, i find using a tripod for BIF too cumbersome. What i really need is to be 20 years younger.
 
Member's gallery
Bluetail said:
You’re touching on just why I’ve been going back and forth re: keeping the Z9 and moving on, because inevitably there will be a Z8 (or whatever) in time; when I think of moving to Sony or Canon, two compelling factors bring me back to sticking with Niikon: the 500mm PF, and, especially, the 300mm PF, which is my favorite lens for closer-in work. Certainly, one of my options is to continue to use the D500–absolutely nothing wrong with this camera—& wait for what’s next from Nikon. Thanks for your input!
Click to expand...
I’m struggling with the same thing. I’ve been bitten with the mirrorless bug (GAS). The problem is my D500 has been 100% reliable and very predictable. It has few limitations and those it does have like high ISO performance I have learned to either avoid or just live with. I have it set up well for my style of shooting and the 200-500 is plenty sharp enough for me although speedy focus is not one of its virtues. The Nikkor Micro 105 is stellar as is the Nikon 24-70 f2.8. The Sigma 100-400 is light, handy and plenty sharp especially at under 200 feet kind of range with deer and other mammals.

As much as I want a new system don’t want to move backward or even lateral. The problem is, as a retiree, I don’t want to spend Z9 of A1 kind of cash. Honestly I probably couldn’t afford one of those plus the host of lenses I would want/need. Spending $10k or more is a big chunk of change for me. Even selling all my Nikon gear I would fe lucky to offset $3,000 and maybe not that much. The D500 is well used and far from pristine. I have used it in the field for the past 3.5 years and nearly 100,000 shutter clicks. My 200-500 has also been in the field a lot and is not “like new” condition although both work perfectly. The Macro lens and the 24-70 are in great shape as they see a different kind of use.

I guess I am fortunate to have such a capable kit and this is not a serious problem to deal with.

Jeff
 
Member's gallery
For those who have more closely compared the R5/R6 - other than 45mp sensor, CFExpress slot, and 8K video what does the additional $1400 buy in the R5 vs R6?
 
NA4M said:
For those who have more closely compared the R5/R6 - other than 45mp sensor, CFExpress slot, and 8K video what does the additional $1400 buy in the R5 vs R6?
Click to expand...

This might help. I find this source reliable.


www.the-digital-picture.com

Should I Get the Canon EOS R5, EOS R6, or EOS R? An Extensive Comparison

Should I Get the Canon EOS R5, EOS R6, or EOS R? An Extensive Comparison — The-Digital-Picture.com
www.the-digital-picture.com www.the-digital-picture.com

www.the-digital-picture.com

Canon EOS R5 Compared to the Canon EOS R6

Compare the detailed specifications of the Canon EOS R5 to the Canon EOS R6
www.the-digital-picture.com www.the-digital-picture.com
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
jeffnles1 said:
I’m struggling with the same thing. I’ve been bitten with the mirrorless bug (GAS). The problem is my D500 has been 100% reliable and very predictable. It has few limitations and those it does have like high ISO performance I have learned to either avoid or just live with. I have it set up well for my style of shooting and the 200-500 is plenty sharp enough for me although speedy focus is not one of its virtues. The Nikkor Micro 105 is stellar as is the Nikon 24-70 f2.8. The Sigma 100-400 is light, handy and plenty sharp especially at under 200 feet kind of range with deer and other mammals.

As much as I want a new system don’t want to move backward or even lateral. The problem is, as a retiree, I don’t want to spend Z9 of A1 kind of cash. Honestly I probably couldn’t afford one of those plus the host of lenses I would want/need. Spending $10k or more is a big chunk of change for me. Even selling all my Nikon gear I would fe lucky to offset $3,000 and maybe not that much. The D500 is well used and far from pristine. I have used it in the field for the past 3.5 years and nearly 100,000 shutter clicks. My 200-500 has also been in the field a lot and is not “like new” condition although both work perfectly. The Macro lens and the 24-70 are in great shape as they see a different kind of use.

I guess I am fortunate to have such a capable kit and this is not a serious problem to deal with.

Jeff
Click to expand...
I hear you! I get palpitations thinking about spending more for a body and lens combo than my parents paid for their first house!
 
Member's gallery
Bluetail said:
Thank you for this!
Click to expand...

You are welcome. It's interesting that the r6 is better than the r5 in some ways, as the first article discusses. But there is that pesky megapixels difference that in some ways accounts for the r6 being better. The r6 might have better dynamic range and less noise for example, but once the r5 is downsampled to be equal resolution to the r6, the difference disappears.
 
Member's gallery
jeffnles1 said:
... The D500 is well used and far from pristine. I have used it in the field for the past 3.5 years and nearly 100,000 shutter clicks. My 200-500 has also been in the field a lot and is not “like new” condition although both work perfectly...
Click to expand...
Good for you, then, Jeff. Cameras and lenses are made to be used, not kept on a shelf in pristine condition and collecting dust, instead of capturing images!!
 
Member's gallery
Whiskeyman said:
Good for you, then, Jeff. Cameras and lenses are made to be used, not kept on a shelf in pristine condition and collecting dust, instead of capturing images!!
Click to expand...
Thanks Whiskeyman, that is the way I look at it too. A carpenter doesn't get upset when his hammer gets some dings and scratches I shouldn't be all that upset when my camera gear suffers the same fate. Honest wear is a far cry from abuse and lack of care. My dad was a mechanic and taking care of the tools that took care of him was something pounded into my head as I grew up.
 
Member's gallery
I moved from Nikon to Sony last fall. Miss the 500 pf with 850/d5. Love A1 plus 200-600. I swear IQ even with the 1.4 TC is just as sharp as my 600mm prime. I have 2 bum shoulders and have found a monod with wimberly gimbal for monopod to be a game changer. I can move around easily, capture BIF, sit on the ground and hike all day with this combo. And yoga plus exrta protien to repair and build muscle for this senior is crucial.
 
Member's gallery
KimM said:
I moved from Nikon to Sony last fall. Miss the 500 pf with 850/d5. Love A1 plus 200-600. I swear IQ even with the 1.4 TC is just as sharp as my 600mm prime. I have 2 bum shoulders and have found a monod with wimberly gimbal for monopod to be a game changer. I can move around easily, capture BIF, sit on the ground and hike all day with this combo. And yoga plus exrta protien to repair and build muscle for this senior is crucial.
Click to expand...
I agree, it’s a phenomenal combo for bird photography. Best camera I’ve ever owned for sure!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top