Opinion of the Sony alpha 1 from a lifelong Nikon shooter

[Mommacat]

They are coming. Let’s face it the F Mount has been around a long time! How many decades did it take till Nikon introduced the PF lenses and some of their long zooms? Sony is still relatively new and they are continuing to bring out new glass and cameras at a pace no other company is currently doing. It’s essentially June and Nikon hasn’t released any lenses or bodies this year. Sony has announced and shipped multiple bodies and lenses.

I understand that, but can say that

If anyone cares, here is a review of the 100-400GM lens. The MTF charts show that the lens is sharp wide open, but even better stopped down. I think that the horizontal axis is the distance from the lens centre.

Sony 100-400mm GM OSS Review

www.kenrockwell.com

(don't ask me what MTF means)

Sony does sell 400/f2.8 and 600/f4, but these cost 1.7x an A1 I would be happy with a compact 600/f7.1 for $4,000 US.

Yep, 400/f2.8 and 600/f4 are too expensive for some of us. Hoping for one of the "in between" lenses or, as Doug mentioned, for Nikon to produce/release a mirrorless option for action photography.

 

[MikePapple]

Mike, sorry to ask what is likely an obvious questions, but are you saying that when you use the 100-400 on the A1 (WITHOUT the 1.4x), you find that it is best to stop down to f8? Yikes!

Stopping down from F6.3 to F8 loses 1 stop of light but with a slightly sharper image edge-to-edge.
Adding a 1.4xTC also loses 1 stop of light, but with a reduced IQ due to the extra optics. With the 1.4x TC you should also stop down 1 stop to F11.
I think this is true for any manufacturer, not just Sony.

If you are in a low light situation, you could try stopping down 1/3 or 2/3 of a stop. Now, if you are cropping your image so you are using the centre of your lens, stopping down may be less important.

 

[Mommacat]

Stopping down from F6.3 to F8 loses 1 stop of light but with a slightly sharper image edge-to-edge.
Adding a 1.4xTC also loses 1 stop of light, but with a reduced IQ due to the extra optics. With the 1.4x TC you should also stop down 1 stop to F11.
I think this is true for any manufacturer, not just Sony.

If you are in a low light situation, you could try stopping down 1/3 or 2/3 of a stop. Now, if you are cropping your image so you are using the centre of your lens, stopping down may be less important.

Thank you, Mike! Honestly, I just don't know enough about all of this, but do know what I'm used to with my D500 and PF lenses -- there is no need to stop down, literally imho. Now I have to wonder why would one pay the additional cost for the A1 with 1-4 + 1.4x over the R5 with one of the f11 lenses if you're stopping the A1 setup down to f11? I haven't rented the Canon setup, but only know that some folks really like it. The main downside mentioned has been that those lenses require good lighting. It would seem the same would hold true for the A1 with the 1-4 + 1.4x or am I missing something? Thank you all for educating me!

 

[Doug Herr]

Mike, sorry to ask what is likely an obvious questions, but are you saying that when you use the 100-400 on the A1 (WITHOUT the 1.4x), you find that it is best to stop down to f8? Yikes!

I'm fine with the 100-400 wide open.

 

[Doug Herr]

(don't ask me what MTF means)

Modulation Transfer Function. Don't ask me what it means! Something about contrast at specified resolution. Higher contrast at higher resolution = more image detail.

 

[MikePapple]

Thank you, Mike! Honestly, I just don't know enough about all of this, but do know what I'm used to with my D500 and PF lenses -- there is no need to stop down, literally imho. Now I have to wonder why would one pay the additional cost for the A1 with 1-4 + 1.4x over the R5 with one of the f11 lenses if you're stopping the A1 setup down to f11? I haven't rented the Canon setup, but only know that some folks really like it. The main downside mentioned has been that those lenses require good lighting. It would seem the same would hold true for the A1 with the 1-4 + 1.4x or am I missing something? Thank you all for educating me!

I suspect that the f11 lens you are referring to would benefit from stopping down some.
The 100-400 at f8 will result in a low noise /ISO (maybe 1600) in daylight with a shutter speed 1/2000s. I am happy with this.
I might use the 1.4 TC for small birds at a distance, if they weren't moving quickly so I could drop the shutter speed to maybe 1/500s.

 

[DaveR]

Many thanks to all who have contributed to a very interesting and informative thread.

I'm coming at the DLSR/Mirrorless question from a slightly different angle in that it is the glass that I want to get later this year that will be driving my next camera decisions. I use a D850 with the 500PF and a 1.4 TC attached most of the time. I moved to the 500PF from the 200-500mm and decided then that I would never buy another zoom. To me it is a compromise and the limitations with max aperture, TC performance and low light operation rule it out. I just about get by with the max 5.6f on the 500PF.

So I've decided that my next lens will be a 600 f4. The question will be which one? The Canon RF and the Sony lenses both weigh in at an impressive 3kg and I'm expecting the Nikon 600mm Z lens to be a similar if not better weight. I would imagine they would all be similar in terms of IQ.

The Sony A1 is, without doubt, a game changer in terms of it's AF performance which is from what I gather is just ahead of the Canon R5, but not by much. Met a guy on one of my local nature reserves today who was using one with the 200-600mm. He told me the AF tracking was brilliant when it worked but there were times when it was frustrating, mostly in low light situations. Also the noise from higher ISO pics was an issue for him. Of course there may be firmware updates that improve this.

The upcoming Canon R3 looks to be an exciting prospect and if they improve on the R5 AF it could be an A1 beater. The Nikon Z9 is an unknown quantity but promises much. Nikon really need to deliver on this one and I wonder if they will aim it at sports shooters rather than wildlife. Time will tell.

So I'm going to carry on with my present set up for the summer and wait until the autumn and see how the land lies but I will not hesitate to move from Nikon if I need to. Whatever way I go I will be moving from DSLR to mirrorless. The sound of that A1 today was sweet and that was without using it on silent!

 

[DavidT]

Many thanks to all who have contributed to a very interesting and informative thread.

I'm coming at the DLSR/Mirrorless question from a slightly different angle in that it is the glass that I want to get later this year that will be driving my next camera decisions. I use a D850 with the 500PF and a 1.4 TC attached most of the time. I moved to the 500PF from the 200-500mm and decided then that I would never buy another zoom. To me it is a compromise and the limitations with max aperture, TC performance and low light operation rule it out. I just about get by with the max 5.6f on the 500PF.

So I've decided that my next lens will be a 600 f4. The question will be which one? The Canon RF and the Sony lenses both weigh in at an impressive 3kg and I'm expecting the Nikon 600mm Z lens to be a similar if not better weight. I would imagine they would all be similar in terms of IQ.

The Sony A1 is, without doubt, a game changer in terms of it's AF performance which is from what I gather is just ahead of the Canon R5, but not by much. Met a guy on one of my local nature reserves today who was using one with the 200-600mm. He told me the AF tracking was brilliant when it worked but there were times when it was frustrating, mostly in low light situations. Also the noise from higher ISO pics was an issue for him. Of course there may be firmware updates that improve this.

The upcoming Canon R3 looks to be an exciting prospect and if they improve on the R5 AF it could be an A1 beater. The Nikon Z9 is an unknown quantity but promises much. Nikon really need to deliver on this one and I wonder if they will aim it at sports shooters rather than wildlife. Time will tell.

So I'm going to carry on with my present set up for the summer and wait until the autumn and see how the land lies but I will not hesitate to move from Nikon if I need to. Whatever way I go I will be moving from DSLR to mirrorless. The sound of that A1 today was sweet and that was without using it on silent!

Something to consider....The a1 was announced and shipped 3 weeks later. No one saw the a1 coming let alone a 50MP camera that could shoot 30FPS. At the time everyone said Canon and Nikon need to come out with a camera to compete with the a9II. I think Nikon will do just that, but I don't think they will come out with a camera that will even come close to the a1 for speed and MP with no blackout combined.

I would also consider that Sony is far from done developing cameras. I suspect we will see a a9III later this year along with an a7R5. I would also fully expect they release an a1MK2 in the next 18 months. One thing Sony has been doing is rapidly releasing new cameras at a rate far beyond what Canon and Nikon have ever done. Their flagship cameras always went along with Olympics every 4 years. Sony is every 2 years or less. I think Canon and Nikon are going to struggle to not only catch up but keep up this pace let alone surpass them. I would bet money that Sony is already working on the next gen of the a1 and likely the 3rd gen is on the drawing board.

Sony is used to the consumer electronics market such as TV's etc. that are on a yearly release schedule. They have the momentum in the camera space to keep this pace going. I am sure at some point we will reach some limitations but it will be awhile. This is why I decided to buy the a1. It is so far more advanced then other cameras I see it lasting for many years until I feel compelled to upgrade. I was going to buy the D6 and frankly I would have been stuck upgrading much sooner. So for the same $6,500 the Sony a1 was by far the better investment.

I believe that as soon as Nikon and Canon drop their pro bodies that get them closer Sony is going to be like...hold my beer and blow everyone away even further. I also believe they will out pace them on lenses as well. Having the head start is always an advantage.

 

[Mommacat]

For me it's not just about the cameras. It's the combination of the available cameras and lenses. So far in my humble testing, the out of camera images with the 1-4 or 2-6 don't hold a candle to the amazing PF lenses with and without a 1.4x on a crop-sensor D500 (and yes I understand it took Nikon years to come out with those and currently we don't have a Nikon mirrorless body to use those on to produce great action images).

I realize the Sony 600/f4 sings with the A1, but unfortunately for me, I don't think the 600/f4 is a good fit for several reasons. I'm still holding out hope for a capable mirrorless body with great glass that isn't as expensive or heavy as a 600/f4. And again I realize I'm in the minority here and there are folks who love the Sony 1-4 or 2-6 with the A1. I also know that I have no where near the experience that most of you have so I can only speak from my experience with living with two D500s and two rentals of the D850 with the two PF lenses with/without the 1.4x teles vs. the two rentals I had of the A1 with the 1-4/2-6 with/without the 1.4x.

At this time, you can see why some folks say for the money that for a mid-range wildlife setup, Canon R5 with the 1-5 is likely the best bet -- extremely highly capable camera with excellent glass.

BTW, I'm still reviewing my images from my A1 rental with the 1-4 WITHOUT the 1.4x and the BIF images stopped down to f/6.3 are sharper, as some folks have mentioned on this thread, and are requiring less PPing. That is good news on the PP side of things, but not what I would ideally like to do all of the time in the field. Or perhaps in this wonderful mirrorless world, the difference between f/5.6 and f/6.3 isn't really that much?

Still so many unanswered questions and an immense amount of pressure to spend money wisely so one can continue to produce gorgeous images and hopefully more or better ones.

Good luck everyone!

 

[DavidT]

For me it's not just about the cameras. It's the combination of the available cameras and lenses. So far in my humble testing, the out of camera images with the 1-4 or 2-6 don't hold a candle to the amazing PF lenses with and without a 1.4x on a crop-sensor D500 (and yes I understand it took Nikon years to come out with those and currently we don't have a Nikon mirrorless body to use those on to produce great action images).

I realize the Sony 600/f4 sings with the A1, but unfortunately for me, I don't think the 600/f4 is a good fit for several reasons. I'm still holding out hope for a capable mirrorless body with great glass that isn't as expensive or heavy as a 600/f4. And again I realize I'm in the minority here and there are folks who love the Sony 1-4 or 2-6 with the A1. I also know that I have no where near the experience that most of you have so I can only speak from my experience with living with two D500s and two rentals of the D850 with the two PF lenses with/without the 1.4x teles vs. the two rentals I had of the A1 with the 1-4/2-6 with/without the 1.4x.

At this time, you can see why some folks say for the money that for a mid-range wildlife setup, Canon R5 with the 1-5 is likely the best bet -- extremely highly capable camera with excellent glass.

BTW, I'm still reviewing my images from my A1 rental with the 1-4 WITHOUT the 1.4x and the BIF images stopped down to f/6.3 are sharper, as some folks have mentioned on this thread, and are requiring less PPing. That is good news on the PP side of things, but not what I would ideally like to do all of the time in the field. Or perhaps in this wonderful mirrorless world, the difference between f/5.6 and f/6.3 isn't really that much?

Still so many unanswered questions and an immense amount of pressure to spend money wisely so one can continue to produce gorgeous images and hopefully more or better ones.

Good luck everyone!

I’m curious what did you expect from the a1 rental when compared to the D500/D850?
I hated the IQ of the D500 and tele on anything but the best primes on the Nikon bodies destroys the AF performance, limits the focus points you have and in my opinion reduced the IQ enough I found TC on Nikon being undesirable on anything but the $10K plus primes.
To me the a1 gives me speed, MP, tracking, no limits on focus points with slower f stop lenses, no decline with the 1.4 and 2x tele.
As soon as I started to use the a1 I instantly saw it’s benefits over the D500/D850/Z6 bodies I’ve owned. And once I spent time learning the camera those advantages continued to increase. Yes the 500PF is a great lens but it’s not so great that it outweighs the other advantages the Sony combo provides.
For me 500 is to short and I often find myself shooting over 800mm and still cropping.
I understand it’s a personal preference but I’m a bit surprised you found the a1 lacking compared to your experience with a D500 and 500PF with tele.
For some of the images I’ve shot with the a1 the D500 would still be trying to focus after I had hundreds of in focus images already written to the card.
If I was using it for non moving stuff then sure the cameras are closer together but action there is no comparison.

 

[RichF]

That’s what I am doing for now, in a sense — keeping my D500 and D850 for BIF and other faster action and using my ZIIs for most everything else. The problem is that you don’t always know when you are going to find action. So it would be great to have a camera with the advantages of mirrorless that is excellent for action.

Does anyone know if there is an adapter that would allow Nikon’s PF lenses to be used on an A1 or A9II? And if so, has anyone tried it? Is there any hit to autofocus or do the cameras autofocus just as well as with a Sony lens?

Looking at B&H there seems to be several. I have not tried it yet

 

[Mommacat]

I’m curious what did you expect from the a1 rental when compared to the D500/D850?
I hated the IQ of the D500 and tele on anything but the best primes on the Nikon bodies destroys the AF performance, limits the focus points you have and in my opinion reduced the IQ enough I found TC on Nikon being undesirable on anything but the $10K plus primes.
To me the a1 gives me speed, MP, tracking, no limits on focus points with slower f stop lenses, no decline with the 1.4 and 2x tele.
As soon as I started to use the a1 I instantly saw it’s benefits over the D500/D850/Z6 bodies I’ve owned. And once I spent time learning the camera those advantages continued to increase. Yes the 500PF is a great lens but it’s not so great that it outweighs the other advantages the Sony combo provides.
For me 500 is to short and I often find myself shooting over 800mm and still cropping.
I understand it’s a personal preference but I’m a bit surprised you found the a1 lacking compared to your experience with a D500 and 500PF with tele.
For some of the images I’ve shot with the a1 the D500 would still be trying to focus after I had hundreds of in focus images already written to the card.
If I was using it for non moving stuff then sure the cameras are closer together but action there is no comparison.

I tried to share several specific examples in my previous posts.

Trust me, I am aware there are plenty of benefits of the Sony setup over my current Nikon setup, and I'm aware this is all about compromises, which is why this is so difficulty. As I said, I probably am unreasonable, but I was hoping it would hold and acquire focus better than my D500 with PF lenses and I'm not seeing it in low contrast situations or busy nest entrance/exists. The additional PPing time is a very big negative imho. I was hoping for less compromises for that amount of money.

I just felt that folks should hear another experience. Also, I would be very glad to learn what I'm not doing right or should try differently.

 

[Mommacat]

I should also add that I've seen no degradation in AF performance with the 1.4x on the 300mm pf. Again, just my experience with "living" with the D500 and that lens/tele.

Yep, crop-sensor isn't nearly as nice as a FF, but ... that D500 for the price is incredible!

 

[Darwin]

Xitek's interview with Nikon - Nikon Rumors

The Chinese website Xitek published an interview with Toru Matsubara, Chairman of P&E Nikon China. Here a brief recap: The Nikon Z9 is going exceptionally well with unprecedented improvement in processor Pixel Shift Multi-Shot functionality in the Z9 is under consideration New super-telephoto Z...

nikonrumors.com

 

[Doug Herr]

As a Sony user I have to say the PF lenses are hard to beat and what matters most is personal preferences and how it translates into the photos you want to make. If you are getting everything you want from your current system there’s no need to change.

 

[DaveR]

I believe that as soon as Nikon and Canon drop their pro bodies that get them closer Sony is going to be like...hold my beer and blow everyone away even further. I also believe they will out pace them on lenses as well. Having the head start is always an advantage.

Well your faith and enthusiasm for Sony is touching and you may well be right in what you say but I really do think it is too early to tell and to come to such conclusions.

I'm not sure I would say that the A1 is 'far more advanced' than other cameras. From what I can see the Canon R5 is not that far behind and that has been on the market for a while now. Sure the R3 is catching up in some areas such as fps in that it will match the A1's 30 fps but are shooters really going want more than this? You'll be buying a video camera. Then there is the issue of high ISO performance where many have said the A1 lags behind. Not to mention long term reliability. Something Nikon pro bodies in the past have excelled in and time will be needed to guage the A1's ability to compete as Nikon's are built like tanks.

As for lenses I see nothing in the Sony range that is ground breaking. Sure they have a light weight 600mm f4 but then so does everyone else. Where, for example, is a lens like the 500PF which was truly ground breaking. Don't forget Nikon's background is in optics, not consumer electronics.

Another interesting development for me was Nikon's decision to drop using Sony sensors and develop their own stacked sensor. There could be many reasons for that of course. Maybe they thought Sony would starve them of the new sensors as they might keep them for their own cameras. To have sensor production in the hands of what has become in recent years one of your main competitors would, I imagine, be an uncomfortable position to be in so maybe they were forced to do it. But maybe they thought they could develop a far superior sensor.

With the sensor and processor being the heart of a mirrorless camera handling pretty much everything, AF, IQ and EVF updating etc. I can see whoever gets that right will be ahead of the pack.

I'll be waiting a little while to see where this settles before parting with a large bundle of my cash that a 600 f4 will consume. It may well be that I'll be attaching a Sony A1 Mkll to it but I still think it way too early to be making that judgement. There may well be new life in the old Nikon/Canon dogs yet.

 

[Deleted member 115]

Well your faith and enthusiasm for Sony is touching and you may well be right in what you say but I really do think it is too early to tell and to come to such conclusions.

I'm not sure I would say that the A1 is 'far more advanced' than other cameras. From what I can see the Canon R5 is not that far behind and that has been on the market for a while now. Sure the R3 is catching up in some areas such as fps in that it will match the A1's 30 fps but are shooters really going want more than this? You'll be buying a video camera. Then there is the issue of high ISO performance where many have said the A1 lags behind. Not to mention long term reliability. Something Nikon pro bodies in the past have excelled in and time will be needed to guage the A1's ability to compete as Nikon's are built like tanks.

As for lenses I see nothing in the Sony range that is ground breaking. Sure they have a light weight 600mm f4 but then so does everyone else. Where, for example, is a lens like the 500PF which was truly ground breaking. Don't forget Nikon's background is in optics, not consumer electronics.

Another interesting development for me was Nikon's decision to drop using Sony sensors and develop their own stacked sensor. There could be many reasons for that of course. Maybe they thought Sony would starve them of the new sensors as they might keep them for their own cameras. To have sensor production in the hands of what has become in recent years one of your main competitors would, I imagine, be an uncomfortable position to be in so maybe they were forced to do it. But maybe they thought they could develop a far superior sensor.

With the sensor and processor being the heart of a mirrorless camera handling pretty much everything, AF, IQ and EVF updating etc. I can see whoever gets that right will be ahead of the pack.

I'll be waiting a little while to see where this settles before parting with a large bundle of my cash that a 600 f4 will consume. It may well be that I'll be attaching a Sony A1 Mkll to it but I still think it way too early to be making that judgement. There may well be new life in the old Nikon/Canon dogs yet.

I am stating the obvious here I know. Nikon 600 f/4 and 500 f/5.6 PF are F mount. I hope they work it out but they have not been impressive lately. Even the 500 PF was a joke as far as production and meeting demand goes.

 

[Icarus]

Something to consider....The a1 was announced and shipped 3 weeks later. No one saw the a1 coming let alone a 50MP camera that could shoot 30FPS. At the time everyone said Canon and Nikon need to come out with a camera to compete with the a9II. I think Nikon will do just that, but I don't think they will come out with a camera that will even come close to the a1 for speed and MP with no blackout combined.

I would also consider that Sony is far from done developing cameras. I suspect we will see a a9III later this year along with an a7R5. I would also fully expect they release an a1MK2 in the next 18 months. One thing Sony has been doing is rapidly releasing new cameras at a rate far beyond what Canon and Nikon have ever done. Their flagship cameras always went along with Olympics every 4 years. Sony is every 2 years or less. I think Canon and Nikon are going to struggle to not only catch up but keep up this pace let alone surpass them. I would bet money that Sony is already working on the next gen of the a1 and likely the 3rd gen is on the drawing board.

Sony is used to the consumer electronics market such as TV's etc. that are on a yearly release schedule. They have the momentum in the camera space to keep this pace going. I am sure at some point we will reach some limitations but it will be awhile. This is why I decided to buy the a1. It is so far more advanced then other cameras I see it lasting for many years until I feel compelled to upgrade. I was going to buy the D6 and frankly I would have been stuck upgrading much sooner. So for the same $6,500 the Sony a1 was by far the better investment.

I believe that as soon as Nikon and Canon drop their pro bodies that get them closer Sony is going to be like...hold my beer and blow everyone away even further. I also believe they will out pace them on lenses as well. Having the head start is always an advantage.

I went with A1 because I was afraid Nikon Z9 might or might not match it and even if it did, availability would be very sketchy and I'd probably never get one. The other thing was that though I loved my two PF lenses, would be using an adapter all the time. As I've said before, a bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush and I'm an old person, I don't want to wait a year or two for a camera that I may or may not be able to obtain.

 

[thelordofthelight]

I can understand what the Sony A1 brought to the table. It is an incredible camera and there are no two ways about it but then some of the statements are a bit going overboard:
- No one even knows the complete specs of the Z9 let alone how it performs and yet there is already an assumption that it "won't come close to the A1"....well, we will see in a few months..
- As for the 500 PF, quite frankly there is no comparison at all between the 500 PF vs the Sony 200-600. If anything the 200-600 is closer to the Nikon 200-500 in terms of optics (of course the Sony has some advantages offered by Mirrorless technology). I know of a lot of people that migrated to Sony who still wait for a competent Nikon ML simply because of the 500 PF. In terms of the best price to performance ratio the D500+500PF is in a league of its own. Fact is, Sony has exceptional 400/600 GM lenses and A1/A9 and an ok'ish 200-600 but nothing in between (Be it a crop camera like the D500 or a lens like the 500 PF).
- Not so long ago (and even now) the D500 was considered one of the best cameras for photographing action and the A1 has now made it a "static shooting only" camera?
- As some one who was very tempted with the Sony system, i learnt my lessons the hard way. After my short stint with the Sony cameras, the one thing that i noticed is that unlike Canon/Nikon where even micro level problems or issues that only affect very specific users/ use cases gets blown out of proportion whereas with Sony, it is the other way round. For e.g. Sony R4+200-600 issue was not even acknowledged by Sony and i found the AF precision with the A9+200-600 not so great (relative to what my D500/850/D4 offered) . Maybe the A1 is different here but the focus precision issues with the Sony system was reported by Thom Hogan and also Photography life. With all such problems with the Sony, i never had the confidence to go big with the 600GM and invest in the Sony ecosystem.

 

[Garfield]

I went with A1 because I was afraid Nikon Z9 might or might not match it and even if it did, availability would be very sketchy and I'd probably never get one. The other thing was that though I loved my two PF lenses, would be using an adapter all the time. As I've said before, a bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush and I'm an old person, I don't want to wait a year or two for a camera that I may or may not be able to obtain.

I tend to agree which is why I switched entirely to Sony and the a1. Once I decided to dump all my DSLR technology, the decision to switch was almost easy. There's absolutely no doubt in my mind that the Z9 is going to be a monster camera for Nikon and it's fans, but the chances of the Z9 outperforming or even matching the a1 in all respects is about zero IMO. If Nikon ever do fully catch up or even get close to Sony's best I'd consider switching back just because I've always been a Nikon fan at heart. It also helps to be shooting with "minimalist" equipment going forward -- exotic lenses are a thing of the past for me simply because they're less important in the mirrorless world. But I think it's safe to say I'll be shooting Sony for at least another camera generation before I need to reconsider Nikon.

 

[DaveR]

I am stating the obvious here I know. Nikon 600 f/4 and 500 f/5.6 PF are F mount. I hope they work it out but they have not been impressive lately. Even the 500 PF was a joke as far as production and meeting demand goes.

I'm slightly puzzled by your reply. In my previous posts I said I was going over to mirrorless and buying a 600 f4. Obviously that would be a Nikon Z mount 600mm if I choose to stick with Nikon. Otherwise it would be a 600 RF Canon or a 600 GM Sony. I mentioned the 500PF as an illustration of the lack of innovation in Sony lenses. When I choose to move from the 200-500 zoom to the 500PF it only took me a week or so of hunting around to find a 500PF. That was back in March 2020.

 

[Deleted member 115]

I'm slightly puzzled by your reply. In my previous posts I said I was going over to mirrorless and buying a 600 f4. Obviously that would be a Nikon Z mount 600mm if I choose to stick with Nikon. Otherwise it would be a 600 RF Canon or a 600 GM Sony. I mentioned the 500PF as an illustration of the lack of innovation in Sony lenses. When I choose to move from the 200-500 zoom to the 500PF it only took me a week or so of hunting around to find a 500PF. That was back in March 2020.

Well your faith and enthusiasm for Nikon is touching. Not everyone was so lucky to acquire a 500 pf so easily.

 

[DaveR]

Well your faith and enthusiasm for Nikon is touching. Not everyone was so lucky to acquire a 500 pf so easily.

It was not luck. I knew where to look. I have no more faith and enthusiasm for Nikon than I do for any other brand. A camera is a tool. I have earned my living from photography all my life and the tools I chose were Nikon, Hasselblad and Sinar. Not because of any love for those brands but they were part of a comprehensive system and were superbly reliable so maybe yes, faith through experience in the case of Nikon. Good tools, nothing more.

 

[Deleted member 115]

It was not luck. I knew where to look. I have no more faith and enthusiasm for Nikon than I do for any other brand. A camera is a tool. I have earned my living from photography all my life and the tools I chose were Nikon, Hasselblad and Sinar. Not because of any love for those brands but they were part of a comprehensive system and were superbly reliable so maybe yes, faith through experience in the case of Nikon. Good tools, nothing more.

Ok fine, You accused David of the same while he literally owns the Sony equipment being discussed. Nikon only has a few in the roadmap listed as "to be announced".
It's a hobby for me so I may lack connections but I am a paying consumer that waited over 6 months before giving up on the 500 PF. I was able to buy one direct from Nikon last fall. Very nice F mount lens for my needs.

 

[ChrisM]

Sony did a lot to bring mirrorless FF to the masses, and then built on that success. But Sony's system as a whole is not a replacement for Nikon as far as I am concerned.
It may be a relacement for the professional sports/wildlife/bird photographers that don't hesitate to spend 20.000 on a combo such as the A1+600GM.

But where is the attraction in putting a 2000,- consumer zoom like the 200-600 on a 6500,- high end pro body? Sony shooters can fill thread after thread on how the 200-600G is a steal for the money and how good it supposedly is for the money, but the complete disbalance remains what it is for me.
A Sony high end crop body is no option either to get a better cost balance between body and lens, while maintaining performance, because Sony's crop bodies are mainly made for vloggers it seems.
Getting a FF A9 at discount prices doesn't do it for me either, with 24mp on a FF sensor.

Can Sony not make a decent 300mm f2.8, 200-400mm f4 or even 500mm f4 lens to give options below the ultra high end of the 400 and 600mm lenses? Or really do something special and go for their version of a still missing Nikon 600mm f5.6PF lens?
Can Sony not make a decent and relatively affordable yet high performance crop A900 like body at 3000,- with decent 20-24mp resolution on crop size for those that don't need the full frame sensor size (and crop 60% away from the captured image by default anyway)?

Just some contrary opinions to that of Sony being thé choice for wildlife and bird photographers.