Best wildlife mirrorless camera kit for around $3,000?

[Tom Reynolds]

You aren't familiar with sensor development as I am, and the fact that a handful of photographers like the system is meaningless. That sensor is stuck in no-man land. Plenty of development for smaller (think phones) up to 1 inch and plenty of action for APS-C and FF for video. Photography is going along for the ride.

Nimi:
If as you say so what?

The m43 lineup has lenses designed for that sensor and nobody seems to want to create a telephoto lens for anything else than full frame cameras. The result is that m43 rigs are simply lighter and more compact than FF or APS-C rigs.

For some, including me, lighter and more compact is considerably more important than the slight IQ gain with larger sensors.

Tom

 

[Nimi]

Nimi:
If as you say so what?

The m43 lineup has lenses designed for that sensor and nobody seems to want to create a telephoto lens for anything else than full frame cameras. The result is that m43 rigs are simply lighter and more compact than FF or APS-C rigs.

For some, including me, lighter and more compact is considerably more important than the slight IQ gain with larger sensors.

Tom

My comment is not directed at people that are already in the system. As a new shooter without lenses and decent budget, MFT from anyone is a mistake. It's the most likely to die, in addition to its other limitations. The sole reasons people justify owning it are light & cheap, neither cited by the OP as goals.

Experienced shooters in the right conditions get great shots out of it. Less experienced who don't nail exposure and/or fill the frame are better off with a good cellphone. And nm vid.

 

[GrandNagus50]

You aren't familiar with sensor development as I am, and the fact that a handful of photographers like the system is meaningless. That sensor is stuck in no-man land. Plenty of development for smaller (think phones) up to 1 inch and plenty of action for APS-C and FF for video. Photography is going along for the ride.

Wow, the "just because" fallacy rears its ugly head. You're right "because you know more."

Sensors smaller than M43 are developing, sensors larger than M43 are developing, and M43 sensors are moribund. Got it.

 

[Nimi]

Wow, the "just because" fallacy rears its ugly head. You're right "because you know more."

Sensors smaller than M43 are developing, sensors larger than M43 are developing, and M43 sensors are moribund. Got it.

Expertise and knowledge still count. I'm in the business, I know.

 

[StefanSC]

My brother is looking for a mirrorless camera kit for wildlife for around $3,000. Could go as high as $4,000 if absolutely necessary. He knows there will be limitations with his budget. It has to be capable of taking action photos.

Depends on how much wildlife experience your brother has...

For a begginer, at under 3000$ a used Nikon D500 and a 200-500F5.6/300mm f4 PF/ used 500mm PF are, IMHO, still the best option.

While newer mirrorless cameras might have more bells and whistles, as a reliable, usable in the filed system, the old Nikon D500 still stands with the best of them (e.g: it gave the A9 and 100-400 a run for it's money when shooting seagulls in a feeding freenzy... and that's with a sluggish Sigma 150-600mm C).

If it must be a mirroless camera, he should stretch the budget to 4k and go for the OM-1 and a used 300mm f4 (and assorted TC's). If I were starting fresh, I'd pick this set-up for wildlife (especially birds) over any 20-ish Mpx camera(even FF) and a 200-600-ish zoom. Just add a pinch of DXOs PureRAW and between that, the nearly 2 stops faster and very sharp lens, the speed of the camera and the miriad of functions, you are more likely than not to get the sharper, better looking photo over even FF alternates.
I'd avoid the 100-400 zoom's though... not really that great.

But the most important thing:

Most people vastly overbuy their gear. If you look at the presentation section of this site, of all the wildlife shots posted in the past week, there might be 3 or 5* that couldn't have been taken with a D7200 and the old AF-S 300mm f4D lens using the old noggin'. And that combo can be had for under 1000$ if you dig a bit through the used market...

*except maybe the true macro ones that do need a 1:1 lens

 

[fcotterill]

As posted above, it's worth choosing a first long lens that can live on with a updated camera. This does not exclude buying a Used lens. The majority of my lenses have been Used bought from a reputable local camera shop with 6 months warranty. And I've traded some of these in towards updates....

I'm not experienced with other systems, but for Nikon there are several excellent choices at competitive Used prices: including the 500 f5.6E PF with a TC14 III and the 70-300 AFP FX model, 300 f4E PF etc

A MILC is not strictly necessary. A used D500 or D850 is the ideal camera to get out and learning with an extremely capable system for wildlife.
There will be more advanced mirrorless cameras released over the next 2 years, which will free up highly capable models into the Used Market, including the Z8. These will continue to work well with G and E type F-mount Nikkors

 

[Calson]

Avoid DSLR cameras and lenses which are a dead end at this point in time. The Nikon 200-500mm was a good bargain when it was introduced in August of 2015 but it is a very old design. When I had this lens I often shot with it at 500mm and wished it went to 600mm. It was much better in its overall performance than the 150-600mm lenses available at the time. Now there are 200-600mm and 180-600mm lenses that are superior in every way.

Weight is important and usually overlooked. I can hand hold an Olympus 300mm f/4 lens that provides the view angle of a 600mm f/4 lens on a full frame camera. I can hold the 300mm at its 3.2 lbs indefinitely but the same cannot be said for a full frame 600mm f/4 lens, in particular the older versions from Nikon that can weigh over 13 lbs plus the weight of the camera.

Not needing a tripod saves you friend $700 to $1500 in the cost of his kit.

 

[Chris K]

You aren't familiar with sensor development as I am, and the fact that a handful of photographers like the system is meaningless. That sensor is stuck in no-man land. Plenty of development for smaller (think phones) up to 1 inch and plenty of action for APS-C and FF for video. Photography is going along for the ride.

Four Thirds has been declared “dead” since the E-3. 15 years of nay-saying later, MFT is still going strong. It’s tough to beat the OM-1 and 100-400 on the low end of the price scale, especially if you buy used.

 

[Tom Reynolds]

Nimi is basically saying that the m43 sensor is dead ended, specifically that the major development in sensor technology is NOT in the M43's size range. Since Nimi is in the business I assume that this is essentially true.

What I have said before is that the m43 line occupies a niche in the market that is not assailed by larger sensor sizes. For Birds in Flight that is size and weight. For macro photography it is increased effective F/stop. For underwater it is both plus lower cost housings.

From a marketing perspective, OM Systems and Panasonic have a suite of lenses designed for the M43 sensor while Nikon, Sony and Canon seem to have no interest in this product line. To me that means that APS-C cameras are dead ended, marketing-wize if not sensor development-wize. As a previous D-500 shooter I find the Z-8 an acceptable upgrade and the 180-600 also a fine upgrade from the 200-500. Reason? Both these lenses are FF lenses with the accompanying weight and size.

What Nimi is also saying is that sensor technology and accompanying software will further increase cell phone inroad into the low end, small sensor point-and-shoot.

 

[Nimi]

Nimi is basically saying that the m43 sensor is dead ended, specifically that the major development in sensor technology is NOT in the M43's size range. Since Nimi is in the business I assume that this is essentially true.

What I have said before is that the m43 line occupies a niche in the market that is not assailed by larger sensor sizes. For Birds in Flight that is size and weight. For macro photography it is increased effective F/stop. For underwater it is both plus lower cost housings.

From a marketing perspective, OM Systems and Panasonic have a suite of lenses designed for the M43 sensor while Nikon, Sony and Canon seem to have no interest in this product line. To me that means that APS-C cameras are dead ended, marketing-wize if not sensor development-wize. As a previous D-500 shooter I find the Z-8 an acceptable upgrade and the 180-600 also a fine upgrade from the 200-500. Reason? Both these lenses are FF lenses with the accompanying weight and size.

What Nimi is also saying is that sensor technology and accompanying software will further increase cell phone inroad into the low end, small sensor point-and-shoot.

100% except for APS-C. Sony just released a powerhouse one that today powers a few new Sonys, Fuji, and the next Nikon. APS-C is still dominant in cinema (S35). As far as what's being worked on, I'm seeing lower resolution, video-centric FF, and higher resolution FF for hybrid. The unresolved issue for the latter is heat until you get into active cooling or the outlier Z9.

Canon is the only camera company making its own sensors, so somewhat of an enigma. We'll see what they put in the C70 mk II soon, my bet is they are going to start using the 33mp S35 Sony sensor.

For phones and industrial equipment, the move is to 1" or slightly bigger. Ditto action cams and low-end drones. Expensive drones use "crash cams" like the entry-level Red.

 

[StefanSC]

I find it quite strange that sensor size dictates development these days...

After all the underlying technology is the same regardless of sensor size and as far as I can think, there isn't any valid technical reason that once some feature is developed it can't be ported to any size. (ironically, some of it like BSI actually scales poorly as you increase the size)

At best, the lack of request for certain sizes (low market share means slower investment recoup) means you'll see certain features come slower to certain sensor sizes.

Then again, sometimes this limitation can force manufacturers to embrace alternate solutions (like phone makers did with computational photography).

 

[Nimi]

I find it quite strange that sensor size dictates development these days...

After all the underlying technology is the same regardless of sensor size and as far as I can think, there isn't any valid technical reason that once some feature is developed it can't be ported to any size. (ironically, some of it like BSI actually scales poorly as you increase the size)

At best, the lack of request for certain sizes (low market share means slower investment recoup) means you'll see certain features come slower to certain sensor sizes.

Then again, sometimes this limitation can force manufacturers to embrace alternate solutions (like phone makers did with computational photography).

Economies of scale. CMOS manufacturing requires scale because of yield. Low demand, high price. In imaging, the MFT is about two stops of dynamic range under FF for similar pixel pitch, so if you want high resolution, you get noise and if your exposure is not spot on, good luck. That's why there is so much processing done on cell phone photos and that's what Olympus started doing. But that comes at a cost (artifacts, noise in shadows, etc.) That's why the sensor size is dying. Too big for phones, too small for cameras. The OM is a niche system and in the right hands produces good pictures. But it's going away. Panasonic is slowly transitioning to FF because they are foremost a video camera and video is moving to FF.

 

[Irap]

I have the Sony A7 4 and use it with the 200-600 and love it. Great image quality at 33mps full frame, great in low light, very good AF. It's not the fastest at 10fps, but its works for me. Also it has an endless buffer with a CF Express A card. The Sony 200-600 is and amazing lens. I think you might be able to find very good used copy of the camera and lens and keep in budget.

 

[Tom Reynolds]

the MFT is about two stops of dynamic range under FF for similar pixel pitch, so if you want high resolution, you get noise and if your exposure is not spot on, good luck. But that comes at a cost (artifacts, noise in shadows, etc.) That's why the sensor size is dying. The OM is a niche system and in the right hands produces good pictures. But it's going away.

Nimi-
The OM-1 does have a two-stop disadvantage but only versus the best FF sensors out there. Versus the R5 for example it is only about a stop.

But let's look at the entire system. Compare the OM-1/100-400 versus a R8/180-600. The OM Systems has a reach advantage so the 180-600 will need to crop more because of the 200mm extra reach. A good part of that 2 stop advantage and the 25MP size advantage due to the FF sensor goes away, no.

And do you think the significantly heavier and larger R-8/180-600 can get on the bird faster? Not likely.

Or how about a Sony A7-4 and a 200-600 lens. Same thing.

 

[fcotterill]

The era of smaller format ILC sensors and "single-layer" sensors is finite. Interchangeable Lens Cameras are becoming all the more Solid-state electronic instruments (like smartphones), with the obvious distinctive advantages in optics.
It's accepted the future of imaging technology is in Smartphones and Stacked sensors etc, as the technology chases faster speeds, big data etc. Investment into the camera industry has become bimodal:

High volume, more capable small sensors in Smartphones;​

Low volume Interchangeable Lens Cameras using large sensors with added features. This is the main reason for the dominance of the FX format - we see this in Hybrid Video MILCs.​

Leveraging Stacked sensors and even faster image chips, we can expect continued advances in high speed image processing in-camera with better EVF quality.

We can expect Unit Costs / ILC to decrease over the next decade of these high tech features.....so look forward to the mid range MILC with a Stacked-sensor and high-speed image processing etc. Spin offs from the competition to improve flagship FX hybrid MILCs will flow downstream. (Camera companies, including Nikon, state this is their strategy). The Z8 is the inaugural exemplar.....

 

[fcotterill]

The focal question is Which lenses does one buy today that will continue to work on the current FX MILCs and their 'Descendent cameras'?

The obvious answer is the ideal is the optimal selection of Mirrorless Lenses, if finances allow this. So the wildlife photographer evaluates the Telephoto options of the dominant systems, and also selects the camera with robust Autofocus and image quality.

The budget option for the most affordable telephoto lenses are Used AFS G and E type F-mount (at least for Nikon). Moreover, Used DSLRs are currently more capable (for the more challenging wildlife subjects) than FX MILCs in their price range, until prices drop for Stacked-sensor MILCs....

On a strict budget, today, I would spend as much as feasible on the best Used lens(es) first and foremost. Then in order to get out shooting, Buy a Used camera with a robust AF system; but aim to upgrade to a capable MILC - in the Z8-Z9 performance class.

 

[CharlieR]

The Canon R7 is a good choice--small, light, and when paired with an RF100-500, produces excellent results. That lens focuses very close, so paired with the R7 and its 32MP sensor, you can get near-macro shots. I have it and the R5; I use the R7 primarily for macro/close-up photography, but if I'm somewhere where I need 'reach,' I pair it with the RF100-500 and I have my 800mm (equivalent). As someone above mentioned, you might be able to get close to the $3,000 ceiling by buying refurbished off Canon's site. The R7s AF borrows a bit from Canon's flagship R3, so you also get very good AF with this camera. An EF100-400 with the EF-RF adaptor would also work great, still giving your brother in excess of 600mm at the long end. And Canon's EF-RF adaptor works very well--none of the sluggishness that Nikon has with its FTZ adaptor.

 

[Cameron T]

--none of the sluggishness that Nikon has with its FTZ adaptor.

What? There's no sluggishness with any of the lenses I've used.

 

[CharlieR]

What? There's no sluggishness with any of the lenses I've used.

Just my sense--I had the Nikon Z7II, Z6, and D500 before switching to Canon--I used the 500 PF on both Z cameras via the FTZ adaptor--there was a difference in focusing speeds with it on the D500 vs both Z cameras--nothing major, but noticeable. I think Steve at one point documented this. In addition, the FTZ adaptor compared to the Canon adaptor is larger in size, adding more weight and bulk.

 

[Steve]

Just my sense--I had the Nikon Z7II, Z6, and D500 before switching to Canon--I used the 500 PF on both Z cameras via the FTZ adaptor--there was a difference in focusing speeds with it on the D500 vs both Z cameras--nothing major, but noticeable. I think Steve at one point documented this. In addition, the FTZ adaptor compared to the Canon adaptor is larger in size, adding more weight and bulk.

Once the Z9 came out we discovered that the sluggishness was actually with the Z6/7 series and not the adapter. On the Z8/9 an adapted lens is as fast as it was on a DSLR - and, unexpectedly, actually faster with a TC than on a DSLR.

 

[Nimi]

Four Thirds has been declared “dead” since the E-3. 15 years of nay-saying later, MFT is still going strong. It’s tough to beat the OM-1 and 100-400 on the low end of the price scale, especially if you buy used.

MFT sensors are less than 0.5% of CMOS image sensors and continue to decline. The OM camera is good, but I wouldn't recommend it to someone who has $3-4k to spend on his first/only camera unless weight is the most important consideration. And after all, that's what the OP asked about.

 

[Bob Hullinger]

Hi,

My brother is looking for a mirrorless camera kit for wildlife for around $3,000. Could go as high as $4,000 if absolutely necessary. He knows there will be limitations with his budget. It has to be capable of taking action photos.

Doing research I came across the Canon R7 and 100-400 RF lens.

Any thoughts?

Other recommendations?

He is not wed to any specific brand.

Any help will be greatly appreciated. He prefers mirrorless.

Thanks,
Bill G.

Hi Bill.

There're so many ways to answer questions like this and none of them wrong or right. It's great your brother is interested in wildlife photography but your question leaves out the most key aspect of the question about what tools would work best. What's your bothers experience level with applying basic photography principles and how proficient is he with using modern camera tech.

It's hard to recommend gear to someone without having a little more to base the recommendation on but hope what I offer helps.

Any reputable photo shop with a trial period (all of them as far as I know with varying terms and conditions) for people in your brother's situation is a good place go looking for answers to this question. There are people at all the main camera gear stores on staff waiting to hear from people in your brother's situation to help put the right camera in his hands.

Gearheads learn quickly that having a connection on speed dial at all the major camera stores and lens rental used departments is required in the land of camera and lens junkies. They never object when someone buys or rents something and calls back and says "I thought I was gonna love it but I hate it. I want to send it back and try something else". They don't mind doing it repeatedly for serious customers. The whole goal would be getting the right tool in your brother's hands to create amazing images and that's what they do for a living.

If something is exciting and works great keep it and if it sucks send it back and try something else.

Everything recommended in the forum will be a correct solution or an incorrect solution depending upon who is reading the comment. My take is that paying up to $4,000 for anything any of us might suggest without the opportunity to use the product first is never going to be the wisest shopping decision. Happy shopping, Bills brother

Have a good one, Bill.

 

[bleirer]

Nimi-
The OM-1 does have a two-stop disadvantage but only versus the best FF sensors out there. Versus the R5 for example it is only about a stop.

But let's look at the entire system. Compare the OM-1/100-400 versus a R8/180-600. The OM Systems has a reach advantage so the 180-600 will need to crop more because of the 200mm extra reach. A good part of that 2 stop advantage and the 25MP size advantage due to the FF sensor goes away, no.

And do you think the significantly heavier and larger R-8/180-600 can get on the bird faster? Not likely.

Or how about a Sony A7-4 and a 200-600 lens. Same thing.

As an R5 shooter myself I have to question the statement. Photons to photos shows the maximum dynamic range of the OM-1 at a respectable 9.54, but it lists the R5 at 11.85.

 

[Jim J]

Does your brother currently have a camera? If so what is he using now? If he does not have a camera maybe something simple would be a good place to start.

 

[Garfield]

Re: format recommendation: IMO MFT is a specialized format that I would never suggest to anyone looking for recommendations for their first wildlife rig. APS-C is just as cost effective and much more widely supported (from a brand perspective).