Camera and Lens Purchase advice required (Z9 and 400 2.8)

[DayDreamzUnlimited]

Hi Everyone,

Longish thread but I am looking forward to receive some valuable advice.
Let me quickly summarize my photographic journey:

1. My first camera was the Canon 650D, went on to get a few lenses apart from the kit lens like the 50 1.8, 70-200 2.8 and then the Sigma 150-600 C
Interest and travel for Wildlife Photography began to grow.

2. Bought the Canon R6 and let go of the Sigma 150-600 C and acquired the Canon 100-500.
Since, it has been quite a few years with this, looking forward to an upgrade and also may be a change in the system.

3. After a lot of thought, I am thinking of adding to my kit with the following options over the next few months/ years:
a) R5 ii to get 45 megapixel and some great new features to combine with my existing 70-200 and 100-500
b) Nikon Z9 + 400 2.8 TC (huge... huge leap and dip into the bank that I shall be required to make)

4. Advice required:
a) Should I get the R5 ii and wait for sometime, may be the Z9 ii will be launched before I jump on to the Nikon bandwagon?
b) Get the Z9 now (if the Z9 ii may still take quite some time) and get my dream lens the 400 2.8 TC along side?

Long term Z9 and 400 2.8 can be my primary body and lens combination.
R5 + 100-500/ 70-200 can be my secondary combination.
R6 + 100-500/ 70-200, I plan to handover to my 12 year old daughter.

Both of the above require a substantial investment and I shall include in my plan after due considerations.

Thanks.

p.s. Primarily a mammal enthusiast. Attaching just a few pics for reference.

 

[hef19898]

I shoot Nikon like forever, after a short period before I was ten using a Minolta film camera, so by no means am I a Canon person. Brand and gear doesn't reall matter so.

If you are comfortable with your Canon gear, and from what little I know those lenses you have a great, why switch system? It costs a lot, and not just money but also time to get accustomed woth, in your case Nikon. And having two (!) different systems is just a lot more overhead and loss of flexibility.

What I would do: keep the R6 for your daughter (I was in her position as a kid, and starting photography with good gear was just so beneficial), keep the R5 as secondary body (if your doughter gets serious, you won't see the R6 a lot), get a R5ii as a necessary upgrade (you will loose your secondary body and seem to crave those 45 MP). Invest in a some more Cannon glass, e.g. a 24-105 (for general purposes, that focal length is unbeatable) and a small, light zoom for your little one. Cheaper than a Z9, better usability, increased flexibility and you might even have some money left to go on a nice photo trip with your daughter if she really starts to like it!

I don't see any reason for you to switch from Canon to Nikon, let alone run both systems in parallel.

 

[Hooligans Imagery]

Not sure why you would mix systems as well. To many things to distract you from the artistic part including all the tools of post processing you now have available. And the hassle of multiple batteries and chargers etc.

If you want that amazing lens then get it and build the body system around it. Maybe start with the Z8 and wait for the Z9ii. Should be within a year. Then you would have your second body.

 

[Venkatesh VT]

I have both Sony A1 +200 -600 & Z9 +400 4..5. While Sony is great for BIfs, for mammals & even stationery birds Z9 +400 4.5 is the gear that i prefer
Mammals are best seen/clicked at low light & Z9 + 400 f 4.5 does a very good job

 

[wotan1]

I agree that managing two separate systems is expensive and cumbersome.

I have the z9 and love it. I plan to get the 400 2.8 but right now I use the 400 f4.5.

There is no telling when there will be the next z9 or how long it will take to get it. You can pick up a used z9 at a good discount and trade or buy the next z9 when it comes out but if I were going to do this I would go now. The z9 is the current flagship camera and they are still upgrading firmware on it.

 

[hef19898]

Not sure why everyone ignores two things OP mentioned:

1. The need for a second camera body / a camera for the daughter

2. No intention of selling off the Canon hear to switch to Nikon

No doubt a Z9 is great, as are the Nikon Z primes. Running two systems in parallel is expensive on the long run, even more so than switching. And that cost might play a role. I know for some here it doesn't, for me and others it does. And even used a Z9 is far from cheap.

 

[Hooligans Imagery]

Not sure why everyone ignores two things OP mentioned:

1. The need for a second camera body / a camera for the daughter

2. No intention of selling off the Canon hear to switch to Nikon

No doubt a Z9 is great, as are the Nikon Z primes. Running two systems in parallel is expensive on the long run, even more so than switching. And that cost might play a role. I know for some here it doesn't, for me and others it does. And even used a Z9 is far from cheap.

Not ignoring it. It's feedback, not right or wrong, good or bad. For many of us just doesn't make sense to me. He can give his existing gear to his daughter or sell it and get her a Z to learn with. Lots of options. Feedback allows people to go beyond their perceptions.

 

[hef19898]

Sure, but praising one kit over the other, and all other constraints, is not the valiable feedback. As is assuming camera kit wouldn't be exchanged within the family, lenses for example. And that is where the real money pit lies, ultimately.

 

[ajrmd]

As a long time Canon user, Sony dilettante, and now Nikon aficionado, my advice is, if you are happy with the Canon gear then stay with it. The only reason I switched to Nikon was the release of the 400 f/4.5 and 800 PF. My hope is that someday, I'll be fortunate enough to purchase a 400 f/2.8 TC and/or 600 f/4 TC. The decision was not predicated on the bodies, ergonomics, or IQ (I actually prefer the Canon in these areas). Likewise, the AF system on the R5/R3 were more reliable for portraiture and birds striking the water (osprey/eagles). The Nikon has superior AF for airplanes as it does a better job at detecting cockpits across various planes. So, I would take a hard look at your gear and decide what it is that you hope to achieve. If you'll be sharing bodies/lenses in a household, it makes sense to stay with Canon. If your needs are met with the Canon gear, I wouldn't be in a rush to switch. Perhaps, understanding your motivation would better assist us in providing direction.

 

[pnbarne]

First off, I am fully invested in the Nikon ecosystem. Moving from the D850 to the Z8 was a big learning curve even though they are both best in class cameras. Switching between them in the field required a lot of mental gymnastics and resulted in some lost opportunities. So, switching between brands literally on the fly strikes me as difficult and risky business.

Good luck with your decision.

 

[DayDreamzUnlimited]

Thanks everyone for your responses.
Great to hear different perspectives.

I do not have a definitive way forward, but I am sure with these views and advice, I should be able to chart my course ahead.

Just adding a few more pieces of information to aid any further views:

1. I am primarily a wildlife enthusiast and that too mammals.
My love to see and photograph tigers continues to grow.
I have been lucky enough to visit a few national parks here in India and snap approx 2% of the tiger population of India (last official count 3682)
Would continue this journey.

2. I also have an African safari for the Big Cats and other mammals on my bucket list.

3. Seriously thinking of a f 2.8 super telephoto. And this is where the 400 2.8 TC got me curious about the Nikon system.

Thanks again for all your thoughts and views.

 

[StefanSC]

You can always get a Canon 400mn f2.8 ... even a used EF mount one and use the adequate adapter if you want to keep the budget reasonable.

Personally I'd stick with the brand that I am with if I had a decent set of lenses already...

Historically, camera manufacturers tend to leapfrog eachother ... a few years ago Nikon was the bottom of the pack, now it seems to be everybody's wildlife darling system.

 

[ajrmd]

Thanks everyone for your responses.
Great to hear different perspectives.

I do not have a definitive way forward, but I am sure with these views and advice, I should be able to chart my course ahead.

Just adding a few more pieces of information to aid any further views:

1. I am primarily a wildlife enthusiast and that too mammals.
My love to see and photograph tigers continues to grow.
I have been lucky enough to visit a few national parks here in India and snap approx 2% of the tiger population of India (last official count 3682)
Would continue this journey.

2. I also have an African safari for the Big Cats and other mammals on my bucket list.

3. Seriously thinking of a f 2.8 super telephoto. And this is where the 400 2.8 TC got me curious about the Nikon system.

Thanks again for all your thoughts and views.

Love the mammals and unfortunately most in my neck of the woods tend to be smaller, thus the need for longer glass. I appreciate the need (want) for a f/2.8 especially in low light. Canon offers plenty of options, though it won't have the luxury of a built in TC. The Canon 400 f/2.8 is spectacular as is the 100-300 f/2.8. Both lenses take TC's well and if you have the $, it might be the way to go. The 100-500 is no slouch and the IQ is very good albeit the wonky TC issue and aperture. Again, if you're happy in the Canon universe (I wasn't for the reasons mentioned - absence of lightweight, mid-priced, high-performing lenses) I don't suggest switching.

 

[wotan1]

I would think the 400 2.8 would be a good lens for mammals.

The Z8/9 cameras are very complex. There is a significant initial learning curve. The camera menu system is complex and a number of settings need to be adjusted before you have the camera set up for they way you will want to use it. This includes customizing controls and configuring the shortcuts.

Since you would be orienting this camera/lens for wildlife you could save a lot of time by getting and reviewing Steve Perry's setup guide. His system works effectively and is aimed specifically towards wildlife shooting. You could go through the guide and set up the camera the way he suggests in a few hours.

Part of working with cameras is to develop "muscle memory" so reaching controls and settings becomes instinctive. The Nikon and Canon systems are very different. I have been pretty much an exclusive Nikon user, the few times I tried to operate a Canon I needed a lesson before I could do even basic things.

I agree with the suggestion to pick one system and stay with it.

With camera systems the adage is you date the camera body but marry the lenses. The mirrorless system allows lenses to be mounted closer to the sensor and Nikon's Z mount has the widest opening among the mirrorless systems. Nikon has exploited this advantage in its new Z lens designs and the results have been excellent pretty much across the board. The Z 400mm f2.8 is a classic example, significantly reducing lens weight and adding a built in 1.4x tc. The lens also takes external teleconverters which greatly expand the focal length range of this lens.

 

[BillW]

I've shot with Nikons for many years. I've been using a Z9 since shortly after it came out and added a Z8 when it was released. I had been mostly using Nikon's light weight telephotos (F 300 mm PF and F 500 mm PF) and zooms with my DSLRs (D500 and D850). Switched to Z mount light weight telephotos (Z 400 mm f4.5 and Z 600 mm PF) and zooms for mirrorless bodies. I've also added two heavier/larger lenses -- the Z 800 mm PF and Z 400 mm TC.

I had thought about a 400 mm f2.8 lens for some time. The size and weight kept me from getting one. The Z 400 mm TC has two very nice features for me. While still large and heavy, it weighs a lot less than its F mount predecessor and it has a built-in 1.4x TC.

I had a trip planned to Botswana for 3 1/2 weeks in April and May this year. I guess I talked about the Z 400 mm TC a lot; my wife said why don't you stop talking about it and buy the lens. You can take it to Botswana. If you don't like it, you can sell it when you get home.

So I bought the lens about 6 weeks before my trip. Did a lot of practicing with it to get used to the size and weight.

The Z 400 m TC was a wonderful lens in Botswana. I really liked having both 400 @ f2.8 and, with the flip of a switch, 560 mm @ f4. I used both a lot. There were 11 photographers on my trip (2 pros leading the trip and 9 participants); there were 5 Z 400 mm TCs in the group. I had a Z 100-400 on my Z8 to use when animals were too close or too large for the Z 400 mm TC.

I'll be keeping the Z 400 mm TC. Plan to use it in British Columbia this fall in the Great Bear Rain Forrest (spirit bears and coastal wolves I hope, along with other bears, marine mammals and birds). It seems to me a great lens for big cats, bears, and many other mammals. Some may prefer a longer lens, and there is also a Z 600 mm TC. But for me, I thought the Z 400 mm TC was a better fit and I have the Z 800 mm PF for times when I need more focal length. (By the way, the Z 400 m TC works well with the external Z 2x TC to get you to 800 mm F5.6. One of my trip leaders in Botswana used his with the external Z 1.4x TC to have 560 f4 and 784 f5.6 with the internal TC engaged.)

Given your interest in mammals, I think you'd love a 400 mm f 2.8 lens. I'm sure Canon makes a very good one too, although as far as I know it does not (at least currently) have a built-in TC. Not sure about the relative size and weight of Canon's 400 mm f2.8 as compared to the Nikon Z 400 mm TC.

I also have liked having a mirrorless body with 45 megapixels. And excellent AF. Again, I'm sure Canon has a great product. And if you learn the AF system, I expect one can do well with any of the current top cameras.

Overall, I'm sure you'd love the Z9 and a Z 400 mm TC. You could also consider a Z8 for a lower cost and smaller size/weight.

Good luck.

 

[arbitrage]

If the value of a built in TC is enough to put up with the headaches of running two systems then sure the Nikon addition is worthwhile to consider.

But the R5II seems an equal or better camera on paper than the Z9 in every which way:
30 vs 20 FPS
Raw Precapture
Equal MPs
Better control layout (more useful back buttons, third wheel)
More customization options for said buttons
Better EVF
Better BEAF (even R5 bests Z9 let alone R5II’s potential)
Most likely better AF across the board but remains to be seen.

The downside with Canon is the big lenses but the RF400/2.8 is a great lens if you are okay with swapping TCs when needed. But for sure the Z400TC is better in every way.

 

[nmerc_photos]

I started as a Canon shooter and moved to Nikon. I would not run two systems at the same time.

I'd either go R5II + RF 100-500 + RF 600 F4, or I'd go Nikon Z9 + 100-400 + 400TC.

I'm never a fan of waiting for "what ifs" IE (what if the Z9II is around the corner). Something is always being developed, and the brands tend to leap frog eachother. The longer you wait - the less time you get to actually use your gear.

Although some have suggested the EF/RF 400 F2.8 - I find that lens pretty niche (or in my case - useless) for wildlife since 400mm isn't often enough reach. the built in TC of the Nikon 400 f2.8 is what allows it be used as a wildlife lens.