NikonBiologist
New member
I know you said you are set on Nikon, but considering that you have no legacy glass to accommodate and no legacy ‘muscle memoryto deal with either, I feel you are doing yourself a disservice by not answering the question of what system will best meet your needs. It may be Nikon, or it may not.
You have explained what you shoot, and many options will do a great job - but why do you shoot is equally important, and what other constraints do you need to think about?
is you goal to simply document what you see and post on the internet? Or are you looking to create art, with the most creamy backgrounds and lowest noise possible so that you can print exhibition pieces (or anywhere in between)? Are weight and size a constraint at all? How waterproof does the gear need to be (shoot in the rain and snow, or only in dry weather)
To document, capture memories, post on internet downsized pictures, you can consider micro 4/3rd - lighter, cheaper, the OM1 has a spectacular AF and they have great glass. Honestly, if weight is a concern, that system is unbeatable, at the expense of some noise and the greater difficulty to create smooth backgrounds.
If weight is not the main driver but you’d still like to keep things compact, need some extra reach sometimes but not always, want a bigger sensor for less noise but not necessary needing the bulk of full frame, then APSC may be right for you. The Goldilocks of formats.
‘The fujifilm XH2s is a great body, the AF is not as good as the z8 but better than the z6ii and because it’s a stacked sensor, you will have the tool to do very high frame rates for birds in flight if you ever desire.
Another option is the canon R7 with their 100-500 which becomes a 160-800 on that body. Amazing AF but some limitations when it comes to buffer size
there is nothing at Sony or Nikon that I would consider right now but that may likely change in the coming months
finally, if size and weight are not a concern, and image quality is the ultimate goal, then full frame it is. But there I would not do the z6ii, it will be limiting if you want to try anything else than the type of photography you described, and if I know one thing about wildlife photography, it’s that once you put a toe in it, it drags you in
‘So the z8 with the 100-400 would be your best option at Nikon, but that’s where I think you also need to look at a few other options.
‘The canon R6ii + 100-500 or even the R5 + 100-500 are hard to beat - the AF is easier to use that Nikon’s (I didn’t say better, just simpler) and both offer plenty of room to grow into more demanding genres. They are not stacked sensors though, so if you ever want to do very fast action, you might see the occasional rolling shutter (although they are both very fast for traditional sensors).
Amd then Sony; the 200-600 is a reference lens that all other systems envy. But you can also find excellent 3rd party lenses that use the native Sony mount and are a lot cheaper than anything by canon, Nikon or Sony - if you are not sure of how much money you want to commit, it’s a great way to start.
‘Body-wise with Sony I’d look at an A9ii, same resolution as the z6ii, but an AF that’s a few generations better, or even an A7iv - which offers a ton of capabilities for the money, and still outperforms the z6ii on AF and resolution.
In the end, the last piece of advice is to hold them all - one brand will feel better in hand and that’s probably the one to pick. If you go with the z8, you won’t go wrong one bit, my advice is just to not jump to conclusions because of nostalgia - you have the luxury of starting new, so don’t paint yourself in a box that you don’t need to.
I would hesitate to recommend the XH2s as Fuji doesn't have much in the way of wildlife lenses (70-300 is good, but short; 100-400 has AF concerns, and 150-600 is large and f8 at long end). Great body, mediocre lens selection.
