Nikon Shooters - Would you switch to another brand (or have you?)

[Drbobcameraguy]

I probably won't switch due to the investment I have made and the point in life I'm at. It is a hobby and a D850 and D500 with more lenses than sense can do more than I will ever need. If I was younger and had more time to spend thirty grand to improve on what I have then in 2 to 5 years I may change to mirrorless when it works out some of the issues it has now. I do not doubt that very soon it will blow the D850 away but not today in all areas. Most I believe but not all. So long story short. I have no need to change when my equipment can out perform me. I'm no slouch but I'm also not a professional. Lol

 

[Deleted member 115]

I probably won't switch due to the investment I have made and the point in life I'm at. It is a hobby and a D850 and D500 with more lenses than sense can do more than I will ever need. If I was younger and had more time to spend thirty grand to improve on what I have then in 2 to 5 years I may change to mirrorless when it works out some of the issues it has now. I do not doubt that very soon it will blow the D850 away but not today in all areas. Most I believe but not all. So long story short. I have no need to change when my equipment can out perform me. I'm no slouch but I'm also not a professional. Lol

The thing is, when auto focus locks onto a birds eye and won't let go, no one will know you're not a Pro!

 

[Drbobcameraguy]

The thing is, when auto focus locks onto a birds eye and won't let go, no one will know your not a Pro!

So very true. Lol lol. I'm a tech geek and love the technology. I just don't want to spend the money when it won't get me much more than I get now. Lol. Old and cheap. Lol lol.

 

[Deleted member 115]

So very true. Lol lol. I'm a tech geek and love the technology. I just don't want to spend the money when it won't get me much more than I get now. Lol. Old and cheap. Lol lol.

I hear you I will wait and see if Nikon gets it figured out and go from there.

I am sure there are plenty of video to see now, I just watched this one. ->

 

[Woody Meristem]

Most people develop brand loyalties fairly early and tend to stick with that brand until it becomes untenable to do so -- especially when they have a lot of money invested in accessories (lenses in the case of cameras). Thus Nikon shooters stay with Nikon, Canon shooters stay with Canon. BUT, the arrival of mirrorless cameras and new lens mounts removes a lot of the pressure to stick with a brand. I've stuck with Canon because of the service they've provided over the years, but have been gradually switching to MFT gear thanks to its lighter weight, smaller size and good IQ -- not to mention its lower cost.

 

[O]

The examples I have seen from Sony are incredible not sure why the image quality is in question at all

Images out of all three big names are all excellent in their own right, many people see things differently like warmer or cooler colours, the list goes on.
Many people cant pick the difference when looking at images on a Phone or iPad that make everything look spectacular.
I run an old 30 inch mac cinema scope screen from 2006 with a high end Old N Vida FX 4500 workstation graphics card on a mac pro tower, its not your eye popping iMac 5k but nor is it artificially over bright or over saturated colours..........its organically neutral and natural and not dissimilar to a Eizo.
Its all about personal taste, for me the image files out of Nikon especially in the Z series with the Z glass is the best image file I have seen in the market, it also seems to be the consensus of many top reviewers.
Myself personally, I don't like the look of the Sony image files compared to Nikon, I even prefer the files from Canon over Sony, just because our taste varies doesn't mean that Sony is bad, just different to my taste. Remember Fuji Film versus Kodak.

Only an opinion
Oz down under

 

[O]

Two very powerful comments in this particular forum page that are very few words yet speak volumes.

"I have no need to change when my equipment can out perform me" LOVE IT

"The thing is, when auto focus locks onto a birds eye and won't let go, no one will know you're not a Pro" So everyone is equally a professional photographer, what is there left for us to do, our skill sets are being made largely obsolete ?


Oz Down under

 

[Deleted member 115]

Two very powerful comments in this particular forum page that are very few words yet speak volumes.

"I have no need to change when my equipment can out perform me" LOVE IT

"The thing is, when auto focus locks onto a birds eye and won't let go, no one will know you're not a Pro" So everyone is equally a professional photographer, what is there left for us to do, our skill sets are being made largely obsolete ?


Oz Down under

I don't know if I want to reference the Luddites or Terminator here.....lol
It's the natural progression of technology. I wonder how many million photos are taken everyday on iphones. Some pretty nice ones too.

 

[Deleted member 115]

Images out of all three big names are all excellent in their own right, many people see things differently like warmer or cooler colours, the list goes on.
Many people cant pick the difference when looking at images on a Phone or iPad that make everything look spectacular.
I run an old 30 inch mac cinema scope screen from 2006 with a high end Old N Vida FX 4500 workstation graphics card on a mac pro tower, its not your eye popping iMac 5k but nor is it artificially over bright or over saturated colours..........its organically neutral and natural and not dissimilar to a Eizo.
Its all about personal taste, for me the image files out of Nikon especially in the Z series with the Z glass is the best image file I have seen in the market, it also seems to be the consensus of many top reviewers.
Myself personally, I don't like the look of the Sony image files compared to Nikon, I even prefer the files from Canon over Sony, just because our taste varies doesn't mean that Sony is bad, just different to my taste. Remember Fuji Film versus Kodak.

Only an opinion
Oz down under

I have a 5k Retina display and it is definitely set too bright

 

[Doug Herr]

"The thing is, when auto focus locks onto a birds eye and won't let go, no one will know you're not a Pro" So everyone is equally a professional photographer, what is there left for us to do, our skill sets are being made largely obsolete ?

Not at all. The bird eye AF helps with a technical problem but does nothing about lighting or composition choices. Gray matter still matters.

 

[JD1]

No switch for me. Nikon has served me well. The Z line of lenses is a big upgrade from the F mounts. The D850 has been on top of all-around Dslr's since it has come out. Still manage to get lots of shots I'm proud of with it. I know Nikon will come out with something to replace the D6, D850 on D500 in mirrorless versions. The Z7ii is a fine camera, just not quite there yet for birds. Paul T summed it up pretty well with his post on 'leapfrogging'!

 

[Deleted member 115]

Not at all. The bird eye AF helps with a technical problem but does nothing about lighting or composition choices. Gray matter still matters.

It doesn’t hurt

 

[fcotterill]

The range and quality of optics have been the biggest factors for a committed photographer (buying more besides a basic ILC+kit lens). Options in a lens system has always been the No 1 Decider for me. This includes options in Used lenses (i suspect for many of us): as even a "few" lenses are a major investment. This the leveller/reality check (not least with a spouse!!).

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

This thread gathers a most interesting range of responses/justifications. One trend is the attractions of key camera vs key lenses; some of us are attracted to the 'best' current camera and/or lens(es).

We can expect shifts in products emphasis - and R&D - as ILC production shrinks, and the squeezing of revenue ramps up rejuggling of company strategy to shift focus to prosumer markets. At the same time, the image quality out of these modern cameras has also levelled off. Their IQ is universally excellent. There's not much left to improve. Video functionality will be refined sooner than later, and so will seamless WWW connectivity (share image as simply as a smartphone).

So what major factor (if any?) in a new camera will enticing upgraders? Either even lighter models with advanced battery power, or more releases upgrading in the "Do it all D850 style" genre? Perhaps stacked sensors will be the No 1 leveller; if so their high production costs will maintain the uniqueness of this niche product, and reposition the companies innovating these more expensive cameras? The market for stacked-sensor ILCs seems limited ie action genres only, because 'standard' sensors work already very very well for the vast majority of photographers (still using an ILC and not a 'simple' phone).

Nevertheless, I for one refuse to buy another camera that fails to include a minimum set of controls (Custom especially). This will have to improve on the minimum "haptics standards" of the Triumvirate (ie D5/D6, D500, D850).

It is obvious lenses is where we can expect more growth in innovations. So sooner than later, yet again, it will be the lenses determining the system in which the returning client invests. So it will be interesting to consider the line up of these R, L, E, and Z mount systems.

 

[Steve]

The examples I have seen from Sony are incredible not sure why the image quality is in question at all

Agree - I'm very happy so far with the IQ from my Sony cameras. The AWB tends toward the warm side, but it's easily correctable.

 

[Deleted member 115]

Agree - I'm very happy so far with the IQ from my Sony cameras. The AWB tends toward the warm side, but it's easily correctable.

Thanks I didn't realize that. I can say that my Nikons tends to favor the cool or blue side, if anything. It might have more to do with the environment I live in???

 

[Steve]

Thanks I didn't realize that. I can say that my Nikons tends to favor the cool or blue side, if anything. It might have more to do with the environment I live in???

Nah, Nikon likes to go a little cool. It's normal.

The thing is, I pretty much have to tweak the WB on all my shots back in Lightroom anyway, so no biggie with either brand.

 

[O]

I have a 5k Retina display and it is definitely set too bright

Yea I am not alone, I have some friends who print professionally and they don't use the I Mac 5k for that reason they also don't use it for editing, they use an Eizo screen and dedicated graphics card.

The range and quality of optics have been the biggest factors for a committed photographer (buying more besides a basic ILC+kit lens). Options in a lens system has always been the No 1 Decider for me. This includes options in Used lenses (i suspect for many of us): as even a "few" lenses are a major investment. This the leveller/reality check (not least with a spouse!!).
View attachment 18652
This thread gathers a most interesting range of responses/justifications. One trend is the attractions of key camera vs key lenses; some of us are attracted to the 'best' current camera and/or lens(es).

We can expect shifts in products emphasis - and R&D - as ILC production shrinks, and the squeezing of revenue ramps up rejuggling of company strategy to shift focus to prosumer markets. At the same time, the image quality out of these modern cameras has also levelled off. Their IQ is universally excellent. There's not much left to improve. Video functionality will be refined sooner than later, and so will seamless WWW connectivity (share image as simply as a smartphone).

So what major factor (if any?) in a new camera will enticing upgraders? Either even lighter models with advanced battery power, or more releases upgrading in the "Do it all D850 style" genre? Perhaps stacked sensors will be the No 1 leveller; if so their high production costs will maintain the uniqueness of this niche product, and reposition the companies innovating these more expensive cameras? The market for stacked-sensor ILCs seems limited ie action genres only, because 'standard' sensors work already very very well for the vast majority of photographers (still using an ILC and not a 'simple' phone).

Nevertheless, I for one refuse to buy another camera that fails to include a minimum set of controls (Custom especially). This will have to improve on the minimum "haptics standards" of the Triumvirate (ie D5/D6, D500, D850).

It is obvious lenses is where we can expect more growth in innovations. So sooner than later, yet again, it will be the lenses determining the system in which the returning client invests. So it will be interesting to consider the line up of these R, L, E, and Z mount systems.

Interesting view and well put

Oz down under

 

[O]

Agree - I'm very happy so far with the IQ from my Sony cameras. The AWB tends toward the warm side, but it's easily correctable.

And Canon ???

 

[O]

The range and quality of optics have been the biggest factors for a committed photographer (buying more besides a basic ILC+kit lens). Options in a lens system has always been the No 1 Decider for me. This includes options in Used lenses (i suspect for many of us): as even a "few" lenses are a major investment. This the leveller/reality check (not least with a spouse!!).
View attachment 18652
This thread gathers a most interesting range of responses/justifications. One trend is the attractions of key camera vs key lenses; some of us are attracted to the 'best' current camera and/or lens(es).

We can expect shifts in products emphasis - and R&D - as ILC production shrinks, and the squeezing of revenue ramps up rejuggling of company strategy to shift focus to prosumer markets. At the same time, the image quality out of these modern cameras has also levelled off. Their IQ is universally excellent. There's not much left to improve. Video functionality will be refined sooner than later, and so will seamless WWW connectivity (share image as simply as a smartphone).

So what major factor (if any?) in a new camera will enticing upgraders? Either even lighter models with advanced battery power, or more releases upgrading in the "Do it all D850 style" genre? Perhaps stacked sensors will be the No 1 leveller; if so their high production costs will maintain the uniqueness of this niche product, and reposition the companies innovating these more expensive cameras? The market for stacked-sensor ILCs seems limited ie action genres only, because 'standard' sensors work already very very well for the vast majority of photographers (still using an ILC and not a 'simple' phone).

Nevertheless, I for one refuse to buy another camera that fails to include a minimum set of controls (Custom especially). This will have to improve on the minimum "haptics standards" of the Triumvirate (ie D5/D6, D500, D850).

It is obvious lenses is where we can expect more growth in innovations. So sooner than later, yet again, it will be the lenses determining the system in which the returning client invests. So it will be interesting to consider the line up of these R, L, E, and Z mount systems.

Love the photo and caption LOL

I think as a potential upgrader sitting on the side line till some time during 2022 is wise, things are changing very quickly, given the battle between mainly with Sony and Canon and Nikon around the edges occasionally some radical innovation is afoot.

Overall, I think 35mm is archaic and long over due for upgrade, I have said it before Nikon should drop a larger sensor into their existing large lens mount body, it would be a game changer.

Only an opinion as always
Oz down under

 

[eaj101]

Look, I consider myself a nature/conservation photographer. I shoot landscapes more than wildlife, wildlife more than birds, and birds more than birds in flight. (My next shoot is ghost towns under the Milky Way. My next big out of town trip is Denali. Yosemite is almost my back yard.) I have owned/used the D850, D500, D5300, D3x, Z7, Z6, Z50, OM-D-E1Mii, OM-D-E10-Miv, A7rii, A7riii a6500. I'm not going to buy a D6, A1, and probably not a Z9 if it's priced in that range because its marginal value to me doesn't compensate for its cost and size/weight.

I've mentioned optics as a concern several times. I need lenses that cover the range from ultra-wide to ultra-long. The most significant new lenses for me have been the 500PF and 300PF and the 19mm tilt/shift (the remarkable Z 14-30 f4 might be in there) and I really want a Z-quality 24-120 f4. Personally I find no functional difference between my Z lenses and the F lenses on the FTZ, though I begrudge the extra length. Sony turned out to simply not have the lenses I need, and especially not used. (I'm not going to spend $10,000 on a single lens). No tilt shift, no 200 f2, 300 f2.8 or f4, 500 f4 or f5.6.... etc etc

Given all that, unless there's something new and earthshaking, I have no incentive to switch. Canon is excellent, but I view Canon and Nikon as essentially so similar that if you used one there's no real benefit in switching to the other. Olympus is great for what I use it for (light, compact, great reach for hiking) but doesn't meet my full range of needs (including printing to 24x30). Sony FE isn't light enough to replace the Olympus and complete enough to replace Nikon or Canon. Sony E was tempting, and I quite liked the A6500 but the lenses were lacking (and the 16-70 was terrible and the 55-200 no better than OK).

If I was a professional whose livelihood depended on my images, and already had most of the gear I needed from one vendor I'm not sure I could cost justify the expense of switching from one vendor to another at this point given the relatively small distinctions.

This discussion thread is fascinating and has helped clarify my own thinking. I'm glad the three vendors are pushing each other to improve their offerings and I'm impressed with the uses some of us have made of those products. I get a lot of ideas and inspiration from reading everyone's input and activities and often get ideas of new subjects and techniques from everyone (including Steve, of course!).

Still no major change in photographic suppliers.

 

[Deleted member 115]

Yea I am not alone, I have some friends who print professionally and they don't use the I Mac 5k for that reason they also don't use it for editing, they use an Eizo screen and dedicated graphics card.


Interesting view and well put

Oz down under

It’s a great display. Mine is too bright due to my settings. When I soft proof photos for printing I sometimes will dial it way back

 

[TonyB]

I just recently switched to a Canon R5 from a Nikon Z7II. It was a really hard decision, one that I mulled over for a long time. I got a chance to try the R5 and RF 100-500 and felt it was a better fit for what I like to shoot - birds/wildlife and landscapes. Granted, landscapes are equal with the Z7II or R5. But, there is no comparison when it comes to the AF for anything that moves - the R5 picks its teeth with the Z7II. The first time I pointed the R5 at an osprey in flight, it locked on the bird’s eye and tracked it as I panned. I fired of a bunch of shots at 20FPS and was really impressed with how many were sharp. When I went back to the Z7II, I could not get the focus tracking to stay on the bird, had no eye AF and was fighting to get other AF modes to lock on the fast moving birds. And, Canon has RF lenses from 15mm to 800mm already released. Nikon’s current Z lens line-up, not much there for a wildlife shooter. Sure, there’s the FTZ but I’m hesitant to invest in F mount anything. At the end of the day, I was just done with Nikon releasing more press releases, interviews and roadmap posters than releasing actual products. I felt let down by Nikon and was ready to move on. For their sake, I hope I don’t represent the silent majority of Nikon users.

 

[O]

It’s a great display. Mine is too bright due to my settings. When I soft proof photos for printing I sometimes will dial it way back

I am waiting for the new generation 27 inch iMac with the super fast Apple processor........just as a general computer update for admin and other work, but for anything to do with photography I use the Old Mac Pro Towers as described in my earlier reply, I can slot into the Mac tower mother board 4 x 4 TB HD and change them like a USB stick, the hard drives are all formatted as X Fat so they plug into everything including a PC, basically I make them a large USB stick, I have two Mac Pro towers so there are 8 hard drives set up as mirrored.
You can buy the towers used for $800 to $1200 each and they are seriously bullet proof, later models are going for $2000. Being X fat means if any tower dies your all good still.

I only use a little of PS CS 6 if at all and and a little NIK if I have to, don't have or need LR, I am not interested in the Adobe subscription software its just another bill and dictates upgrading computers which I have no interest in doing for photography. My Macs operate off line 99%, if export images its via a USB on the PC hence I never have any issues with bugs viruses updates junk mail.......etc.

I predominantly shoot Jpeg Fine Ken Rockwell style LOL........but not as saturated, I like to get things right in camera as much as possible.
For deadly serious stuff I use TIFF/Jpeg fine, again I am free of subscriptions and IT demands, I am FREE LOL.

I gave up printing ages ago, my best friend is Drop Box, outsourcing has become so easy cheap and way more capable than me spending hours editing and printing.
Many labs are insanely good with really high end commercial gear that exceeds anything possible domestically especially with more options like printing on 300gsm water colour rag paper that just makes the work jump out at you, the Epsom and Canon papers are simply crap by comparison.
Again I can just Drop Box the money shots as taken, sit back and watch a movie LOL...Done.....

As for serious creative editing of images for example $35 each image gets editing done by graphic designers that blow your mind with the end result so I asked why sit for hours toiling on a computer playing with software......yes its my photo but they can do things in minutes that would take me hours and hours.

Labs today are so cheap, excellent and hungry, I save so much time, money, and go and do the things I want to do.
Hey that's me, not everyone is like that..........I just don't like sitting on a computer all day after a shoot its not healthy.......nice to skim through and make a selection of money shots, then hey Drop Box the winners for touch up or printing. Done deal mate happy as LOL.....

 

[Palmor]

This is for the current and former Nikon shooters. I'm kind of curious. I get a lot of people asking me about switching to Sony or Canon and I'm wondering how many Nikon shooters would consider it or have already done so. It feels like there are a lot of people on the fence with this and I' curious to get an idea of the percentages. Also, if you have a moment, I'd love to hear why either way. Inquiring minds want to know!

So my current Nikon kits consists of d500 and Z6, 500PF, 200-500, 70-300 AFP, 70-200 e-fl, 20 f1.8, 14-30z, 24-70z f4, 24-70z f2.8 and 50z f1.8. I had moved from Canon to Nikon a number of years back when it obvious that they were’t going to upgrade the 7d II and once I tried the D500 I was hooked.

Anyway, during the lock-downs last year I discovered photographing birds from a blind, close (within 5-10ft) and I noticed the mirror slap spooking them so I started using my Z6 in silent mode. While I got good shots using the Z6 +FTZ with the 500PF was frustrating. AF was so much slower (although more accurate) that it got me thinking about all the hype around the a9 and it’s super fast silent shutter, so I bought a used A9 II and 200-600 and it got me hooked…. I have to say that I’m addicted to silent shooting. Now when I hear a mirror slap it’s like nails on a chalkboard, especially when I’m outside in nature. I enjoy being less intrusive, at least as much as you can be. My problem with the A9 II was the low MP count, then the A1 was announced and I ordered it and I haven’t used my D500 since.

Now I haven’t sold my Nikon stuff because the z6 and the z lenses I have are great for everything else, plus I just can’t part ways with the 500PF. I figure since I’m not traveling any place anytime soon I can continue to wait and see what Nikon brings out but for the foreseeable future I’ll be running a dual system (kind of what I did when I first dabbled in Nikon).

 

[Doug Herr]

…. I have to say that I’m addicted to silent shooting. Now when I hear a mirror slap it’s like nails on a chalkboard, especially when I’m outside in nature. I enjoy being less intrusive, at least as much as you can be. My problem with the A9 II was the low MP count, then the A1 was announced and I ordered it and I haven’t used my D500 since.

Same for me. I don't think I've used the a1's mechanical shutter at all aside from closing when the camera is powered off to reduce dust accumulation on the sensor. When working in a blind I'm often at very close range and mirror slap means I get one exposure before the bird departs. Silent mode with a slower camera often means distortion from the rolling shutter effect (example attached). The biggest problem with the a1 is that I end up with too many acceptable photos and I still cringe at the thought of deleting a huge number of them to showcase the best few dozen.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.