Which would you pick for birds

[Snapquacky]

Not interested in brand bashing, I am interested in best image quality. Based on current availability and for a relatively matched budget, with some future proofing in mind, which would you choose.

Nikon Z6/Z6II + 800PF or Sony A1 + 200-600G, these work out roughly the same cost, ie about $6500-7500 in my area. I am light challenged in the UK so f6.3 will mean relying on VR and IBIS.

I am likely going to pre-order an 800PF regardless and I realise the focus tracking on the two cameras above isn't ideally matched, but, assume still subjects rather than birds in flight. Interested to get some thoughts from those who have used or are using both systems, bit early for the 800PF feedback I know. My usual theory is to spend money on glass, less so on the camera, but I would certainly like to play with a stacked sensor I could stretch to a Z9 and 800PF but interested to see what you think on comparatively priced packages, which end up with a 'similar' amount of pixels on the bird, or somewhere near.

Once the Nikon 200-600 lands it will be a more even comparison, I like the idea of zooming out if something surprises me! but the 800PF is just so very tempting

 

[Patrick M]

If you're going to use that 800mm pf - and its a gorgeous lens! - then I'd be tempted to get the Z7ii so you can digitally zoom in an retain high image quality - admittedly you'll lose the Z6's better low light capability.

 

[Snapquacky]

If you're going to use that 800mm pf - and its a gorgeous lens! - then I'd be tempted to get the Z7ii so you can digitally zoom in an retain high image quality - admittedly you'll lose the Z6's better low light capability.

Thanks Patrick, I agree the Z7ii resolution would be nice, was trying to keep on roughly similar budget in this comparison, also the Z6 sensor would help a bit with lower light/higher ISO potentially. Very keen to end up with a 45MP+ sensor long term, my train of thought was the Z6 would get me running on the 800PF until Z9 drops a bit in price or future stacked sensor Z bodies arrive. Also suspect the Z6 might tolerate the TC1.4x better being lower resolution, kind of compensate or even out the Z6 vs Z7, I wish my mind was more simple than it is

 

[Palmor]

It kind of depends on what and how you like to shoot. Personally the A1/200-600 would be my choice, not only because of the better AF of the A1 but because you can use it in electronic shutter 100% of the time. I don't think IQ will be different in the final images. Obviously you get more cropping ability with the A1 but you'll use some of that to match the 800mm focal length of the Nikon. Once both images are sized to the same resolution I don't think you'll notice a difference.

I think in summary:

• I'd choose the Nikon if...
  • You shoot Nikon already and have glass you like and will use
  • Lower frame-rate and not always being able to use electronic shutter isn't a dealbreaker
  • Not having latest and greatest AF (with Bird Eye AF) isn't a primary requirement
  • Plan to upgrade to the Z9 sometime before the above bullets become a dealbreakers
  • Constant 800mm isn't prohibitive
• I'd choose Sony if...
  • Latest AF technology, higher frame rate and being able to shoot electronic shutter are requirements
  • Cost of switching is not prohibitive (if you need to switch)
  • 200-600mm is a better focal length for your type of photography
  • Rest of Sony lens lineup meets your needs

 

[bleirer]

Just based on reviews and what is said here, the a1 is far better for tracking and animal eye detection than z6ii or z7ii. The z9 would be in the same league as the a1, as would the Canon R3, and the R5 a respectable 2nd place. Z9 with the 800 would really be a winner.

 

[Snapquacky]

It kind of depends on what and how you like to shoot. Personally the A1/200-600 would be my choice, not only because of the better AF of the A1 but because you can use it in electronic shutter 100% of the time. I don't think IQ will be different in the final images. Obviously you get more cropping ability with the A1 but you'll use some of that to match the 800mm focal length of the Nikon. Once both images are sized to the same resolution I don't think you'll notice a difference.

I think in summary:

• I'd choose the Nikon if...
  • You shoot Nikon already and have glass you like and will use 3
  • Lower frame-rate and not always being able to use electronic shutter isn't a dealbreaker 5
  • Not having latest and greatest AF (with Bird Eye AF) isn't a primary requirement 4
  • Plan to upgrade to the Z9 sometime before the above bullets become a dealbreakers 4
  • Constant 800mm isn't prohibitive 6
• I'd choose Sony if...
  • Latest AF technology, higher frame rate and being able to shoot electronic shutter are requirements 8
  • Cost of switching is not prohibitive (if you need to switch) 8
  • 200-600mm is a better focal length for your type of photography 7
  • Rest of Sony lens lineup meets your needs 5

Thank you Palmor, I only have one lens that will autofocus with the Nikon and that is 300 f4, others are screw drive. My sensible side keeps zoning in on the Sony combo but then Nikon throw the 800PF in to the mix. I added an weighting out of 10 (higher is better) next to your summary list above, probably doesn't help much!

I have no doubt with 200-600 I would be at the long end mostly, coming back to 200 might be useful on occasion, or for tracking moving subjects. My normal shooting pattern is birds, lower light, mostly static but I do occasionally go for sea birds in flight and the odd barn owl/harrier when they are around.

 

[Snapquacky]

Just based on reviews and what is said here, the a1 is far better for tracking and animal eye detection than z6ii or z7ii. The z9 would be in the same league as the a1, as would the Canon R3, and the R5 a respectable 2nd place. Z9 with the 800 would really be a winner.

Thank you Bleirer, yes indeed, A1 is stellar for tracking no doubt, the Sony tech is a big attraction, as is their 200-600. Like you say though Nikon stacked sensor body and 800PF is a mighty combination also

 

[Palmor]

Thank you Palmor, I only have one lens that will autofocus with the Nikon and that is 300 f4, others are screw drive. My sensible side keeps zoning in on the Sony combo but then Nikon throw the 800PF in to the mix. I added an weighting out of 10 (higher is better) next to your summary list above, probably doesn't help much!

I have no doubt with 200-600 I would be at the long end mostly, coming back to 200 might be useful on occasion, or for tracking moving subjects. My normal shooting pattern is birds, lower light, mostly static but I do occasionally go for sea birds in flight and the odd barn owl/harrier when they are around.

I'm going to throw another option out there for you assuming that ~800mm is the effective focal length you are trying to get to

Z9 with 500PF get you to ~750mm with the ~same pixel count as the Z6 and 800PF. Again this is just my preference but if staying with Nikon I think I'd go this way instead of using the Z6 body. Once you start using the advanced AF, high frame rate and electronic shutter there is no going back

Of course this is all a very personal decision and that is just how I'd go.. everyone is different!

 

[Snapquacky]

I'm going to throw another option out there for you assuming that ~800mm is the effective focal length you are trying to get to

Z9 with 500PF get you to ~750mm with the ~same pixel count as the Z6 and 800PF. Again this is just my preference but if staying with Nikon I think I'd go this way instead of using the Z6 body. Once you start using the advanced AF, high frame rate and electronic shutter there is no going back

Of course this is all a very personal decision and that is just how I'd go.. everyone is different!

Thanks Palmor, I will be sticking with native lenses though going forward now, much as I like that 500PF concept. Stacked sensor is high on my list, I am trying to justify the 800PF initially, and also aware that maybe the Z9II or mini Z9 second gen will make some steps forward. I am suspecting Sony might not put much forward in between the 200-600 and 600f4, where as Nikon are filling this gap, no real bad choices but feedback from users is always good.

Another thing which seems to crop up is IBIS, Nikon seem to have a good system, Sony maybe not so good from comments I see, interested to know how actual owners have found this. Due to low light, I will depend on this more so it is a factor for me.

 

[bleirer]

I'm going to throw another option out there for you assuming that ~800mm is the effective focal length you are trying to get to

Z9 with 500PF get you to ~750mm with the ~same pixel count as the Z6 and 800PF. Again this is just my preference but if staying with Nikon I think I'd go this way instead of using the Z6 body. Once you start using the advanced AF, high frame rate and electronic shutter there is no going back

Of course this is all a very personal decision and that is just how I'd go.. everyone is different!

Though I believe noise runs with the crop factor, not the pixel count, so maybe a cost to doing that?

 

[bleirer]

Thanks Palmor, I will be sticking with native lenses though going forward now, much as I like that 500PF concept. Stacked sensor is high on my list, I am trying to justify the 800PF initially, and also aware that maybe the Z9II or mini Z9 second gen will make some steps forward. I am suspecting Sony might not put much forward in between the 200-600 and 600f4, where as Nikon are filling this gap, no real bad choices but feedback from users is always good.

Another thing which seems to crop up is IBIS, Nikon seem to have a good system, Sony maybe not so good from comments I see, interested to know how actual owners have found this. Due to low light, I will depend on this more so it is a factor for me.

My view is that IBIS won't help any with subject motion, and all these modern cameras have enough to counter camera movement where one stop either way in the specs won't make a difference.

 

[Snapquacky]

My view is that IBIS won't help any with subject motion, and all these modern cameras have enough to counter camera movement where one stop either way in the specs won't make a difference.

I believe there might be some benefits for motion but limited. Static subjects it where I am hoping for benefits, I've seen some nice shots with the 800PF handheld at low shutter.

 

[bleirer]

I believe there might be some benefits for motion but limited. Static subjects it where I am hoping for benefits, I've seen some nice shots with the 800PF handheld at low shutter.

Zero effect from IBIS for subject motion since the shutter speed is the factor there, as far as I understand it anyway. I'm willing to learn something though if you know otherwise.

 

[StefanSC]

The only benefit of image stabilization on subjects in motion is that it stabilizes the image in the viewfinder, making it easier to keep the focus on them.

 

[Snapquacky]

The only benefit of image stabilization on subjects in motion is that it stabilizes the image in the viewfinder, making it easier to keep the focus on them.

Thanks Stefan, that makes sense, I was maybe confused reading that some IBIS systems detect when you are panning and disable themselves. I have zero experience of IBIS or VR etc, looking forward to trying them out though, I will take any help I can get

 

[abc123brian]

Given the limit placed on the choices, it would come down to if I was trying to shoot action of the bird or my main goal was of perched goals. The AF on the Zii bodies is similar to a DSLR and it won’t offer any sort of automation like eye AF for birds. It does alright following what you put the focus point on, but it’s on you to keep it there. The A1 has the automated focus modes to track the bird and eye as it moves around the frame. If shooting stationary birds, more reach could be a big benefit and the 800mm PF would work very well for. It should help bring out more details and reduce the amount of cropping needed. Both lenses are going to put you at F/6.3 so no advantage there.

If the Z6iii was available, I think I’d go with the Nikon setup. Given the specific question and the fact you really have no lenses for either, I’d chose the Sony here. You mentioned you could go Z9 and 800mm PF and that would be my choice given those options since you get great AF, 800mm, high resolution, and high fps; everything you could ask for.

 

[Snapquacky]

Given the limit placed on the choices, it would come down to if I was trying to shoot action of the bird or my main goal was of perched goals. The AF on the Zii bodies is similar to a DSLR and it won’t offer any sort of automation like eye AF for birds. It does alright following what you put the focus point on, but it’s on you to keep it there. The A1 has the automated focus modes to track the bird and eye as it moves around the frame. If shooting stationary birds, more reach could be a big benefit and the 800mm PF would work very well for. It should help bring out more details and reduce the amount of cropping needed. Both lenses are going to put you at F/6.3 so no advantage there.

If the Z6iii was available, I think I’d go with the Nikon setup. Given the specific question and the fact you really have no lenses for either, I’d chose the Sony here. You mentioned you could go Z9 and 800mm PF and that would be my choice given those options since you get great AF, 800mm, high resolution, and high fps; everything you could ask for.

Thanks Brian, perched birds are first and foremost, I would like to get a stacked sensor, just working out whether now is the time to jump on one. I suppose we are at a stage where stacked sensors are poised to become more mainstream and cost effective, but that could take a while. I am certainly not tied to Nikon since only really my flash and one lens will work on the Z bodies now. The 800PF would certainly reduce cropping, that is something I do a lot even with my 420mm DX setup, I need to be at 600-620mm to match that on full frame, you then realise that actually 600mm on full frame is still pretty short! it never ends does it

I admit my question was a slightly odd one, being that one camera has exceptional tracking and the other is not so much, one lens is a zoom and the other a 800 prime. It was more the fact they both reach roughly the same end result, whilst both offering room to advance with upgrades. Biggest difference I suppose is that Nikon currently offer more in between $1500 and $6500 regarding lenses, Sony have a gap between $1500 and $10000.

Fast forward 2 years and it might be an easier decision, once the Z8 lands, as if decisions get any easier I suppose the biggest thing is making the correct brand choice, would rather not go to Sony only to realise 2 years down the line I probably should have stuck with Nikon, not the end of the world of course, just hurts the bank balance a bit more

 

[DRwyoming]

I suppose the biggest thing is making the correct brand choice, would rather not go to Sony only to realise 2 years down the line I probably should have stuck with Nikon, not the end of the world of course, just hurts the bank balance a bit more

Honestly if your focus is birds and not building a do-everything camera kit choosing a brand likely isn't a long term commitment. IOW, if you'll buy say a Sony and their 200-600mm lens and shoot with that for a few years and then decide some other brand has something that better fits your needs it's not too bad to sell that kit and move to another brand. Sure there will be ergonomic, menu navigation and perhaps other changes as you jump brands so some relearning but the big issue with brand jumping is for folks that have a deep investment into lenses and accessories in one brand or another. But sure, if you pick up a camera and long lens and then decide to invest in a broad range of lenses, flashes and other accessories you do tend to get more financially entrenched in that brand.

I really don't think you'll go wrong with any of the major brands today so I'd pick a system you like that fits your price point and get out shooting. Ideally you'd get some hands on time with the system you hope to purchase, either in a brick and mortar camera store or perhaps by renting first but there more great camera systems out there today than ever before so if you stick with the big brands it's hard to go wrong.

 

[Doug Herr]

Fast forward 2 years and it might be an easier decision, once the Z8 lands, as if decisions get any easier I suppose the biggest thing is making the correct brand choice, would rather not go to Sony only to realise 2 years down the line I probably should have stuck with Nikon, not the end of the world of course, just hurts the bank balance a bit more

If only we could predict the future!

Speaking only for myself, I don't make major purchase decisions based on rumors, roadmaps or expectations especially since I'm old enough that my future no longer appears as infinite as it did when I was 20. I buy the equipment available now that meets my current wants/needs. Nikon's roadmaps may be published with the best of intentions, the rumors might be well-founded, but to quote Harry Potter: "since when have our plans ever actually worked? We plan, we get there, all hell breaks loose."

IMHO roadmaps are a way for a company that is bleeding market share to slow the rate of defections. They're an enticement to wait 'just a little longer'. IDK about anyone else but I'm done waiting for promises to be fulfilled; I want to make my photos now.

 

[John Woodworth]

I read through this thread and, based on your comments, I would buy the glass. Bodies will come and go but you will have the 800mm PF for 20+ years.

 

[Snapquacky]

Honestly if your focus is birds and not building a do-everything camera kit choosing a brand likely isn't a long term commitment. IOW, if you'll buy say a Sony and their 200-600mm lens and shoot with that for a few years and then decide some other brand has something that better fits your needs it's not too bad to sell that kit and move to another brand. Sure there will be ergonomic, menu navigation and perhaps other changes as you jump brands so some relearning but the big issue with brand jumping is for folks that have a deep investment into lenses and accessories in one brand or another. But sure, if you pick up a camera and long lens and then decide to invest in a broad range of lenses, flashes and other accessories you do tend to get more financially entrenched in that brand.

I really don't think you'll go wrong with any of the major brands today so I'd pick a system you like that fits your price point and get out shooting. Ideally you'd get some hands on time with the system you hope to purchase, either in a brick and mortar camera store or perhaps by renting first but there more great camera systems out there today than ever before so if you stick with the big brands it's hard to go wrong.

Very fair comments there, thank you. My birding kit is pretty much one camera and one lens, so as you say it isn't a massive deal to switch again at some point in the next few years. I think my current decision is tougher because I have increased the budget from my last upgrade, which was 8 years ago and cost around $1700 for body and lens. This time around I am looking at closer to $6500-7500, puts a bit more pressure on the choice I make.

Maybe I shouldn't be going mad and getting a stacked sensor, sure an Z7ii or A7IV would do the job just fine in either camp with associated lenses, my plan was to get something which would last me another 6-8 years. Maybe I am approaching this all wrong but it certainly is getting much harder to make a bad choice.

 

[Snapquacky]

I read through this thread and, based on your comments, I would buy the glass. Bodies will come and go but you will have the 800mm PF for 20+ years.

Indeed John, this is something I always tell myself, buy the glass, don't buy the camera. My f2 and f2.8 lenses always remind me of this, also the glass will almost always retain more value, if that is a consideration.

 

[Snapquacky]

If only we could predict the future!

Speaking only for myself, I don't make major purchase decisions based on rumors, roadmaps or expectations especially since I'm old enough that my future no longer appears as infinite as it did when I was 20. I buy the equipment available now that meets my current wants/needs. Nikon's roadmaps may be published with the best of intentions, the rumors might be well-founded, but to quote Harry Potter: "since when have our plans ever actually worked? We plan, we get there, all hell breaks loose."

IMHO roadmaps are a way for a company that is bleeding market share to slow the rate of defections. They're an enticement to wait 'just a little longer'. IDK about anyone else but I'm done waiting for promises to be fulfilled; I want to make my photos now.

Thanks Doug, agreed, crystal ball would be nice right!

I do agree that Nikon can buy themselves time with the roadmap and even announcements with pre-orders, it certainly isn't ideal and I do in many respects share your viewpoint. Many images could be made whilst waiting on the promise of new kit.

 

[John Woodworth]

Indeed John, this is something I always tell myself, buy the glass, don't buy the camera. My f2 and f2.8 lenses always remind me of this, also the glass will almost always retain more value, if that is a consideration.

Well, you are posing a decision problem with a lot of constraints. If I were jumping into a new system, I would choose the Sony since the A1 is so good and Sony equipment seems more available.

But they don't have the lens you require. Nothing beats filling the frame for quality images.

For static birds, the image quality of the Z6/7ii will be as good as any mirrorless available. The Z6ii has the better low-light focus, but the image quality of the Z7ii can be better in good light, and if you can get a focus lock, programs like DeNoise in post-processing can pretty much equalize the picture quality if the light is low. (If you can't get a focus lock with either of these cameras then the light is low indeed, and maybe better to shoot another day.)

By the time you get the hang of the 800mm, which will probably have a big learning curve (don't be fooled by Steve Perry's video where he makes everything look easy), there will be a realistic stacked sensor Nikon body for your next financial conquest. And Nikon seems to be on track to providing high-quality, professional lenses at more affordable prices, and particularly at the long focal length.

On switching to the Z system, I retired some screw-drive lenses that were 20 to 30+ years old. Lenses really do outlast bodies so I would put the premium on buying the lens you really want.

 

[abc123brian]

IMHO roadmaps are a way for a company that is bleeding market share to slow the rate of defections. They're an enticement to wait 'just a little longer'. IDK about anyone else but I'm done waiting for promises to be fulfilled; I want to make my photos now.

I don‘t see roadmaps as that at all and I appreciate them. I view roadmaps as a way for a company to let current customers know where they are going and potential customers know what they are planning. It is especially important when introducing a new product line. It can work both ways as someone may look at the roadmap and say it’s not for me as much as someone might say that is what I’m looking for. The roadmap helped me move to Nikon as it showed they were going to build the lenses I was looking for incldimg some other brands haven’t yet made. Fujifilm also had a roadmap when introducing the X lineup. Car manufactures are using them to tell us where they are going with electric vehicles.