Sony Alpha 1, SEL 200-600 or Canon R5, RF 100-500

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
nandbytes Veteran Member • Posts: 6,220
Re: Sony Alpha 1, SEL 200-600 or Canon R5, RF 100-500
2

duncang wrote:

SafariBob wrote:

thomeven wrote:

This is most likely asked before, but I have to decide within a few days which combo to go for.. The money is about equal, since the A1 is more expensive than Canon R5. Today I have the A9ii with the 200-600mm. I am going more into bird photography and both combinations is excellent for BIF, but they are also somewhat different.. I have been a long time Sony shooter, but also owned Canon gear some years ago.

Does anyone have some facts to consider helping med to decide.. I would probably be happy with both combos, and AF, eye AF and IQ is probably the most important for me. Something tells me to stay Sony, but I am not sure..

for bird/bif, there is no contest, the Sony combo is superior, for a landscape & wildlife hiker (me), it’s a tougher call, but given the 1 stop advantage of the Sony and the tamron 28200, I am still going to call it a slight Sony advantage. It’s a pity Sony doesn’t have a more competitively priced 8k body.

What a9ii/200-600 is going to give better AF, eye AF and IQ that the R5/100-500 ?

You must be joking right ?

What bird eye AF does the a9ii have and how is 24MP going to give better IQ than 45MP ?

In what way is the a9ii/200-600 combo superior to the R5/100-500 for bif ?

The R5/100-500 gives you way more cropping ability so the extra 100mm on the long end isn't going to be much of an advantage.

For handheld BIF the canon combo it is a much lighter combo.

And given the R5 has 0.5 to 1 stop advantage over the Sony the f6.3 of the 200-600 provides little advantage.

R5/100-500 might be a toss up with the A1/200-600 but no contest against the a9ii/200-600 in my opinion.

A9II still does true blackout free shooting that R5 doesn't really do.

Also A9II tracking in general I have read is better than R5. For example even dpreview writes:

"Back when I wrote our review of the a9 II, I said it had the best autofocus performance money could buy. Canon's subsequent EOS R5 and R6 cameras have come close to closing the gap, and they have pretty awesome animal detection algorithms. But the a9 II's tracking just works incredibly well, pretty much all the time;"

To me reading such reviews say as far as tracking goes A9II is still more accurate and sticky to the subject than other bodies. No good having eyeAF and animal detection if the subject itself isn't in focus. Overall/general subject tracking capabilities and experience (real time lag free blackout free shooting) might still make it slightly for BiF.

Disclaimer:

All this is just theory from my various reading online. I haven't used A9II for tracking birds. I have used only briefly in a Sony event for tracking race cars.

I have used R5 for tracking humans and children but never animal/birds.

Having said all that I'd probably still go with R5 over the A9II

-- hide signature --

Focus on what you have, not on what you don't.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/nandbytes/

 nandbytes's gear list:nandbytes's gear list
Sony a7C Sony a1 Sony FE 200-600 F5.6-6.3 Sony FE 20mm F1.8G Tamron 28-200mm F2.8-5.6 +2 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow