jtr27
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 4,037
- Solutions
- 1
- Reaction score
- 8,469
Thom's take on the Z50II's competition.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
What are Nikon's strengths/weaknesses compared to Canon & Sony
- Thread starter Fabian Joya
- Start date
They're complementing each others' sales. Offering the same resolution and similar stills performance (yes the Z6III has better video) while providing a meaningfully different choice in control layout and ergonomics. I chose the Zf because I like the dials and can properly hand hold a long lens; however if I preferred PASM I would have bought the Z6III-or even settled for the Z6II if I didn't need the second fastest AF Nikon offers (compared to Z8-9).
It's truly amazing to have those old school ergo feels yet modern day AF inside. Also, I discovered after leaving the auto-ISO set to factory defaults (maxing out at 64000), some rather amazingly clean shots at 18000 and even a couple at 40000. I wouldn't make a habit of using that high of ISO, but the shots were quite sufficiently usable. To my surprise and delight.
When discussing cameras at around a thousand bucks, he didn't mention the Fuji X-M5. A rather glaring omission for someone shopping on price versus performance. It is $899 with 15-45mm XC lens and will ship Nov. 21. Lacking EVF and IBIS, but packing Fuji's latest CPU and tried and true 26mp sensor. Also can do 4K60 with less crop (1.29 vs 1.5x). Thankfully, that old 30 minute recording limit is now gone on all cameras' video modes. Fuji claims big improvements to the autofocus, but we shall see how that pans out.
Otherwise, well reasoned article.
Fujifilm's catalog of first party and third party APS-C specific glass is unrivaled in this space-even by Sony.
Michel_Vaillant78
Member
- Messages
- 34
- Reaction score
- 52
Since the key strenghts have already been detailed, I'll focus on the biggest drawback of the Nikon line-up:
-Where is the Canon R7/Sony A6700/Fujifilm X-H2 competitor with up-to-date AF?
-Where is the Canon R7/Sony A6700/Fujifilm X-H2 competitor with up-to-date AF?
DDaugherty
Active member
- Messages
- 59
- Reaction score
- 77
For me, Nikon's weakness is the focus system. Sure, the Z8/9 is greatly improved over any previous Z body but it has not caught up with Canon or Sony and now Canon and Sony have good predictive / AI co-processors that are quite amazing for sports photographers. I would hope Nikon would be in parity before Canon and Sony took another jump but they did not quite make it.
All modern Cameras have pretty amazing focus systems but when you shoot in challenging situations, and use multiple bodies at the same events, it is obvious Nikon is a little behind here. I still prefer to use Nikon (and Canon) over Sony for a variety of reasons, it is still a great system with fantastic glass.
All modern Cameras have pretty amazing focus systems but when you shoot in challenging situations, and use multiple bodies at the same events, it is obvious Nikon is a little behind here. I still prefer to use Nikon (and Canon) over Sony for a variety of reasons, it is still a great system with fantastic glass.
BillyBobSenna
Veteran Member
Sorry, the comment was not intended to be a reply to you. IMHO, it is hard to answer this question unless you own the latest from each manufacturer.
Fabian Joya
Leading Member
- Messages
- 815
- Reaction score
- 964
JustSomeone
Forum Enthusiast
Check the flexible colour picture control as well. Very powerful.
Completely different take.
Strengths:
- I actually like the micro SD card slot on the Zf as a backup card, that's pretty unique and very useful (and you basically never have to take it out)
- The 1.8 S prime series is great (again, pretty unique)
- I like the pattern match supported tracking of the Z6/Z7, which pretty often was able to find the selected subject again even after leaving and re-entering the frame, in this aspect it is better than 3D tracking
- I like the official Nikon store ("online shop") that, at least in my country (EU/GER), sometimes has pretty good offers in combination with corporate beneftis and instant rebates compared to let's say Canon, where cashback is super akward and the store rarely has anything good to offer
- The "legacy sensors" are beasts (Z6 / Z7 / Zf) in terms of pure image quality
A maybe strength:
- Frame.io looks promising on paper, let's see how it turns out
Weaknesses:
- The bodies are too heavy and /or too big, or at least a smaller alternative is missing, see Sony A7C II or Canon EOS R8, a compact high MP body is missing as well
- AF is pretty good nowadays but critical sharpness keeper rate is still better on my Canons and Nikon has some very specific AF quirks, that they seemingly don't want to fix
- Lenses are too heavy & big or some lighweight pro alternatives are simply missing (see Canon RF 70-200 2.8 or most of the new Sony 2.8 zooms or even something like the RF 100-500), the 1.8 primes are on the larger side as well
- Some "lighthouse" lenses are missing (please give me a sub 1kg lighweight 28-70 f2, like Sony is rumored to release one soon), same goes for sub 20mm primes and some of the more exotic zooms that prioritze weight over aperture at the long end
- The Z6 III is a great camera but I suspect that it will look a bit dated as soon as Canon releases an R6 III with the R3 sensor and Sony updates the A7 V with a stacked sensor, the Z6 III comrpimises pretty hard and that will potentially make it one of the less desirable mid level full frame sensors in the 24-33MP range (quite the opposite of the Z6 sensor)
- Nikon still tends to hold back on features even on their relatively expensive mid range models (e.g dedicated birds AF on the Z6 III), not that cool, it's a classic Canon move, but they changed this with the introduction of the R8/R6 II
Strengths:
- I actually like the micro SD card slot on the Zf as a backup card, that's pretty unique and very useful (and you basically never have to take it out)
- The 1.8 S prime series is great (again, pretty unique)
- I like the pattern match supported tracking of the Z6/Z7, which pretty often was able to find the selected subject again even after leaving and re-entering the frame, in this aspect it is better than 3D tracking
- I like the official Nikon store ("online shop") that, at least in my country (EU/GER), sometimes has pretty good offers in combination with corporate beneftis and instant rebates compared to let's say Canon, where cashback is super akward and the store rarely has anything good to offer
- The "legacy sensors" are beasts (Z6 / Z7 / Zf) in terms of pure image quality
A maybe strength:
- Frame.io looks promising on paper, let's see how it turns out
Weaknesses:
- The bodies are too heavy and /or too big, or at least a smaller alternative is missing, see Sony A7C II or Canon EOS R8, a compact high MP body is missing as well
- AF is pretty good nowadays but critical sharpness keeper rate is still better on my Canons and Nikon has some very specific AF quirks, that they seemingly don't want to fix
- Lenses are too heavy & big or some lighweight pro alternatives are simply missing (see Canon RF 70-200 2.8 or most of the new Sony 2.8 zooms or even something like the RF 100-500), the 1.8 primes are on the larger side as well
- Some "lighthouse" lenses are missing (please give me a sub 1kg lighweight 28-70 f2, like Sony is rumored to release one soon), same goes for sub 20mm primes and some of the more exotic zooms that prioritze weight over aperture at the long end
- The Z6 III is a great camera but I suspect that it will look a bit dated as soon as Canon releases an R6 III with the R3 sensor and Sony updates the A7 V with a stacked sensor, the Z6 III comrpimises pretty hard and that will potentially make it one of the less desirable mid level full frame sensors in the 24-33MP range (quite the opposite of the Z6 sensor)
- Nikon still tends to hold back on features even on their relatively expensive mid range models (e.g dedicated birds AF on the Z6 III), not that cool, it's a classic Canon move, but they changed this with the introduction of the R8/R6 II
Last edited:
Brian Homer
Senior Member
True but the OP was talking about now?
Things I find very useful with Nikon cameras:
- You can quickly delete an image by double-pressing the 'delete' button. For some reason, no other brand has been able to adopt such a wonderful shortcut
- Most Nikon cameras have larger 3.2-inch screens, while other brands often stick to smaller 3-inch screens
- Camera settings can be conveniently saved to and recalled from a memory card, where other brands might inconveniently rely on PC software
- To mount a lens, you turn it counter-clockwise, which is counter-intuitive and the opposite of every other brand. Nikon had a wonderful opportunity to get this right with the introduction of the new mount, but they botched it.
- The click-less nature of the Z lens control ring makes it basically useless for most applications, and many users just turn it off
- The rubber coating is prone to swelling, deformation and stickiness.
- Unreliability of the SnapBridge
- Strange lack of parity in features between models (e.g. the cheaper Z50 has the handy ability to quickly delete all images from a given day, but the Z6II doesn't)
- Battery charge displayed as vague 3 or 5 bars rather than %.
Last edited:
FuhTeng
Senior Member
I disagree. I like Nikon's built in color (and especially monochrome) profiles. They don't look fake like Canon or Olympus, or need a bunch of work like Fuji.
To each their own, but no, not everyone likes overcooked jpgs.
chambeshi
Veteran Member
Two resources for comparisons
Is Nikon AF (Z9/8) really that much worse? - Nikon-mount SLRs - Photography - FM Forums
Join the Nikon-mount SLRs photography discussion: I am reading threads over on the canon board where basically current nikon af is being trashed relative to the new r52 and now the r1...and to the a1. I was usi
www.fredmiranda.com
Comparing Nikon Z to Sony A | Thom Hogan
Some thoughts about how Nikon Z cameras are different than Sony A cameras
www.zsystemuser.com
Nebido
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,456
- Solutions
- 3
- Reaction score
- 3,424
For me, the choice of a system always comes down to the range of lenses, as this is where I invest by far the most money for my equipment.
This is already evident in the ratio: 90% of the investment I've made in the Z-mount so far has gone on Z lenses, 10% on the body.
So the fascination for me always comes from the lenses and factors such as the history and the heritage of a company in this field logically also play a role.
This is where I personally see Nikon's greatest strengths, its long history and passion as an optical manufacturer.
That's not to say that other manufacturers don't also have outstanding lenses on offer, but I personally feel that Nikon is the best choice for me.
For one thing, I have always been a lover of exotic lenses; I bought my first 85mm f/1.2, a Canon FD by the way, over 40 years ago.
So there's no going back for me and Nikon offers the most interesting lenses at the moment with the Z-mount, especially as my great love, apart from 35mm, is the medium telephoto focal lengths, so I currently have a whole range of primes, Z-mount, FD-mount and Mamiya645 with 80/2.8, 85/1.2, 105/2.8, 135/1.8, 135/2.8, 150/3.5, 200/2.8.
In addition to rational considerations, however, irrational factors always play a role, which are always unconsciously involved.
Aesthetics are also always a factor for me when it comes to camera equipment, and here too I prefer the current Nikon Z design compared to the competition.
In addition, I am a burnt child in relation to Canon, mount change from FD to EF, where you are suddenly no longer allowed to play along with a Canon FD lens fleet in the five-digit range.
Only since MILC my remaining FD lenses are again fully usable again apart from an FD SLR.
Since then, Canon as a company has been burned for me.
I would also feel comfortable with Sony on the lens side, especially in their wide-angle range, but I would miss the f/1.2 exotics, lenses like the Z 400/4.5 VR S or the 600/6.3 PF VR S.
Apart from that, I belong to a generation for which Sony simply has no lasting legacy in the field of photography, at least not in comparison with other manufacturers.
Even if a traditional company like Minolta has merged into it and doesn't lack know-how, it's not the same.
For me, Sony is much stronger in terms of perception with TVs, video recorders, CD/Blu-ray players, etc.
Another factor that drove me to Nikon, is the mount that has the fewest limitations in terms of adaptation.
With a Nikon Z, I can not only adapt my old FD, M42, Nikon F, Mamiya645 lenses, I can theoretically adapt any lens for the E-mount if I want to add individual Sony lens highlights, but with Sony as a body I would have to do without the complete Z lens line-up and that would not be an alternative for me as a lover of exceptional optics.
This is already evident in the ratio: 90% of the investment I've made in the Z-mount so far has gone on Z lenses, 10% on the body.
So the fascination for me always comes from the lenses and factors such as the history and the heritage of a company in this field logically also play a role.
This is where I personally see Nikon's greatest strengths, its long history and passion as an optical manufacturer.
That's not to say that other manufacturers don't also have outstanding lenses on offer, but I personally feel that Nikon is the best choice for me.
For one thing, I have always been a lover of exotic lenses; I bought my first 85mm f/1.2, a Canon FD by the way, over 40 years ago.
So there's no going back for me and Nikon offers the most interesting lenses at the moment with the Z-mount, especially as my great love, apart from 35mm, is the medium telephoto focal lengths, so I currently have a whole range of primes, Z-mount, FD-mount and Mamiya645 with 80/2.8, 85/1.2, 105/2.8, 135/1.8, 135/2.8, 150/3.5, 200/2.8.
In addition to rational considerations, however, irrational factors always play a role, which are always unconsciously involved.
Aesthetics are also always a factor for me when it comes to camera equipment, and here too I prefer the current Nikon Z design compared to the competition.
In addition, I am a burnt child in relation to Canon, mount change from FD to EF, where you are suddenly no longer allowed to play along with a Canon FD lens fleet in the five-digit range.
Only since MILC my remaining FD lenses are again fully usable again apart from an FD SLR.
Since then, Canon as a company has been burned for me.
I would also feel comfortable with Sony on the lens side, especially in their wide-angle range, but I would miss the f/1.2 exotics, lenses like the Z 400/4.5 VR S or the 600/6.3 PF VR S.
Apart from that, I belong to a generation for which Sony simply has no lasting legacy in the field of photography, at least not in comparison with other manufacturers.
Even if a traditional company like Minolta has merged into it and doesn't lack know-how, it's not the same.
For me, Sony is much stronger in terms of perception with TVs, video recorders, CD/Blu-ray players, etc.
Another factor that drove me to Nikon, is the mount that has the fewest limitations in terms of adaptation.
With a Nikon Z, I can not only adapt my old FD, M42, Nikon F, Mamiya645 lenses, I can theoretically adapt any lens for the E-mount if I want to add individual Sony lens highlights, but with Sony as a body I would have to do without the complete Z lens line-up and that would not be an alternative for me as a lover of exceptional optics.
Last edited:
Fabian Joya
Leading Member
- Messages
- 815
- Reaction score
- 964
I agree with this, and should have added that as a strength. Nikon's image rendering is simply fantastic in my view. Not just colors, but in the noise handling as well, especially in RAW (NEF) files. I mostly leave noise reduction off as a result. Only very high ISO's in my mind need some processing. I prefer the graininess to the lack of detail.
michaeladawson
Forum Pro
That's totally subjective. I can imagine Canon and Sony users might say their cameras have better ergonomics and ease of use.
You have an asterisk here. So this opinion is based on the electronic vs. mechanical shutter? I see no "strength" here for Nikon. It's not a weakness either. But I personally have not benefited one bit from an electronic vs. mechanical shutter. If you use flash much I think the electronic shutter still has issues in certain situations.
You want f/1.4 lenses. I couldn't care less. I want small f/1.8 lenses. Or even f/2. Nikon's current f/1.8 lenses are huge. Point being that everyone has different opinions. I can imagine that a lot of people say the Nikon lens lineup is pretty good so far. Sure, they have a few more lenses to put out.
I have a ton of Nikon gear going all the way back to the F2 era. Too expensive to switch for questionable gain. I like the look of Nikon cameras. I never liked the look of Canon cameras. Sony is no better.
+1
For access to the best choice of lenses in the 90s you chose Canon or Nikon. I read Don McCullin’s autobiography and the fact that his Nikon F stopped a bullet and saved his life and the choice was made.
I would say, strengths - photography, ballistic protection; weaknesses - integration with smartphones.
A key weakness is the ergonomics and ease of use - compared to the new gen Sony's like the A9iii which have far more customisation options, 3 dials for exposure control, better quality view finder, flippy screen. Ideal to tailor for individual in fast action scenarios.
Firmware is easier to use and camera easier to set up - no need for a 900 page manual.
AF just works no need for clunky AF mode handoffs etc.
The Z8/Z9 are based on a 2021 hardware platform which has proven limited in terms of performance - fine for stills or slowish action but not competitive for fast action.
Disappointing to see even the newest released are still based on the 2021 hardware platform (Z6iii, Z50ii) and suffer the same AF limitations.
Concerns that Nikon have a long (6 year?) hardware platform cycle time so will never really compete with Sony/Canon cameras.
20fps is pretty slow by todays standards
no RAW pre-capture - rather dated
Sony has some of the best, lightest and most affordable lenses by comparison e.g. 70-200GM, 600f/4, 200-600, 300 f/2.8.
Not a big fan of the PF lenses - I would prefer sticking with the primes. Nikon 180-600 is disappointingly soft wide open - unacceptably so imo.
Unfortunately lenses like the 400 f/2.8TC, while they offer some convenience, don't make up for poor AF accuracy. Did a trip earlier in the year and one guy had a Z9/400f2.8TC and never made any fast action shots because the Z9 couldn't handle the distractions and stick on the subject. Probably not an issue for those who just shoot standard big game - but for that I would prefer the dynamic range and resolution of something like the A7r5 anyway.
?? Not sure I can since it doesn't seem to help with autofocus accuracy or higher FPS or RAW pre-capture.
One key strength is the stabilisation when shooting video - but unfortunately my experience with the AF is that it seems to hunt continuously which is a bit annoying.
Nothing, switched in 2019 to Sony and never looked back - seems Nikon designed the Z8/Z9 to help the ageing DSLR users migrate over to mirrorless rather than starting from scratch.
Lets see the next gen hardware platform - current one is processor constrained and cannot be improved.
Autofocus
reduce weight and size
high resolution and refresh rate EVF
flippy screen like A7R5/A9iii
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum