Honestly, would you buy ...

Honestly, would you buy an R, RP or R6 over the new Nikon Z5 camera if primarily a stills shooter with no existing camera gear or brand loyalty?

I have a hard time seeing why one would spend the extra money on the R or R6. Is the RP cheaper enough to forgo IBIS, AF joystick, 2 card slots, and better EVF?

Now let's assume one is looking at this starting from scratch.

I own an R and RP. Love them both, but this Z5 seems like the perfect balance of capabilities and pricing. IBIS which both the R & RP lack. Better EVF than the RP. AF joystick and 2 card slots which are missing on the R/RP. Considerably cheaper than a R6 and similarly specified for stills.

It seems to me the R6 either has to come down in price drastically or Canon has to update the RP to compete.

Regardless, this has to be good from a camera buyers perspective as pricing on the lower/middle range has to get more competitive.  Surely Sony will have to come out with a lower priced model and not just sell older models cheaper.

So, put all loyalty aside and look from the perspective of a first time buyer.

Honestly, would you buy an R, RP or R6 over the new Nikon Z5 camera if primarily a stills shooter with no existing camera gear or brand loyalty?

Sadly the Z5 would have appeared to have inherited the lame AF system of the Z6 (whicj still comes out bottom on DPR's tests) , it would by the tech also appear to have an even older sensor (no doubt complete with the heavy AA filter sony 24Mp FF sensors have) , Hopefully its not inherited the banding issue when pulling shadows and hopefully not simply jammed the thing permanently in 12bit mode or fudged some masking out routine in the firmware , then there`s the flaky FTZ adapter (OK that`s a bit strong but an RF or M adapter it is not) ....

thankfully they did fix the silly 1 XQD slot business by giving it 2 UHS2s instead but failed to take advantage of the opportunity to give the thing a traditional Nikon look (a`la DF or even D5) so it joins its older bretheren as the Fugliest Mirrorless camera ever made ..

I shoot Nikon for work and I wouldn`t touch a Z with a bargepole , admittedly the 1 card slot, banding and lame AF were the main reasons and they`ve definitely fixed one of these issues here but unless they`ve fixed the other two it`s same old same old .. I'm sure it`ll sell , Sony's complacency has helped this as has Canon`s not putting the 30Mp sensor in the RP but not one for me

Canon have done well with the 24Mp DPAF APS_C sensors in the M series , maybe its time for a new tech FF one with amazing DR and high ISOs to go in an RP mark-II

jwilliams wrote:

Honestly, would you buy an R, RP or R6 over the new Nikon Z5 camera if primarily a stills shooter with no existing camera gear or brand loyalty?

I have a hard time seeing why one would spend the extra money on the R or R6. Is the RP cheaper enough to forgo IBIS, AF joystick, 2 card slots, and better EVF?

Now let's assume one is looking at this starting from scratch.

I own an R and RP. Love them both, but this Z5 seems like the perfect balance of capabilities and pricing. IBIS which both the R & RP lack. Better EVF than the RP. AF joystick and 2 card slots which are missing on the R/RP. Considerably cheaper than a R6 and similarly specified for stills.

It seems to me the R6 either has to come down in price drastically or Canon has to update the RP to compete.

Regardless, this has to be good from a camera buyers perspective as pricing on the lower/middle range has to get more competitive. Surely Sony will have to come out with a lower priced model and not just sell older models cheaper.

So, put all loyalty aside and look from the perspective of a first time buyer.

Canon currently has
$3900 R5
$2500 R6
$1800 R
$1000 RP

Nikon:
$2800 Z7
$1800 Z6
$1400 Z5

Sony:
$4500 A9ii
$3200 A7r4
$1800 A7iii

I wonder if Canon will have 4 lines or 3 lines range from RP and R5. Your desire seems to go for not RP replacement but R replacement. IMO, RP would better remain under Z5 as a real entry level and the position of R must be adjusted. If Canon had 3 lines, both R and RP would be gone altogether and a new one would be a counter to Z5.

jwilliams wrote:

Honestly, would you buy an R, RP or R6 over the new Nikon Z5 camera if primarily a stills shooter with no existing camera gear or brand loyalty?

I got an RP not too long ago to start playing with mirrorless with plans to upgrade to an R5/R6 for wedding work.  I actually really enjoy my RP.  I love the size and its been a great performer.  I think it would be great for a first time buyer.  For the price of body only R6, you can get the RP with 24-105mm F4 L and the new RF 85mm or RF 35mm (depending on what interests them to shoot).  Otherwise maybe even go the 24-240mm kit route instead if they wanted to shoot stuff they need more zoom (like kids sports, etc).

jwilliams wrote:

Honestly, would you buy an R, RP or R6 over the new Nikon Z5 camera if primarily a stills shooter with no existing camera gear or brand loyalty?

I have a hard time seeing why one would spend the extra money on the R or R6. Is the RP cheaper enough to forgo IBIS, AF joystick, 2 card slots, and better EVF?

Now let's assume one is looking at this starting from scratch.

I own an R and RP. Love them both, but this Z5 seems like the perfect balance of capabilities and pricing. IBIS which both the R & RP lack. Better EVF than the RP. AF joystick and 2 card slots which are missing on the R/RP. Considerably cheaper than a R6 and similarly specified for stills.

It seems to me the R6 either has to come down in price drastically or Canon has to update the RP to compete.

Regardless, this has to be good from a camera buyers perspective as pricing on the lower/middle range has to get more competitive. Surely Sony will have to come out with a lower priced model and not just sell older models cheaper.

So, put all loyalty aside and look from the perspective of a first time buyer.

Personally I dont like the new Nikon Z lenses or their design so I would pick the r or r6

i also prefer the Canon ergonomics and Nikon’s crap autofocus doesn’t do the range any favours

jwilliams wrote:

Honestly, would you buy an R, RP or R6 over the new Nikon Z5 camera if primarily a stills shooter with no existing camera gear or brand loyalty?

R would be a maybe, RP would be a no, R6 would be a definitely for me.

I have a hard time seeing why one would spend the extra money on the R or R6. Is the RP cheaper enough to forgo IBIS, AF joystick, 2 card slots, and better EVF?

The Nikon is a great competitor for the R and RP, but IMO it doesn’t touch the R6.  Nikons af hasn’t been great and the R6 looks to be incredible.  It’s also substantially faster.  Very different cameras IMO

Now let's assume one is looking at this starting from scratch.

I own an R and RP. Love them both, but this Z5 seems like the perfect balance of capabilities and pricing. IBIS which both the R & RP lack. Better EVF than the RP. AF joystick and 2 card slots which are missing on the R/RP. Considerably cheaper than a R6 and similarly specified for stills.

For some it will be, no doubt

It seems to me the R6 either has to come down in price drastically or Canon has to update the RP to compete.

it will come down some to around $2000 at some point, but it’s in a different league than the Z5.   I agree on the RP though

Regardless, this has to be good from a camera buyers perspective as pricing on the lower/middle range has to get more competitive. Surely Sony will have to come out with a lower priced model and not just sell older models cheaper.

they wouldn’t have to necessarily.  When an A7iv comes out, they could keep selling the A7iii which is still better than the Z5.

So, put all loyalty aside and look from the perspective of a first time buyer.

RP, hands down.

RP pros:

Cheaper, lighter, better AF, better ISO, better video AF (by a lot), RF and EF glass access.

Z5 pros:

Joystick, dual slots, higher quality EVF, IBIS

.

The joystick is not going to save the lackluster AF of the Z series, and the AF of the Z5 will be even more poor (vs the Z6/Z7) since it's based of the A7 II sensor meshed with Nikon firmware!

Likewise, comparing the PDAF of the A7 II sensor vs EOS RP DPAF? You've got to be joking.

The Z5 looks good on paper, but man when you look at just the AF alone of the Z5, it's like the A7 II, except even dumber as it doesn't have Sony's AF firmware. Ugh. Bad backend (slow old sensor) + bad front end (class-trailing Nikon mirrorless AF firmware) = AF disaster ala EOS M (original).

IBIS is nice, but, the Z format is lacking glass which to use IBIS with?

Nikon needs to come down in price, fast, on that Z5, unless, your purpose is landscapes. But then, shoot a A7 II and post process it to death to make up for the bad colors.

The RP is a no brainer vs the Z5. Like I wouldn't blink. If you could hold both in BestBuy, it'd be obvious to anyone trying both...

Think of it this way...

No offense to the EOS M (original), but it's autofocus was it's undoing. Think along those lines and we're on the same wavelength.

Like the original EOS M, it saw firesales shortly after it's launch where an EOS M + 22mm could be had for $249. And for static objects, it was killer for price and size. The Z5, if it comes down in price, could be similar in terms of it's fate I predict.

May be the 5Ds or 6DII if you are stills only.

Colin46 wrote:

jwilliams wrote:

Honestly, would you buy an R, RP or R6 over the new Nikon Z5 camera if primarily a stills shooter with no existing camera gear or brand loyalty?

I have a hard time seeing why one would spend the extra money on the R or R6. Is the RP cheaper enough to forgo IBIS, AF joystick, 2 card slots, and better EVF?

Now let's assume one is looking at this starting from scratch.

I own an R and RP. Love them both, but this Z5 seems like the perfect balance of capabilities and pricing. IBIS which both the R & RP lack. Better EVF than the RP. AF joystick and 2 card slots which are missing on the R/RP. Considerably cheaper than a R6 and similarly specified for stills.

It seems to me the R6 either has to come down in price drastically or Canon has to update the RP to compete.

Regardless, this has to be good from a camera buyers perspective as pricing on the lower/middle range has to get more competitive. Surely Sony will have to come out with a lower priced model and not just sell older models cheaper.

So, put all loyalty aside and look from the perspective of a first time buyer.

Personally I dont like the new Nikon Z lenses or their design so I would pick the r or r6

i also prefer the Canon ergonomics and Nikon’s crap autofocus doesn’t do the range any favours

You have to stop regurgitating what you read by people with little to no experience using the Z’s. I’ve been using them professionally since new and have 99% in focus shots. The 1% is user error. Video tracks beautifully. AF is far better (very good actually) that what YouTube leads you to believe.

tkbslc wrote:

RLight wrote:

Think of it this way...

No offense to the EOS M (original), but it's autofocus was it's undoing. Think along those lines and we're on the same wavelength.

Like the original EOS M, it saw firesales shortly after it's launch where an EOS M + 22mm could be had for $249. And for static objects, it was killer for price and size. The Z5, if it comes down in price, could be similar in terms of it's fate I predict.

I think you are VASTLY overstating the AF differences here.

I think the Z5 is vastly more capable than the EOS M (original), but, when you throw the class-trailing sensor with a class-trailing firmware, and then charge $1399 body only...

I'm overstating it, but the point is valid.

Folks already balk that the RP isn't capable enough AF wise.

Imagine going even lower, and you've arrived at the Z5.

It's an overstatement, but perhaps not a large overstatement.

For landscapes and static objects, it'll work obviously. But, for candid/events/sports? This is highly questionable what your hit rate / keeper rate will be based off the fact this is suspected A7 II sensor which means it's a slower readout, combined with Nikon's, well, not stellar AF software driving that slower readout. It's not a happy ending like the R6, put it that way.

Let's give Nikon credit where credit is due:

Nikon finally give us a Small & Cheap FF mirrorless that photographer wants instead of force to pay for video feature I don't need nor want

Nikon you earn my respect 👏👏👏👏👏

But I find Nikon Z lens Boring Uninspiring & Expensive。Z mount lack the

• cheap $399 RF 35mm F/1.8 IS
• nor RF 85mm F/2 Macro IS
• nor $700 RF 600mm F/11
• not $900 RF 800mm F/11

Canon RF lens are more exciting. The problem with $2500 20mp R6 is that your force to pay premium for Video features that I don't need:

• I don't shoot 8k nor 4K
• I don't colorgrade my video footage
• I don't need 10bit 4:2:2 when my monitor is only 8bit

What is important for me are:

✓ Decent Eye Tracking (Z5/Z6 with firmware)

✓ Inbody stabilization (Z5/Z6)

✓ Good Battery (420 shots in Z5 is better > R6)

✓ Good Value for money

I think Nikon hit the ball out of the park with Z5. Hopefully 3rd party Tamron or Sigma can give Pathetic Z lens library some competition。Z5 is a great camera but lack interesting lens.

I can't speak for Nikon, I been shooting Canon for over 40 years. But I bought the R a year ago. To do it over if that was an option today, The IBIS would be huge for me. As would the 2nd card slot as a redundant raw card should one go bad on me.

Last camera was a 5D3 with a 22mp I think, don't really remember. It worked just fine for me. The R6 has a 20MP sensor right? And really, that is more than enough for the average shooter. I like the 30mp of the R but don't see a need for larger right now. I can crop plenty if I need to.

The R and RP was the first mirrorless for canon, the RP was offered as a budget or entry level for mirrorless. The R5 is more about extreme video and most of the focus is on that. Not that it wouldn't be a superb stills camera also but at almost $4000 US that's a hard pill to swallow for a non working pro. especially if you don't need 8K video. And to buy to future proof is not a good plan IMHO. Most folks upgrade their bodies 3-6 years, who knows what will be out then and at what price.

If I was starting out fresh, look at both brands but I would probably forgo the R and go with the R6 if you went with canon. It has most of the features of the R5 without the extreme 8K video (seriously, who needs that today?) I'm typing this on a 5K 27" monitor two feet from my face. I'm not sure what more detail could be seen.

Whatever your budget is, plan on the best glass you can afford. IQ from brand to brand should be about the same all things being equal. Quality lenses is where the IQ really is. The end of the day, unless you need a certain feature, its all about your ability and the quality of the lens, not the body.

Happy shopping...

jwilliams wrote:

Honestly, would you buy an R, RP or R6 over the new Nikon Z5 camera if primarily a stills shooter with no existing camera gear or brand loyalty?

I have a hard time seeing why one would spend the extra money on the R or R6. Is the RP cheaper enough to forgo IBIS, AF joystick, 2 card slots, and better EVF?

Now let's assume one is looking at this starting from scratch.

I own an R and RP. Love them both, but this Z5 seems like the perfect balance of capabilities and pricing. IBIS which both the R & RP lack. Better EVF than the RP. AF joystick and 2 card slots which are missing on the R/RP. Considerably cheaper than a R6 and similarly specified for stills.

It seems to me the R6 either has to come down in price drastically or Canon has to update the RP to compete.

Regardless, this has to be good from a camera buyers perspective as pricing on the lower/middle range has to get more competitive. Surely Sony will have to come out with a lower priced model and not just sell older models cheaper.

So, put all loyalty aside and look from the perspective of a first time buyer.

I don't like the current Nikon lens lineup as much as Canon's. I'd prefer the Z6 and would spend up for it, if Nikon had more reach in their smaller zoom and smaller primes

jwilliams wrote:

Honestly, would you buy an R, RP or R6 over the new Nikon Z5 camera if primarily a stills shooter with no existing camera gear or brand loyalty?

I have a hard time seeing why one would spend the extra money on the R or R6. Is the RP cheaper enough to forgo IBIS, AF joystick, 2 card slots, and better EVF?

...

So, put all loyalty aside and look from the perspective of a first time buyer.

If I was coming in fresh from compacts or phone, I'd probably balk at the price of big cameras. That would likely drive me to a budget APS-C DSLR or mirrorless.

Realistically, coming in now after shooting a few different DSLRs and mirrorless cameras, I know I want a jack of all trades camera. This covers off hiking, travels, social snaps, action, events and whatever may come my way. I remember years back preferring to run a FF and APS-H combo of DSLRs. One for image quality and one for high burst rates and CAF performance. Eventually I settled on a flagship APS-C DSLR as a do all camera.

So the R, RP , Z5 don't have the AF performance, CAF burst rates I'm after. I would lean towards the R6 but, the AF performance is yet to be deeply reviewed. R6 is actually what I had hoped to have seen in one of the 5D iterations to present 1D level specs in a lighter body. Nikon D850 got in theory close to this but you need to attach the battery grip to get the higher voltage to drive things to max burst rates.