Camera system advice for nature photography

[Catstrat]

Hello everyone,

I am an enthusiast nature photographer in need of some buying advice. I have been using the Nikon D3X00 and D7X00 series for some years now and recently decided to switch to mirrorless. Reasons for switching are lower weight/size, better low light performance and exciting upcoming technology.

I mostly do nature photography, around 50% landscapes and 50% wildlife. The wildlife I photograph are mostly mammals and some birds, but not very often in flight. So I would need good AF, but doesn't need to be top of the line. I need good low light performance and good dynamic range for landscapes, as well as great weather sealing as I shoot in extremely challenging and cold conditions. While I do shoot some video, my main focus are stills.

Currently I just own a couple of cheap Nikon DX lenses which I plan on selling, so I'm starting anew. As much as I've enjoyed Nikon in the last years, I am concerned about their current struggles in the market, so I'm leaning more towards Sony and Canon. My budget would be around 5000$, and unfortunately it is hard to get used gear where i live. Some options I've looked into are:

Canon R6: seems like a great camera, high fps and great AF for wildlife photography, but 20 mpx seem a bit on the low end for landscapes. Good ergonomics as well, which is important. Downside is that canon lenses are painfully expensive and seem limited at the moment

Sony a7riii or used a9: the a7riii seems like it would be great for landscapes, but I've heard some concerns about the AF. The a9 is on the higher end of the budget, but seems great for wildlife. I must say I've used the a7iii before and didn't like the ergonomics at all since I come from DSLRs.

I am open to other options and I appreciate your help, thanks in advance!

 

[AstroVagabond]

If I did this correctly here are Canon R6 pictures on Flickr:

Loading…

www.flickr.com

Here are some Sony A7riii images:

Loading…

www.flickr.com

You can do your own search for the Sony A9

Not sure if this helps so ignore if it is not helpful.

 

[Bank Shot]

The used a9 will have better autofocus overall, by a wide margin, and it'll have a real-time display in the evf, both due to the stacked sensor. The a9-series was not designed with landscape shooting as a priority.

The R6 uses frame duplication to mask the blackout in the evf, but it apparently has a very usable bird eyeaf function that the a9-series does not have.

Lens selection in your country should be a big factor in the purchasing decision.

Nikon just announced an upcoming stacked sensor camera, I wouldn't write them off yet. They have done some mirrorless things better than Canon did.

 

[robgendreau]

Hello everyone,

I am an enthusiast nature photographer in need of some buying advice. I have been using the Nikon D3X00 and D7X00 series for some years now and recently decided to switch to mirrorless. Reasons for switching are lower weight/size, better low light performance and exciting upcoming technology.

I mostly do nature photography, around 50% landscapes and 50% wildlife. The wildlife I photograph are mostly mammals and some birds, but not very often in flight. So I would need good AF, but doesn't need to be top of the line. I need good low light performance and good dynamic range for landscapes, as well as great weather sealing as I shoot in extremely challenging and cold conditions. While I do shoot some video, my main focus are stills.

Before you conclude that mirrorless will be lighter, especially full frame mirrorless, account for the lenses. Except for the smallest rather slower primes, I think you'll find you may be toting MORE weight and bulk.

And if you don't get fast lenses then the one stop or so of better low light performance will be negated. You could perhaps get better performance just upgrading your current lens set if all you have is slow stuff. The R6 only has .3 stops of better DR than say a D7500; not much.

OTOH the R6 say would have other features you might like re focus, IBIS, etc. I would think it would have better weather proofing than the Sony but not up to the Olympus or Pentax cameras. But probably good enough for your uses.

And focus more on the lenses; any new camera body is probably good enough, and the lenses will make more of a difference. A slow lens and your low light hopes go out the window if you say take shots of critters in foilage and/or bad light. So budget for that, and look at those new Canon 600/800mm long lenses if you can live with the slower speed; they're quite good values.

 

[Thecylon]

Hello everyone,

I am an enthusiast nature photographer in need of some buying advice. I have been using the Nikon D3X00 and D7X00 series for some years now and recently decided to switch to mirrorless. Reasons for switching are lower weight/size, better low light performance and exciting upcoming technology.

I mostly do nature photography, around 50% landscapes and 50% wildlife. The wildlife I photograph are mostly mammals and some birds, but not very often in flight. So I would need good AF, but doesn't need to be top of the line. I need good low light performance and good dynamic range for landscapes, as well as great weather sealing as I shoot in extremely challenging and cold conditions. While I do shoot some video, my main focus are stills.

Before you conclude that mirrorless will be lighter, especially full frame mirrorless, account for the lenses. Except for the smallest rather slower primes, I think you'll find you may be toting MORE weight and bulk.

And if you don't get fast lenses then the one stop or so of better low light performance will be negated. You could perhaps get better performance just upgrading your current lens set if all you have is slow stuff. The R6 only has .3 stops of better DR than say a D7500; not much.

OTOH the R6 say would have other features you might like re focus, IBIS, etc. I would think it would have better weather proofing than the Sony but not up to the Olympus or Pentax cameras. But probably good enough for your uses.

And focus more on the lenses; any new camera body is probably good enough, and the lenses will make more of a difference. A slow lens and your low light hopes go out the window if you say take shots of critters in foilage and/or bad light. So budget for that, and look at those new Canon 600/800mm long lenses if you can live with the slower speed; they're quite good values.

This is absolutely not true, especially if you go woth Sony which prioritizes loe weight on many of its lenses.

To OP, go with the A9. It will blow you away. And you jave 113 native lenses to choose from, in all focal lengths and all price ranges.

 

[Catstrat]

To OP, go with the A9. It will blow you away. And you jave 113 native lenses to choose from, in all focal lengths and all price ranges.

I'm leaning more towards Sony for all the lens options which is a huge deal. I am still not sure about the body though. Since landscapes is a big part of my work, and the wildlife I photograph are slower animals such as mammals and not BIF, I don't know if I need the state of the art AF of the a9.

Would a a7riii (or a7riv if I find a nice price) be a good all around nature photography body? Paired with something like a 100-400 would it be a good wildlife setup as well?

 

[AstroVagabond]

To OP, go with the A9. It will blow you away. And you jave 113 native lenses to choose from, in all focal lengths and all price ranges.

I'm leaning more towards Sony for all the lens options which is a huge deal. I am still not sure about the body though. Since landscapes is a big part of my work, and the wildlife I photograph are slower animals such as mammals and not BIF, I don't know if I need the state of the art AF of the a9.

Would a a7riii (or a7riv if I find a nice price) be a good all around nature photography body? Paired with something like a 100-400 would it be a good wildlife setup as well?

Have you poked around in the Nature and Wildlife Forum and asked those who post there your Sony specific question about the a7riii and a7ric? There may be some Sony shooters there.

Loading…

www.dpreview.com

 

[Thecylon]

To OP, go with the A9. It will blow you away. And you jave 113 native lenses to choose from, in all focal lengths and all price ranges.

I'm leaning more towards Sony for all the lens options which is a huge deal. I am still not sure about the body though. Since landscapes is a big part of my work, and the wildlife I photograph are slower animals such as mammals and not BIF, I don't know if I need the state of the art AF of the a9.

Would a a7riii (or a7riv if I find a nice price) be a good all around nature photography body? Paired with something like a 100-400 would it be a good wildlife setup as well?

For slower than birds in flight, the a7riv is the best of both worlds. I use the 100-400 a lot because it is so versatile. Landscapes, animals, and even gets close for insects or flowers. The r3 is great too.

 

[NikonNature]

Regarding autofocus - I am a primarily a birder and for a few years I only shot with a Nikon D610, which is considered to be on the low end of AF performance. Yet I got by just fine and made some images that are to this day some of my favorites. So for the subjects you shoot, I would say any current model would serve you well.

Regarding brands - I would not discount Nikon so quickly, since the Z mount shows they are committed to serious development of their mirrorless line. While they are behind in the number of lenses available, the ones they have released are stellar.

That said, I would not discount Sony or Canon either. But it would pay to handle them to see if the ergonomics suit you. That can have a significant impact on your user experience.

 

[ericbowles]

I'd take a look at the Nikon Z6II. It's a very good camera for most wildlife - leaps and bounds above your current cameras. While you would want some Z lenses, your current DX lenses will most likely work with the FTZ so you can make adjustments at your own pace.

The Z6II will be cheaper than some of the other options, and have a lot shorter learning curve. Many of your accessories will work in the new camera. And most importantly, you understand the menus and ergonomics.

--
Eric Bowles
https://bowlesimages.com/

 

[Catstrat]

Regarding autofocus - I am a primarily a birder and for a few years I only shot with a Nikon D610, which is considered to be on the low end of AF performance. Yet I got by just fine and made some images that are to this day some of my favorites. So for the subjects you shoot, I would say any current model would serve you well.

Regarding brands - I would not discount Nikon so quickly, since the Z mount shows they are committed to serious development of their mirrorless line. While they are behind in the number of lenses available, the ones they have released are stellar.

That said, I would not discount Sony or Canon either. But it would pay to handle them to see if the ergonomics suit you. That can have a significant impact on your user experience.

At the moment I am leaning more towards the Sony a7riii/iv, mostly because of all the lens options.

I must say the ergonomics and menus of the Nikons are very tempting, but the glass options are very limited. As far as I can see there is no native telephoto lenses beyond 200 for Nikon Z, which is essential for my wildlife work.

I only own a couple of cheap DX lenses from Nikon, which I won't carry over to the new system. So essentially it is as if I'm starting from scratch.

 

[NikonNature]

Regarding autofocus - I am a primarily a birder and for a few years I only shot with a Nikon D610, which is considered to be on the low end of AF performance. Yet I got by just fine and made some images that are to this day some of my favorites. So for the subjects you shoot, I would say any current model would serve you well.

Regarding brands - I would not discount Nikon so quickly, since the Z mount shows they are committed to serious development of their mirrorless line. While they are behind in the number of lenses available, the ones they have released are stellar.

That said, I would not discount Sony or Canon either. But it would pay to handle them to see if the ergonomics suit you. That can have a significant impact on your user experience.

At the moment I am leaning more towards the Sony a7riii/iv, mostly because of all the lens options.

I must say the ergonomics and menus of the Nikons are very tempting, but the glass options are very limited. As far as I can see there is no native telephoto lenses beyond 200 for Nikon Z, which is essential for my wildlife work.

I only own a couple of cheap DX lenses from Nikon, which I won't carry over to the new system. So essentially it is as if I'm starting from scratch.

I completely understand. Nikon has a 200-600mm on their roadmap, but no details or ETA. In my opinion, they should make this a priority to at least get in the game for wildlife.

My point about ergonomics is only based on what I've read. Some people seem to really dislike Sony. Others are fine with it. Personally, I'd hate to buy into a system and then not enjoy using it. If you can get your hands on one, you could see for yourself whether you like it or not before you take the plunge.

 

[ericbowles]

Regarding autofocus - I am a primarily a birder and for a few years I only shot with a Nikon D610, which is considered to be on the low end of AF performance. Yet I got by just fine and made some images that are to this day some of my favorites. So for the subjects you shoot, I would say any current model would serve you well.

Regarding brands - I would not discount Nikon so quickly, since the Z mount shows they are committed to serious development of their mirrorless line. While they are behind in the number of lenses available, the ones they have released are stellar.

That said, I would not discount Sony or Canon either. But it would pay to handle them to see if the ergonomics suit you. That can have a significant impact on your user experience.

At the moment I am leaning more towards the Sony a7riii/iv, mostly because of all the lens options.

I must say the ergonomics and menus of the Nikons are very tempting, but the glass options are very limited. As far as I can see there is no native telephoto lenses beyond 200 for Nikon Z, which is essential for my wildlife work.

I only own a couple of cheap DX lenses from Nikon, which I won't carry over to the new system. So essentially it is as if I'm starting from scratch.

The 200-600 is certainly a nice zoom lens for the Z system, and it is expected to be released this year.

I'd also consider the 300mm f/4 PF and 500MM f/5.6 PF lenses. These lenses are recent designs that work wonderfully with the FTZ adapter. They are sharper, smaller and lighter than the various 200-600 options. They also work well with the Nikon TC14E III teleconverter and FTZ.

This is with the Z7II and older 300 f/4 AFS and TC14E II teleconverter and the FTZ. This combination is my favorite for birding and casual bird photography since it's smaller and sharper than zoom alternatives like my 200-500. But if you want sharp, the 600 f/4 or similar lenses are going to be even better (but above your budget). The 200-600 lenses are good enthusiast lenses, but they are midlevel lenses in terms of performance. The benefit is they are flexible and smaller than primes at the same focal lengths, and you give up a bit of low light performance and sharpness to get those benefits.

It's certainly your call, but any of these systems are going to be upgrades from your current gear. I just think you have a bit of a misconception about the differences and options.


100% crop - Nikon Z7II with FTZ and Nikon 300 f/4 AFS and TC14E II teleconverter.



--
Eric Bowles

Eric Bowles / Bowles Images

Eric Bowles is an Atlanta based commercial photographer specializing in the Southeastern United States. His specialty areas include nature, equestrian, events, sports, and bird photography. His work has been published in magazines, newspapers, and commercial publications. He is a regular speaker...

bowlesimages.com

 

[Krusty79]

A big consideration is the lens lineup. For me, it does not matter which prime lenses are available because I have to shoot with a zoom telephoto. I have to start at a lower focal length, find the bird, then zoom in on it. If I used a prime, I wouldn't be able to find the bird at all. I respect those who can shoot with a prime lens, as I can't. YMMV.

I'm not sure why I seem to be the only one who ever mentions this, but if you do buy a zoom telephoto, you want one that can zoom in all the way with the fewest turns possible. The reason is that you are going to be turning the lens with one hand while you hold the camera and track the flight with the other hand.

I like the Sony 200-600 because it only takes about 3/4 of a turn to zoom it all the way. In contrast, the Nikon 200-500 takes almost two full turns. I can't see anyone giving a lens two full turns while trying to track the bird's flight with the other hand.