Creating a Custom Bridge Camera: Canon R7 or Nikon Z50II?

[Jersey Shore]

The title says it all. The idea would not involve building an entire kit or system but to attach either a Sigma 16-300 or Tamron 18-300 to the camera body. Perhaps I would carry one fast prime just in case - or maybe not - but that would be it.

I am no newbie and do own other gear. But this set-up would be kind of a thing unto itself and I’d be using it for general vacation/travel photography and some nature/wildlife. Sure, it’s possible some sports could get thrown in the mix but that wouldn’t be the main focus.

Also, I understand that neither the Sigma nor the Tamron are yet available in RF-mount or Z-mount. They are due “this summer” (2025) but Lord knows what kind of impact the tariff/trade situation will have on those plans.

Essentially, I can pick up a factory-refurbished R7 with 18-150 kit lens for a tick more than the cost of a Z50II with two-lens kit. I can also pick up an R7 without lens for about $100 more than the Z50II with 16-50 kit lens.

I admit the R7 interests me a lot due to its higher-resolution sensor and general feature set. But it seems to require a bit of work to set it up correctly for each different lens used on it. There is also some talk of shutter shock but I suspect that is overblown and the electronic first-curtain shutter would probably take care of that.

The Z50II gets very good reviews and has the Z8 image engine and autofocus system. But it has a much smaller battery and a lower-resolution sensor compared with the R7.

Perhaps there are better options. A Fujifilm X-S20? The Tamron 18-300 for X-mount is already available. But the Sigma 16-300 is not.

Suggestions and thoughts are welcome.

 

[ZilverHaylide]

The title says it all. The idea would not involve building an entire kit or system but to attach either a Sigma 16-300 or Tamron 18-300 to the camera body. Perhaps I would carry one fast prime just in case - or maybe not - but that would be it.

I am no newbie and do own other gear. But this set-up would be kind of a thing unto itself and I’d be using it for general vacation/travel photography and some nature/wildlife. Sure, it’s possible some sports could get thrown in the mix but that wouldn’t be the main focus.

Also, I understand that neither the Sigma nor the Tamron are yet available in RF-mount or Z-mount. They are due “this summer” (2025) but Lord knows what kind of impact the tariff/trade situation will have on those plans.

Predicted sales at a high tariff might not be enough to justify importing them at all.

Essentially, I can pick up a factory-refurbished R7 with 18-150 kit lens for a tick more than the cost of a Z50II with two-lens kit. I can also pick up an R7 without lens for about $100 more than the Z50II with 16-50 kit lens.

I admit the R7 interests me a lot due to its higher-resolution sensor and general feature set. But it seems to require a bit of work to set it up correctly for each different lens used on it. There is also some talk of shutter shock but I suspect that is overblown and the electronic first-curtain shutter would probably take care of that.

The Z50II gets very good reviews and has the Z8 image engine and autofocus system. But it has a much smaller battery and a lower-resolution sensor compared with the R7.

Perhaps there are better options. A Fujifilm X-S20? The Tamron 18-300 for X-mount is already available. But the Sigma 16-300 is not.

Suggestions and thoughts are welcome.

The IBIS of the R7 might be a significant differentiator. Even if the zooms you are considering have OS, (do they? haven't paid any attention to them, and am too lazy to look it up), there might be the possibility for the R7 IBIS to work with and augment the lens OS (not sure if it would, especially with third-party lenses). Perhaps more important, if you supplement with a fast prime, most of those don't have OS, so IBIS is your only way to stabilize for stills (other than a tripod or monopod); so IBIS could be useful for travel interiors.

I wouldn't give undue weight to the R7 greater resolution relative to the 20MP of Z50. Some benefit, I think, but the R7 supposedly has a fairly strong anti-aliasing filter, which cuts the benefit. See the review at the Polish parent site of Lenstip.com (link at the top of the Lenstip page), which also tests cameras. Also, what resolution do you actually need? An A4 print or 4K TV only needs about 8 MP resolution, social media even less. Only if you are going to print fairly big (or crop significantly) might you actually see benefit from higher resolutions.

I think (but am not sure) the R7 has pre-capture, a benefit for wildlife and sports. Not sure about whether the Z50 (i or ii) have it, or if important to you.

Size/weight could matter, especially for travel. Can be compared at CameraSize.com

 

[Heritage Cameras]

Perhaps there are better options. A Fujifilm X-S20? The Tamron 18-300 for X-mount is already available. But the Sigma 16-300 is not.

The Sigma 16-300mm for X-mount is apparently going to be available next month:

https://www.fujirumors.com/sigma-16-300mm-f3-5-6-7-dc-os-shipping-may-15/

 

[ZilverHaylide]

Perhaps there are better options. A Fujifilm X-S20? The Tamron 18-300 for X-mount is already available. But the Sigma 16-300 is not.

The Sigma 16-300mm for X-mount is apparently going to be available next month:

https://www.fujirumors.com/sigma-16-300mm-f3-5-6-7-dc-os-shipping-may-15/

 

[Jersey Shore]

Perhaps there are better options. A Fujifilm X-S20? The Tamron 18-300 for X-mount is already available. But the Sigma 16-300 is not.

The Sigma 16-300mm for X-mount is apparently going to be available next month:

https://www.fujirumors.com/sigma-16-300mm-f3-5-6-7-dc-os-shipping-may-15/

That’s assuming the tariff situation won’t delay or scuttle those plans. I hope they don’t.

 

[Ruedon]

The title says it all. The idea would not involve building an entire kit or system but to attach either a Sigma 16-300 or Tamron 18-300 to the camera body. Perhaps I would carry one fast prime just in case - or maybe not - but that would be it.

...

Suggestions and thoughts are welcome.

The Z50II is for sure a very tempting camera. But lenses ... the 16-300 wins. Coverage of 16mm vs 18mm doesn't sound much. But it is -- equivalent to 24mm vs 28mm full frame. Bridge cameras typically start at 24mm.

This only leaves the Canon R7 that appears to be a step up from the Z50II anyhow (resolution, IBIS, battery).

As a Nikon shooter, I hope that Nikon will "make a deal" with Sigma soon, also looking at other lenses like 18-50/2.8 and 28-45/1.8.

 

[Nazpharoz]

I looked at superzooms with nice starting range and this popped up as one of them with kinda long range. The others were aps-c 16-300 and the Nikon 28-400 might be worth to look into.

I don’t know what equiv you might like to have. If it needs to start at 24 or is 28 good enough? If 200 is fine already, or needs to span to 400 (some aps-c goes to 450 equiv).

 

[Eightace]

If it were me I'd probably go for the Sony A6700 and the tamron 18-300. It's supposed to be a bit sharper than the Sigma from what I've seen.

Christopher Frost did a review of the canon sigma and it seemed a bit soft.

 

[Jersey Shore]

If it were me I'd probably go for the Sony A6700 and the tamron 18-300. It's supposed to be a bit sharper than the Sigma from what I've seen.

Christopher Frost did a review of the canon sigma and it seemed a bit soft.

Yeah, I’m going to wait a bit but I think, as much as I’d like that 16mm wide end, that the solution will be the Tamron 18-300… probably with the Nikon Z50II. Price is part of it but there are a few too many issues/potential issues with the Canon and Fuji. I appreciate all of the feedback.

 

[Ruedon]

If it were me I'd probably go for the Sony A6700 and the tamron 18-300. It's supposed to be a bit sharper than the Sigma from what I've seen.

Christopher Frost did a review of the canon sigma and it seemed a bit soft.

Yeah, I’m going to wait a bit but I think, as much as I’d like that 16mm wide end, that the solution will be the Tamron 18-300… probably with the Nikon Z50II. Price is part of it but there are a few too many issues/potential issues with the Canon and Fuji. I appreciate all of the feedback.

In that case, welcome to Nikon! You might also have a look at the full frame Z5(II) with 28-400 lens. Not much bigger than the Z50II, but offering double sensor size, higher resolving EVF and IBIS. As you want to add a fast prime, full frame has significantly better options there.