Lauchlan Toal wrote:
Yeah, Canon does seem to have an edge with their teleconverters with most lenses, I can't dispute that.
I'm curious as to why Brad would use Nikon/Sigma gear if the Canon lenses are that much better though. He seems to shoot at high ISO or in soft lighting situations a lot where Nikon's DR edge doesn't matter, and with all the kit he uses and the rate at which he buys and sells gear I have no doubt that he could have switched to Canon quite easily long ago. And he'd have the opportunity to try out Canon gear from all the photographers who use it on his photo tours. With the amount of time he spends testing gear and his meticulous standards I really can't imagine him choosing to use inferior equipment....Show more →
Brad would never, ever leave Nikon.
The 500mm f4 has always been the weak link in Nikon's telephoto lineup, which is why he predominantly uses the 400mm f2.8 and 600mm f4 lenses, and doesn't use the 1.7x and 2x teleconverters. I suspect Gentec (Canadian Sigma distributor) "gave" him the Sigma lenses, like they have done with several other well-known Canadian photographers recently.
I have the feeling we will see a further drop of used Canon lens and camera gear shortly.....but that's nothing new what has started since 2012 (D800/E release) and fully took off in 2014 (A7 series release).
speedmaster20d wrote:
A few months back I had an opportunity to shoot with a Nikon D5 and 600FL, I compared it to my 1DXII and 600II, while it was significantly better than the Nikon's I had tried in the past and I made some good frame with it, I can't say I was impressed with the results.
Usually switching systems (either side) is a waste of money and will not make you a better photographer.
Did you find Nikons AF better than the 1dxII? I just keep wondering if Nikons 3D AF system is more advanced than Canon, resulting in more keepers when shooting action. Would like to hear your opinion about this.
Everytime a new camera comes out, the forums are full of people getting gas and thinking about switching. To gain a tiny bit DR at base ISO, or a fps more or a few MP more. First it was the Sony a7rii, then Sony a9, now people think about the D850. If you don't earn money with the gear, what would the small improvements earn you?
therealthings wrote:
Did you find Nikons AF better than the 1dxII? I just keep wondering if Nikons 3D AF system is more advanced than Canon, resulting in more keepers when shooting action. Would like to hear your opinion about this.
Hi,
I did not find the combination of the Nikon D5 with the 600FL to give more keepers than the Canon 1DXII and 600II. It is important to realize that with any camera, Nikon or Canon, if you let the camera decide and choose one of the entire AF array the AF will latch to the BG when photographing challenging BIF against any kind of varied BG, so the "3D tracking" in Nikon is just as useless as "iTR" in Canon and I don't expect any such system to work for the type of photos I like to take. The most productive method for photographing BIF is to use the center AF expansion for either camera so that it is forced to focus where you want it to focus.
Initially the D5 seemed to hold focus better when the bird was changing direction but upon close inspection on my computer, many of those shots were not what I'd call tack sharp compared to my Canon files, they were slightly soft which makes it unacceptable to me. I also found that the Nikon couldn't quite keep up with the bird coming at you at high speed where as the 1DXII would often nail at least a couple of those shots (e.g. below).
The Nilkon system falls apart quickly when you throw in a TC, whereas the Canon system does not care if a TC is attached, many if not most of my photographs are taken with a TC. So as a bird photographer, if I were to start today, I would again choose Canon without thinking twice but I will always keep my options open, if Nikon get's the job done better I have no problem buying an entire Nikon system, but they are still far from there IMO.
Holger wrote:
Everytime a new camera comes out, the forums are full of people getting gas and thinking about switching. To gain a tiny bit DR at base ISO, or a fps more or a few MP more. First it was the Sony a7rii, then Sony a9, now people think about the D850. If you don't earn money with the gear, what would the small improvements earn you?
I don't think the D850 is a small improvement over the Canon choices for bird photography. Provided the camera performs as promised, it's an awesome improvement providing speed, a deep buffer, excellent long glass and tons of resolution.
Does the D850 attract my eye and make me want the dynamic range? Certainly
Am I tempted to switch? Nope. Of the 'wow' features the only one I like the look of is the in-camera focus stacking. Other than that I really like the ergonomics of the Canon and the real-world advantages of the D850 are not enough for me to risk what I remember being quirks that made me prefer Canon in the first place.
retrofocus wrote:
I have the feeling we will see a further drop of used Canon lens and camera gear shortly.....but that's nothing new what has started since 2012 (D800/E release) and fully took off in 2014 (A7 series release).
Yes, the availability of good used Canon lenses and gear has really dropped off, because people are hanging onto it.
When I sold my Sony gear, I spent a long time searching for used Canon gear to replace it, but what little current gear was available was priced too close to new. On the other hand, I had no trouble putting together a very nice Nikon kit for pennies on the dollar. The Nikon system has a lot of weak areas, but the price was right, and I'm pretty much brand-agnostic.
johnvanr wrote:
I don't think the D850 is a small improvement over the Canon choices for bird photography. Provided the camera performs as promised, it's an awesome improvement providing speed, a deep buffer, excellent long glass and tons of resolution.
People forget the A99ii. Even faster. Eye AF, no mirror slap, EVF, high Res.
For birders the D850 might give some benefits, although I think the 5div is not a bad camera if you don't want to spend for an 1dxii. I doubt real life results will show drastic differences compared to an A7rii for landscape or 5div for most applications. I find Canon's DPAF to be a game changer. Nikon still uses CDAF only.
The A99II is a camera looking for a lens system... But I've heard great things about it (like many things Sony, on paper, at least).
The D850 specs look pretty great to me, for sports. Like with birds/wildlife, there are times one is lens limited and can benefit from the reach of a higher-rez sensor. I would already be shooting with the 5DS, if not for its ~5fps and slooww buffer.
I agree with an earlier comment - switching systems costs too much, particularly when the performance improvement is more for ones own ego than something clients are asking for and willing to pay more for. Here I'll wait for Canon's response. Patiently. Even if it takes a couple years. By then hopefully 10TB+ HDDs will be down to current 4TB prices...
TC use is the one huge selling point with Canon over Nikon still. I've tried asking about the 2xTC on the Nikon boards and the majority of the replies are either negative, cautious or have never tried. Some people say it is okay but compared to the raving reviews from all users of Canon's 2xTCIII and the MkII big whites, I don't think it would satisfy a current Canon 2xTCIII user.
Hard to beat the 100-400II/1.4TCIII and the 400DOII/2xTCIII paired with 65 red AF points on a 1DX2.
rscheffler wrote:
The A99II is a camera looking for a lens system... But I've heard great things about it (like many things Sony, on paper, at least).
The D850 specs look pretty great to me, for sports. Like with birds/wildlife, there are times one is lens limited and can benefit from the reach of a higher-rez sensor. I would already be shooting with the 5DS, if not for its ~5fps and slooww buffer.
I agree with an earlier comment - switching systems costs too much, particularly when the performance improvement is more for ones own ego than something clients are asking for and willing to pay more for. Here I'll wait for Canon's response. Patiently. Even if it takes a couple years. By then hopefully 10TB+ HDDs will be down to current 4TB prices......Show more →
I think the Sony A99 II was the final salvo of the Alpha system - a small batch run of a very good camera, to help clear out the remaining slow-moving inventory of A-mount lenses. Problem was, by the time it was released, most shops I know of had already stopped carrying A-mount stuff.
molson wrote:
With the D850, Nikon has finally caught up to Canon and Sony in the resolution department, and of course the Dynamic Range is likely to be best-in-class, like the D810.
For my photographic pursuits, here are the pros and cons I see (based on the information currently available):
D850 Pros:
- Best-in-class dynamic range (hopefully)
- high resolution
- no AA filter
- good high ISO performance (hopefully)
- tilt and touch rear LCD with
- 4K video with no crop factor
- focus stacking feature
- silent shutter
- class-leading battery life
D850 Cons:
- substantial weight gain
- still no EFCS in Live View (according to DP Review)
- still very poor implementation of Live View
- rear LCD not fully articulated; designed for video only
- still no built-in GPS
- external GPS prevents use of standard remotes
- no timed shutter speeds longer than 30 seconds
- still no AF-compatible extension tubes
- no built-in flash
- no Log profiles for video
- crippled WiFi
- Nikon service...Show more →
As for the weight gain it's 25g, yes 25g, D810 with battery is 980g, D850 with battery is 1005g. It has a flat picture profile for video, which is more than Canon offers in camera and it offers 4K from FF, not 1.7x crop. Rear lcd still articulates infinitely more than my 5D4's. It offers fully electronic shutter in LV. Also has 0.75x VF, just behind the 1DX/1DXII and better than D5 and 5D4. Zebras are also offered, something Canon refuses to do. Too bad no focus peaking, SD card is UHSII and XQD is blazing fast.
Only major cons I see is still no on-sensor PDAF after all these years and the crappy WiFi. Canon's never had flash in FF and if it means better sealing I don't mind, a small flash like the 270EXII is much better than any integrated solution anyway and is under 100g, get something similar for the Nikon.
molson wrote:
The 500mm f4 has always been the weak link in Nikon's telephoto lineup, which is why he predominantly uses the 400mm f2.8 and 600mm f4 lenses, and doesn't use the 1.7x and 2x teleconverters. I suspect Gentec (Canadian Sigma distributor) "gave" him the Sigma lenses, like they have done with several other well-known Canadian photographers recently.
That is true, though the new E version seems to be a noticeable step up from the G version based on reviews. And I'd be very disappointed if Brad was given the lens, since it means he lied when he said "Keep in mind that I am intentionally self-funding this field test (i.e., buying the gear!) and while I don't mind investing in the knowledge I will glean from it, I have no interest in burning money!". He doesn't seem like the kind of guy who would deceive other photographers though.
I did not find the combination of the Nikon D5 with the 600FL to give more keepers than the Canon 1DXII and 600II. It is important to realize that with any camera, Nikon or Canon, if you let the camera decide and choose one of the entire AF array the AF will latch to the BG when photographing challenging BIF against any kind of varied BG, so the "3D tracking" in Nikon is just as useless as "iTR" in Canon and I don't expect any such system to work for the type of photos I like to take. The most productive method for photographing BIF is to use the center AF expansion for either camera so that it is forced to focus where you want it to focus.
Initially the D5 seemed to hold focus better when the bird was changing direction but upon close inspection on my computer, many of those shots were not what I'd call tack sharp compared to my Canon files, they were slightly soft which makes it unacceptable to me. I also found that the Nikon couldn't quite keep up with the bird coming at you at high speed where as the 1DXII would often nail at least a couple of those shots (e.g. below).
The Nilkon system falls apart quickly when you throw in a TC, whereas the Canon system does not care if a TC is attached, many if not most of my photographs are taken with a TC. So as a bird photographer, if I were to start today, I would again choose Canon without thinking twice but I will always keep my options open, if Nikon get's the job done better I have no problem buying an entire Nikon system, but they are still far from there IMO.
Thanks for sharing your experience, good info. Did you try group area AF (better than D9 or similar for birds in flight), and did you adjust the focus tracking with lock-on delay? Nikon defaults to a delay of 3 I think, but I find that turning the delay off entirely is best when photographing incoming subjects.
