Well everyone seems to love the R5 and R6 just fine. I am talking about a mirrorless camera that can do what the D500 does but better. You don’t need a stacked sensor for that. If you are looking for a mini Z9 that’s never gonna happen. Nikon isn’t going to engineer a sensor for that niche of a camera. They will use an off the shelf sensor, which may or may not be stacked.
Steve Spencer wrote:
To be clear Sony has exactly zero stacked sensor APS-C cameras. I don't expect they will bring one out soon. I don't think Nikon will either. I don't think the Canon R7 will have that type of sensor as well. You may be interested in an APS-C camera with a slow sensor scan speed, but I am not and I don't think it would do this lens we are talking about here justice but that is just me. If you like that sort of camera fine, but what I am talking about is a stacked sensor APS-C camera and I don't see that happening soon....Show more →
I'm excited about the 800 but even more excited about the Z lineup as a whole. 400/4(ish), 800/6.3 would be a spectacular 2-lens wildlife combination - 400 for the mammals and environmental shots, 800 for birds or anything else lacking reach. Throw both in your bag with maybe a TC and you are more or less covered. If 500 PF is anything to judge by, it they will also be lightweight and compact enough to travel anywhere with. If $ is no object, one can spring for the 400/2.8 and 600/4.
My finance on the other hand uses an R5/R3 with adapted glass - 400 DO II - (she's waiting for a 500/4) and though she loves her kit, it's anyones guess what Canon will come out with. 400/2.8 and 600/4 RF are amazing, but expensive and seem like SLR holdovers, Canon even admitted they had no plans to convert the mount on those. I remind her that Canon is surely lurking with some great telephoto lens releases, but it does suck to have to "wait and see" if they are ever going to offer a lens that will round out one's system. So kudos to Nikon for providing a roadmap even if it tells the competition what they are up to, and also kudos for planning to throw ~ 6 telephotos options at us wildlife/sports nerds within a relatively short span of time.
jwolfe wrote:
Well everyone seems to love the R5 and R6 just fine. I am talking about a mirrorless camera that can do what the D500 does but better. You don’t need a stacked sensor for that. If you are looking for a mini Z9 that’s never gonna happen. Nikon isn’t going to engineer a sensor for that niche of a camera. They will use an off the shelf sensor, which may or may not be stacked.
Most R5 buyers come from 5DmkIV that was far behind in aF compared to a D500/D850.
Perception being relative it means they describe the R5 as being amazing but I hear that the actual hit rate for birds is ok but not that great.
Sure enough R3 testers on birds will describe it as being much better than the R5. Mark my word for it…. :-)
I know a ton of bird photographers using the R5 and R3 (one). They love it. Personally I’m upgrading to a D500 and waiting for either a Z7iii or a Z500 equivalent.
bernardl wrote:
Most R5 buyers come from 5DmkIV that was far behind in aF compared to a D500/D850.
Perception being relative it means they describe the R5 as being amazing but I hear that the actual hit rate for birds is ok but not that great.
Sure enough R3 testers on birds will describe it as being much better than the R5. Mark my word for it…. :-)
jwolfe wrote:
I know a ton of bird photographers using the R5 and R3 (one). They love it. Personally I’m upgrading to a D500 and waiting for either a Z7iii or a Z500 equivalent.
Out of curiosity how many is « a ton » as far as the R3 goes?
jwolfe wrote:
Well everyone seems to love the R5 and R6 just fine. I am talking about a mirrorless camera that can do what the D500 does but better. You don’t need a stacked sensor for that. If you are looking for a mini Z9 that’s never gonna happen. Nikon isn’t going to engineer a sensor for that niche of a camera. They will use an off the shelf sensor, which may or may not be stacked.
Well we are in agreement that Nikon is not going to be building a APS-C stacked sensor anytime soon. What we are in disagreement about is whether Nikon can build a non-stacked sensor camera that would be much better than the Z50. I think they have done pretty much all they can with a non-stacked sensor with that camera. Nikon doesn't have anything like the Canon R5 or R6 in full frame (i.e., a non-stacked sensor with somewhat fast sensor scan speed). Sony doesn't have anything like that either unless the new A7 IV turns out to be that sort of camera, which I doubt it will be. So, it is not a matter of making an APS-C sensor that is a smaller version of a current Nikon FF camera. So, I don't see how you can think Nikon is going to come up with a new sensor with faster sensor scan speed than the Z50 unless they use a smaller version of the Z9 which is of course a stacked sensor. So, I don't see anything that makes me think Nikon is going to build a Z90 (or a Z70, which is a lot more what you seem to be suggesting) anytime soon. In addition any higher level camera, IMO, would require Nikon to slow down making FF Z lenses and make more APS-C Z lenses, so for those reason what your suggesting I just don't think going to happen.
I think before we get that type of camera we will get a smaller FF camera with the Z9 sensor which will work wonderfully with this new 800 PF even in crop mode for as a pretty spiffy APS-C camera with 20 MP.
Have you shot with an R5 or a Sony A6600? They have really really great AF. Neither have a stacked sensor.
Nikon can't do more with the Z50? Umm, the A6600 shoots at 11 FPS and has Real-Time Tracking AF. So that is totally false.
I would be happy with a Z50ii that is similar to the A6600 while we wait for the Z500 down the road. I suspect many people would agree.
Steve Spencer wrote:
Well we are in agreement that Nikon is not going to be building a APS-C stacked sensor anytime soon. What we are in disagreement about is whether Nikon can build a non-stacked sensor camera that would be much better than the Z50. I think they have done pretty much all they can with a non-stacked sensor with that camera. Nikon doesn't have anything like the Canon R5 or R6 in full frame (i.e., a non-stacked sensor with somewhat fast sensor scan speed). Sony doesn't have anything like that either unless the new A7 IV turns out to be that sort of camera, which I doubt it will be. So, it is not a matter of making an APS-C sensor that is a smaller version of a current Nikon FF camera. So, I don't see how you can think Nikon is going to come up with a new sensor with faster sensor scan speed than the Z50 unless they use a smaller version of the Z9 which is of course a stacked sensor. So, I don't see anything that makes me think Nikon is going to build a Z90 (or a Z70, which is a lot more what you seem to be suggesting) anytime soon. In addition any higher level camera, IMO, would require Nikon to slow down making FF Z lenses and make more APS-C Z lenses, so for those reason what your suggesting I just don't think going to happen.
I think before we get that type of camera we will get a smaller FF camera with the Z9 sensor which will work wonderfully with this new 800 PF even in crop mode for as a pretty spiffy APS-C camera with 20 MP....Show more →
Like many, I would appreciate a non-gripped, prosumer Nikon crop body. I'm confident Nikon could deliver if they wanted to, and it wouldn't necessarily have to have a stacked sensor. The main reason I keep my Sony A6600 around is that it gives me the option to go very small and use APS-C specific lenses if and when the situation calls for it, and it's a far better camera for action shooting because it doesn't have the same shutter slideshow effect as the "non-stacked" Zs. The EOS R had the same drawback years ago when I first tried it but can confidently say Canon fully addressed it with the R5/R6. I'm not suggesting its impossible to capture action with those cameras, but I never found it to be particularly enjoyable experience, especially coming from the D850/D500.
I also have great reach and portability with my 70-350 G lens. If Nikon produced something like this I would be tempted to replace the A6600. If I decide to get the 800 PF, I'd also appreciate using a capable crop body with it , and all else being equal I would choose the crop body over the 35mm.
My 2 cents for my particular use case.
Dec 20, 2021 at 12:32 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
jwolfe wrote:
Have you shot with an R5 or a Sony A6600? They have really really great AF. Neither have a stacked sensor.
Nikon can't do more with the Z50? Umm, the A6600 shoots at 11 FPS and has Real-Time Tracking AF. So that is totally false.
I would be happy with a Z50ii that is similar to the A6600 while we wait for the Z500 down the road. I suspect many people would agree.
If you would bother to read the specs, you would know that the Z50 has 11 fps so no the A6600 does not do more fps. In that high fps mode in both cameras they have serious limitations, however, mainly because of the slow sensor scan speed of both cameras. Yes, the a6400/a6600 have "real time tracking," but you do realize that is just a algorithm that allows easy use of the AF system and does not improve the underlying hardware limitation of the slow sensor scan speed. Specifically, 1) you will get a lot of motion blur if you shoot in silent mode (which a lot of wildlife photographers would like to use); 2) you will have a huge reduction in AF updates per second compared to a stacked sensor camera; 3) the viewfinder will have lots of insertions of old frames making tracking a lot more difficult especially if you get anywhere near the 11 fps in the specs.
I am not saying you can't use these cameras for wildlife you can, but they are seriously limited compared to stacked sensor cameras. They are even limited compared to the D500 which functions much better at its full fps than these APS-C mirrorless cameras where it can shoot at 10 fps without any impact on the viewfinder and without any reduction in the file quality. Sure the Sony has the new algorithm for easier use of the AF system, but it has no additional AF updates per second, file quality is lost as you move to higher frame per second and the viewfinder experience is compromised. All in all, I think any APS-C camera on the market right now is inferior to a D500 and it will only be when an APS-C camera comes with a stacked sensor and can shoot silently without motion distortion, has a black out free continuously updated viewfinder, and has the big increase in AF calculations per second that mirrorless APS-C cameras will actually be better than a D500.
I am not saying that you can't use an a6400/a6600 or a Z50 for wildlife shooting; you can. I am saying, however, that I think the D500 is better than any of these cameras so Nikon building another version of such a camera is not going to be a replacement for the D500.
The one additional advantage the mirrorless APS-C mirrorless cameras would of course have is that they can use modern mirrorless lenses like the one we are talking about here, but in the case of Nikon which has many excellent F mount lenses at lower prices that would only matter if you want a very specific lens. The 800 PF might be that lens, but you would have to use an inferior camera to be able to use it.
The A6600 can shoot at 11 fps WITH af and tracking. It can shoot at 8 fps with live view between the shots, which makes it work extremely similar to a DSLR. I never said it could shoot in electronic mode. It also has real-time tracking af with animal eye af. It is a very capable camera and will run circles around a DSLR in tracking people and some animals. I've never tried it with birds. Most people bird photographers shoot the A9 on Sony, and a few the A1.
The Z50 does not have real-time tracking. It cannot track eyes, faces and objects in real time. It can only shoot at 5 fps with af tracking.
You are trying to compare two entirely different camera systems.
Meanwhile Fuji, which is all APS-C, also has real-time tracking af. I have several friends who've been shooting sports with them for a few years.
So not only is it possible without a stacked sensor, MOST mirrorless bodies on the market right now lack it. Only the very high-end pro cameras have stacked sensors, and Canon isn't using them at all.
If you are going to post at least be accurate.
Steve Spencer wrote:
If you would bother to read the specs, you would know that the Z50 has 11 fps so no the A6600 does not do more fps. In that high fps mode in both cameras they have serious limitations, however, mainly because of the slow sensor scan speed of both cameras. Yes, the a6400/a6600 have "real time tracking," but you do realize that is just a algorithm that allows easy use of the AF system and does not improve the underlying hardware limitation of the slow sensor scan speed. Specifically, 1) you will get a lot of motion blur if you shoot in silent mode (which a lot of wildlife photographers would like to use); 2) you will have a huge reduction in AF updates per second compared to a stacked sensor camera; 3) the viewfinder will have lots of insertions of old frames making tracking a lot more difficult especially if you get anywhere near the 11 fps in the specs.
I am not saying you can't use these cameras for wildlife you can, but they are seriously limited compared to stacked sensor cameras. They are even limited compared to the D500 which functions much better at its full fps than these APS-C mirrorless cameras where it can shoot at 10 fps without any impact on the viewfinder and without any reduction in the file quality. Sure the Sony has the new algorithm for easier use of the AF system, but it has no additional AF updates per second, file quality is lost as you move to higher frame per second and the viewfinder experience is compromised. All in all, I think any APS-C camera on the market right now is inferior to a D500 and it will only be when an APS-C camera comes with a stacked sensor and can shoot silently without motion distortion, has a black out free continuously updated viewfinder, and has the big increase in AF calculations per second that mirrorless APS-C cameras will actually be better than a D500.
I am not saying that you can't use an a6400/a6600 or a Z50 for wildlife shooting; you can. I am saying, however, that I think the D500 is better than any of these cameras so Nikon building another version of such a camera is not going to be a replacement for the D500.
The one additional advantage the mirrorless APS-C mirrorless cameras would of course have is that they can use modern mirrorless lenses like the one we are talking about here, but in the case of Nikon which has many excellent F mount lenses at lower prices that would only matter if you want a very specific lens. The 800 PF might be that lens, but you would have to use an inferior camera to be able to use it....Show more →
In my opinion, it really has to do more with Nikon's implementation of blackout on the Z's (minus the Z9) than it does with differences in AF, FPS, or even sensor readout. If Nikon simply allowed one to have a live feed with blackout in H+ shooting like some of the other non-stacked cameras do, it would be far better for this use case, but as it stands the frame skipping/slideshow effect is jarring for action shooting.
Dec 20, 2021 at 02:17 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
jwolfe wrote:
Just about everything in this is wrong.
The A6600 can shoot at 11 fps WITH af and tracking. It can shoot at 8 fps with live view between the shots, which makes it work extremely similar to a DSLR. I never said it could shoot in electronic mode. It also has real-time tracking af with animal eye af. It is a very capable camera and will run circles around a DSLR in tracking people and some animals. I've never tried it with birds. Most people bird photographers shoot the A9 on Sony, and a few the A1.
The Z50 does not have real-time tracking. It cannot track eyes, faces and objects in real time. It can only shoot at 5 fps with af tracking.
You are trying to compare two entirely different camera systems.
Meanwhile Fuji, which is all APS-C, also has real-time tracking af. I have several friends who've been shooting sports with them for a few years.
So not only is it possible without a stacked sensor, MOST mirrorless bodies on the market right now lack it. Only the very high-end pro cameras have stacked sensors, and Canon isn't using them at all.
No you are a Sony advocate who has hopped onto the Nikon board to play up a Sony camera without acknowledging its limitations. The three limitations I noted are real and for wildlife shooting they are serious limitations. The a6600 runs circles around a DSLR in AI AF modes if you don't know what you are doing, but with skill and a DSLR you can track extremely well. You just need to have the practice and skill to do so. There won't be an algorithm to select the eye, but you can select the eye and you can follow that eye if you have skill. The Sony's algorithm advantage can be replaced with skill, but you can't shoot an A6600 at 10 fps without seriously compromising the view finder experience, which matters. Given the lag in the a6600 and the compromised VF at high fps, I would never pick the a6600 over a D500. Viewfinder experience matters a great deal to me and it is seriously compromised on the a6600. You might not care about the viewfinder experience, but if you are fairly evaluating the cameras you should be able to acknowledge that is an issue with the a6600. That you can't shows your bias, The D500 doesn't have a compromise in viewfinder experience at higher fps like the a6600 does. That to me is definitive in determining my preference for the D500 over the a6600. You may care a lot more about algorithms than I do and prefer the A6600, but let's be clear that those AI AF modes are the only advantage of the a6600 over the D500 and the A6600 has a distinct disadvantage compared to the D500 is viewfinder experience. So, to many people still using the D500, who use it for the better viewfinder experience they are not going to be persuaded by an a6600 or a camera like that (such as the Z50 or a slightly better non-stacked sensor APS-C camera). They are going to want a better viewfinder experience, they are going to want to be able to shoot silently, and they are going to want the extra AF calculations that a stacked sensor can provide. Such a stacked sensor APS-C camera will, IMO, get D500 shooter to switch, but a non-stacked sensor APS-C camera like the Sony a6600 or the Nikon Z50 will never do it and it comes down to the viewfinder experience of such cameras will always be a big step backward that I don't think many D500 shooter will want to take.
In regards to this thread, if you want to buy the 800 PF then I think you are going to want a stacked sensor camera to have the viewfinder experience to take advantage of it. Viewfinder experience matters even more with such a long telephoto and I can't see a non-stacked sensor APS-C camera being many people's choice for such a long focal length expensive lens. You argument are not only biased, but irrelevant to this thread.
jwolfe wrote:
Just about everything in this is wrong.
The A6600 can shoot at 11 fps WITH af and tracking. It can shoot at 8 fps with live view between the shots, which makes it work extremely similar to a DSLR. I never said it could shoot in electronic mode. It also has real-time tracking af with animal eye af. It is a very capable camera and will run circles around a DSLR in tracking people and some animals. I've never tried it with birds. Most people bird photographers shoot the A9 on Sony, and a few the A1.
The Z50 does not have real-time tracking. It cannot track eyes, faces and objects in real time. It can only shoot at 5 fps with af tracking.
You are trying to compare two entirely different camera systems.
Meanwhile Fuji, which is all APS-C, also has real-time tracking af. I have several friends who've been shooting sports with them for a few years.
So not only is it possible without a stacked sensor, MOST mirrorless bodies on the market right now lack it. Only the very high-end pro cameras have stacked sensors, and Canon isn't using them at all.
My entire kit is Nikon. I am not a Sony shooter. You should stop posting BS. Stick to facts.
A shoot the D7500 and the D500. Fantastic cameras. But the af on the Sonys is amazing, and so with the new Canons and I'm sure the upcoming Z9. I've spent quite a bit of time with the A6600 and it is a great camera. Terrible ergomonics, but from an af standpoint its amazing.
No one said the viewfinder in the A6600 is perfect. It's progress not perfection. It's going to take time for the tech to flow downhill.
Stop being such a Debbie Downer.
Steve Spencer wrote:
No you are a Sony advocate who has hopped onto the Nikon board to play up a Sony camera without acknowledging its limitations. The three limitations I noted are real and for wildlife shooting they are serious limitations. The a6600 runs circles around a DSLR in AI AF modes if you don't know what you are doing, but with skill and a DSLR you can track extremely well. You just need to have the practice and skill to do so. There won't be an algorithm to select the eye, but you can select the eye and you can follow that eye if you have skill. The Sony's algorithm advantage can be replaced with skill, but you can't shoot an A6600 at 10 fps without seriously compromising the view finder experience, which matters. Given the lag in the a6600 and the compromised VF at high fps, I would never pick the a6600 over a D500. Viewfinder experience matters a great deal to me and it is seriously compromised on the a6600. You might not care about the viewfinder experience, but if you are fairly evaluating the cameras you should be able to acknowledge that is an issue with the a6600. That you can't shows your bias, The D500 doesn't have a compromise in viewfinder experience at higher fps like the a6600 does. That to me is definitive in determining my preference for the D500 over the a6600. You may care a lot more about algorithms than I do and prefer the A6600, but let's be clear that those AI AF modes are the only advantage of the a6600 over the D500 and the A6600 has a distinct disadvantage compared to the D500 is viewfinder experience. So, to many people still using the D500, who use it for the better viewfinder experience they are not going to be persuaded by an a6600 or a camera like that (such as the Z50 or a slightly better non-stacked sensor APS-C camera). They are going to want a better viewfinder experience, they are going to want to be able to shoot silently, and they are going to want the extra AF calculations that a stacked sensor can provide. Such a stacked sensor APS-C camera will, IMO, get D500 shooter to switch, but a non-stacked sensor APS-C camera like the Sony a6600 or the Nikon Z50 will never do it and it comes down to the viewfinder experience of such cameras will always be a big step backward that I don't think many D500 shooter will want to take.
In regards to this thread, if you want to buy the 800 PF then I think you are going to want a stacked sensor camera to have the viewfinder experience to take advantage of it. Viewfinder experience matters even more with such a long telephoto and I can't see a non-stacked sensor APS-C camera being many people's choice for such a long focal length expensive lens. You argument are not only biased, but irrelevant to this thread. ...Show more →
Personally I'm very excited about the 800 pf and the rest of the new Nikon stuff coming.
gdsf2 wrote:
Perhaps you guys should create another thread for your crop camera discussion. You have really derailed this thread, which is about a lens.
Dec 20, 2021 at 02:44 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
mbike999 wrote:
In my opinion, it really has to do more with Nikon's implementation of blackout on the Z's (minus the Z9) than it does with differences in AF, FPS, or even sensor readout. If Nikon simply allowed one to have a live feed with blackout in H+ shooting like some of the other non-stacked cameras do, it would be far better for this use case, but as it stands the frame skipping/slideshow effect is jarring for action shooting.
Nikon may not make up for the slow sensor scan speed as well as some of the other companies, but IMO it is bad with Sony as well and I have used a lot of Sony cameras. Don't know as much about Canon, but that is a very different system and some people like the non-stacked sensor live feed and some don't. Without a stacked sensor even live feed EVF is going to have serious limitations especially as you task the processor in the camera.
I still think the 800 PF deserves a stacked sensor given its price and focal length.
My entire kit is Nikon. I am not a Sony shooter. You should stop posting BS. Stick to facts.
A shoot the D7500 and the D500. Fantastic cameras. But the af on the Sonys is amazing, and so with the new Canons and I'm sure the upcoming Z9. I've spent quite a bit of time with the A6600 and it is a great camera. Terrible ergomonics, but from an af standpoint its amazing.
No one said the viewfinder in the A6600 is perfect. It's progress not perfection. It's going to take time for the tech to flow downhill.
I have been presenting facts not BS, so stop the name calling. There is no place for that. We can disagree about the value of an EVF. We can disagree about the AF algorithms. That is what is happening here. That you have to call me names because I disagree is the worst way to have a discussion. You may not own a Sony but you were clearly advocating for a Sony camera on the Nikon board. Why do that? I agree you should take that discussion to a different thread.
