This is not to start a brand war. I don't care for those. I'm just really curious how the new Nikon Z8 compares with the Canon R5 in real-world specs.
I have the R5, but use my Olympus OM-1 and Leica more. I'm pretty sure I would have gone to Nikon instead of Canon if Nikon had released the Z8 before or at the time Canon released the R5, as I considered the D850 the best overall DSLR and I prefer Nikon bodies a bit over Canon. Nikon for me screwed up with the release of the Z6 and the Z7 with their slowish AF.
So, do we now have parity between Nikon and Canon in their all-round cameras, at least when it comes to most shooting situations?
Would be interesting, because if the Z8 and R5 kind of match, then the ball is now squarely in Canon's court to come up with a Z9 competitor, which the R3 isn't.
The Z8, overall, is likely the superior body. And it probably should be - it's 3 years newer.
For action, the Z8 has the advantage of having a stacked sensor, reducing rolling shutter in electronic shutter mode, plus a few other newer bells and whistles. The R5 has a higher resolution viewfinder, and most of the same capabilities, minus a few newer features (some of which like pre-roll burst, are on newer RF cameras like the R6 II and R8).
I definitely don't think the Z8 is enough of a difference to switch systems for, though. All of these cameras (including the A7R V and A1 as well) are just so damn good nowadays.
johnvanr wrote:
This is not to start a brand war. I don't care for those. I'm just really curious how the new Nikon Z8 compares with the Canon R5 in real-world specs.
I have the R5, but use my Olympus OM-1 and Leica more. I'm pretty sure I would have gone to Nikon instead of Canon if Nikon had released the Z8 before or at the time Canon released the R5, as I considered the D850 the best overall DSLR and I prefer Nikon bodies a bit over Canon. Nikon for me screwed up with the release of the Z6 and the Z7 with their slowish AF.
So, do we now have parity between Nikon and Canon in their all-round cameras, at least when it comes to most shooting situations?
Would be interesting, because if the Z8 and R5 kind of match, then the ball is now squarely in Canon's court to come up with a Z9 competitor, which the R3 isn't....Show more →
The Nikon Z8 could have kept aboard a lot of D850 or (in my case) D500 users if it had been released first instead of the Z9. I know I would have gone for the Z8 to replace my D500, but the Z9 was too much size and weight for me, so I ended up with the Sony A1, and am now too deeply invested in Sony with the 600GM to even consider switching back, and there really is no reason apart from the Z800PF being smaller and lighter than the 600GM+1.4TC.
The D500 was my ideal camera body to hold size wise, and the Z8 is much much better for wildlife/birding/action than the Sony A1 or Canon R5 or Nikon Z7 i.m.o. when it comes to size.
I would not really compare the Z8 to the Canon R5 though, as it features a stacked sensor which gives it a faster scan rate, much better viewfinder experience and more overhead for AF programming.
I just watched the Fros video on the Z8. Stacked sensor or not. The Z8 still lags in AF vs the Canon R5, Sony A1, Sony A7R5, and others.
The Z8 looks like a great camera. But for less, one can get the Canon R5 for less that has better AF.
But I'm sure Nikon will address this in a firmware update.
Z8 seems to be the better camera in most ways for stills, bird and wildlife shooting.
The biggest advantage is the stacked 45MP sensor which does give a much better shooting experience for shooting fast/erratic BIF. (based on my ownership of Z9 and R5).
Where I feel the R5 still has the advantage is button layout, button customization and AF prowess (would be even better if it got the R3,R7,R8,R6II updated modes). I still rank Z9/Z8 AF in 3rd place when comparing CaNikSon.
But If I had to choose, starting from scratch, I'd choose Z8 based on price, size, and mostly the stacked sensor. AF is still amazingly good even though I rank it 3rd. And of course the Nikon lenses rank 1st IMO for birds/wildlife.
My AF ranking: A7RV>A1>A9II>R3>R5>Z8/Z9
My camera I would buy for BIF: A1>Z8>Z9>A9II>R3>R5>A7RV
AZHeaven wrote:
I just watched the Fros video on the Z8. Stacked sensor or not. The Z8 still lags in AF vs the Canon R5, Sony A1, Sony A7R5, and others.
The Z8 looks like a great camera. But for less, one can get the Canon R5 for less that has better AF.
But I'm sure Nikon will address this in a firmware update.
IMO if you're doing bird/wildlife photography, the only reason to switch to Nikon is if you are willing to pay for 800pf or the 400/600 with built in TCs. If there was a reasonably priced zoom that competed with the Sony 200-600 or RF100-500, I'd consider it. Right now I'd rather use the 20k CAD it costs for a 600mm on a few wildlife photography focused workshops/trips.
arbitrage wrote:
Z8 seems to be the better camera in most ways for stills, bird and wildlife shooting.
The biggest advantage is the stacked 45MP sensor which does give a much better shooting experience for shooting fast/erratic BIF. (based on my ownership of Z9 and R5).
Where I feel the R5 still has the advantage is button layout, button customization and AF prowess (would be even better if it got the R3,R7,R8,R6II updated modes). I still rank Z9/Z8 AF in 3rd place when comparing CaNikSon.
But If I had to choose, starting from scratch, I'd choose Z8 based on price, size, and mostly the stacked sensor. AF is still amazingly good even though I rank it 3rd. And of course the Nikon lenses rank 1st IMO for birds/wildlife.
My AF ranking: A7RV>A1>A9II>R3>R5>Z8/Z9
My camera I would buy for BIF: A1>Z8>Z9>A9II>R3>R5>A7RV...Show more →
I haven't had the luxury of using any of these cameras, but how great a difference in capability is there in AF between the listed models? E.g, comparing my OM-1 to the Z6 and it's a wide, wide gap; but comparing my old XT3 to the Z6, the gap was a lot smaller than I'd anticipated.
berimbolo wrote:
IMO if you're doing bird/wildlife photography, the only reason to switch to Nikon is if you are willing to pay for 800pf or the 400/600 with built in TCs. If there was a reasonably priced zoom that competed with the Sony 200-600 or RF100-500, I'd consider it. Right now I'd rather use the 20k CAD it costs for a 600mm on a few wildlife photography focused workshops/trips.
I'm willing to pay for the 400/600 VR TC S but I'm not willing to wait till 2050 when they become available in stores
The Z8 is an undoubtedly great camera, but it's basically a re-release of a 2 year old camera with a saw-off grip. It still weighs almost 1kg not much different from the gripped R3. Why didn't Nikon bother to improve it? For the same period of time Sony managed to improve IBIS and AF. At least Nikon could have put a better EVF in the Z8 but no...
docusync wrote:
I'm willing to pay for the 400/600 VR TC S but I'm not willing to wait till 2050 when they become available in stores
The Z8 is an undoubtedly great camera, but it's basically a re-release of a 2 year old camera with a saw-off grip. It still weighs almost 1kg not much different from the gripped R3. Why didn't Nikon bother to improve it? For the same period of time Sony managed to improve IBIS and AF. At least Nikon could have put a better EVF in the Z8 but no...
there is nothing wrong with the EVF , Sony with all the specs on paper really sucks here. On paper its high res yada yada , but in use the Nikon EVF's are just better. Maybe it's the optics ? I'm not sure .. it just is better IMO.
May 10, 2023 at 09:32 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
berimbolo wrote:
IMO if you're doing bird/wildlife photography, the only reason to switch to Nikon is if you are willing to pay for 800pf or the 400/600 with built in TCs. If there was a reasonably priced zoom that competed with the Sony 200-600 or RF100-500, I'd consider it. Right now I'd rather use the 20k CAD it costs for a 600mm on a few wildlife photography focused workshops/trips.
You missed the Nikon 400 f/4.5S, which is part of the reason in time I will very like move to Nikon over Sony. Great lens, great price, great size.
JustShootMe wrote:
there is nothing wrong with the EVF , Sony with all the specs on paper really sucks here. On paper its high res yada yada , but in use the Nikon EVF's are just better. Maybe it's the optics ? I'm not sure .. it just is better IMO.
Most modern EVFs are pretty darn good...even the 2.36M dot EVF on my R8 is pretty nice, and certainly doesn't hinder usage at all...though the higher res 5.8M dot EVF in my R5 is still clearer and sharper. And I have no doubt the Z8's finder is very nice...but it is still a little odd to shove a finder that is a few years out of date resolution wise into a $4,000 body. I'd expect to at least see a 5.8M dot EVF in a camera of this spec. It definitely shouldn't be a dealbreaker for anyone, but it's also a finder panel that is more common among $2,000 range cameras (similar to R6 II and A7 IV) than $4,000 range cameras.
AZHeaven wrote:
I just watched the Fros video on the Z8. Stacked sensor or not. The Z8 still lags in AF vs the Canon R5, Sony A1, Sony A7R5, and others.
The Z8 looks like a great camera. But for less, one can get the Canon R5 for less that has better AF.
But I'm sure Nikon will address this in a firmware update.
I was just saying similar on another forum. Still lags the AF, which is important to some, including me. But given that its 3 years newer than an R5 and the main thing going for it is the stacked sensor I don't see it as an 'R5 killer'. A very nice body, but not the leapfrog some thought it might be.
Spec sheets can't adequately convey the Z8/Z9 EVF experience. It's the brightest and smoothest of any camera I've used, including ones with "higher" specs.
I wouldn't mind a little more resolution, but I would not want that at the expense of current performance.
Jman13 wrote:
Most modern EVFs are pretty darn good...even the 2.36M dot EVF on my R8 is pretty nice, and certainly doesn't hinder usage at all...though the higher res 5.8M dot EVF in my R5 is still clearer and sharper. And I have no doubt the Z8's finder is very nice...but it is still a little odd to shove a finder that is a few years out of date resolution wise into a $4,000 body. I'd expect to at least see a 5.8M dot EVF in a camera of this spec. It definitely shouldn't be a dealbreaker for anyone, but it's also a finder panel that is more common among $2,000 range cameras (similar to R6 II and A7 IV) than $4,000 range cameras. ...Show more →
I agree , it makes sense to have higher res, but in reality it works great currently. Guess they have to cut cost somewhere , that stacked FF sensor can't be cheap , the only other sensor of that type are in cameras 5-6.5k ... You almost have to compare it to those cameras and not the other 4k cameras like A7R5 / R5 etc , and yes AF can be improved but the faster image pipeline / video specs matter.
Jman13 wrote:
Most modern EVFs are pretty darn good...even the 2.36M dot EVF on my R8 is pretty nice, and certainly doesn't hinder usage at all...though the higher res 5.8M dot EVF in my R5 is still clearer and sharper. And I have no doubt the Z8's finder is very nice...but it is still a little odd to shove a finder that is a few years out of date resolution wise into a $4,000 body. I'd expect to at least see a 5.8M dot EVF in a camera of this spec. It definitely shouldn't be a dealbreaker for anyone, but it's also a finder panel that is more common among $2,000 range cameras (similar to R6 II and A7 IV) than $4,000 range cameras. ...Show more →
I don’t have a Z9, but *many* reviewers highlighted that the Z9 despite the lower resolution blew away a number of higher resolution EVFs for usability due to the dual readout sensor. So resolution isn’t the only figure of merit. Many of those reviewers also mentioned that in some cases obviously the higher resolution EVF was nice (e.g. playback review and focus checking) and they would of course love to have the best of both worlds.
I’d guess that the Z8 EVF resolution is based on achieving the extremely high performance live view using the same Z9 dual readout and to do that there simply was no option to go to a higher resolution EVF.
I'm thinking if you don't like brand disagreements, you probably shouldn't start an R5 vs Z8 thread, then basically say the expensive R3 stinks (at least vs the other brand,) posting to both Canon and Nikon boards
Doing all that and then saying , oh, I don't want a brand war? Please.....
kwalsh wrote:
I don’t have a Z9, but *many* reviewers highlighted that the Z9 despite the lower resolution blew away a number of higher resolution EVFs for usability due to the dual readout sensor. So resolution isn’t the only figure of merit.
I thought the Z9's EVF was remarkably good. If Nikon could apply the same tech to a higher resolution EVF panel (like all of their competitors use), it would be class-leading.
