p.12 #1 · The new Nikon Z8 vs the Sony A7RV and potential A9III
Literally every person on YT with the Z8 in their hands are saying they don't understand the CIPA ratings. Some are claiming 1000 shots per day/charge. I think we'll find out pretty soon that this concern is overblown and the camera in regular use will hold up like most other mirrorless cameras with similarly sized batteries.
It's all in how you use the camera. Writing to SD only will save battery. Not enabling 120hz on the EVF will save battery. Not using the rear LCD when your eye is away from the cam will save battery.
That said, shooting 8K60 RAW will melt your battery. Even then, to have it rated for 90 minutes of recording is pretty impressive for such a small battery.
May 12, 2023 at 04:24 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.12 #2 · The new Nikon Z8 vs the Sony A7RV and potential A9III
osv2 wrote:
if availability mattered this entire thread would be invalid, because most of the lenses you listed are unavailable.
the 800pf/400tc/600f4 for instance are all backordered/OOS at b&h, with no delivery date listed, and last i heard it's been like that for a long time.
we are telling you what the real world is like with sony; for instance there is a much greater depth of both new and used milc gear that can't be matched by z-mount.
new lens availability:
e-mount: 384
z-mount: 162
New telephoto prime lens longer than 135mm and less than $10,000
e-mount: 0
Z-mount: 2
This is what matters to me. Obviously even 162 lenses is way more than anyone needs. The question is where they holes are and how that affects you being able to shoot what you want. Sony has not made the lenses I want and neither has anyone else for e-mount, so it makes no difference if there are 384 lenses of e-mount. E-mount simply doesn't have long primes anywhere near what I can afford.
p.12 #3 · The new Nikon Z8 vs the Sony A7RV and potential A9III
tzhang4284 wrote:
Part of it might be that Nikon just doesn't have the same engineering ability to miniaturize and optimize electronics as much as Sony or Canon does. A couple of signs of this I see vs the A1:
1. CIPA rated Battery life is poorer on both the Z9 and Z8 compared to the Sony A1 with and without battery grip - a much smaller body. There shouldn't be any reason the Z8/Z9 draws significantly more power than the A1.
2. The single CF Express / SD Card slot on the Z8. If the camera is marketed towards pros, you wouldn't do this and find a way to squeeze two CF Express card slots in. Either they purposely did this to protect Z9 sales (not sure this is the case) or they ran out of space.
I do think there is a market for a more sizable camera but some of the design decisions point to lack of engineering prowess and/or some other priority - maybe weather sealing(?) that can't be easily explained by the size benefit argument alone....Show more →
It is all about efficiency of design. The z8 is based on the z9 design with so similar specs so naturally it’s huge. I bet Nikon is working on a smaller stacked sensor design the size of z7.
p.12 #4 · The new Nikon Z8 vs the Sony A7RV and potential A9III
molson wrote:
My dealer wan't happy when I told him I didn't want the Z8 he had on order for me. It sounds as though unlike previous Nikon product launches, supply will exceed demand for the Z8. There are already 22 pallets of Z8 bodies sitting in Mississauga... but no telephoto lenses in sight.
I have been posting for a couple of Months now that Nikon has made extraordinary efforts to ensure that Z8 inventory is larger than usual for a new release, so wait times would be shorter for their customers. I have no idea how successful Nikon has been with this. I applaud Nikon for its efforts on behalf of its users and dealers. I still don't expect that there will be no wait times for many. Demand will also likely be exceptional. Nikon will have no trouble selling every Z8 they make for some time to come. I wouldn't make judgements about the success or failure of this camera based on wait times, or pallets of inventory in stock.
p.12 #5 · The new Nikon Z8 vs the Sony A7RV and potential A9III
RoamingScott wrote:
Literally every person on YT with the Z8 in their hands are saying they don't understand the CIPA ratings. Some are claiming 1000 shots per day/charge. I think we'll find out pretty soon that this concern is overblown and the camera in regular use will hold up like most other mirrorless cameras with similarly sized batteries.
It's all in how you use the camera. Writing to SD only will save battery. Not enabling 120hz on the EVF will save battery. Not using the rear LCD when your eye is away from the cam will save battery.
That said, shooting 8K60 RAW will melt your battery. Even then, to have it rated for 90 minutes of recording is pretty impressive for such a small battery....Show more →
Don't forget the two usb ports on the Z8 that allow charging, and charging while shooting. This will enable a number of mitigation strategies even if what you are doing tends to eat battery power. Remember the Z8 battery charges at approximately 1% per minute through the USB port.
Shooting landscapes or video from a tripod? Just strap a battery bank to the tripod and connect it. Pretty much unlimited shooting on a single battery then.
Driving between subjects? Just plug your Z8 into a USB port in your car. Battery will most times be full by the time you get there.
Hiking? just have a battery bank strapped to your backpack strap, or in the bag, and charge while walking.
Stopping for a coffee or something to eat? What coffee shop, or restaurant doesn't have charging ports these days?
You get the point. Add your own mitigation strategy to deal with your situation. I wouldn't waste my time worrying about the Z8 CIPA ratings.
p.12 #6 · The new Nikon Z8 vs the Sony A7RV and potential A9III
I love the idea of the Z8, it looks fantastic to me. Sure, it's a DSLR style 900g brick, oh but what a pretty, well made brick it is
Considering that the Z7 series exists, as does the Z9, I think Nikon has done a great job of making a camera that fits a niche, one I'm sure they've done enough research on to know exists. Competition is always good, and maybe this pushes Sony in an interesting direction for something like the A9. Maybe not that big, but a more substantial grip? Heavier duty build and weather sealing?
I'm still not a fan of Nikon's physical lens design compared to Sony, but throw one of the new Voigtlanders on, that's a sexy setup
I'm happy for Nikon users that they now have such an option. A healthy Nikon developing new products is good for every camera company, I think.
p.12 #7 · The new Nikon Z8 vs the Sony A7RV and potential A9III
1bwana1 wrote:
I have been posting for a couple of Months now that Nikon has made extraordinary efforts to ensure that Z8 inventory is larger than usual for a new release, so wait times would be shorter for their customers. I have no idea how successful Nikon has been with this. I applaud Nikon for its efforts on behalf of its users and dealers. I still don't expect that there will be no wait times for many. Demand will also likely be exceptional. Nikon will have no trouble selling every Z8 they make for some time to come. I wouldn't make judgements about the success or failure of this camera based on wait times, or pallets of inventory in stock....Show more →
I was basing it on a dealer having a lot more inbound inventory than he has customer interest in, since normally on a new release, the opposite is true.
I guess Nikon put the 9-month delay from when they first notified dealers about the camera to good use building up inventory. For once they might actually be able to fill all their orders before Canon and/or Sony announce their next camera to upstage it.
p.12 #8 · The new Nikon Z8 vs the Sony A7RV and potential A9III
I don't expect that the Z8 delivery wait will be as short as the A7RV's release delivery times, but If I was to guess, I'd say if one orders an Z8 they could reasonably expect to get it within 30-45 days. Nothing like what happened of course with the Z9
p.12 #9 · The new Nikon Z8 vs the Sony A7RV and potential A9III
Steve Spencer wrote:
New telephoto prime lens longer than 135mm and less than $10,000
e-mount: 0
Z-mount: 2
This is what matters to me. Obviously even 162 lenses is way more than anyone needs. The question is where they holes are and how that affects you being able to shoot what you want. Sony has not made the lenses I want and neither has anyone else for e-mount, so it makes no difference if there are 384 lenses of e-mount. E-mount simply doesn't have long primes anywhere near what I can afford.
It really isn't enough though.
Autofocus lenses 12-14: E-mount 2 Z-mount- 0 for the entire mount.
Prime doesn't really offer anything special tbh. And sony has the lightest and best 70-200, not even counting the multiple 3rd party options, which Nikon has none of.
p.12 #11 · The new Nikon Z8 vs the Sony A7RV and potential A9III
groob wrote:
Again, not good relative to what? An A1, a D850, a D3, a Canon Rebel, a Coolpix? You seemed to say earlier that all of your comparisons in the post I quoted were relative to an A9ii. But your most recent statement, again, has no limiting principle. So, I don't know where the context begins and ends. Additionally, you now seem to say that Nikon DSLRs performed better in this specific context than their mirrorless offerings. Honestly, I'm still unclear what situations you're actually referencing. Is this specific to shooting swallows? Because, in a prior discussion we had, you said that the Z9 was on par with the A1 for basically everything but shooting swallows. Do you have a different opinion now? I'm not trying to interrogate you, but I do think it is helpful for everyone to tease out what the practical differences are in the systems. I still haven't moved to mirrorless. I'd prefer to stick with Nikon, but I'm not so invested that a system switch is impossible. I do think Nikon has the best lens ecosystem for what I shoot, but if I am not going to gain as much in AF functionality as I'd assumed, then perhaps I need to look more closely at Canon (which I think has a better lens ecosystem for me than Sony). ...Show more →
I have a hard time ranking the DSLRs against the MILCs. There are so many advantages to MILCs that I would never go back to a DSLR. I kept my D500 around for a long time (right up to the Z9 release) and every time I decided to pick it up and shoot it, I'd put it down after an hour and go back to the MILCs I'd come to love. But that wasn't because of the AF, it was just because of the many other things I like about shooting MILCs.
All I can say about the DSLRs is Nikon had some magic sauce in the AF for their final generation of DSLRs. Something Canon couldn't touch.
Specific to the D850/D500 vs Z9/Z8 for AF there are two sides to the story...the Z9/Z8 are better because of the BEAF and because of the full sensor tracking. They are also more consistent in focusing due to focusing on the sensor and not bouncing light down to an AF sensor in the floor of the mirror box.
However, as I said in the previous post, I think the D850/D500 (shot in Auto AF or Zone AF) are better at acquisition which includes at distance and over complicated backgrounds than the Z9/Z8.
But I would always choose a Z9/Z8 over a D500/D850. You will get more keepers even if you have to struggle with acquisition in certain situations compared to the DSLRs. But for most situations the Z9/Z8 will acquire, will track over the whole frame, will give you a blackout free live feed as you follow the action and actively fire the shutter and will have more accurate AF due to on sensor AF. Not to mention you will get 20FPS compared to 9-10FPS.
If we focus just on the MILCs then I'll copy and paste what I posted the other day in that R5 vs Z8 thread. My rankings of the AF systems overall (and yes with a focus on more difficult, fast, erratic BIF) VS my ranking of what I'd buy which takes into account a lot of other factors like MPs, FPS, quality of life improvements and even lens selection.
My AF ranking: A7RV>A1>A9II>R3>R5>Z8/Z9
My camera I would buy for BIF: A1>Z8>Z9>A9II>R3>R5>A7RV
As you can see, my #1 AF ranking goes to last place for camera I'd buy to do BIF (especially any type of challenging BIF).
May 12, 2023 at 08:27 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.12 #12 · The new Nikon Z8 vs the Sony A7RV and potential A9III
shadow9d9 wrote:
It really isn't enough though.
Autofocus lenses 12-14: E-mount 2 Z-mount- 0 for the entire mount.
Prime doesn't really offer anything special tbh. And sony has the lightest and best 70-200, not even counting the multiple 3rd party options, which Nikon has none of.
What the 400 f/4.5S prime offers is a faster aperture than any Sony zoom. That you don't recognize that as anything special is puzzling. What the 800 f/6.3 PF offers is a lot of reach at a much lower price than anything Sony offers, That you don't recognize that as special is puzzling. I have zero interest in a 12-14mm AF lens, YMMV. I have lots of interest in the long less expensive prime and again YMMV.
p.12 #13 · The new Nikon Z8 vs the Sony A7RV and potential A9III
molson wrote:
My apologies - the original blunder was on the part of another user, not you:
You kept incessantly trying to defend their bad math, so much so that I had forgotten who had originally posted it.
There is one factor I had failed to consider when comparing the relative systems - the big Nikon telephoto lenses are not actually available, so you save quite a bit of cost and weight going the Nikon route, whereas with Sony you would be bogged down with those exceptionally good 200-600mm, 400mm f2.8, and 600mm f4 lenses.
While the GM 400/2.8 and 600/4 are great and available in Sony if I remember getting both will cost me $25,000 I don’t have even if Sony has them. Nikon has a Z 400/4.5 @ $3000 and the adaptable 500/5.6 PF at $2600 used. Those are both available and affordable for me. So consider buying a Z8 to support them even if I have a A1 and a FE 200-600 G. Thats because each is between 1000 to 800 grams less in weight. So it would be a point solution to use along side Sony.
If I didn’t consider this what alternative is there? Any suggestions?
p.12 #14 · The new Nikon Z8 vs the Sony A7RV and potential A9III
arbitrage wrote:
I have a hard time ranking the DSLRs against the MILCs. There are so many advantages to MILCs that I would never go back to a DSLR. I kept my D500 around for a long time (right up to the Z9 release) and every time I decided to pick it up and shoot it, I'd put it down after an hour and go back to the MILCs I'd come to love. But that wasn't because of the AF, it was just because of the many other things I like about shooting MILCs.
All I can say about the DSLRs is Nikon had some magic sauce in the AF for their final generation of DSLRs. Something Canon couldn't touch.
Specific to the D850/D500 vs Z9/Z8 for AF there are two sides to the story...the Z9/Z8 are better because of the BEAF and because of the full sensor tracking. They are also more consistent in focusing due to focusing on the sensor and not bouncing light down to an AF sensor in the floor of the mirror box.
However, as I said in the previous post, I think the D850/D500 (shot in Auto AF or Zone AF) are better at acquisition which includes at distance and over complicated backgrounds than the Z9/Z8.
But I would always choose a Z9/Z8 over a D500/D850. You will get more keepers even if you have to struggle with acquisition in certain situations compared to the DSLRs. But for most situations the Z9/Z8 will acquire, will track over the whole frame, will give you a blackout free live feed as you follow the action and actively fire the shutter and will have more accurate AF due to on sensor AF. Not to mention you will get 20FPS compared to 9-10FPS.
If we focus just on the MILCs then I'll copy and paste what I posted the other day in that R5 vs Z8 thread. My rankings of the AF systems overall (and yes with a focus on more difficult, fast, erratic BIF) VS my ranking of what I'd buy which takes into account a lot of other factors like MPs, FPS, quality of life improvements and even lens selection.
My AF ranking: A7RV>A1>A9II>R3>R5>Z8/Z9
My camera I would buy for BIF: A1>Z8>Z9>A9II>R3>R5>A7RV
As you can see, my #1 AF ranking goes to last place for camera I'd buy to do BIF (especially any type of challenging BIF).
Very interesting, thanks for the detailed response. For lots of personal and professional reasons, I likely won’t be able to shoot much until the fall/winter, which is also when I’ll likely move to mirrorless. So, I doubt I’ll have much opportunity for challenging BiF subjects until next spring/summer. Certainly looking forward to all the mirrorless advantages. And I’m sure I’ll stick with Nikon when I upgrade. I’m just not willing to spend the money on a modern 600mm f/4, and Nikon undoubtedly offers the best alternatives for my purposes. It’ll also be fun to work through the various AF modes. With my D850, I actually prefer dynamic AF modes for everything but BiF situations where the bird is the same color as the background. That’s the only time I use Group. But I’ve never really trusted Auto area—always had better results with dynamic. All of which makes me wonder if I’ll have a somewhat different experience than you with the AF modes (notwithstanding firmware updates in the interim).
p.12 #15 · The new Nikon Z8 vs the Sony A7RV and potential A9III
Steve Spencer wrote:
What the 400 f/4.5S prime offers is a faster aperture than any Sony zoom. That you don't recognize that as anything special is puzzling. What the 800 f/6.3 PF offers is a lot of reach at a much lower price than anything Sony offers, That you don't recognize that as special is puzzling. I have zero interest in a 12-14mm AF lens, YMMV. I have lots of interest in the long less expensive prime and again YMMV.
So many ways to get to a certain focal length and aperture these days. We just have to pick which one works best for us.
I can easily get to 400mm, at f/4, in a lighter smaller package, with a Sony Zoom. In fact this works so well for my needs that I sold my Sony 100-400 GM. I just mount my amazing 70-200 GM, which is incredibly light on my A1 body in crop mode. I am at up to 420mm at f/4. I have shot wildlife, landscapes, and even portraits with this setup with superb results.
Similarly I can get to 800mm, at f/6.3, on my A1 in crop mode. But this is not a small light setup like a PF lens offers.
These high resolution bodies make such things feasible these days.
I know some will say that by going to crop mode I give up IQ. Maybe, but it is still high enough tor very large prints, and has almost zero impact on any image shared digitally. In trade I can mush more flexibility when shooting.
You will note that I didn't bring up using a 2X TC. I see no meaningful degradation in IQ with the 1.4 tc, but I do see it in the 2X TC.
Which way works best for an individual is a choice in compromises. I will not argue with whichever way one thinks is better for them. I am more and more a zoom lens shooter with my Sony these days. My leica serves as my prime lens body. Amazing IQ in that setup.
p.12 #16 · The new Nikon Z8 vs the Sony A7RV and potential A9III
swldstn wrote:
While the GM 400/2.8 and 600/4 are great and available in Sony if I remember getting both will cost me $25,000 I don’t have even if Sony has them. Nikon has a Z 400/4.5 @ $3000 and the adaptable 500/5.6 PF at $2600 used. Those are both available and affordable for me. So consider buying a Z8 to support them even if I have a A1 and a FE 200-600 G. Thats because each is between 1000 to 800 grams less in weight. So it would be a point solution to use along side Sony.
If I didn’t consider this what alternative is there? Any suggestions?...Show more →
The only alternatives are F or EF mount supertelephotos that have come way down in price since their mirrorless counterparts were released. My primary wildlife lens will eventually be a Nikon 600mm f/ E FL, which will require the use of of an adapter. But that’s fine with me. I’ve used a 500mm f/4 AF-II for years now, and it doesn’t even have vibration reduction.
May 12, 2023 at 09:59 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.12 #17 · The new Nikon Z8 vs the Sony A7RV and potential A9III
1bwana1 wrote:
So many ways to get to a certain focal length and aperture these days. We just have to pick which one works best for us.
I can easily get to 400mm, at f/4, in a lighter smaller package, with a Sony Zoom. In fact this works so well for my needs that I sold my Sony 100-400 GM. I just mount my amazing 70-200 GM, which is incredibly light on my A1 body in crop mode. I am at up to 420mm at f/4. I have shot wildlife, landscapes, and even portraits with this setup with superb results.
Similarly I can get to 800mm, at f/6.3, on my A1 in crop mode. But this is not a small light setup like a PF lens offers.
These high resolution bodies make such things feasible these days.
I know some will say that by going to crop mode I give up IQ. Maybe, but it is still high enough tor very large prints, and has almost zero impact on any image shared digitally. In trade I can mush more flexibility when shooting.
You will note that I didn't bring up using a 2X TC. I see no meaningful degradation in IQ with the 1.4 tc, but I do see it in the 2X TC.
Which way works best for an individual is a choice in compromises. I will not argue with whichever way one thinks is better for them. I am more and more a zoom lens shooter with my Sony these days. My leica serves as my prime lens body. Amazing IQ in that setup....Show more →
Sorry, Steve you are not at 420 f/4 with your 70-200 and a 1.4X TC and a crop. You are cropping your full frame sensor (now 26 MP on your A1) and you are using fewer photons (total light is a function of shutter speed, aperture, and the size of the part of the sensor you are using) so it will have the IQ (including dynamic range) of a shot with a stop higher ISO and you have the depth of field of an f/5.6 lens. So that 70-200 f/2.8 with a 1.4X TC and a crop is nothing like a 400 f/4.5 prime. It is a totally different image you are getting. It really is much more like a 400 f/5.6 lens. It will have image quality of a higher ISO shot required by that lens, it will have that depth of field, and on top of that you will be working with a lot less resolution.
Same thing if you try to get to 800 f/6.3 with a zoom and cropping. The 200-600 can be cropped to an 800mm equivalent, but it will have the depth of field of an f/8 lens, you will the IQ of an image with the ISO cranked up 2/3rds of a stop, and you will be dealing with the low thirties in MP on your A1. It simply is not the same at all as the prime on a FF sensor.
I am a prime shooter by preference because it can let you have a faster aperture that is not compromised by cropping. I like primes both on my Leica and on my Sony and Nikon MilC. If you want a lens that really can get you to 400 f/4, it needs to be a 200 f/2 and Sony doesn't have that either.
p.12 #18 · The new Nikon Z8 vs the Sony A7RV and potential A9III
Steve Spencer wrote:
Sorry, Steve you are not at 420 f/4 with your 70-200 and a 1.4X TC and a crop. You are cropping your full frame sensor (now 26 MP on your A1) and you are using fewer photons (total light is a function of shutter speed, aperture, and the size of the part of the sensor you are using) so it will have the IQ (including dynamic range) of a shot with a stop higher ISO and you have the depth of field of an f/5.6 lens. So that 70-200 f/2.8 with a 1.4X TC and a crop is nothing like a 400 f/4.5 prime. It is a totally different image you are getting. It really is much more like a 400 f/5.6 lens. It will have image quality of a higher ISO shot required by that lens, it will have that depth of field, and on top of that you will be working with a lot less resolution.
That's only true if you interpolate the 26MP crop back up to 50MP. Otherwise, cropping has absolutely no affect whatsoever on image quality (unless you're talking about a Nikon that uses pixel binning for its cropped modes).
May 12, 2023 at 10:30 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.12 #19 · The new Nikon Z8 vs the Sony A7RV and potential A9III
molson wrote:
That's only true if you interpolate the 26MP crop back up to 50MP. Otherwise, cropping has absolutely no affect whatsoever on image quality.
It is true whenever the output size is held constant. If you take the 50MP file and downscale it to 26MP you will see the IQ advantage too. If you crop both of the images smaller than 26MP you will see the IQ advantage as well. If you have the same output size the advantage is there.
p.12 #20 · The new Nikon Z8 vs the Sony A7RV and potential A9III
Yep, as I said, different sets of compromises with each way of getting to the same field of view. Pick which one you prefer. For me right now I prefer smaller/lighter/more flexible.
I can travel the World with just 3 relatively small light lenses in a shoulder bag and cover from 17mm to 420mm with no FL gaps in coverage. I just need to be aware of my compromises and shoot to accommodate them. I end up with images like this one which has IQ I am happy with.
ILCE-1FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II + 1.4X Teleconverter lens280mmf/8.01/30s100 ISO0.0 EV
