If you have a problem with my question, please explain. I'm a Canon/Sony shooter looking for an alternate to the A9 III for some specific uses, which the A9 III cost does not justify.
rancherpix wrote:
If you have a problem with my question, please explain. I'm a Canon/Sony shooter looking for an alternate to the A9 III for some specific uses, which the A9 III cost does not justify.
Good thing you clued us in on your specific use cases so we could give you meaningful and relevant advice!
A9 III faster and has better AF. It also has global shutter so possibly slightly less dynamic range and low light performance vs Z6 III. The Z6 III is better in terms of video (6K RAW, ProRes RAW, Line-in, etc). As Scott said, it really depends on what you are shooting or using the camera for.
rancherpix wrote:
Big price difference (especially with Nikon refurbished). How do they compare on AF and image quality, especially with the recent Z6 III FW update?
They are hugely different cameras, with the a9iii having some advanced capabilities as a result of its global shutter. i.e. no rolling shutter, no flicker with tricky light sources, very high speed shooting. It also has pre-capture in RAW format, which the Nikons don't.
Unless you need those specific capabilities, you'll probably want a different camera.
If you're just looking for a 24mpx camera with good AF and image quality, the z6iii is a great choice.
Yeah these aren’t comparable cameras. The Z6 III is more a direct competitor to the A7 IV, and it’s partially stacked sensor is good for AF and lower rolling shutter than a typical BSI sensor, but it doesn’t compare to a global shutter like the A9 III or a fully stacked sensor like the earlier A9s or something like the Z8. The Z8 is a much closer comp to the A9 III, but there’s still trade offs there (global shutter vs high resolution), with the Z8 actually being a closer analogue even to the A1 II than the A9 III.
The A9 III really sits alone in the photgraphy world at the moment and nothing else is directly comparable. If you don’t need global shutter, the A9 III shouldn’t be on your radar anyway.
The Z6 III is really a camera that does a very good job at most everything, without being the best at anything. It’s certainly capable of excellent quality images, and can be well used for sports or action photography, though there are cameras better at all of it, such as the Z8, though you pay for it in size and money.
RoamingScott wrote:
Good thing you clued us in on your specific use cases so we could give you meaningful and relevant advice!
My group does wildlife photography on a commission basis for ranchers, landowners, etc. who want a photographic record of game on their properties (usually Blackbuck, Axis, Whitetail, etc.). Our Canon R5s are perfectly adequate for these jobs generally and they get a rough workout, usually from dust. We've used a couple of Sony A9s in the past for birds but both reached their useful limits for a variety of reasons. Most clients aren't primarily interested in BIF but interest is increasing and we want equipment to meet that need, at a relative cost. Hence these questions.
FWIW...
I use a Z8 and Z9 for most of my photography. I purchased these new and would like to have a 3rd body so I can send my others in for a deep clean. My Z9 probably has over a 500,000 shots on it and has never been in for a cleaning. My Z8 is used in the Monterey Bay while kayaking and whale outings. The camera is hit with salt spray many times a week and needs a deep clean as well.
For the last 3 months I've been trying to figure out which camera... another Z9, another Z8, or Z6III should become the back-up when the others are off to Nikon. In the end, I settled on the Z6III because it looks as if Nikon has given it the AF capabilities of the Z8. While I would have preferred a 3rd camera with the 48MP sensor, the price of the Z6III ultimately forced my hand.
My point... I think that while the A9III (and A9II) is the superior camera for speed and AF, the Z6III is no slouch. It is a robust camera that matches Nikon's design ethos and offers users superior AF responsiveness at a more affordable price point.
rancherpix wrote:
My group does wildlife photography on a commission basis for ranchers, landowners, etc. who want a photographic record of game on their properties (usually Blackbuck, Axis, Whitetail, etc.). Our Canon R5s are perfectly adequate for these jobs generally and they get a rough workout, usually from dust. We've used a couple of Sony A9s in the past for birds but both reached their useful limits for a variety of reasons. Most clients aren't primarily interested in BIF but interest is increasing and we want equipment to meet that need, at a relative cost. Hence these questions.
Aren't the R5's adequate for birds in flight ? Or even a secondhand A1 - both are probably better options than a Z6iii given the resolution on them and you probably have lenses.
I used Z9s for a few years and then swapped to Sony with the A1ii and A1s at the end of last year, I've played with both the Z6iii and the A9iii but never owned either.
The A9iii has better af than the A1ii, it's a very special camera - but the 200iso base is very frustrating, and from my usage I noticed image quality took a big hit compared to the A1s - less contrast, flexibility, and dynamic range off of the A9iii sensor which was too much of a sacrifice for me to own one. Having a 24mp body alongside multiple 50mp bodies didn't flow very well either.
That said - if you're already shooting on canon and sony systems, adding a nikon to the mix isn't worth it. You can buy a used A1 for less than an A9iii, or an R3/R5ii, which will still fit within your systems and do what you need.
rancherpix wrote:
My group does wildlife photography on a commission basis for ranchers, landowners, etc. who want a photographic record of game on their properties (usually Blackbuck, Axis, Whitetail, etc.). Our Canon R5s are perfectly adequate for these jobs generally and they get a rough workout, usually from dust. We've used a couple of Sony A9s in the past for birds but both reached their useful limits for a variety of reasons. Most clients aren't primarily interested in BIF but interest is increasing and we want equipment to meet that need, at a relative cost. Hence these questions.
I'm confused about what function you are chasing by looking to add an A9III or Z6III to your R5 or older A9s? If you are Canon/Sony why would you want to add a 3rd brand in Nikon? What feature in the Z6III is tempting you to go that route?
The Canon R5 and older A9 are both very good at BIF if that is the new use case you are chasing. If you are looking for a 24MP sensor then what about the R6II or upcoming R6III (may be 32MP)? Why add Nikon?
