p.1 #1 · Sony A7CII & Tamron 25-200 vs Nikon Z5II & 24-120
What would you choose? Has someone had the chance to use both cameras?
I initially opted for the A7CII due too it's handy size and lens selection but had the chance to use the Z5II for a short while and it's very mature for a Nikon camera.
A7CII
+ smaller and lighter than the Nikon, better suited for travel
+ greater lens selection
+ probably better AF
+ the Tamron 25-200 is arguably the best travel super zoom atm
+ low resolution & dark back screen
- expensive
- more noise in raw files in dark conditions
- poor EVF, I use glasses and don't know if this could be a deal braker
- subpar plasticky build quality, flimsy dials and knobs
- the Tamron might be too uncomfortable on a small body
Z5II
+ exceptional price-perfomance ratio unmatched by Sony
+ build quality
+ better low light AF (?)
+ the Z 24-120 is arguably the best 24-105/120 lens atm
+ good evf and high-res bright back screen
+ great low light sensor
+ can be used for professional work
- big and heavy
- lens selection is limited
- 24-120 has less range and is bigger and heavier than the Tamron 25-200
- most Z lenses are expensive, big and have subpar build quality
p.1 #2 · Sony A7CII & Tamron 25-200 vs Nikon Z5II & 24-120
Can’t go wrong either way. You’ve listed your pros and cons for each so now it’s time to decide which are the most important. I like the size and weight and resolution of the Sony and the range of the Tamron lens. I’ve never been too dependent on EVF or even the LCD as I’m not a chimper and rarely look at photos on camera. But I have other Sony gear so it makes sense for me to choose Sony. But I would be happy with the Nikon if I starting from scratch.
p.1 #3 · Sony A7CII & Tamron 25-200 vs Nikon Z5II & 24-120
I had 6700 and got rid of it because of two reasons. Too small for hand and useless EVF (at least for me).
I assume A7C has similar EVF?
Ryzbor wrote:
What would you choose? Has someone had the chance to use both cameras?
I initially opted for the A7CII due too it's handy size and lens selection but had the chance to use the Z5II for a short while and it's very mature for a Nikon camera.
A7CII
+ smaller and lighter than the Nikon, better suited for travel
+ greater lens selection
+ probably better AF
+ the Tamron 25-200 is arguably the best travel super zoom atm
+ low resolution & dark back screen
- expensive
- more noise in raw files in dark conditions
- poor EVF, I use glasses and don't know if this could be a deal braker
- subpar plasticky build quality, flimsy dials and knobs
- the Tamron might be too uncomfortable on a small body
Z5II
+ exceptional price-perfomance ratio unmatched by Sony
+ build quality
+ better low light AF (?)
+ the Z 24-120 is arguably the best 24-105/120 lens atm
+ good evf and high-res bright back screen
+ great low light sensor
+ can be used for professional work
- big and heavy
- lens selection is limited
- 24-120 has less range and is bigger and heavier than the Tamron 25-200
- most Z lenses are expensive, big and have subpar build quality
p.1 #4 · Sony A7CII & Tamron 25-200 vs Nikon Z5II & 24-120
Ryzbor wrote:
What would you choose? Has someone had the chance to use both cameras?
I initially opted for the A7CII due too it's handy size and lens selection but had the chance to use the Z5II for a short while and it's very mature for a Nikon camera.
A7CII
+ smaller and lighter than the Nikon, better suited for travel
+ greater lens selection
+ probably better AF
+ the Tamron 25-200 is arguably the best travel super zoom atm
+ low resolution & dark back screen
- expensive
- more noise in raw files in dark conditions
- poor EVF, I use glasses and don't know if this could be a deal braker
- subpar plasticky build quality, flimsy dials and knobs
- the Tamron might be too uncomfortable on a small body
Z5II
+ exceptional price-perfomance ratio unmatched by Sony
+ build quality
+ better low light AF (?)
+ the Z 24-120 is arguably the best 24-105/120 lens atm
+ good evf and high-res bright back screen
+ great low light sensor
+ can be used for professional work
- big and heavy
- lens selection is limited
- 24-120 has less range and is bigger and heavier than the Tamron 25-200
- most Z lenses are expensive, big and have subpar build quality
You have laid out the pros and cons very well (except I disagree about Nikon lens build quality, I’ve owned a bunch from both brands), so it’s up to personal preference to choose what you like best.
I have owned both cameras and I prefer the build, feel in hand, overall ergonomics, and EVF of the Z5II by a mile. Also, that 24-120 is one of the best midrange zooms ever designed. I am in my 4th year shooting Sony (A7RV and now A7R6) after decades with Nikon and both brands are fully capable in the right hands. I enjoy the vast number of native E mount lenses available (I tried adapting on a Nikon body and the experience was not enjoyable for me).
But that’s just me, the important thing is to go with what feels most right for you.
p.1 #5 · Sony A7CII & Tamron 25-200 vs Nikon Z5II & 24-120
I am just curious who told you that nikon's lenses have subpar build quality. I think they are one of the best build in any given price class.
I agree that both zooms are kind of big (though I don't mind even for travel). I think 20-70mm will pair better with A7cii. A7cii has more pixels so you can crop more. You can use it on nikon too with adapter (lots of people do), but nikon also has it's own 24-200mm which is a bit more balanced on bigger Z5, and they have a lighter, but slower, 24-105mm too.
I will say this though. After having owned A7cr and A6700 several times, the lack of buttons and focus point joystick are really missed. I am much happier taking A7riii (or nikon Z6/z7) on a trip with me then azcxxx.
p.1 #6 · Sony A7CII & Tamron 25-200 vs Nikon Z5II & 24-120
I happen to be a Sony user, with aps-c and ff kit. I would suggest looking to finder, fit and feel in hand as a first priority. Then lens availability for your purposes.
Try before you buy/choose a body/system intitally based on the evfs. Not everyone likes the small body evf, sometimes it's working with glasses, eyepoint, resolution, or just placement. And there are better or worse finders in the full size bodies, too. I don't mind using my A6700, I don't know how the evf compares to the A7Cii finder. I believe the A7CR finder is said to be better but haven't tried it either.
I don't follow Nikon so not sure on lens offerings. Probably there would be suitable offerings. Sony has been doing mirrorless longer and more open to third party lenses. Sony could have a broader range of choices. If either has bodies that work for you, then maybe look lens first.
I have a Tamron 28-200. It's fairly typical of a number of "super-zooms" on the ff side when it comes to lens size and weight. I think it's kind of at the edge point for use on the smaller bodies. Smaller and lighter is nicer, of course, for walk around. If one's lens selections tend to start there and go heavier/bigger, then I'm not sure the smaller bodies are worth the trade off in features not there to be smaller. But I don't think it's so big as to not be a reasonable walk-around lens, either. (Nikon has a different set of body sizes so how that might work for you could be different.) One might decide to go with two or three lenses and maybe choose differently. For example, there's the Sony 20-70. Smaller and lighter, at least some, compared to the 20-200, 25-200 and 28-200s. But if wanting longer than 70mm, 100mm or out to 200mm, maybe there's a different all-in-one choice. And some might want a 16-xx or 17-xx zoom and then go with a 25-200 or 28-200 to get 200mm in a two lens kit. (I find swapping between a 17-29/2.8 and 28-200 frequent in a compressed "old city" urban environment but 28-200 almost all I need in other more open or non-urban settings.)
