Re: Canon R5 (and R5M2) vs Nikon Z8 (low light AF performance)
Gochugogi wrote: bernardl wrote:
No direct experience comparing these 2 in low light, but to me Canon is ruled from the onset for the following reasons:
- largely inferior native lenses line up
- inability to adapt other mirrorless mount lenses
- no third party lenses support despite rumors for years
- typical delay of several years compared to Sony/Nikon in terms of the latest sensor tech
- low value firmware update policy
- habit of introducing nasty half hidden limitations in their gear, from the heating issue of the R5 with video to lenses not supporting TC or only in a sub set of the range
- unique UI which differs too much from other brands I am using such as Fuji and P1
- ...
You got the religion. Preach, dude preach!
What's not factual in what I wrote? These aspects may not matter to you but they do matter to me.
- I wouldn't want to use another 400mm f2.8 without a TC, living without a 400mm f4.5 would be hard as well. I love being able to choose between a top notch 85mm f1.8 S and a 85mm f1.2 S depending on the situation,... and when I use my 85mm f1.2 S I like it being a T1.3 lens and not a T1.5 lens like the Canon, these 0.2 Stops being why I pay big money for the lens,
- I use my Sony FE lenses through adapters which is great when I mix the 2 brands in a shoot
- I shoot with the native Tamron 35-150mm f2.0-2.8 and love it (just this Saturday it enabled me to both capture the latest landscape images on my Instagram and 20 minutes later ski action photographs), that lens isn't accessible to Canon users, so aren't the Voigtlander APO-Lanthar 35mm f2.0 and 50mm f2.0 (they may come at some point)
- I wouldn't want to work without a high DR 45mp stacked sensor camera both for still and video and I have been able to do this for 2+ years and would have been able to do that for 3 years had I been a Sony user. I also prefer to apply my high ISO NR in post processing instead of my camera de-noising my raws without any user control like the R5 does,
- I didn't have to buy a new camera to get auto capture and pixel shift
- I can use my TCs with all my tele lenses from 70-200mm f2.8 to 180-600mm and can shoot for hours with my Z9 in Nraw 8K 60p if needed without having to buy a separate dedicated video camera,
- I switch easily between my Z8 and GFX-100II because the physical controls are very similar
What exactly would Canon offer me that Nikon or Sony don't?
- I first thought that the 28-70mm f2.0 was one appeal of the RF system then I checked the IQ in details and the look of oof highlight alone told me what I needed to know. Sure enough Canon is already rumored to be about to update this lens. Too bad for early adopters who trusted the brand.
- The 24-105mm f2.8 would come handy at times, but I can live without it,
- The 100-300mm f2.8 is absolutely great but why on earth did they not equip it with a TC?
- The R1 may be great if rumors are true, we will see. It comes 3+ years too late honestly speaking.
Is any opinion about gear differing from "they are all good enough" the proof of an irrational liking of a brand? Are the points I listed above not all real world aspects impacting photography?
Cheers,
Bernard
Feb 27, 2024 at 01:02 AM
Previous versions of bernardl's message #16482875 « Canon R5 (and R5M2) vs Nikon Z8 (low light AF performance) »
