From the Zach Theatre production of "James and the Giant Peach."
I have to say upfront that I'm very happy with the files I'm getting with the Fuji cameras and lenses and have no plans in the immediate future to consider switching to anything else; or even augmenting what I have. Which puts me, as a writer, in the delicate position of having to just write about how I do stuff or why I do stuff but rarely about what's new in the kingdom of cameras. An acquaintance called me, interrupted a nice nap, and wanted to know which full frame, mirrorless system he should buy and that gave me a chance to look around and develop an opinion.
There are basically four mirrorless systems which would interest professional or advanced users in the full frame space: Sony, Canon, Nikon and Panasonic. I think including Panasonic is a stretch because they are such an unproven player in this space. It's all new for them. But I do include them because after using the GH5s and G9s I have a profound soft spot for the brand. I can't in good conscience include Leica's SL because the sheer cost of the system is too much of a deterrent for 90-95% of photographers looking at products in this niche. And I can't include Pentax, well, just because.
Having used a bunch of different Sony products I have to dismiss Sony at the outset. I don't care how good their sensors are or how fast their line of lenses is growing, I just know that I hate the ergonomics of the A7xxx bodies. Hate the hard edges. Hate the small grips. Hate the less than robust feel. I say this having shot with an A7ii and an A7Rii for well over a year. Tens of thousands of frames. The cameras work fine, the images look great, but holding onto the cameras is about as comfortable as hugging cactus.
Since I would use the chosen camera system to make a living creating photographs for a diverse client base I think I'd have to skip the Panasonic twins because the availability of 2.5 lenses just isn't enough to cover all the stuff I need to do with a camera. I'm sure their image stabilization is incredible and I'm willing to bet that the feeling you get when the camera is nestled in your hand is superb but I'm done being a beta tester for camera companies. That, and occasionally I need access to wildly different lenses than they currently offer. I hope they continue to grow the line-up (both cameras, lenses and flashes) as I'm sure at some point in the future I'll feel compelled to try out the Panasonic full framers.
That moves me on to Canon. And here, please, don't get me wrong, I think the 5Dmk4 is a great camera but it's not mirrorless. I really think Canon hates the concept of mirrorless and wishes they didn't have to defensively offer products in the space just to maintain parity with their competitors. Scratch a Canon exec and I'm sure they'd grouse about just how much better traditional DSLRs are than the Johnny Come Lately mirrorless stuff. Maybe that's why the models they have on offer seem an odd fit in the market. Decent bodies with cheap lenses or crappy bodies coupled with pricey lenses. I can't figure out their strategy. Maybe they don't have a strategy.... But so far the cameras being marketed by them seem like afterthoughts or basic amateur cameras. You can only woo me so far with the dual pixel AF. Remember? I like to focus my video manually....(snob? you bet).
In short order that brings me round to Nikon. If I were starting from scratch today and was required by law, peer pressure and divine intervention to pick a mirrorless, full frame camera system to shoot with for the next duration it would be a Nikon Z6 and a bunch of the new lenses along with an adapter that lets me use the old 70-200mm f4.0 (while waiting for the Z version). The camera has its issues; "only" one card slot, slow C-AF, and a few other misses but it seems like they put a lot of thought into video, the handling is very nice and the 24 megapixel, full frame sensor should be adequate for all but the most extreme needs. Add in a nice EVF and good battery life and you're almost there. But frankly, after having cameras in my hands for more than 2/3rds of my life I've got to say that the handling, and hand feel, is more important than whether a camera or a brand is X% faster or has X% more resolution, etc. If it doesn't feel right you won't want to carry it around and use it. That's what matters most.
Yep. I think the Z6 is the right mix. Everyone else can shut down production and go home. Except for Fuji. While I haven't tested them all side by side I'm going to bet that the differences between good full frame and really good APS-C aren't all we've been led to expect.
But really, it's all just my opinion. Colored by past experiences and nostalgia. YMMV.
Now, what's your take?
20 comments:
Gotta agree with you about Sony's ergonomics. Every time I let myself be wooed by sample images and user testimonies, I go to a store and pick one up. The spell is lifted as soon as I put one up to my eye and feel my fingers grasping the body awkwardly as my pinkies dangle midair. Not to mention the menus.
I am traditionally a Canon user, though I know that paints me as a fuddy-duddy. They simply work (and work simply, some might say). But lately the Fuji colors have drawn me in to their system. I don't really feel the need for full-frame, after all.
Agree, but Pentax wouldn’t be on this list not because it’s Pentax, but because they don’t make a FF mirrorless camera.
Practically speaking I would go with the Sony... Great f4 zooms available and a few key primes...
However I had the chance to handle all but the Panasonic, and the Nikon's are very comfortable to hold.
My advice has been "wait a year," but if a person must buy now I like your thinking.
In many ways Sony seems like the way to go, with a decent selection of bodies and lenses, but I have to agree they seem awkward to handle. I like Nikon, but I worry about their corporate position and their ability to develop a full line in a timely manner.
We live in interesting times.
I've recently acquired the Nikon Z6 (in addition to my Fuji XT3) and have to say it's an awesome camera. It's a solid build and feels secure in the hand. The ergonomics are typical Nikon, which is to say excellent. A comfortable and fat grip, nice controls and buttons layout, and (for me) a very intuitive menu. It also has a very small form factor, particularly with the 24-70 Z f4 attached, and is almost identical in size as the XT3 with 16-55 f2.8.
It shoots incredibly sharp, contrasty, colorful images and renders beautiful video. The one card slot is a non-issue for me. I've had only one SD card fail me in over 15 years of shooting, and with the greater reliability of the XQD in the Z6, I think reliability is essentially a non-issue.
I've not found the AF to be much of an issue. In video it's incredibly quick and reliable, and I don't think it needs to be faster to alleviate any concerns. It just works. In stills mode it's also very quick and reliable, but does struggle somewhat in low light when there is little contrast. Otherwise, it's quick enough to be unnoticeable. And don't forget, later this month Nikon is scheduled to release a major firmware update to improve AF and add eye detect to compliment the face detect (which also works incredibly well in its current form). I think this update will basically make all the fuss about who's AF/Face/Eye detect is best nothing more than useless fodder for those with too much time at the keyboard.
The colors are classic Nikon, and though different than the Fuji I don't know if one is better than the other. They're both beautiful, but the Fuji has more of what I call a 'painting' effect, which I find pleasing for portraits, but I prefer the Nikon for landscapes and general shooting. I think both shoot comparable video, but again the Fuji has its unique color and contrasting.
The XT3 definitely has better pre-amps, and when using my Juicedlink external pre-amp I notice less input is needed to get comparable audio levels to the Z6. This is also true when compared to my Panasonic GH3, so I think this may reflect the better pre-amp in the XT3 and is not so much a demerit to the Z6.
I'm looking forward to Nikon's future lens development with the Z mount. I'm loving the excellent image quality, and looking forward to adding a wide angle and perhaps a big aperture prime in the mix just for fun. Overall this is an excellent camera and I've no regrets. And, it's a fun camera to shoot!
As a Canon user and new-ish owner of an R, I have to say it is a decent camera and I love the wicked accurate AF that a mirrorless body affords. However, I do not care for the decision to re-vamp ALL the controls because...mirrorless.
I saw the Nikon Z6 at the local camera store and I was very impressed with the size and ergonomics. I also was very impressed with the diminutive 24-79 f4 that was on it. By comparison the R, with its very good 24-105, is much larger.
Overall the Fuji really appeals to me as its dials and conventional controls that speak to my upbringing in the SLRs of the 70s.
But, business logic compels me to soldier on with my Canon FF gear as it 1. does the job, and 2. is paid for.
I can’t afford a new camera-not that I need one-but if I could it would be a Z6. Looks right, seems to handle well, and has several affordable Z mount lens available. Maybe next year.
I'm a Sony user & I agree entirely with your comments about handling etc, but I just love the lens options, from cheap 3rd party to the expensive Sony GM lenses. I love my manual focus Voigtlander lenses which have a unique character. So for now I will live with the Sony, but if I were starting afresh I would seriously look at the Panasonic S1R due to its Multishot mode which Lloyd Chambers says is the biggest advance in digital in a decade
I went through the same decision process before Christmas. I had a D800 and an A7ii that I bought used to test. I loved the Voightlander 65mm and the Sony 85mm 1.8 was outstanding. In the end I sold off the Sony and the D800 and bought a Z7 with the kit zoom and the two primes. I already had a number of F and ZF.2 lenses. Everything works great with the FTZ adapter and the Z lenses are spectacular. I have already started selling off the ZF.2's including an Otus 55mm. Overall, the Z7 is a joy to shoot with. I can happliy carry it around all day on a wrist strap. The image quality is spectacular (as are pretty well all current cameras). Zero regrets and much satisfaction with the purchase.
I'm with you Kirk, if I had a need to go full-frame I would go all-in on Nikon, I prefer their handling and color science. In terms of the top players, it mostly comes down to preferences and specific needs mapped to the performance envelope of each camera. They are all incredibly capable tools.
Still like and use my "full frame" 5x7 and 8x10 Deardorffs.
On digital mirrorless - no thanks. I'm one who will stay with an optical finder. Do wish Canon or Nikon would make the interchangeable finders as with the F1 and F3's. Then, ISO 25 or even Tech Pan territory like ISO 3 - with the accompanying increase in sharpness.
A lot will like the mirrorless. Good for them as long as they actually use the gear.
I am a Nikon user who wanted a smaller camera to reduce my load for travel, while still letting me do the architectural work I enjoy. I went with the Z7. I carried it with the 24-70 around Cuba for a few days as my sole camera (plus a phone, of course) and it was so close to my Nikon DSLRs that there was little learning curve. Performed very well, focusing was fast enough even in low light - Tropicana night club - to be useful. I am sure the Z6 would be better for this but I wanted a do everything camera. The 14-30 Z lens is amazing. It is as small as the compact 24-70 but is an ultrawide that takes regular filters. The forthcoming update to the firmware that fixes eye focus and gives you RAW video output will be a big fix. All that said, unless you are making big prints of high detail subjects, II doubt that the images would be better than from an APS-C sensor. (The other value, which is not relevant to your work, is that the bigger sensor and pixels gives a lot of room for architectural corrections that burn pixels.)
You hit the nail on the head with your description of Canon's attitude toward mirrorless cameras, Kirk. Instead of having a unified vision or gestalt the EOS RF-mount cameras appear to be a mixed effort to mollify various internal stakeholders. The result is a little of something for everyone, but not enough of any particular thing to get anyone in particular excited, much less everyone. Combine lackluster bodies with a limited selection of oversized and expensive lenses and it's small wonder their sales are slow. To put it in a nutshell, Canon and Panasonic offer ample reasons to cross them off the list. That leaves Nikon and Sony almost by default.
Kirk
imaging resource in there camera reviews have a tab called samples. Slide down to the still life with fabric samples, bottles, and a coffee cup. pick a iso and noise reduction and click on it. Click on the picture that comes up and you'll see a much larger picture suitable for pixel peeping. Comparing the xh1 and z6 at higher iso's such as 3200 the Fuji is at least as good as the z6 for noise. I think the xh1 is maybe better with the highlights. The only place the xh1 falls down is in the fabric samples and that's maybe a pathologic case. Gh5s doesn't do well either with one of the fabrics.
Going to photons to photos, the photographic density range/iso plot shows they're almost identical. After looking at the imaging resource pictures I can see why.
Jay
IF I were to go mirrorless, full-frame, I'd go Canon or Nikon. Both have decades of cameras that they've evolved from. Canon has a new "R" series which, like the Nikon, has adapters for the older lenses.
Personally, I prefer the mirrored type, because it lasts for hundreds of shots without changing batteries. It also seems easier on my eyes - I spend enough time looking at an LCD screen at work, so I don't love the idea of having one on my camera as well.
BTW, I've graduated from the Canon FTb I used to have when we worked together @ Audio Concepts.
I’m still shooting my Nikon D600 but the Canon R looks really good because of that adapter for the EF mount with the variable neutral density filter. If Nikon had an equivalent adapter for screwdrive lenses I’d have bought it and the Z6 already
I was extremely happy to read this column, because just this afternoon I ordered a Z6 kit (24-70 and FTZ adapter.) That came after a lot of hand-wringing about moving somewhat away from my Panasonic GX8s, which I really like, and for which I have a lot of glass. But my "big camera," a D800, was getting a little long in the tooth, and I grew to dislike the size of the thing, especially with the f2.8 zooms. With the Z6 I should be able to use at least some of my Nikon glass -- most notably, an 85, for which there is not yet a Z equivalent. The other question I had to deal with was whether to go with the Z6 or Z7. Here reality finally took hold, and I realized I'd have almost no use for the extra resolution of the Z7, but would have use for the Z6s low-light capability which is said to be at least marginally better than the Z7s. If it turns out that I like the Z6 as much as I think I will (and I'm an old Nikon guy) I'll probably for a G7 later on. By the way, the Z6/Z7 twins are almost exactly the same size as your GH5s, within a couple of millimeters in most dimensions, although the Zs are notably "thinner". Weight is about the same as well (the Z6 is five grams heavier, or about 1/6 of an ounce.) Can't wait to get my hands on it.
John Camp
Nice analysis Kirk, and helpful. Helpful in reinforcing my continuing-to-cling to my Canon 7D & 7DMrkII bodies. Oh, I've felt the tingles of lust growing for an upgrade. But not for dumping my full array of lenses and lighting gear (or for work arounds which will add a big learning curve and resulting compromises on tech quality). That move will be terrifyingly expensive. So, you have sort of convinced me to wait following the old "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" law of budget defense. Seems as if the field's still a too young to give in to internal demons that are goosing me toward CHANGE!. I'll stay tuned to your thoughts though and reeeeely appreciate them. BTW, Andreas Manessinger switched to the Olympus mirrorless system with impressive results and he did make me use his camera, then mine on an A-B test of comparative stabilizers last year in a dim Vienna subway. His was at least three stops better than mine... at least. And you/ve probably seen his results at https://blog.andreas-manessinger.info ?
OH... btw, what's become of "PLOP!"? Is Cedric Canard OK? Have you heard anything? Miss his insights (and he turned me onto yours).
Interesting that the Z6's C-AF is slow given that it was Nikon who showed the world how to do fast C-AF with Nikon 1 cameras.
I don't remember you ever mentioning sports/action much (I could easily have missed it), so why do you care about fast C-AF?
Late to comment on this one, but if I wanted a full-frame mirrorless system, which I don't, I could go with Canon. I switched from Nikon to Canon (happily) in 1993 and continued with them, both film and then digital until 2017, when I abandoned full-frame altogether.
Canons aren't spectacular, but I found them easy to use and they did a great job in the day-in, day-out work of a small-market commercial and travel photographer. But I did get tired of carrying that bag of heavy lenses around.
That's the thing about Sony -- the bodies are small and light, but the lenses aren't.
I used Olympus m4/3s as a secondary system from 2010 on, before moving to Fuji entirely in 2017. I like my Fuji cameras and lenses very much, but in my opinion, the Fuji menus are more difficult than the Olympus ones.
Post a Comment