Toertel76
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.2 #2 · R3 to A1ii or R5 mii? | |
Hi All,
I have made experiences with both, the A1II and the Canon R5II. I have been driving myself mad (and my GAS wasn't helping), because I wanted a new camera system for Wildlife shooting on my next Safari. I've started with a Leica SL2 and a Sigma 100-400, which is easy enough to improve on, but this system had already something pretty unique - an amazing viewfinder, which is beside all technicalities in my opinion very enjoyable and almost lifelike.
After a quick test of an R5II and an A1 Mark I I decided to order the A1II, assuming that with the AF improvements it should be at least on par with the R5II. Main reason was spec sheet hunting - better viewfinder, higher resolution, faster sensor, super flippy dippy screen, best lens system on the market ... - you name it. I waited ages, committed also several lenses (200-600, 35 GM, 24-70 GMII). First things first - it is an amazing camera. I would not hesitate to call it the most complete camera on the market. That said, I failed to enjoy it. I used it for street, tested it with wildlife, but it was never fun. Three things, which looked great on the spec sheet, but were never great in practice:
- Viewfinder: although the best viewfinder on the spec sheet, it always looks like a screen, not like reality. It is overly sharp, resolution drops, ... . It is on the spec sheet blowing all others out of the water, but I recon that Leicas viewfinder just looks better to the eye, Nikons viewfinder looks supposedly better from what I heard, and honestly I quite like the viewfinder in the R5II better in real use cases.
- Autofocus: There is so much talking about the AF system, that it is almost impossible to get to what it means to us individually. First things first: the AF system of Sony is second to none. The tracking is best in class, human subject recognition and tracking is certainly good with almost every brand, and the options you can configure are mind-blowing. You will be able to do everything with this system that you need to it do. What was in my opinion by far not there where the Canon is, is the subject recognition.
- Weight: I found the combination of the A1II with the 200-600 extremely clunky and heavy. Yes, again it looked great to have a high performing internal zoom, and yes, it is only 2.7kg according to the specs, but in reality, when I've put it on a scale, it was 3152g (measured!). The reason is, that they just mention the bare lens, but when you add the tripod collar, the lens hood, the lens cap, etc., then you are adding significant weight. The canon with the 100-500 is significantly lighter (~2700g, haven't measured it yet myself, but I love it). And that is one of the reasons why the OM Systems OM1 Mark II with the 150-400 was much more fun to use, see below (measured weight 2654g).
I am cutting to the case. I had committed a serious amount of money, and I had the "best" camera on the market with the "best" possible glas (please spare me the discussion on WL primes - too expensive and I think zooms are better for safari unless to need to make a living out of it).
Then I tried to photograph a bird in a cage in front of me, and the camera didn't acquire the bird, whatever I did (unless I used spot AF, which is the way to go with Sony in "difficult" cases). I was so annoyed with it that I decided to try OM Systems OM1 II with the high end glass. And, what happened? I liked the viewfinder, I liked the AF (even though it is supposedly and most likely objectively "worse"), I liked the handling. I didn't like that it would have cost me almost the same amount of money that I had spent on the Sony system. I knew that the Canon has the objectively better subject recognition, and after some scrutiny I was able to get to the bottom of any marketing bla - when I actually take the right lenses (RF100-500, RF28-70 f2.8), I am able to get one of the lightest, and in the same time best performing systems on the market, despite all influencer BS. I was able to get a good deal, saving some money, and jumped.
And now what? I have a tremendous amount of fun in every shooting situation so far - street, wildlife, documentary. For anything else I am anyhow using Leica digital and analog.
What I want to say is the following: the technical nerd in me was initially doing an excessive amount of research and engineering to get the best possible outcome. It reminded me of comparing the Nokia N95 to the first iPhone - the Nokia was winning in every objective category. I got the iPhone and never looked back. Here I decided to go for the Sony, and that was for me a mistake, because I didn't go for the handling, but for the spec sheet.
Or in other words: My recommendation is, choose the system what feels better and forget the spec sheet optimisation and what you can find in all the videos on Youtube. I would say that I finished watching all videos about the top cameras, and it wasn't really help - it is more like watching voluntarily 600h commercials than anything else. Test it. And from your background I would find it hard to believe that Sony would be doing the job better for you than the Canon - and you are even already heavily invested in RF mount. You can get two VCM lenses and an R5II, or any other sexy combination for the same money than the overpriced (yes, now I said it!) A1II.
The A1II for roughly 10-20% more than the Canon R5II would be arguable, but not for 100% more.
I am very happy Canon user now.
I hope that makes all sense and helps a bit.
Cheers,
Toertel
|
