Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
|
 p.1 #11 · Transition from NIkon (DSLR) to Canon - Good move? | |
GreenHaven wrote:
Transition from utilizing Nikon gear to Canon?
Background: Bordering on becoming an elderly Nikon shooter (since at least 2009) bird photography emphasis (since 2014) Cameras owned include the D90, D-800, D810 and D-850 (D-850 owned for 6.5 years and currently. Wife is dead set against buying used. No experience with mirrorless. Local retail chain is having their twice annual “sale/expo” in 2 days. Prices are sky high, no thanks to tariffs, inflation, corporate greed and what I consider to be price fixing policies which is intentionally utilized to suppress competition between retailers and to unsure profit levels. Skill level: amateur plus to semi professional.
Under serious consideration: Canon EOS R5 Mk II with RF 100-500 mm
Needs:
a) Reliable, accurate, quick to both acquire, lock-down and maintain a rock steady focus.
b) Produce reasonable quality frames in lower light environments and situations.
c) Reasonably fast fps but not excessive as I am not making a movie nor willing to wade and hand select from a myriad of shots.
d) Not interested in its video capability at the moment. Subject to change.
e) Education in regards to improving on the factory settings in order to optimize the settings exclusively for bird photography.
f) Ensuring focus is sharp and the best it could possibly be. Can the focus be fine tuned or calibrated in camera?
Concerns:
a) Viable ISO achievable and ‘acceptable” noise levels without requiring extensive and time consuming editing especially factoring n my declining eyesight. At what threshold/point does ISO output deteriorate and become unusable? Numbers please, thank you.
b) I’ve read battery life can be short….. i.e. only a few hundred shots. Truth or inaccurate?
c) It’s been out there since August 2024 or so. Replacement in the works in the next year or two? Is the value going to nosedive anytime soon?
d) IBIS quality while handheld, especially for BIF since I am 65+, have limited arm strength and my hands are shaky when gear is elevated or otherwise pointed up.
Are some of this models features gimmicky or a real improvement over the original body? Online reviews seem to be all over the place.
a) What is pre-capture good at and what is it used for? What types of scenarios.
b) Is Eye Control effective or usable in meaningful way to the average user?
This may well be my last camera body and understandably I don’t want to regret the above purchase due to lack of knowledge or what to reasonably expect. Thanks for your patience in advance with a newcomer to the Canon world. All input, tips, pointers and responses most welcome!!...Show more →
Let me respond to some of what you wrote. I have fairly recently switch to Canon and in the past I have shot Sony, Nikon, Fuji X, Fuji GF, Olympus OM, and Leica M camera. I am an inveterate system switcher.
You wrote for needs:
a) Reliable, accurate, quick to both acquire, lock-down and maintain a rock steady focus.
Canon will provide this. So will Sony and Nikon Z camera will mostly provide this as well. If you can live with a smaller sensor Olympus m4/3rds, and even Fuji X mount do pretty well too. Since you are using a DSLR, albeit a good one for AF, I still think you will be impressed by how much mirrorless has really helped on this issue in particular.
b) Produce reasonable quality frames in lower light environments and situations.
All the brands have pretty similar and very good high ISO performance. There are not huge differences and all will be just a bit better than your Nikon DSLR
c) Reasonably fast fps but not excessive as I am not making a movie nor willing to wade and hand select from a myriad of shots.
Top cameras let you select the fps. One feature I like with the Canon R5 II is that you can select the exact fps that you want to use. If you want 30 fps it does that, but if you want 14 fps you can shoot that instead if you like.
f) Ensuring focus is sharp and the best it could possibly be. Can the focus be fine tuned or calibrated in camera?
No need to fine tune any mirrorless camera. Since the camera use the sensor rather than a separate AF unit to focus they are all wonderfully calibrated. Calibration in DSLRs was about getting the AF unit and the sensor in sync. Since the sensor is the AF unit in mirrorless cameras they are always in sync.
Concerns:
a) Viable ISO achievable and ‘acceptable” noise levels without requiring extensive and time consuming editing especially factoring n my declining eyesight. At what threshold/point does ISO output deteriorate and become unusable? Numbers please, thank you.
For the Canon R5 II, I find I can shoot up to ISO 6400 with very little post-processing required if there is enough light to make that a proper exposure. Of course if you shot at ISO 6400, but the frame has to be brightened you will start to have problems. If I wanted to learn an AI noise reduction program, I hear they are excellent and getting better every day, but like you I prefer to keep my post-processing simple and haven't taken that leap. I could and you could as well if you wanted and I am pretty sure that even higher ISO could be achieved with that step.
b) I’ve read battery life can be short….. i.e. only a few hundred shots. Truth or inaccurate?
As Gary said, this is part of the cost of mirrorless. Battery life will be shorter. With the R5II you can add a battery grip and two batteries, which would help a lot, but do know that this will be an issue.
c) It’s been out there since August 2024 or so. Replacement in the works in the next year or two? Is the value going to nosedive anytime soon?
Of course we never know for sure, but the original R5 has held it value pretty well, so I don't see any particular reason to worry about the R5 II.
d) IBIS quality while handheld, especially for BIF since I am 65+, have limited arm strength and my hands are shaky when gear is elevated or otherwise pointed up.
As Gary responded this is strength of both the R5 II and the Canon system with many of its lenses also having IS in the lenses as well as the camera.
Other things you asked:
a) What is pre-capture good at and what is it used for? What types of scenarios.
For a bird photographer this can be really useful, IMO. It let's you notice the bird doing something and shoot a half second after it happens rather than having to anticipate the action. It captures quite a few shots you, "just missed." You still have to respond quickly but you can respond after something happens which is a really nice capability and does add to the shots you get. I say not a gimmick, but it isn't a panacea either.
b) Is Eye Control effective or usable in meaningful way to the average user?
I don't know about the average user, but I need my glasses to shoot and it seems worthless to me and I can't get it to work. Some people love it. I don't find it necessary, however, as Gary suggested.
All that said, I think you should also look at the Nikon Z8 or Z9 as you are a Nikon shooter already and they are really good cameras. I think the AF and image stabilization might be just a bit better with Canon, but the high ISO performance (not the noise but the detail per noise--this is where baking in the noise reduction in Canon might matter) and the sensor scan speed (especially important for very fast birds like hummers or falcons) might be slightly better with Nikon. The big draw for Nikon, however, IMO, for bird photographers is there excellent PF lenses. The 600 f/6.3 PF isn't that much more than the Canon 100-500L, but would both give you a bit more reach and would provide a bit wider aperture when the light is lower and if it is beyond your budget the 400 f/4.5S (which I think is a lovely lens and not a PF lens if you don't like those) with a 1.4X TC is a great option and actually a little cheaper than the 100-500L and with the TC will get you a bit more reach than the 100-500L and a bit wider aperture--it of course with the 1.4X TC is a 560 f/6.3.
If you know you want a zoom, however, then I think the 100-500L is a great option if it provides enough reach. On the Nikon side, if you can deal with the size and you want a zoom, then the 180-600 f/5.6-6.3 again provides more reach and a faster aperture at most focal lengths and especially at the critical longer ones. So, I would recommend looking at Nikon both because that is what you are used to and because they have a pretty compelling system for bird photography in particular. That said I think the Canon R5 II and 100-500L is a great system too and would very much do what you want.
|
