groob wrote: RoamingScott wrote:
The R1 and A1 II don’t “run circles” around the Z9, each has a few strong points and a few where it’s weaker than the others. People who care about brands (lol) will latch onto these extreme edge case differences as ammo that their BRAND is better and all other brands are behind and laughable to even consider shooting.
I know I personally have very rarely been held back by my Z9 and that it has gotten consistently more capable with every major FW update. Sony apologists might have to google what those are.
I agree with this and have been making that point for years. The Z9 almost never falters for me. I took it to Ft. DeSoto and Sanibel this winter and spring, and I'd bet that less than 1% of my photos missed focus. My hit rate is the same locally and with kids.
But there are plenty of reports that Sony and Canon perform better in extreme edge cases, like swallows. That kind of subject isn't something I shoot much of, and I think that is true for 99% of photographers. So, differences in AF competency are certainly overstated. But if swallows and other difficult BiF targets were my main priority, I'd have to think very hard about staying with Nikon. TBH, though, if I were still with Nikon right now, I'd stay because the Z9 ii will almost certainly be on par with the A1ii and R1, and the Z9 ii could surpass them. It also seems clear that the other manufacturers are not going to prioritize similar lens offerings as Nikon, and I'd value that much more than small differences in AF competency.
Just to chime in - I don’t disagree that the AF differences can be overstated depending on what someone shoots. And to be clear, I’m not talking about swallows or tiny erratic birds — I don’t really shoot that either.
My comparison/comment is coming from my own use case. With the Z9 + 600TC, shooting wild dogs hunting and coming fast through brush, grass, and obstacles, the Nikon would lose focus. Not constantly, and not enough for me to say the Z9 isn’t a great camera — because it is. But it did happen... and more than once.
More recently, I was shooting a fast-moving animal coming directly toward me with the R1, the camera tracked perfectly, with not a single frame out of focus. That kind of difference matters to me because it shows up in the type of wildlife I actually shoot, not just in extreme swallow-type edge cases.
But overall, I fully agree their lens lineup is incredibly compelling — the 400TC is still one of my favorite lenses ever. I’m just saying that, for my specific shooting, the R1’s AF/tracking has given me more confidence in those moments where the subject is fast moving from far to close, and moving through a messy background, midground and sometimes foreground environment.
May 10, 2026 at 08:38 PM
Previous versions of robert_in_ca's message #17035869 « Official Nikon Z 120-300mm 2.8 TC - Image Thread »
