Mirrorless Fujifilm, Nikon, Sony.

I ventured into Fujifilm mirrorless. I want to sell it.
Now I wonder if Nikon will come out with a mirrorless which would match Sony a7r iii.
or I should sell a few things and go for the aforementioned Sony and probably for the 200-600 Sony lens.

Go for the Sony. They’re lightyears ahead of Nikon and have great lenses available. Nikon and Canon are playing catchup. A7rIV would be preferable to A7rIII.

Joe

Depending on your use, keep in mind Sony's "supposedly" weather sealing is anything but. Sony's are fair weather only cameras.

They already have a camera that is fairly similar to an a7r3 - it's the Z7. In some ways it's better and in some slightly worse like any other camera comparison between brands. What they don't have is something that competes with the a7r4 as of now.

Karl Egressy wrote:I ventured into Fujifilm mirrorless. I want to sell it.
Now I wonder if Nikon will come out with a mirrorless which would match Sony a7r iii.
or I should sell a few things and go for the aforementioned Sony and probably for the 200-600 Sony lens.

Hi Karl; 

As per E.J., the Z7 is Nikon's direct competitor to the A7RIII. Each camera has their strengths and weaknesses, but if you're thinking of using it to shoot birds the A7RIII's C-AF likely still has the edge. Of course, the A7RIV and A9/A9II are currently Sony's best performing models. Perhaps more importantly, you can buy the Sony 200-600 right now whereas Nikon's version could be as long as two years out. I expect the 100-400Z will be released first. Anyway, hopefully by then Nikon will have released a high-performance body to take full advantage of it.

Personally, I'm sticking with Nikon for the moment as I'm quite happy with my D850, Z6 & Z7 combo. We certainly do live in interesting times, however. 

Cheers!
Gary

I don't think Sony has or anyone else has cameras that match the D5, D500 or D850 for bird and
wildlife photography right now.
Why do you want to something not as good as what you have?
I have friends with the Sony 200-600 who would sell it and get the 500pf in a second.

Dan Kearl wrote:I don't think Sony has or anyone else has cameras that match the D5, D500 or D850 for bird and
wildlife photography right now.
Why do you want to something not as good as what you have?
I have friends with the Sony 200-600 who would sell it and get the 500pf in a second.

Because they want mirrorless, that's why.

Isn't the reality that the major camera manufacturers are moving toward mirrorless 35mm systems now, just as they moved from 35mm SLR film systems to DSLR 35mm systems in the early 2000s? That movement raises value retention, obsolescence and maintenance/service issues.

Best Regards,

Roman

Porsche917 wrote:Isn't the reality that the major camera manufacturers are moving toward mirrorless 35mm systems now, just as they moved from 35mm SLR film systems  to DSLR 35mm systems in the early 2000s?   That movement raises value retention, obsolescence and maintenance/service issues.

Best Regards,

Roman

I completely agree and my next camera will probably be a mirrorless in
a couple years. I just think at the present time and in the near future,
for birds and wildlife, Nikon has the best system.
I was just wondering why Karl, who shoots the best Nikon has, would like to change.

If it's about what's gonna be the future that you make the switch now, how many of you are driving an electric vehicle?

Dan Kearl wrote:

Porsche917 wrote:Isn't the reality that the major camera manufacturers are moving toward mirrorless 35mm systems now, just as they moved from 35mm SLR film systems  to DSLR 35mm systems in the early 2000s?   That movement raises value retention, obsolescence and maintenance/service issues.

Best Regards,

Roman

I completely agree and my next camera will probably be a mirrorless in
a couple years. I just think at the present time and in the near future,
for birds and wildlife, Nikon has the best system.
I was just wondering why Karl, who shoots the best Nikon has, would like to change.

I don't want to change. I would like to add a mirroless either Sony or Nikon. Being 77 I don't want to wait an other five years until I either won't be around or I won't be able to shoot. The perspective on time is a function of your age as well.

Karl,
I was a little down on Sony after the a7R2, but stuck with it and picked up the a7R3 and the a9.  I'm very impressed with the results; especially the AF.  But it is a learning curve moving to a new system.  If you feel up to it, go for it.  I don't have the a7R4 or the 200-600, but I've heard it's a great combo.  However sticking with a Nikon mirrorless is a good choice as well.  You are familiar with the system, and it may be be an easier transition.

Why now?

If mirrorless is the future, don't you think the mirrorless a couple of years or more down the road would be even better?

I mean, unless you don't have gears that work for you now....

Dan Kearl wrote:I don't think Sony has or anyone else has cameras that match the D5, D500 or D850 for bird and
wildlife photography right now.

That's just plain false and I own both systems.

The Nikon Z7, IMO is not a good choice for birds. It’s too sluggish for fast movers. It’s a fine camera for pretty much any other nature usage though. If you want mirrorless and AF performance, then I’d say the A7r4 or A9. The A9 sits at the top of the heap imo. The A7r4 plus 200-600 is a great bird combo because in crop mode your FOV is 900mm with 26 megapixels. The zoom is fabulous for birds, quick to zoom, not too heavy and sharp. The AF of the A7r4 is a significant step up from the a7r3, but below the A9.
Good luck predicting Nikons high performance body.

Thanks Scott.

The only negative I've read about with the A7r4 is the buffer is relatively small and slow to clear.

Joel Eade wrote:The only negative I've read about with the A7r4 is the buffer is relatively small and slow to clear.

Uncompressed full frame RAW files are huge which takes its toll on the buffer although it's still pretty respectable.  Using compressed RAW largely gets rid of this although at some loss in certain circumstances.  The fact that Sony is the only manufacturer that does not offer a lossless compressed RAW file is inexcusable.  The large files of course also take longer to clear.  Shooting the A7R4 in APS-C mode which leaves you with 26 megapixels is a good option as it eliminates all buffer concerns, still gives you more pixels than any of the traditional wildlife cameras, with phase detection AF points throughout 100% of the image with the ability to track your initial focus point on the subject anywhere in the frame automatically.  It is how I would recommend shooting the a7R4 for wildlife.

So basically the buffer doesn't need to be a limitation at all from the standpoint of buffer capacity.  Where the a7R4 and ALL Sony cameras fall flat on their face is that you are essentially locked out of doing anything on the camera via the menus, rear LCD, or changing camera configuration until the buffer completely clears.

Joel Eade wrote:The only negative I've read about with the A7r4 is the buffer is relatively small and slow to clear.

It speeds things up by using fast(write speed) UHS ll cards only. Not all UHS ll cards are equally fast. Even Sony Tough cards are not all the same speed at writing. Some UHS ll cards are as slow as 70MBs to as fast as 300MBs. Especially important is the sustained write speed.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=sdxc+uhs-ii&

Joe

Well, I decided to jump into mirrorless for a lightweight carry around travel camera. I bought the Sony a6400 with the 10-135 lens. While it does fit the need I had, I find the colors to be very green biased and the center AF point to be a small area rather than a point. I can deal with AF as I don't use this camera for anything other than general photography like meetings, and walking around towns, but the green color bias drives me nuts. I have read other articles regarding Sony's color algorithms not being the same as Canon which is what I am used to.