I’m a very happy R5 owner, but also a tech geek.
When Sony came out with the A1, I really couldn’t understand what the draw was? It seemed to be almost identical to the R5 but significantly more expensive.
Now the Z9 is doing the same thing. Comparing the stats, they seem almost identical. The R5 actually has a higher mechanical FPS over the A1… if I read correctly the Z9 has 30 fps mechanical?
I’ve seen some reviews comparing to the R3…. But I also don’t understand that camera.
I guess this is to say, what am I missing? While not cheap, the R5 seems to offer pretty much all of the features that these other big bodies have.
Anyone seen a good link or have some insight?
Videos
On the verge of buying a Canon R5 Mark II - talk me off the ledge on why I shouldn’t get a z8/z9 instead. Have been a Nikon guy for forever and currently my go to is a D850.
Hi everyone,
I have been using Nikon gear for 10+ years along with my associate and incrementally upgraded towards a full set of Z lenses and bodies.
After years with disappointing Z6/Z7 and the ii variants I'm finally happy with the Z9, but I have wrist issues and Nikon constantly seems to aim towards big heavy bodies and lenses. I have preordered the Z8, but its still almost 30% heavier than the R5 and the A1. I'm also a big 35mm user and I'm scared of the weight of the upcoming 35 1.2.
Are there any Nikon Z9 shooters with solid experience with its direct competitors regarding handling and autofocus performance, also during dance floor bounce flash situations? Thank you.
Hey everyone,
I’m looking for a full-frame mirrorless camera that can handle serious outdoor abuse — multi-day treks off the grid, rough handling, cold, humidity, sand, dust, no backups, no babying.
Right now I’m torn between the Nikon Z8 and the Canon R5 / R5 Mark II. What I really care about is ruggedness and reliability — I already lean toward Nikon because of the lenses, but I need to know:
Is the Z8 body truly durable? What’s the mix of plastic vs metal, and how solid is the build compared to the R5/R5 II?
How do the weather sealing and resistance to extreme elements (rain, cold, dust, sand) compare?
Has anyone used these bodies in rough, remote environments — any weak points or failure stories?
I’m not too worried about specs or autofocus at this point — just which camera is more likely to survive a week in the wild without a padded case or gentle treatment.
Would love to hear real-world experiences or teardown insights. Thanks!
I have used Nikon D3300 , D7500 , D700.
Was pondering buying R6 mark ii and a 100-500 lens when I was going Mirrorless , but finally ended up buying the Nikon ZF as I was already invested in the Nikon ecosystem. I almost exclusively shoot wildlife mostly birding.
So what would be the best choice right now?
I come from a 5D mk2 and desperately need to update… My other equipment, drones and action cams, all do 4K with decent FPS. My current DSLR is definitely the weak spot.
I found out I actually love doing video, so i want to focus on being full hybrid… Or at least be able to do both video and photo.
I do want to be able to shoot raw 8K for cropping and oversample reasons. Also the 4K 120fps is much appreciated for the action shots i do.
Does that mean i need to buy a R5 plus a C70? Will a R5C be good enough?
Or more drastically; should i look at the Nikon Z9??? (I don’t mind selling my gear, since otherwise i would want to upgrade to RF)
Very few people have gotten their hands on an R5C yet. If you are interested in it, I'd suggest attempting to rent before buying. LensRentals should have it in stock soon. Some people cannot stand the battery life and it is a deal breaker.
Thanks for all the input so far!
Fellow photogs I need your advice. I am a wedding photog shooting for at least 12 hours a day currently with dual D810 and looking to upgrade. Im stuck between Z7II, Z9 and R5. I want the best bang for the buck and Im willing to switch systems. Z7ii looks like the most logical option at the moment R5 the best one and Z9 like an overkill. The most important specs id say are MP great autofocus and dynamic range, if you have any experience or any take on these 3 or others let me know. TIA (PS I didnt include the Z6II due to less MP as I am a cropper but if you have something to say about it please do)
You wont get a Z9 for a loooooong time unless you put in your preorder moments after it was announced or if youre willing to pay the outrageous 12,000 USD prices on the secondary market.
The z7ii seems like a natural movement forward but hou may not enjoy usinf adapted glass or you can invest in native Z glass.
Also is there a specific reason why you want to upgrade? That could help.
The Z9 is serious overkill and I would suggest you consider as well that you would be hauling around a three-pound body before even adding a lens. I also think the Canon R5 is overrated and not worth its price. That is not a Nikon thing since I have also owned and enjoyed Canon cameras. It just doesn't impress me on most fronts and does very little better given its nearly $4000 price tag. For AF it is probably a bit better than the Z7II (same for raw video) and the Z9 is in its own league, but the Z7II is easily the superior camera for dynamic range and most early testing suggests it bests the Z9 as well.
For full disclosure, I switched from a D850 to a Z7II for the weight savings (lost some strength and dexterity in my hand due to a neck injury). While I would love to have the D850's controls back and would buy a Z7III without hesitating if they made that change, the Z7II has without a doubt fast become my favorite digital camera. The IQ matches the D850, but the real-time EVF display re exposure has meant I spend far less time setting up shots and have far fewer discards. Is the D850 AF faster? Yes, but a good photographer needs solid focusing not the fastest. For a camera with the highest keeper rate of any camera I have owned, that has the same industry leading IQ as the D850 but can be carried in one hand for hours, the Z7II was a great investment that I would make again without hesitation.
What’s the true difference that only enthusiastic lifetime users know? To help put aside the usual bickering, let me use an analogy: BMW vs. Mercedes Benz, Coke vs. Pepsi, Nike vs. Adidas, etc…
At the end of the day, all these company’s have design philosophies/business model differences that transcend any individual body or lens. Nike will always pay up for the best marketing and biggest athletes. BMW skews performance, Benz skews luxury.
At the same time, design philosophies/business design often come with the same trade-off/flaws. German cars are needlessly complex and typically have unreliable electrician system vs. Japanese makers like Toyota. But that reliability takes the soul out of the vehicle.
So forget about the current ecosystem as things will change year after year. But some corporate values/philosophies can endure decades. So what’s the truth between Nikon and Canon?
As a 3 year old Sony Aps-c user, I would like to switch to Canon for its video capabilities (8K 60fps) I do wildlife photography and videography and I kind of needed the flexibility 8K gives in post processing…
But I am wondering about the honest opinion, is Canon R5 ii really worth the price? As it will be a big jump for me 🤭