I May Jump Ship

I've often made the argument as to why I couldn't see myself switching from Nikon to anything else, and I woke up yesterday feeling the same way. I went to sleep with a completely different mindset.

Setting the stage, I shoot wildlife 90% of the time, primarily with a pair of D500s and 300mm & 500mm PF's among others. I added a Z6ii to start the transition to mirrorless, replacing my D750 and D610. The Z6ii is great for everything but wildlife for me, speaking primarily about birds in flight and things where I need high frame rates. I figured that when I bought it and I'm happy to use the D500's until Nikon comes up with a mirrorless replacement.

That is until yesterday when I had the opportunity to play with an R5, the RF 100-500mm f4.5-7.1, and an 800mm f11 IS STM.

First off, shooting with the R5 showed me just how far behind Nikon is in mirrorless tech. I got to play with an R6 as well and for the first time I regretted buying the Z6ii. Focus tech is a couple notches above Nikon. You don't lose the viewfinder as you shoot, even at 20fps. I know Nikon will get there eventually, but the gap I'm seeing leads me to believe they may never catch up, and the price points are close enough that they can't be used to justify one over the other - in fact you have to ask why the Nikons are so close in price but not performance?

Now to the lenses. The 100-500mm is a wildlife and sports photographer's dream lens, and while it's not super fast from an aperture perspective, given than I've been shooting with a 300mm f4 and a 500mm f5.6, usually stopped down a touch, I'm not losing a lot for all that flexibility I'm gaining. Oh, and it weighs in at 100g lighter than the 500mm and costs $900 less. Crisp, sharp, with great optical stabilization. But the real surprise was the 800mm f11. Yeah, I know, you're saying , "Who would want something that slow?!" Well, when you consider it weighs 2.77lbs and is shorter (in its storage configuration) than the 500mm PF I would say, "Just about anyone hiking out into the wild who doesn't want to carry pounds of gear and a tripod." The lens has a retractable barrel at the mount end that shortens it for transport and then extends it to about 5-6" longer than the 500mm PF when shooting. The weight is nothing, so even fully extended you can hold the camera by the body only and not feel like the lens is in any way pulling on the mount. The quality is extremely good when you consider this will only hit your wallet for $899, and the image stabilization was so good that I could shoot at 1/100s handheld sitting with my elbows on my knees. The high minimum aperture means that you can only focus in the center part of the viewfinder, but that's an incredibly small price to pay if you consider what it adds to your range - and if you're shooting it in cropped mode on an R5 that's almost full frame!!

So I've been thinking about them ever since. For the price of the 500mm PF I can get both lenses and sooooo much more flexibility. The R5 is a few hundred more than the Z7ii, but it has none of the barriers to wildlife shooting that the Z's currently have. I know Nikon may get there eventually, but my mirrorless journey is currently one body and one lens (24-200mm), and I am not sure I want to wait, even with the rumored 200-600mm, because the cameras aren't ready to use them. When I consider where both companies are now, both tech and financially, if I'm gonna change I don't think I'll find a better excuse. And if I act rationally I can likely replace the 3 bodies and mostly F mount lenses I have with the perfect kit for what I will really use moving forward and not really "lose" money.

Yeah, I know. I never thought I'd get a divorce just because I felt like I'm "trading up", but given that no vows were ever spoken here I may just need to start making separation plans.

If your not under contract with Nikon, I don't see any reason why you shouldn't go with the system that meets your needs the most. I've shot Pentax and their auto focus system isn't up to par for birds in flight. And who said you can't come back 10 years down the road? Good luck with whatever system you decide to you use. I also use Oly mirror less and I love the compactness of that system. The oly is strictly for Monochrome because the evf.

So were you hanging out with your amazing pro photographer brother who shoots Canon? :encouragement: In the past I remember he offered some of his Canon gear for you to use to help make a decision. You didn't jump ship then but at this point in time, you aren't as fully invested in Nikon mirrorless like you were with your Nikon DSLR's. And as you mentioned, the transition might not come with much, if any, additional cost after selling your current gear.

I gotta say I've been impressed with Canon for quite some time now. Back when I purchased my first SLR, The Camera Store showed me three manual focus bodies (this was prior to bodies having AF). One was Nikon, one Canon, and the other Minolta. I remember the Nikon cost twice as much as either the Canon or Minolta. The store led me to believe Nikon was geared more towards pros at that time. But look how things have changed over the years/decades. [For the record, I went with the Minolta since it offered Aperture Priority and Manual. The Canon body was Shutter Priority and Manual].

Canon really delved into designing and manufacturing their products by offering some amazing features. Even Scott Kelby jumped ship from Nikon to Canon when Canon offered him a complimentary kit and showed him how the Canon body could be configured similarly to the Nikon.

You really need to follow your heart with this one so you don't have any regrets. As was mentioned, it won't be a financial hit so the decision really depends on what you feel would work best for your needs.

But before you make your decision, if it was your brother who let you use his gear, maybe see if he will do a temporary swap so you can try his setup for a week while he uses yours. Honestly I can't find fault with jumping ship to Canon. So image-wise how does the Canon mirrorless compare to your D500 for wildlife? Granted that Canon lens is a bit slower, but how is its quality when viewing the images?

Yup, now sounds like the time to do it if you're gonna. I too am interested to see if you have any comparison shots.

hark said:

But before you make your decision, if it was your brother who let you use his gear, maybe see if he will do a temporary swap so you can try his setup for a week while he uses yours. Honestly I can't find fault with jumping ship to Canon. So image-wise how does the Canon mirrorless compare to your D500 for wildlife? Granted that Canon lens is a bit slower, but how is its quality when viewing the images?

Click to expand...

It was my brother and I pinged him this morning telling him that he's finally in my head, and that if he can arrange an R5 and the 100-500mm plus a 1.4x TC for a week, or even weekend, he'll likely be able to tell his boss he finally won me over.

I can't speak immediately to image differences because we were at his place and there wasn't a lot to shoot that I could bring back with me and dive deep into. One reason why I'd like to shoot with it first. One thing about Canon is that cropped is 1.6x instead of 1.5x, so I gain some reach but lose some MP's over the D500 (17MP vs 20MP). But given that I now have a zoom instead of just the 500mm then I'm only losing that when I have to go to cropped mode to get the shot. Again, spending some time shooting with it in the conditions I normally shoot will tell the tale. I wasn't going over there expecting to be won over, so I only had the Z6ii. Would be good to shoot side by side and see.

*sob*

How could you do this to me? After all we've been through! And...and...THINK OF THE CHILDREN! THINK OF THE CHILDREN, DAMMIT!!

On the other hand: yup, totally hear where you're coming from. Brand loyalty is fine...to a point. If you find something else that gives you better results though, you'd be silly to not switch. So if this the right move for you, I hope it brings you happiness and as almost a friendly forum as this one.

Ya bum.

BackdoorArts said:

...if he can arrange an R5 and the 100-500mm plus a 1.4x TC for a week, or even weekend, he'll likely be able to tell his boss he finally won me over.

Click to expand...

Wait...huh? A 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1 with a 1.4TC? It'll be interesting to hear how quickly it responds. That's definitely a test for sure.

On a side note, while I was out this afternoon, I received a text of a bear sighting near me. Of course my trusty D500 and 300mm f/4 PF with 1.7TC was right on the seat beside me. BUT the police were in the vicinity and no where to pull over without causing an issue so....:sorrow: However, if I'm going to capture something digital like that, I want to be sure to have a body/lens combo with a really fast response time. I'll be interested to hear how well your combo works. I know you will enjoy it.

Having had a real crap day behind the camera today, the LAST thing I should do is think about gear. There is always this little voice telling me that I need better, faster, and more features. LOL.

That said, I think you are likely on the right track for your needs and budget. the 100-500 really looks like a great lens, and I've seen evidence from real shooters (not social media dudes) that the R5 and R6 are both the real deal. If it was in my budget, I'd be very tempted.

Some people are waiting for the Z9, but I'd bet anything that's going to be a $6000 to $7000 camera. The promised 200-600 from Nikon has yet to show up, either.

Just one more thought here, Jake. Please be sure to test the combo at its extremes. If you remember, I wound up getting my 300mm f/4 PF repaired by Nikon because eventually almost everything missed focus. And it works much better now.

BUT...the 300mm f/4 PF coupled with the 1.7x TC means my wide open aperture is f/6.7. Even after the repair, subjects that are low contrast or are in lower light tend to be soft because the AF still struggles in those situations. So please assess the gear along with a TC where performance is truly put to the test. At some point, I want to move to an f/5.6 lens. When my combo works well, I'm happy with it. But there are times when it disappoints. For me, the low light and low contrast situations are where it struggles the most.

Before my lens was repaired, one other thing that frequently didn't work well was focusing on moving subjects - especially low contrast ones. That would be something I'd want to test with the TC if it were me only because I remember how much my lens hunted...and how many birds I missed simply because the lens never locked focus. With a slower lens coupled with a TC, I'd want to thoroughly test it. For me, shooting wide open at f/6.7 is something I eventually want to move away from because my combo still struggles occasionally. Hopefully with the advances Canon has made, you won't run into issues with a slower lens than you're accustomed to using with a TC.

One thing to remember here is that this is a mirrorless and is focusing on the sensor, so a lot of the focus limitations of a DSLR don't exist. That's why Canon can make a pair of long and inexpensive primes at f11 for the budget minded hiker (the 800mm weighs under 3 lbs!!). The 1.4x test for me is more about whether I go with the R5 or R6 initially.

The real test for me is not so much about extremes but about my normal backyard shooting - which involves extremes as a rule. Early morning deer and late afternoon birds in the shadows. Dark subjects against light backgrounds. Tracking birds in flight. The huge difference with the R's is that I can shoot 10-20fps and the viewfinder never changes - no flicker, no blackout. That's huge for tracking a bird.

I spoke with him last night and he said he should be able to arrange something for me in a couple weeks. I am 100% convinced that I will be going mirrorless with Canon, selling the Z6ii and 24-200mm. The question is whether or not I hang onto a D500 and the pair of primes for a while just for wildlife because the IQ of the zoom isn't quite there. The one thing Canon currently lacks is an "inexpensive" lightweight prime in the 500-600mm range (except the f11's). But if the zoom isn't more than a small notch down then I'm not too worried.

BackdoorArts said:

...Early morning deer and late afternoon birds in the shadows. Dark subjects against light backgrounds. Tracking birds in flight.

Click to expand...

Hey Jake, what part of Jersey do you call home? I'm up at the top of Sussex County, where fauna is abundant and sometimes dramatic - lots of black bear, foxes, bobcats, on a raptor migration route, etc. Are you anywhere around here?

Dangerspouse said:

Hey Jake, what part of Jersey do you call home? I'm up at the top of Sussex County, where fauna is abundant and sometimes dramatic - lots of black bear, foxes, bobcats, on a raptor migration route, etc. Are you anywhere around here?

Click to expand...

Next county south - Washington, Warren County. I've seen everything in our yard except for the bobcats. If you check my Instagram I'd say that 85-90% of the wildlife shots are in my back yard. Lately it's been a pair of white-tails and their kids that have been keeping us entertained.

Cool! Beautiful there by you - I know it well. Ever been to the Lakota Wolf Preserve? Got there just before lockdown last year and took some good shot (but not on their "Photographer's Tour", which is 300 bucks!) Love those deer pictures! Ah, the benefits of not landscaping your yard....

I've never been to Instagram. Do you have to pay for a membership to see the pics?

(BTW I serviced WRNJ Hackettstown for something like 15 years until recently, as traffic guy and general sidekick on the morning show.)

:encouragement:

I don't think any decision is a clear case of will I go Nikon or Canon. I have owned many Canon DSLR's with numerous lenses and now two Nikon DSLR's and I can think of pro's and cons for both. I have also tried several bodies over the years. My own thought's are that in many cases Canon edges it at the top/pro end, but Nikon has a superior choice of mid range dslr's (D500 being better than the 7D2). One advantage with Canon is that there is more choice with more secondhand gear available. But more is not always better. If I was looking to go into mirrorless at the moment I would probably go with Canon, but that could change at time as more bodies are released. Of course if feasable you could still run with both Nikon and Canon systems as I do, albeit with not a huge financial investwnt in either system.
Good luck whatever you choose!

Dangerspouse said:

Cool! Beautiful there by you - I know it well. Ever been to the Lakota Wolf Preserve? Got there just before lockdown last year and took some good shot (but not on their "Photographer's Tour", which is 300 bucks!) Love those deer pictures! Ah, the benefits of not landscaping your yard....

I've never been to Instagram. Do you have to pay for a membership to see the pics?

(BTW I serviced WRNJ Hackettstown for something like 15 years until recently, as traffic guy and general sidekick on the morning show.)

:encouragement:

Click to expand...

Oh, we're plenty landscaped, but we're backed to a 33 acre parcel of land that was supposed to be developed 25 years ago and just never got there (we're on the left side of the road going up).



All the field stones that they dug up to do our foundation are piled in a wall across the back and just beyond that is small wilderness. You can hear foxes at night this time of year (blood curdling), and I did see a cat fight one off once. The deer are about 10-25 feet beyond the back of the property in these photos.

Instagram is free but I believe you need an account to look. Click on the link below and it'll either bring you there or tell you to open an account. I'm not worth joining for.

Never listened to WRNJ. When I commuted it was down 31 to 78 and then 287.

BackdoorArts said:

O....The question is whether or not I hang onto a D500 and the pair of primes for a while just for wildlife because the IQ of the zoom isn't quite there. The one thing Canon currently lacks is an "inexpensive" lightweight prime in the 500-600mm range (except the f11's). But if the zoom isn't more than a small notch down then I'm not too worried.

Click to expand...

I'm glad to hear you wouldn't just sell the D500 and 500mm f/5.6 without having an adequate replacement. The Nikon combo is exemplary, but it will be interesting to hear your thoughts on how anything by Canon compares to it. :encouragement:

Dangerspouse said:

Hey Jake, what part of Jersey do you call home? I'm up at the top of Sussex County, where fauna is abundant and sometimes dramatic - lots of black bear, foxes, bobcats, on a raptor migration route, etc. Are you anywhere around here?

Click to expand...

We have coyotes, foxes, and lots of raptors although probably not on any type of migration route, but would you believe there was a black bear in the greater Philly suburban area just yesterday? It was spotted running along the Route 1 Super Highway near Sesame Place before it disappeared. Then it reappeared near some residential properties just a few miles away. I went to that area in hopes of capturing an image or two, but the police staked out the area to keep people away. The bear was captured in a trap overnight...they used donuts as bait! :beguiled:

No bobcats in this area yet that I'm aware of. Just stay outta their way!

Looking forward to seeing your test shots.

@BackdoorArts - have you have a chance to put the other mirrorless system to the test?

So I picked up a loaner R5 yesterday w/ grip and 100-500mm f4.5-7.1 (plus some other goodies I haven't tried yet). It was sort of a damp, overcast day, so not ideal for shooting, but I figure if you want to see how something performs then bad light is better than good light.

Shooting with a Canon for me is like driving in England. You recognize 90% of it but the 10% that's backwards messes with your head for the first hour. And that's about what it took me to get the dials and buttons set up to where they were close to how I shoot with the D500's.

This isn't a full review, just some immediate first impressions in the midst of my insomnia. The kit as is weighs roughly the same as a D500 + 500mm PF (I'm guessing it's within 4 oz), and that's with a grip and extra battery which I likely won't shoot with. So it's lighter. I expected to lose some sharpness with the zoom over the prime but if I am then it's minimal. This was taken at 500mm wide open at f7.1 (I normally shoot at f7.1 or f8 for birds like this so I don't feel like I'm losing anything)...




But that wasn't the most impressive part. We had a turkey in the yard pecking a seed under a bird feeder and the camera had no issue focusing on the head when it was surrounded by seed in the frame, and it would immediately go the eye when it lifted its head and would track on the eye perfectly. With the Z6ii it'll grab an eye but the tracking in the viewfinder will lag as the subject moves or you reframe. I pinged my brother to tell him how impressed I was and he asked if I'd set it to animal eye detect? I told him I hadn't even thought to because I was still wandering through the menus, but I quickly found it and changed it.

The next shot I attempted to take was a female bluebird perched in a weeping cherry. I spotted her with a treat for her babies through a gap in the foliage (below is processed but zero crop at 500mm f8)...



I put the focus box over her (she was slightly out of focus) and when I pressed the button to focus it not only focused but it put a box square on her eye - sharp as a tack.




It kept doing that every time an eye was available. And by "available" I mean if you could see a part of it the camera grabbed it. Take a look at these shots, straight out of camera, zero adjustments. The first is the full frame as seen at 500mm f8 ISO 3200, the second is cropped in. I put the focus box over the bird (the entire bird fit in the box) and it grabbed the eye even as it looked away from the camera...






Really impressive and I could be more than happy if this was all I had to shoot with. My one and only complaint is the color of the raw images in Lightroom. Apparently Adobe rushed the Camera Raw profiles for the camera and did a crappy job on color rendering, something my brother told me to expect. He also told me that the horror is that Adobe won't fix it because if they do then when you upgrade Lr/Camera Raw to the fixed version any images processed with the old one will now be off. Worse yet he's said that he's tried to create profiles using the Profile Creation Tool but he's not been able to get anything that's perfect, so his recommendation was to download Canon's Digital Photo Professional software and use that as my first step to generate a color-perfect Tiff file that I could then edit as normal. I hate adding steps and more files to the process, particularly considering the size of the files you get from 45MPs, but I'm going to need to do some testing (I can also shoot in cropped mode and save some of that space).

The one thing I can say is that there's no doubt in my mind that I'm selling the Z6ii and 24-200mm and switching to the R5. I can easily go on vacation with one body and 2 lenses (the 24-105mm and the 100-500mm) and shoot anything I wanted or needed to and not feel like I'm missing out. So if anyone is looking for a barely used, really nice mirrorless rig (I'd be keeping it if I didn't shoot wildlife so much), the Nikon is available.

Sounds like you're getting a setup that will make you happy for a long time to come. Congrats, and best of luck with it! That was a terrific write-up detailing your experience, I can see why you came to your decision. I wish a Nikon corporate honcho could read this...although I suspect they've already read thousands of similar reviews/comparisons. I wonder how they'll respond?

Anyway, Nikon's loss is your gain. Have a blast!