The best cameras for wildlife photography (at 3 budgets)
2024 ж. 1 Мам.
198 267 Рет қаралды
Wildlife is a challenging subject to photograph, and few cameras are up to the task. Chris Niccolls walks you through his picks for the best wildlife cameras at three different budgets.
Music provided by BeatSuite.com
www.beatsuite.com
Rental equipment provided by The Camera Store
www.thecamerastore.com
0:00 - Intro
0:54 - $1000 Picks
5:03 - $3000 Picks
9:30 - Money’s no object picks
12:40 - The wrap
-----------------------
DPReview.com is the world's largest digital camera review website. Welcome to our KZhead channel! Subscribe for new feature videos, reviews, interviews and more.
Discover the world's most in-depth digital camera reviews at www.dpreview.com
As a Panasonic Lumix G9 user, I was pleased to see your recognition of this camera as a very competent wildlife camera. The G9 with the lumix Leica 100-400mm lens is a fantastic combo. Stabilization is excellent even shooting an iguana in tree from a rocking boat on the Amazon at 1000 feet! An important part of choosing a camera is the user interface. Panasonic's is so user friendly that once you use one Lumix camera you can find your way on any other. Plus the customization of the camera is endless and so easy! Finally, Panasonic has done an outstanding job providing firmware updates that have improved performance and added new functionality. So, for $1000 USD for the body and $500 USD for the 100-300mm (200-600mm ff equivalent) you have a fantastic, weather sealed, affordable wildlife camera. Great job presenting the buyer's guide, and kudos to Jordan for making the autofocus tests so enjoyable.
As a G85 + 100-400 user, I approve this message. So much power / range in such a small combo. While not as clean an image as FF, it is literally half the size and weight.
В точку. Панасоник g9 номер 1 .
Unfortunately the G9 has awful AF and high ISO performance.
You really have to consider the cost of the camera AND the lens unless money is no object, especially for wildlife photography. For instance, comparing the OM-1 to the R6 II, you could compare the OM-1 with a 100-400mm lens ($3,400) to an R6 II with a 800mm f/11 ($3,400) and that would be a fair comparison, and in such a match up, I think you would find that the low light performance would be about the same, but the R6 II would only have focus points in the center of the frame, whereas the OM-1 has focus points across the entire frame with any AF lens and the 100-400mm lens has the flexibility of a massive zoom range, whereas the 800mm f/11 leaves you stuck at a single focal length. Therefore, I think you really need to look at systems as a whole, comparing a camera and lens combination from one system to a camera and lens combination from a different system to have a real apples-to-apples comparison.
@David Williams I'm glad you're happy with your system, but the R5 is almost double the price of an OM-1, and as I recall, it doesn't even have Pro Capture, which is, in my opinion, just as much of a game changer today as the invention of autofocus was in the 1980's. And while the 800mm f/11 is a sharp lens, it only has focus points in the center of the frame, so you're very limited in your composition. I think the OM-1 with a 300mm f/4 vs. R5 with one of the f/11 lenses would be a very interesting matchup for wildlife photography because while one would expect the 300mm f/4 to perform a little better in low light, even with a smaller sensor, and it would offer focus points across the entire frame as well as Pro Capture and MUCH faster continuous shooting, the R5 would offer more resolution. I'm guessing the OM-1 would probably get more in-focus shots per second simply because of the faster frame rate, even though the hit rate may be lower, but that would be an interesting comparison. So would the lens sharpness.
@David Williams I agree that having focus points all the way in the extreme corners of the frame is not necessary, but I do often find myself putting it 4/5ths of the way to one side fairly often, or I'll set up a 5x5 square that's centered 2/3 of the way to one side for birds in flight. I like to be able to capture the animal looking into the frame, and if I'm using continuous autofocus on an animal that I'm expecting to move, I like to give it room in the frame to move into. With that said, I haven't used the Canon f/11 lenses myself, so I can't speak from experience. I just know that I would find it somewhat annoying. Maybe that's just because I've never owned a DSLR. I agree that a 300mm f/4 lens for MFT does not give the same depth of field or low light performance of a 600mm f/4 on a full frame camera. However, I would expect that it would exceed the low light performance of an f/11 lens on a full frame camera, especially with a Canon sensor since their low light performance generally isn't up to par with the other brands that use Sony sensors these days. Hence, I think it would be interesting to see a comparison of the Canon R5 with a 600mm f/11 and the OM-1 with a 300mm f/4 since the price would be similar. I can't speak for you, but ProCapture has been a game changer for me! I remember about a year ago when I used it to capture a photo of an otter with a fish in its mouth with its mouth wide open showing all of its teeth and I was able to go through and pick a frame with its eyes open. That's been one of my most-liked photos on Instagram and I would have missed it without ProCapture. However, I'm sure that I've missed a lot of good shots because of my camera's terrible autofocus too. While I don't think frames per second is usually all that important once you get past about 15-20 fps, I think in-focus frames per second is, and I would find it much more forgivable for a camera to miss 5 frames per second if it's shooting 50 frames per second than if it's only shooting 20 because you still end up with more in-focus frames per second due to the frame rate. That was one of the reasons that @MikeLaneFRPS chose the OM-1 with the 150-400mm f/4.5 lens over the Sony A1 with the 200-600mm lens. I think the main advantage of a full frame camera is that you have more pixels and therefore the ability to make bigger prints, even if you have to crop, at least for wildlife photography. Aside from that, sensor size doesn't really matter if you can compensate by using a brighter aperture. I could certainly see OM System manufacturing a 300mm f/2 someday, which would probably be much easier to handhold than a full frame 600mm f/4 and would, at least theoretically, provide the same low light performance, but it wouldn't provide the same resolution. However, if I was in the market for a new camera right now, I would be most interested in the OM-1 with a 300 f/4 to use alongside my 40-150mm f/2.8 and teleconverters or a Canon R7 with a 100-500. Another option might be a Sony A9 with a 200-600mm lens, but that's getting pricey. Also, since wildlife photography is not the only thing I use it for, I'd have to spend a lot more money on lenses to get Canon or Sony wide angle and normal lenses that will do what my MFT lenses will do and they would be much heavier too, so I'll probably end up with an OM-1.
@@keithholland4322 lo primero, pido disculpas por escribir en español, el inglés es mi asignatura pendiente. Lo segundo, tengo una OM-1 y ahora he tenido que cambiar a Canon, mi nueva cámara es una R6 Mark II, básicamente tiene el AF de una R3 (es más rápida y precisa que una R5) con un sistema similar al procapture y 40 fotografías por segundo con cualquier objetivo y en enfoque continuo. Sinceramente, el que diga que micro4/3 esta muerto, es porque no tiene ni idea de lo que una OM-1 ofrece, es más, la OM-1 es una cámara con características que no encontrarás en una Canon y virtudes de suficiente peso como para que te decidas por ese sistema. Por cierto, la OM-1 desde el firmware v1.3... 🤯 el CAF a 50fps va como un misil, lástima que solo se pueda usar tan descomunal rafaga en objetivos pro.
@David Williams that's odd. Professional BIF field tests put OM-1 and R5 neck and neck for keeper rate using much faster lenses than the f11, which likely lowers AF performance.
FInally mentioned the G9 in one of these videos! Still a great camera, and it is very good value for money at the moment.
After using Canon 5DmkIII + 600mm F4 L IS II, and losing photos due to the bulk of this combo, I switched to Panasonic G9 + Leica 200mm F2.8. No regrets ! So much fun, more easy to carry, lighter, top notch image quality -> so globally it means more opportunities of wildlife photography !
Love the format and the more focused recommendations! Can’t wait to see the other categories. And also, countdown is on to THE best video of the year, the DPRTV drunk awards show
Great work as always. I'd like to see looks at art or architecture photography. I love photographing when I travel, both cityscapes and in museums. And while I love my A7rIII/16-35 combo for that, I'd love to see what other pairings you'd recommend. Also, I'd love to see more Wooden Nickels/Niccolls that highlighted what gear you use to create the look of iconic scenes. I always enjoy the take you two have on classic movies!
It is always a pleasure to watch a DPreview TV episode. The combination of humor and content is always well balanced. Even if it's not about topics that concern me. Now that we've touched on that topic. I would love to see the current mirrorless cameras put to a test where business events with crappy projectors and poor LED lighting (especially in silent shooting) are held, and if possible, which MILCs are the best AF at concerts bring the best. Let's go party in suits Jordan and Chris💃
Very nice comparison. Just adding some personal observations applicable to Canon. I haven't used a Canon R6 Mk2 but I did purchase an R6 and returned it for an R5. Both cameras had excellent eye auto focus that was accurate, fast and super sticky to the subject. The R5 simply provided more than double the pixel count which really made a significant difference when cropping in on birds and animals. The more advanced video features and the ease of switching from custom photo to custom video modes are helpful as well. Also firmware 1.6 has seemed to eliminate overheating issues in video. High resolution video can also be deeply cropped if 8K video is available. Perhaps two general points are worth mentioning. The first is that almost all camera systems are excellent these days so if you are already vested in Sony, Canon, Nikon or another, then perhaps taking an economic hit switching systems makes less sense than in the past few years. The second point is that if you need to deeply crop photos, then the extra pixels can really provide a more usable image.
Good one, nice video. For me the Nikon Z9 together with the Nikkor Z 800mm 6.3 is the killer and especially because of the excellent Nikkor Z 800mm - this lens is truly a game changer for Wildlife photography.
So happy to see the G9 here. Adapt a Vivitar 1 70-210 and you have an absolute beast. Only issue is that you have to pull focus manually.
Wedding and portrait cameras, lenses and lighting would be a good idea for a review guide. Great vids!
Really good video, well done. I can just say about the Z9 and the 800pf, a fantastic combo, love it..
Really nice and good video. I think porttrait photogs know what they need and want, but what about travel photographers? What about studio photography? Give us more! These guides are nice.
Another category: Kits for "backcountry adventure" photography. Size/Weight/Robustness/capability etc. Performance in cold, rain, sand, low light, ease of use with gloves & the like.
For that one I reckon you can’t go past the OM-1 - rugged and weather sealed. If you’re on a budget look at the OM-5.
The best wildlife camera for me, personally, is the OMDS OM1: and I am fortunate enough to own two. I don't understand this "it's M43 so it can't match full frame image quality" school of thought. I previously owned a Sony A7R4 and Sony A9 and I do not miss the 61MP of the A7R4 at all. I doubt many photographers can even discern the difference, if they are honest. As for our target audience (mainly family and friends for the majority of us), forget it. For those who laugh at this, go and take a look at the KZhead channels of: Derek Forss, Andy Rouse, Mike Lane, FRPS and Roger Hance, FRPS.
True words!
Amen on, Derek Forss. What a mentor for MFT's / Olympus!
I love my G9. Bought it a few years ago along with the Panasonic-Leica lenses (12-60 f/2.8-4 and 50-200 f/2.8-4). I also picked up the 2x teleconverter. It makes for a great travel setup.
Тем более сейчас, когда появился G9 ii . Панасоник G9 ii + 12-60mm , 100-400mm -БОМБА.
Great video! Would love to see a landscape photographer’s buyers guide. I feel like no one is talking about landscapes anymore! You could throw astrophotographers in there too!
Money no object: OM-1+150-400 pro. 1. Still a lighter combo than most lenses in that class. 2. Doing mostly daytime shooting except the occasional morning owl 3. Already invested in the system. 4. Doesn't call as much attention as big FF glass . 5. Paying $12,000+ just isn't for me and $7500 is already pushing it lol. If you can get that kind of reach at constant aperture, that's as much as you need for me. Living in reality picks: OM-1 on sale+300 f4 pro used or Lumix S5 w/Sigma 150-600 if I go FF because I'm more familiar with Panasonic.
#3 is the biggie there... seems the right cool if you have the money. An A1 with the 200-600 is cheaper tho.
@@JonInLondon yeah, I looked at that lens and it looks great and for 1300 used. Only thing I hadn't been really able to do is pay for the Sony A1 body, but if you get past that it's like 7-$8000 which is great value for money being no object. I like the dual stabilization of the OM-1/150-400 combo and relative size but resolution of that Sony body with that lens price point is fantastic. What it comes down to is your shooting preference and styles these days with how good this generation of cameras/lenses are.
Thank you so much for this video!!! Great job, I love this information
I think full frame is an excellent choice for sports, where light indoors becomes a big consideration, but if I was going to shoot wildlife, I’d go with a crop for the reach. The Fuji X-H2s with the Fuji 150-600 or the Tamron 150-500 would take a lot of beating for the price, maybe the OM-1 with the 300 f4 and teleconverter is an option.
Thx for that guide, very helpful and down to earth!
I still use my D500 with the 200-500 and works great! I use Z7ii for Landscape, but havent found anything Nikon mirrorless wise that isnt heavy and bulky and costly. Im waiting for the Z8…..that will be a game changer
Me too. It’s the prefect setup for bird photography and especially birds in flight. Sadly, I haven’t found ant mirrorless cameras that don’t have lag. Until they sort that out I’m stay with the DSLR.
@@GeraintDafis i don't think the a74 is an upgrade over the d500, just sayin...
I've got the Canon R3 for my wildlife photography. The 24 MP is more then enough for me, especially because of the low pass filter it shows even more detail. The main reason why I've chosen this camera is because I don't want images as big as 45 MB or more. Must buy a new, faster computer also then. Coming from a 1DX, there is much more detail visible. Many people buy the R5 so they can crop more, but I'll try to limit that as much as possile. Try to achieve my goal by training my skills!!
The OM-1 is a phenomenal wildlife camera and paired with the 150-400 F4.5 Pro lens is a heavy weight contender. This combo costs tens of thousands of dollars less than full frame, is razor sharp, super fast to focus and fits in a 30 liter backpack. The 300 F4 Pro is equally as sharp and fast to focus, costs about $1,600 used and is the size of a water bottle. Plus it's bullet proof. This system absolutely deserves a second look, both for quality, portability and price.
Last time I looked the 150-400's weight and cost made this something needing a lot of thought (BTW I've owned more m43 cameras than all other DSLRs and Mirrorless put together). The key thing to remember is you get a narrower FoV (so harder to find/stay on stuff) than high-MP FF cameras but no big increase in subject detail due to the 20MP sensor. Weight and cost don't have noticeable advantages. However cropping FF sensors reduces the "effective aperture" advantage of the larger sensor (as you're making it smaller). Pricing from earlier in the year: OM1+150-400/1.25x $9698 (=100%) A7m4+200-600 $5496 (= -43%) R5+100-500+1.4x $7297 (= -25%) A1+200-600 $8496 (= -12%) Pixels on a 30cm subject at 20m: A7rIV @ 600mm = 2400 (=100% say) OM1 @ 400mm + 1.25x = 2439 (= +1.6%) R5 + 100-500@500mm+1.4x = 2389 (-0.46%) OM1 @ 400mm = 1728 (-28%) R5 @ 500mm = 1706 (-28.9%) Weight: A7rIV/200-600 2780g (=100%) A1/200-600 2852g (+2.6%) OM1/150-400+1.25x 2474g (-11%) R5/100-500@500mm+1.4x 2327g (-16%)
@@JonInLondon Does the FF lens actually resolve 20MP of information when cropped to the same frame size. Hint the answer is no and you've lost the shallow depth of field advantage of FF. Not a smart choice in terms of cost and weight IMHO.
@@MrReadboy I have FF lenses that are pixel-sharp on 50MP, so yes, they do...
@@MrReadboy None of you are understanding how DOF works across formats. For any given distance the bigger the aperture diaphragm of the lens the thinner the DOF, more background separation etc. Whether you crop a FF, use a smaller sensor or an extender you are achieving the same thing. A good used 500mm f/4 IS for less than 3 grand on any body you choose is by far the best value, gives you fantastic IQ, while 8.5lbs is not light in comparison to what it gives it is not that heavy and the ability to get a very usable and extremely useful 1000mm is fantastic. Personally I got a 1Dx as my primary body and the 5Ds R which has 50mp if reach is a problem. Which I find I don't use very often. Extremely heavy crops are less than ideal and pixels on target is really not helping you nearly as much as you would think. Having a long lens like a 500mm is game changing having some extra pixels are not. Cuz IQ drops off a hill really really quickly with heavy cropping. Even if you had 100mp, I still would want to use the best lens I could afford, spend the time and effort to get close enough and minimize cropping as much as possible. Which to me the 500mm strikes an amazing balance of IQ, reach, weight, portability and not getting cramps in your hand after 8 hours of shooting.😆 Coming from someone who has been in this game 15 years.
@@MrReadboyDepends on the crop. A 400mm lens on a FF would need to resolve a true 80megapixels on an 80 megapixel sensor to match on the 2x crop. The 600mm on the Sony is only a 1.333x crop, so you have 33.7 megapixels left on your A7RI V or 28.1 megpixels on the A1. Does the FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G OSS resolve 61 megapixels at f/6.3? Maybe... it's very close to being diffraction limited, but it ought to match the M43.
Gave up my D850/600 F4 combo for OM-1/300mm F4 Pro +/- 1.4TC and I love it. I absolutely loved the 45mp IQ but what I didn’t enjoy were the limits on my composition given the size and weight of the kit and also, how time consuming it was to set up which caused me to miss many, many shots. With the Olympus setup, I don’t miss any shots. It’s almost as easy as whipping out your phone and taking a photo. While I will certainly get the Z9 and the new 600mm F4, It is certainly a want rather than a need.
Why not 500pf? I would think that’s a better fit than to change system
@@rohitkhetarpal2945 The 500pf is a great lens but the 300mm F4 is sharper, has the faster aperture but the most important fact: SYNC IS. The IS in that lens combined with the body is like glueing the camera to a rock, it’s not moving. I’ve taken shots as slow as 1/5 at 840mm effective focal length. No other kit can do that for me without a tripod, a cable release etc. I should’ve prefaced by saying that prior to the switch, I was already quite deep in both Olympus and Nikon. Only my wildlife setup switched but I still have many bodies and lenses from both brands.
@@jackwestcott4469 thanks. Makes sense then. I still think 500pf on a full frame would give better results than oly 300 on MFT with sharpness, DOF and low light.. sharpness differences maybe marginal either way. But yes, sync IS is a big thing, and nikon doesn’t have a light weight full frame to go with it yet. Maybe Z8 would be a better fit for 500pf in light weight department.
@@rohitkhetarpal2945Well, I extensively used both systems and if there was a restrictive difference in IQ, I would never continue to use MFT after using a 45mp full frame sensor with a 600mm F4. It’s just personal preference, use what works for you. I’m well beyond comparisons at this point, my goal is simply photography 🙂
@@jackwestcott4469 totally. A lot of people use MFT and get amazing pics. I have used 300mm and loved it myself, just the noise was something I wasn’t happy with but topaz etc of current age do great. I may in future have to give it another try. Olympus bodies are highly ergonomic.
Best choice: Z9 ! Totally agree. I only have the 100-400mm Z lens plus TCs, quite happy so far.
I have not had it for very long. I have been really enjoying my nikon Z6 II with my old nikon 200-500mm lens. I have also done sunset landscape pictures with is. They turned out perry amazing.
The OM-1 plus the 150-400 was my pick. I can't see anything that I'd be willing to carry around bettering it!
The size and the crop zoom really makes MFT nice for wildlife.
Wildlife + Macro + Travel + weather resistant = OM-1 pick.
Even the light gathering capability is not lack behind the ff competitors. The only ff zoom competing closely with the oly lens is sony's 200-600 f5.6-6.3. After including the 2-stop advantage of the sony's ff body, the oly lens is only1/6 stop slower but it is way lighter(perhaps sharper too). Otherwise, no (mirrorless) zoom lens in ff (or apsc)realm come close to be a competitor.
Yeah I'm not paying that much for a lens though lol
@@JoeMaranophotography I'm the same, 100-400 is fine or the 50-200 swd + 1.4x.
Olympus OM1 😍
Chris, need to point out that you failed to mention that the R10 can be used with the great value RF 100-400, for a maximum 640mm reach. This lens is great for the intended audience and selling for $499 now.
Thanks for sharing this breakdown! One of the difficult things I find with wildlife photography is falling into the trap of "longer is better" in terms of reach. As with everything in photography, it depends on what your goals are. I know it would be a bit on the nerdy side and might be a much longer video than people would find interesting, but perhaps do an explanation with lenses on what would typically be shot at 400mm vs. 600mm vs. 800mm vs. bridge camera reach. Look at the practicality of transporting the lenses and what other considerations are needed when shooting different types of animals. I know this is going from "gear purchase" to "gear use," but I think it's important. For example, if someone just wants to do bird portraits, that sends them in one direction. If they want to do birds in flight, that takes them down another. Thanks for the great content guys!
Also Field of View, a high-MP FF camera shows you a wider view to find/stay on things while giving similar detail to lower-MP cropped cameras. However there can be associated size/weight/cost issues (if the system has cropped lenses, many long lenses by the big 3 are FF so going APS doesn't save much weight). Zooms are also good as sometime stuff happens closer to you, but the lower light levels can be challenging on duller days. (Then again long primes are more for lottery winners or rental.) A phone is also useful, for when the bird lands on the long white lens... (had that, but no chance to get the phone out).
I’m wondering this myself
Great video as always guys, and can't argue with the conclusions. How about a buying guide for black and white photography? It's a genre that many of us shoot, and every camera body will accommodate, but really, which gives the ABSOLUTE best results? I think it would be a very popular subject, and a little different to the more obvious categories. Personally I shoot b&w portraits, street and fine art with Fujifilm. Cheers, and merry Christmas, Ian
Great cameras, one and all. Having used all the gear over the years, I now use two Sony A1 cameras and a Sony 600mm f4, 200-600mm and a 70-200mm GMii...for my BIF/wildlife action work, it's unbeatable.
Got the A1 & 70-200GMII have no desire for anything else
Have you ever shot with the A7R5? I currently have the 100-400gm and 200-600g. If so, aside from the fps, how does the new focus system work compared to the a1?
@@Unknown2024w 70-200mm seems pretty limited for wildlife
From personal experience G9 works best with oly pro lenses due to silly fast motors those lenses have and they allow G9 to go full throttle. With release priority set to focus, my keepers rate has been easily in 90%+ territory, with subject detection it rarely ever misses.
Wow, interesting. Even faster than pana-leica lenses?
I would have thought that without DfD it would be slower?
I've no complaints with the Oly 300mm f4, but find the Leica 200mm f2.8 faster to focus. They are both utterly rapid though.
My keeper rate is closer to 40% or less for birds in flight using the 100-400. The autofocus for fast moving subjects with this camera is really very poor and why I'm desperate to try the G9ii
Loved this review. I would love an Astrophotography camera comparison. There is no much content about mirrorless sensor comparison for long exposure and in extreme low light situations.
I think portrait, studio, landscape photography is a must to have in terms of guides ! And maybe a video centered even tho i think you did one (?) Love from France
I went for the Canon R7. The 100-400 lens performs way better than I thought it would plus there are tons of EF options. Lots of great features packed into it too, Animal eye AF, dual card slots, high burst rates, log modes etc
The RF100-400 looks weak on paper, but a decent performer in real life.
The RF 100-400mm is one hell of a sleeper lens. Lightweight, with great performance, super affordable, does 0.41x magnification and takes TCs. It's probably RF mount's winner in terms of quality to price ratio.
Same here! The R7 with the rf100-400mm is the best affordable lightweight combo out there with the most reach.
Yeah, strange that he highlighted the lack of lenses *for wildlife* with RF-S when IMHO the 100-400 is very clearly the best screaming bargain lens for that application in the entire industry. It makes the Canon package price significantly lower than any reasonable alternative. I don't see how anything can touch R7+RF 100-400 for the price at the moment.
I've put performed the z9 with my Canon 80d with a Tamron 150-600 G2 lens
One genre I want to learn more would be family photography. Not as a professional, but as a parent. I think this is one of the most natural genres of photography for amateurs.
Very Informative..Thank you! Can you make a video about each camera systems entire advantages and disadvantages?It would be really helpful.
Wedding photography would be an interesting subject to tackle because there’s a balance of low light, size/weight concerns, image quality, etc.
Awesome review....my Nikon Z9 with the Sigma 85mm f1.4 dg dn art lens for portraits and the Sigma 150-600mm dg dn lens for wildlife are top combinations.
Got the Pentax K3-III a few weeks ago. It's a great dlsr for wildlife photography, great autofocus, robust, and ergonomic. If I can gather the funds for the FA 150-450 I'll be set.
Another well done video. Bravo.
For under $2000 the Somy RX10iv is hard to beat and should have been included somewhere in your list.
Good point, deserved a mention. Although a RX10V that could AF while zooming would be a nice improvement for Wildlife work...
I have one too... Good camera. But a 1" bridge camera goes into the under $3000 category... but of a hard sell there.
@@DaveHaynie $1,698/£1,428 and 600mm equiv (at f/4 exposures) that is light enough to be an easy carry - a compromise worth a thought though...? (I don't have a Superzoom camera BTW.)
@@DaveHaynie Too few catagories.
@@nyobunknown6983 Sure!
Wow. I was pre-outraged especially when you said you wouldn't factor lenses into the price, and suddenly there it was, the G9 is on the list. Hopefully this reminds Panasonic Lumix that photographers also exist! Especially when they are allegedly discontinuing the divine 200mm f/2.8.
With the ”right” focal lenght and fairly fast mft lens it will look good… My GH5s with dual native iso’s is producing nice low light images with the option for 3:4,3:2 and 16:9 in camera, Thats a big deal to have in camera. Not mentioned here but is very versatile when set to a quick function. With my .64 speedbooster and fast EF glas its low light a preformer. I also noticed with speedbooster im getting the FF look, and feeling to the image’s.
Nice! Many good options there for all the pockets 👍🏻👍🏻
Portraits and weddings! I think sports can translate pretty well over from wildlife. And portraits is a hugely popular subject, whether it be parents getting pictures of their kids to a hobbiest that does it on the side or a full blown professional wedding and portrait photographer. That's my vote for your next top 3 budget picks.
Great video. The Z9 is one of the things that I dream of when I play PowerBall!
You forgot to mention the ProCapture feature on the OM1. When you are out all day shooting animals with high burst rates, you fill up cards quickly. I mean, even with my 20mp sensor that is. With 40+mp that is even more true. The ProCapture mode helps you weed out all the unimportant shots that you take just to catch the right moment. That saves you so much time and space..
ProCap is great but others (Z9, G9, ...) are also offering it.
Nice review! I'd like to add that for the Canon R10, you do have the very affordable RF 100-400mm lens.
Just want to take a moment to say thank you love your videos. Been watching you guys for years.. P.S. And being that I am from the US, this is the time of Thanksgiving with better time to give you guys. Thanks.
Thanks for sticking with us all this time! -Jordan
I wonder why he didn't mention the specific FPS for the OM-1, but did for the others in the same category. It is a real advantage for birds in flight an other fast moving wildlife.
I would like to see something similar done for portrait photography / family photography and travel. It is very nice when you review lenses and point the good and the bad for the equipment. I know it is not entirely in the type of videos but you can easily expand into lighting, modifiers etc. When pros invest at the end of the day - they make money and write off the expense. When consumers indulge - it is mainly driven by hobby. So what the last are looking for (and these are likely the big flowers) is likely what is best for the buck (because they can't try everything apparently) nor they can write it off. For example - it is possible to save on kit lens but on a long term would be better to buy just the body and 1 or 2 much better lenses (because the kit lens is not sharp). Thank you for the video - very informative.
The Z9 with the new Nikon lenses looks fantastic, those integrated Teleconverters are brilliant, and I expect the future iterations of competitors to implement !! I don't think I would pick the camera itself over the A1since this one is more versatile (lends itself for more uses) and can balance as well with the vertical grip. Most (non nikon )reviewers prefer the focusing of the A1 with a higher hit rate. But Sony Kind of sucks when it comes to Firmware updates after their camera releases !!!! but we're splitting hairs here . Great video
It's interesting that you picked the Nikon Z9 as the top wildlife camera - on account of the lenses. I totally agree, those Z lenses are simply incredible. I have owned the Canon R5 for a year and sold it because of their substandard wide angle zooms or primes (except the 35mm). There tele options aren't convincing either, having started with the RF 600 and RF 800 what, f/11 lenses?! I haven't tried the 100-500 zoom but having 3 out of 4 lenses real bummers didn't encourage me to continue with that line. The Nikon mirrorless cameras aren't per se better than the Canons, but their lenses make the real difference. Can't talk about Sony, but some people take great photos with their A1.
As soon I leave more then a few hundred meters away from home, my OM-1 comes into my backpack. Smaller body, not much but a bit. BUT way smaller lenses, less weight and I'm not carrying a telezoom worth of a car in my pack. FF system for wildlife, really wildlife, not going to zoo... is a torture for your back and bank account.
I would love to see your picks for documentary/environmental portraiture!
I went for the R10 with used EF lenses :) love that camera
Yeah for the G9 mention! Older but my travel kit with 4 lenses and camera is 7 pounds, PL100-400 gives equiv 800mm reach!
Great video! Would love to see a buying guide for close-in photography/macro photography or landscape photography.
Thanks.. It helped. I bought both Nikon P1000 and canon R10
The Z9 is a great camera and you’re right about the lens choices for it. The only issue i have with it is the built-in battery grip which is why it’s so much larger. I noticed that both times you showed yourself shooting a vertical shot you didn’t change your grip which tells me that it’s unnecessary for 90% of its users. Otherwise love its price point and lens choices
not true. I have a nikon d4s, true my GFX gets more use this days, but goddammit that style body of the d4s is to die for!! it's butter in the hands, it's like well set up guitar.. you would love the vertical grip on the z9! plus the balance is out of this world. The R3 and the Z9 have the best bodies in the world by far. (so do the canon 1dx and the nikon d3-->d6)
Glad you at least talked about the a7rV. Its not meant for wild life. However its a solid option if you do it in the side. Same goes for the EOS R5. Honestly wish sony had nikon 800mm as 6.3. Seems like a solid option
The point Jordan makes about lenses is the reason I took a chance and chose the Z6ii over the (much) better tracking R6. No one had anything comparable to Nikon's PF lenses and I was confident Nikon creating mirrorless equivalents was only a matter of time. In the long focal length range, Canon seems to have prioritzed weight at the expense of light gathering and I personally was not keen on paying over 3000 Euro for 100-500 that is f7.1 at the long end. I'm not rich, but the idea of pairing an enthusiast level body in the 2500ish Euro range with a fixed f11 800mm lens seemed like buying a mid-level sports car and putting bias ply tires on it. Nikon pairs bodies and lenses better for my type/level of photography better than Canon does, is what I am trying to say. I guess I could have saved myself a lot of pain and done the rational thing and bought a Sony A7.3 + 200-600, and been happy. But this is not a rational hobby and I have always been a sucker for the underdog. If Nikon would now just do me a favor and finally bring the Z6iii with R6ii level AF to market, I could happily tell myself how smart I am while I wait in cold morning light for that uncooperative king fisher to appear...
I really enjoy this series and would love to see a travel kit episode. I'm limited by budget to one camera and have gone with the Fuji XT5 as it hits the right balance of price, size/weight and versatility for me. But I love learning about (and drooling over!) more specialized kit.
Yes! A travel episode would be so good
Good choice, although does depend on lens needs and people vary. I'm slightly debating one for travel. Lens availability/cost (to fit individual's needs) is IMHO as important as camera choice, maybe more so.
I feel like the AF differences between the G9 and OM1 were glossed over. As someone who has tried shooting a lot of BiF with both over the last couple years (first the G9 then the OM1), the OM1 is way better at locking onto a bird in flight. I prefer it with the PL100-400 rather than the Oly 100-400. Even for non flight shots, the OM1 AF is more confident.
You guys forgot the RF 100-400 lens, it's currently a steal at $499 US and even when it goes off sale it's only $649. Full-frame telephoto lenses on APSC bodies are always a winning combination for wildlife photographers so don't frown on the lens because it is full frame. It's still small light and sharp. With that lens, the R10 should be number 1 under $1000. I always enjoy your content even when I don't agree with it completely. Another example is the R7 blows away the R6markII for wildlife. The R6MarkII might be ok for large wildlife but at 24mp full frame, it just doesn't have enough reach for small birds which most wildlife shooters work on. I own both. The cameras you listed that I haven't used that intrigue me the most are the OM-1 and the Z9, especially with the 800mm f/6.3! Thanks for the enjoyable content!
Great Video , thx for this, I thought about the Fuji XH2 too since i already own a Fuji XT3 and have some lenses but to be Honest , the change in Design is not my thing. So I´m pairing the new Fuji xt5 with my 70-300 and bought the 150- 600, great and lightweight combination, good versatility and 40 Mega Pixel gives me enough space to crop when shooting small birds. The Canon R6 MKII would be my top pic because of the Autofocus but i want more MP and the R5 is to expensive for me. So I´d rather have the chance to crop if needed with the 40 MP Fuji .Also the Canon RF100-500 was a bit to expensive for me so i have now a 3800 Euro Setup instead of a 5900 Euro Setup. The apsc reach is great too so im quite happy with my choice. the only downside of the Fuji is, that there is no battery grip... but yeah, cant have it all and i love the Fuji design, ants to make me go out and shoot all the Time, what more can a Camera offer. The newer Cameras are all absolutely fantastic, Im photographing for over 20 Years now, started with Analog Cameras, Boy did we come a long way to those great Gear these days. cheers from Germany
Still rocking my sony a6400 with a 200-600 lens. Very happy with the results
I use the A7III + Tamron 150-500 combo at the moment. Lightweight and superb image quality. But I will probably upgrade to the A9III when it's released and next thing will be the Sony 600mm F4 +TC's
Good reviews, as always, and glad to see the Lumix G9 get a mention, but you may have missed one of the biggest benefits of the G9; the weight and portability of M43 systems is a huge benefit if you carry your gear for long distances. The G9 with the Lumix 100-400 and 12-35 zooms, plus a carbon fiber tripod, spare batteries, etc. comes in at seven pounds and is remarkably compact for such a flexible kit. I carry that on backpacking trips and I don't know of any other system that match that.
I have one now and I love it! The color rendering . The long lens availability (100-400). And the 200 w/1.4 f2.8 used is pretty doable these days as sharp as that lens is.
Agreed but I prefer my Panasonic Leica 12-60mm lens with my G9 and Panasonic Leica 100-400mm lens.
@@MarkoKoskenoja I had debated with myself on my next lens because I have the Ony 40-150 pro which has been fantastic for everything. I like the idea of the 200 prime when I'm looking for owls, but then the Only 300 f4 exists. At the same time, the 100-400 is super convenient but loss of light. Either way, they're all fun to use because they're pretty light.
Can someone verify if the G9 has a good hit rate for birds in flight photography? It's a toss up between G9 and Em1 mark III for me, at similar price range.
@@sosomelodies659 G9 has decent autofocus for most of the scenes, sometimes even better than em13. However, BIF is one area that G9 struggles a lot compared to mainstream cameras. As a G9 user, my honest opinion is that if you are interested in BIF, go get em13 or even om1 instead. If BIF is not your main subject, G9 can deal with other scenes, including still birds, very well. The afs is one of the fastest in class.
Nice video. When will the R6 Ii review be out? I am. curious about the front side illuminated sensor
I don't get why you're so focused on burst rate. I've been shooting animals (especially birds) for decades, and I've actually stopped shooting bursts altogether. The one factor I would put forward is the ability to crop - so the mix between optical resolution and sensor definition that will allow me to get the smallest details in the final image. The second factor would be AF speed, as animals tend to move quite fast, and ability to make the focus area a pinpoint so I can shoot between twigs. The third would be weight and balance, as wildlife photography often means walking a lot off-road, in the woods and mountains, and then staying perfectly still several minutes while holding the camera. Bottom line: lightweight lens with very sharp center and fast AF drive, and high-density sensor (something like a 30MP APS-C or 60MP FF). I'm currently using an A7RIV with 400 and 500mm lenses, and given how often I still need to crop heavily, I wouldn't trade it for a 24MP FF for any framerate in the world. Actually, having used a 36MP K-1 for years, I've seen the difference in feathers rendition and I wouldn't even consider anything below 40MP on a full-frame sensor.
I primarily shoot Nikon, but I thought about an R7 or R10 as a standalone wildlife camera for its autofocus, but I also struggled with lens selection. The RF 100-400 seemed too entry level for me (0 weather sealing), but the 100-500 is out of my price range. For reference, I’m an enthusiast currently shooting wildlife with a D7500 and a Tamron 100-400. I guess I’ll just wait for a Z90 ;)
Used EF 100-400 II and an adaptor? Very sharp wide-open...
If you aren't going into rain or duststorm. You underestimate the RF100-400.
I’ve watched/read many reviews of the RF 100-400 to know it would be an upgrade in sharpness over my current Tamron 100-400 for sure, albeit losing 2/3 stop at 400mm and downgrade in weather sealing, which the Tamron has basic sealing. I’m also a little concerned about noise with f8 at 400mm on the R7, which many are saying the 32MP sensor can get noisy pretty quick with increased ISO.
@@Jviotr I traded my Tamron EF 100-400 for RF100-400. The AF improve massively, and IMO the Tamron isn't that great on basic sealing. f8 is a concern for Full frame as well. I just plan my usage of it. I switch back to EF80-200L/EF300 f4L/EF 400 f5.6 when sunsets
I'm a bit sad that you didn't mention the Sony RX10IV. Other than the R10 with the RF 100-400mm, you can't get a combo on APS or MFT with similar reach and IQ for a similar price. That camera still has great AF, a stacked sensor, and very competitive specs in a compact package. It's ideal for wildlife trips where you don't need massive reach, but when carrying multiple bodies and lenses can be too much of a PITA or simply unfeasible.
Looking forward to this year’s Christmas video!
Please can you do a series on lighting, both natural and artificial? Thank you.
Chris you have the Fuji X-H2 S on your list and I was very interested in it but after watching a lot of reviews most say the photo focus traking isn't very reliable?
It's excellent review. My question is IBIS and weather sealing important for wildlife photography. If yes, which is good for low light wildlife photography camera under 1500 USD?
Love these buying guidesHow about portrait, low light, night, B&W and compact systems next?
With firmware 2.0, G9 is such a amazing under appreciate hybrid camera
Buying guide based on the type of photography is a great great idea.
Well done! But ... I am a retired guy, old school and due to budget and environment I reject changing gear any time there is something new on the market. My FX Nikon D750 and my DX D7500 still work fine, but I lack a decent lens to reach wildlife or birds. And both are hard to get in dusk or dawn. How about a video that shows what effordable lens brands can be combined with a 2x TC and what adaptors can be used that allow autofocus and function?
Sigma S and C series is probably the cheapest quality lenses you can get. If you don't mind giving up some quality you can look into tamron.
@@muzlee7479 Mahalo for your input!
I just sold my EM1x and 300mm plus other Pro Olympus lenses. And bought a DSLR the Nikon D850. Great IQ and very nice AF loving the switch.
Strangely the D850 still a great camera, despite many others coming since, the product launches didn't magically reduce its performance at all. If DSLRs are your thing it's IMHO still an excellent choice.
Great video :) For the Canon R10 you have the very good RF 100-400. Even if it is 5.6 - 8 it gives very good results, and at a very good price point at under 500$
I don't think that I have ever agreed more with you on a comparison, but as a Nikon and Panasonic G9 user, I would, wouldn't I... One thing that you didn't mention, but which is relevant to many wildlife photographers, is that the G9 is also a very capable video camera. The R6 II and the Z9 are too of course, but for a camera costing less than $1K, the G9 is rather exceptional. I do btw. also have the 100-300mm that you showed briefly. It's hard to find more bang for the bucks when it comes to long telephoto lenses. Glue it to f/8 for consistent sharpness, and you're ready to go hunting.
Just pulled the trigger on the X-H2s, it’ll do everything I need for wildlife or track. I’ll be upgrading my 100-400 to the longer Fuji or Tamron next year.
Great camera-just wish Fuji had decent telephoto prime lenses. Sorely missing.
@@ts7071 Agreed but, up until recently it only had one super telephoto the 100-400, that’s changed. It’s also, unlike some, encouraging third party manufacturers, so it’s only really a matter of time.
@@wanderingfool6312 the 150-600 is too slow and not a prime so didn’t interest me in the slightest. I wonder what will happen first-Fuji to actually come out with a decent wildlife prime lens or for Nikon to come out with a wildlife dx camera
@@ts7071 Well you could get the Tamron at f6.7, but really what are you comparing it with?
@@wanderingfool6312 300 f4 or 200 f2.8 on m43; or 300 f4, 400 f4.5, 500 f5.6 on Nikon. This does not include the use of 1.4 tcs either.
My picks will be Panasonic Lumix DC-FZ1000 II, Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 IV, Sony A 6600, Sony A7RIII, Sony A7RIV, Sony A7RIVA, Sony A7RV (I have Sony A7RIV+A7RIVA which I use in both full frame and in APSC mode). Sony mirrorless Cameras have so many Lenses to choose for in all budgets.
Budget category - you never mentioned the Canon RF 100-400 with the R10? - its an excellent lens at a great price - and you can also use the 600mm RF also? - its a great wildlife set up for not much money.
I recently got a Z9 with the 100-400 lens, which is amazing for wildlife and lighter than I was expecting.
Wildlife yes, birding - too short :/
@@dicekolev5360 For birding you want the 800mm f/6.3. No other manufacturer has anything to compete with it.
@@dicekolev5360 Far I've mostly done birding and with the DX mode, it's great for birding. It's nice and light to carry around compared to the older 500mm f4. I can just sling the camera over my shoulder when going for a walk, in case I see anything.
@@dragonnyxx guess you've never seen the Olympus 150-400 4.5 with the built in teleconverter huh? FOV of 300-800 at 4.5 and then with the TC makes it equal to 1000mm
@@Jgatti41 Of course I've heard of it. But I also understand how aperture equivalence works, and the 2x crop factor on that makes it equivalent to an f/9.
I just used Canon R6 Mark II with RF 100-500 in Kenya and it was unreal. Super sharp. Im a total amateur and it was so easy to get amazing shots of wildlife in Kenya.
For wildlife photography, I'd pick the Pentax K-1 Mark II. Always been a big fan of Pentax's all-weather durability and reliability, which I place above fancy features and gimmicks. I don't do any video shooting, so it's never been a consideration for how I capture Mother Nature. Also love that I can use legacy K-Mount lenes.
what lens would you suggest to go with the k mount?
I respect the body only comparison, but comparing kits would be nice as well. I would mention three kits: on to carry in my car (weight no object), one for trekking/mountaineering (min weight) and another for airplane travel, preferably with two bodies and under 8Kg.
Hell yes, I love my G9 for wildlife. M43 is the best to lug around a telephoto without breaking your back
Nice to see the OM-1 on the list. But is there a special reason you didn't mention its class leading frame rate, IBIS, or AI animal/bird AF, a thing Olympus pioneered.
I use a Sony A77 II fore sport and wildlife. I like it,....Nice Minolta lenses, with Capture one software. Can a old prof camera like a Canon Ds, Nikon D3/D3X Sony a900, etc etc. compete entry full full frame of even crop sensor
I am not even a canon shooter but I am puzzled that you left out what I’d consider today the price / performance champion for wildlife photography which is the canon R5. It’s got issues for video, but for stills, you get high resolution , high fps, stunning AF and little rolling shutter for thousands less than the z9. Now lens wise, Nikon is hard to beat and if they add a decent 200-600 they’ll have an impeccable lineup, but since you were just looking at bodies, the R5 is a weird omission.
Nice summary for wildlife photography, but you really should consider putting more emphasis on cost, especially stressing system cost. Ultimately, the cost benefit analysis is probably the most important consideration, and as cheap or expensive as any body is, you're not just buying a camera. You're buying into a system. An open system with good third part support can't be underrated here. Over the life of a system, lens and accessory costs will be the items that can make or break photography for many people.
Have you guys reviewed the m zuiko 150-400 on the OM1?