camera choices Nikon Z7 vs Sony A7 IV vs Sony A7R III

[John E 7]

I wonder if there is an update on this subject for 2022 including the Canon R5? 

I'm mainly interested in wide-angle reef scenes using an 8-15mm fisheye with an 8 inch dome, so Sony, Nikon or Canon could all work . 

A high res full frame with this lens seems to offer (i) ability for very high res ff fisheye pictures at 15mm for big enlargements, (ii) Tokina10-17- like zoom-ability on the APS-C settings with still decent resolution for smaller enlargements, plus (iii) image stabilisation for occasional video and (iv) good image quality including corners. The closest APS-C camera option look like the not-so-recent Sony A6600 or the Fuji XT4 with limited housing availability. 

Travelling size and weight is not as issue but smaller size for mobility underwater using ambient light is preferable. I also want to do split shots, so thinking of avoiding 230mm domes or wet lenses. 

Any advice appreciated.

John

[Draq 135]

My reaction to these "which brand" questions is that one should seek out unbiased reviews and guides online and then go and handle each of the contenders.  Use the menus, operate the wheels and buttons, see if the way such things are laid out makes sense to you.  Look through the viewfinder in bright light and dim light.  Even better, rent one of each contender for a week and use it.  Look at the housings that are available and decide what you like.  Look at lens availability for your interest area. 

The problem with asking for opinions online and taking polls is that the discussion mainly attracts responses from people who have, shall I say, a "strong brand affinity."  This is not unique to photo equipment.  I shoot Nikon stuff, but in my past I had Olympus and Canon.  Those companies don't give me cameras or pay me and I have no brand loyalty to them.

You can accomplish the photography you describe with any of the major brands, and really, for the most part, they are fairly equal in capabilities, and in any event, the mirrorless gear keeps evolving.  that technology is just entering adolescence and will improve.  New lenses and cameras will be introduced frequently and the equipment landscape will be much different in two-three years than it is now.  Viewfinders will improve and the lens lineup will fill out, to some extent.  On the other hand, the camera companies seem focused on things like high burst rates, super long telephoto lenses and being able to focus track your kid's and dog's eye, so some of this development is irrelevant to me. 

As a fan of cropped sensor for underwater use, unless and until that format becomes a viable choice in the mirrorless market, beyond entry-level cameras, I am pretty uninterested in the new gear.  Frankly, I have no need for anything new anyway, but rumor is that both Canon and Nikon may be producing interesting cropped sensor cameras in the next year or two.  That could be interesting to me over time.

 

[PhilW 5]

@Draq: definitely, the "which brand" questions are difficult to get a "good" answer from, since every one of us has slightly different preferred techniques and likes stuff which others find useless.

Nonetheless, it helped me quite a bit to get many pros and cons together in one thread.

 

@John E: whether the R5 greatly tumbles things up? hard to tell, but I don't think it is a gamechanger. In the end, it is like Draq wrote: best thing is to rent the gear and use it for a couple of dives! Like I did - rented a Sony A7R IV and found out that all bad prophecies about nonsense-like menu-structure etc were not true to me. I quickly got used to the knobs and wheels.

Yet I have to say: NAUTICAM definitely has a high-quality housing; but the arrangement of knobs is such that if you're used to using the camera at land, you will not find some knobs and wheels in the first place - but that has nothing to do with the great specs of the camera itself.

 

Hope you'll find the camera which suits you best, JohnE! if I can be of more help, let me know!

[Phil Rudin 485]

I think that if you want to reboot this 2020 original post the current cameras for comparison would probably be the Canon R5, Nikon Z7 II and the Sony A7R IVA.

Regarding the older Nikon Z7 verses the current Z7 II the widely shared view is that the Z7 like the EOS R had pretty poor auto focus. with the Z7 II and Canon R5 & R6 the bar has been raised significantly. 

 

[LarryHallas 45]

On 4/7/2022 at 11:15 AM, Phil Rudin said:

I think that if you want to reboot this 2020 original post the current cameras for comparison would probably be the Canon R5, Nikon Z7 II and the Sony A7R IVA.

Regarding the older Nikon Z7 verses the current Z7 II the widely shared view is that the Z7 like the EOS R had pretty poor auto focus. with the Z7 II and Canon R5 & R6 the bar has been raised significantly. 

 

I agree with Phil. I shoot with the Nikon Z6 II and the auto-focus is excellent once I learned how to use it. Autofocus on Z6 II is many times better than my original Z6 (without firmware), so I can see the "DSLRs have better AF" argument back then, but not any more. With the latest firmware, I can set it to AF-C, dynamic area AF, with back button focus and track a fast moving subject (like a small fish) with great accuracy. As long as I keep the fast moving subject in the dynamic area "dots" and hold down the back button, I can track the subject and the focus is tack sharp when I pull the shutter. For example, capturing this fast moving, and very tiny, yellow damselfish with perfect AF (Nikon Z6 II, Nikon Z 105mm Macro, Nauticam NA-Z7II, Inon Z-330 strobes, ISO 400, 105mm, f/18, 1/160sec) 

Edited April 9, 2022 by UWPics

[adamhanlon 0]

My D800 was able to track fast moving fish around the frame using AF-C and 3D AF mode. It is now 10 years old. While you can argue that if it can do this, this is all you need, it is not the full picture. The crucial test is when light conditions are challenging, and you are shooting subjects that have poor color definition and/or contrast.

My (somewhat unsophisticated) testing of the Z9 showed that its AF with the new Z 105mm macro is as accurate as that of the D850, but still slower. With the ZTF adapter and the F mount 105mm, the AF is actually more like that of the D7000, in both speed and accuracy.

I appreciate the Z9 was not a model in consideration in this thread, but it does have what Nikon describe as the most advanced AF in a mirrorless camera. Certainly, they consider it better than the Z7II.

At the risk of continuing my Luddite reputation, I think the thread should include the D850. Second hand value of these will fall and they offer a very viable option that will perform at least as well, if not better than the mirrorless options. 

Contentiously, as I am aware this thread is about full frame options, for underwater use, I would actually also add the D500 into the comparison. With Adobe’s super resolution and good lens choices, it is capable of producing files that will rival most full frame options, without all the optical challenges that the latter has.

[oneyellowtang 112]

@adamhanlon

To put a bit of a fine point on it...

D500 w/60mm (in low light) is still a touch faster in AF than the D850 w/60mm (in low light).

Blackwater dive is a great way to viscerally experience this difference (it is small).

 

[adamhanlon 0]

@oneyellowtang

Great point. AF performance should be measured with tiny semi translucent subjects, in the dark, while floating over several thousands of meters of depth

[John E 7]

I was thinking of the newer Nikon Z7ii which costs more than the Sony A7Riv. The Sony A7RIV does look like the top of the list.. but I wonder how close is the Sony A7Riii? I notice it is the least popular on the vote. 

Even if big enlargements or stabilised video with good colour are only a small percentage of camera usage, it can be crucial for those times its used, so the choice narrows down. I haven't used any of these cameras and don't have access to them, but the ability to use cropped sensor mode and larger depth of field looks the best of both worlds. So, like the original question it comes down to these few high resolution mirrorless cameras that seem to have the most versatility unless I'm missing something? The housing costs look similar so any saving on the camera body is less significant in the scheme of things.

 

[PhilW 5]

@John E: please don't think that these 3 models are the only "good options" or even "the best options"! At the point of time when I started this thread (Sept 2020), I have already had taken the decision:

a) to change from Olympus E-M1 II to fullframe and

b) that it's gonna be a mirrorless

 

In the end, I picked those 3 options and wanted to hear about the community's opinions and experiences.

 

No doubt that a "real FF" definitely has some advantages which are very hard (if even possible) for the mirrorless to meet!

 @adamhanlon is right: D850 and/or D500 are still very good - and for some use-cases the best - options! especially if you get them second-handed

And the usual prejudice is that FF are very bulky - well, yes they are. But mirrorless are not very much less bulky.....

[TimG 62]

4 hours ago, PhilW said:

And the usual prejudice is that FF are very bulky

They are but I'm not sure that is the real issue. Once you add all the bits and bobs, few systems are small.  With FF It's more the difficulty of housing wide-angle rectilinear lenses and the implications in terms of domes, soft edges and the like. And then the much higher cost. 

[John E 7]

Thanks for the information... I have experience of the Olympus 16mp sensor (EPL-10 at the moment) and have used several AOI manufactured housings. I'm also a big fan of the TG-6 with a UWL-400A wet lens which is great for free diving and pictures that are just for screen viewing.

The new AOI housing for the Olympus OMD 1 iii is tempting except one of my main reasons for upgrading is to occasionally get big prints. I took note of PhilW's comments on changing from Olympus OMD 1ii. I have read Phil Rudin's comments that the 20mp Olympus sensor is not necessarily a big upgrade in image quality from the 16mp, and Chris's comments that the 20mp Olympus sensor is close to the D500 - makes these options seem a sideways move.... 

I find the 120 degree field of view of the UWL-400A a bit narrow sometimes but am wary of being fixed at maximum fisheye like the Olympus 8mm. Hence the appeal of a zoomable fisheye if using APS-C mode (and still getting around 20mp) but having the full resolution fisheye at 15mm for big reef scene prints. (Not too fussed about rectilinear.)  I suppose I'm really looking for a more versatile version of the D500 and Tokina fisheye - with higher resolution (when needed) and better video .... 

The Canon R5 is the most expensive option and would be a more serious contender if video was a higher priority. So that is probably bottom of the list. No image stabilisation on the D850 seems a limitation (or better to stabilise in post?). 

24mp resolution full frame mirrorless cameras seem hamstrung in options for zoomable fisheye in a dome due to lower resolution in that crop mode and don't seem to work with the Tokina 10-15mm for a zoomable fisheye? (Wanting to do split shots puts me off the wet lens option.)

24mp+ resolution APS-C cameras seem to have little choice for underwater other than Sony A series... which again doesn't look to me to be a worthwhile change from Olympus.

A local dealer suggested I got a Nikon Z50 but that does seem to have no advantage in a housing compared to the better focusing D500.

So that seems to bring us back to this shortlist .....with the Nikon D850 added in ... (all using either Nikon or Canon 8-15mm). 

[ChrisRoss 150]

If you after occasional big prints it's seems like a lot of investment to get them and sounds like you would only be doing that with exceptional images - by this I mean you are only doing minimal cropping.  Natively the 20MP sensor will do a 438 x 329mm image at 300 dpi.  That's a little bigger than A3 - achieving A2 (420 x 594mm) is easily achievable via up-ressing the image and there is also the new Adobe super resolution option which seems to do an even better job. 

If you want a zoomable fisheye the Canon 8-15 adapts well to m43 and allows you to zoom between a full 180° diagonal fisheye to 67° diagonal which is about equivalent to the a full frame 27mm rectilinear on horizontal field of view.  You can also use the 8-15 fisheyes on APS-C and they act as zoomable fisheyes from about 10-15mm.

I don't know that I'd agree with the premise that the EM-1-II/III 20MP sensor  is not a decent upgrade from the older 16MP sensor.  For me I rarely shot over ISO400 with my EM-5 mKII but was equally happy with ISO800 on the EM-1 MkII.  The DXO tests seem to reflect this.  I now have the OM-1 which seems to me to be a step up again.  It's not a huge step but going from the 16MP sensor it seems like a decent upgrade to me.  If you are shooting with strobes you will be mostly at base ISO and differences among cameras are much les

Of course if you can afford a full frame setup it is certainly a nice option.

[LarryHallas 45]

19 hours ago, adamhanlon said:

My (somewhat unsophisticated) testing of the Z9 showed that its AF with the new Z 105mm macro is as accurate as that of the D850, but still slower. With the ZTF adapter and the F mount 105mm, the AF is actually more like that of the D7000, in both speed and accuracy.

Adam... I agree, the Z 105mm macro is slower than the F 105mm macro with the FTZ, hopefully this will be fixed with a firmware update soon. Sometimes I struggle with the Z 105mm hunting before it finally grabs focus. But, I think these AF issues are with the Z 105mm and not the camera.

I am surprised at your findings with the Z9 as it is supposed to the the "best auto-focus in the world" with the latest EXpeed 7 processor. I would love to see you write a review of the Z9 underwater! Haven't seen an underwater review of the Z9 yet. Nikon is "rumored" to be releasing an AF update for the Z6 II and Z7 II with the dual EXpeed 6 processors sometime this year, but not for the single processor Z6 and Z7. This is why I upgraded to the Z6II. 

Yes, the Nikon Z mirrorless cameras still have a way to go before the AF is as good as the D850 (the underwater AF benchmark), but I think the future cameras with dual EXpeed 7 processors will out perform the D850. Maybe the Z8? If so, that will be my next camera!

[adamhanlon 0]

I'm going to film a Wetpixel Live episode about my (very limited) experiences with the Z9 tomorrow. 

I found that the Z9 with the  Z 105mm was slow to focus as on each activation, it racked the lens out and then moved in to achieve focus. i.e. it wasn't hunting. This may be a settings issue. Once it focused, it was very accurate.

My comment about the "best autofocus in the world" was quoting Nikon marketing's pitch  

I don't plan on buying one, which limits review options somewhat. I may be able to borrow one from someone. It would be good to try one underwater. I will have the opportunity to use a Sony a7s III over the next few weeks, which will be very interesting too.