Which body is the goto for wildlife

D

DrAdam

Messages
65
Edit My Images
Yes
Just wondering what everyones thoughts are with regards to the 'goto' camera body for Wildlife (particularly bird photography). I'm guessing the Z9 would be good, but for a more budget conscious choice what would people go for? I see a lot of youtubers on the Sony A74. I also see comments about the AF system on the Z7ii etc not being that good?
I'm wanting to get a new body but not sure where to start.
 
Hi, Sony A7 iv or Nikon Z ?
I moved from Canon DSLR and at the time chose a Sony A9 now use a Sony A7 iv with 20-600 lens, bought the A7 iv mainly for the eye detection and on birds close to camera and static it IMO works great as does the tracking option for BIF, cannot give opinion on Nikon Z as never used one but my son uses the Z6 and is very happy with that. Russ.
 
Last edited:
With bird photography it’s not just having a body it’s about the combination of a good lens and body. For birds in flight the AF has to be good for tracking and the AF motors in the lens have to be fast to respond. For static birds AF is less important other than accuracy. My point is look for the lenses you need and then the body to pair it with.
 
It all comes down to budget, most if not all Canon mirrorless have great bird AF, a friend uses the R5 and gets amazing shots. Im Sony and the A1 is great as is the A7iv and A7RV. For Nikon the Z8 and Z9 are the way to go. Great to have choice.
 
I use Sony A7iv with great result, really works well. Personally pair it with 200-600mm. For travelling have paired it with even the 70-350mm which is an APS-C lens and still come away with results I have loved.

If can afford it Nikon Z8/9 with some of the teleprimes makes for an amazing wildlife setup. I know someone who uses Z8+400mm f4.5 which works incredibly well. The AF tracking itself is about as good as my A7IV IME but Z8 has much higher frame rate with blackout free shooting which will give you more keepers overall.

Canon R5 looks amazing but no native RF lenses I like for wildlife. So canon is out of the question for me.
 
Thanks for all the input.

As it's something I'm just starting to take an interest in my lens choice was going to be the 150-600 Sigma.
I'll take a look at the D500. We currently have a D7100.
 
The Nikon Z 180-600 lens is a surprisingly good lens for the money... paired with a Z8 would be quite the kit (I use it on a Z9).

But with a lot of people turning to mirrorless, the D500 should be a bargain; I would pair it with a 500mm PF (or a 300mm 2.8 + TCs for more money)... I would buy used if possible.
 
Last edited:
DrAdam said:
Thanks for all the input.

As it's something I'm just starting to take an interest in my lens choice was going to be the 150-600 Sigma.
I'll take a look at the D500. We currently have a D7100.
Click to expand...
you can also probably afford a D850 if you can afford A7IV.
if you already have lenses it may make sense to go with D850 with nikon 200-500mm or 500mm f5.6 PF

if you need to buy new lenses anyway then worth considering mirrorless (regardless of the mount).
 
D850 AF is not up to D500 capability. :)
 
DrAdam said:
I'll take a look at the D500. We currently have a D7100.
Click to expand...

I went from D7100 to D500. On its won the D7100 was quite an accomplished camera for wildlife, but it's not anywhere near as capable as the D500. Mine is paired mostly with Nikon 200-500, and more recently the 500/4. Kit is only limited by operator.
 
The D500, used, still commands strong money imo from the usual used camera websites.

The Nikon 200-500 seems to be a similar price to the Sigma.
 
Last edited:
If I was starting with a fresh system for wildlife, I would go for an OM system I think.
 
nandbytes said:
I thought they were basically the same (as far as AF is concerned)
Click to expand...
I've used both with Nikon 500 f4, Sigma 150-600 and Nikon 200-500 and although the D850 has advantages (inc higher Mp count), in actual use in the field it doesn't match the speed and accuracy of AF that the D500 provides.
 
gramps said:
I've used both with Nikon 500 f4, Sigma 150-600 and Nikon 200-500 and although the D850 has advantages (inc higher Mp count), in actual use in the field it doesn't match the speed and accuracy of AF that the D500 provides.
Click to expand...
My experience was similar. They have the same AF module and specs, but the D850 just seemed slower.
 
gramps said:
I've used both with Nikon 500 f4, Sigma 150-600 and Nikon 200-500 and although the D850 has advantages (inc higher Mp count), in actual use in the field it doesn't match the speed and accuracy of AF that the D500 provides.
Click to expand...
sk66 said:
My experience was similar. They have the same AF module and specs, but the D850 just seemed slower.
Click to expand...
I guess the processor might be stretched dealing with high res readout and tracking.
I wonder if you shoot D850 in APS-C mode does the performance improve (assuming the camera is clever enough to only read middle of the sensor instead of reading the whole sensor and then binning data)
 
Last edited:
OM1 paired with either with 100-400 or 300mm pro
 
nandbytes said:
I wonder if you shoot D850 in APS-C mode does the performance improve (assuming the camera is clever enough to only read middle of the sensor instead of reading the whole sensor and then binning data)
Click to expand...
Nope. :)
 
nandbytes said:
I guess the processor might be stretched dealing with high res readout and tracking.
Click to expand...
Yeah, probably stressed a bit.

I wonder if you shoot D850 in APS-C mode does the performance improve (assuming the camera is clever enough to only read middle of the sensor instead of reading the whole sensor and then binning data)
Click to expand...
The sensor is read out row by row regardless of what is retained; you can't read out only the center area (currently). The 153pt AF area already only occupies the DX crop area, so you don't lose any AF points; you also do not get something greater AF point density... nothing really changes.
 
AF system on the D7100 wasn't too bad at the time of introduction. I thought it was pretty good - much better than the K-3 and K-5 I had at the time - however ISO performance was dire compared with the Pentax, as was the buffer. It was the 200+ shot buffer on the D500 which sold me that camera.

If the D7100 still works well why not use the money for a higher performance lens? For the Sigma - go for the Sport rather than the Contemporary or look at say the Nikon 200-400/4 or an older version of the 500/4 ... One of the benefits of the D7*00 range was its lens compatability.
 
Canon R5 for me, together with the 800 RF and 100-400 RF and 70-300 L are my main wildlife kit, I am toying with a Nikon Z7 and Leica SL2 and a bit of micro 4/3. Overall though, R5 is undisputed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top