This is a continuation of a series of posts on the Nikon D850. The series starts here. You should be able to find all the posts about that camera in the Category List on the right sidebar, below the Articles widget. There’s a drop-down menu there that you can use to get to all the posts in this series; just look for “D850”. This is also a continuation of a series of posts on the Sony a7RIII. You should be able to find all the posts about that camera in the Category List on the right sidebar.
We had our children and grandkids at our house over the holidays. It had been a while since we were all together, so I was feeling the need to catch up photographically. I take the pleasant task of documenting some of our family history seriously, and I approached this the same way. But I also had two new cameras, Sony’s and Nikon’s latest take on what an all-around full framer should be, and this was a good chance to use them extensively side by side. I learned a lot, and I’ll tell you what I found. By the way, for the most part, I am not showing you the best pictures, but the ones that illustrate interesting differences. Pictures where the cameras did everything perfectly are not that useful in this post.
But first, a disclaimer. Taking family photos, at least the way I do it, is a moderately specialized activity, so what I’ll be talking about here won’t apply to photography in general. Much of it will apply to event photography – at least the kind with no artificial lighting or light modifiers.
I don’t do posed shots, except the very occasional – and rarely successful – “hey, look at me for a second” kind. I concentrate much more on the kids than the grownups. That means that the action is pretty rapid, and I need to frame and focus in an instant. I use aperture priority almost all the time to handle lighting variations, and on DR-Pix cameras like the a7RIII and D850, mostly use the higher base ISO: 400 for the Nikon, and 640 for the Sony. I use the exposure compensation dial to get the shutter speed I need.
I used to use what Sony calls flexible spot for autofocusing (and I always use autofocus for these fast-moving shots), but Nikon’s and Sony’s face detection is now so good that I use that, gaining a lot of speed in framing and focusing. In the case of the a7RIII, I use the eye-detection for many shots.
I decided to see how far I could get with similar lenses on the two cameras. I put a Zeiss Batis 85 mm f/1.8 on the Sony, and a Nikon 105 mm f/1.4 on the D850. I could have used the Sigma Art 85/1.4 on the Nikon and kept the aperture to f/1.8 and narrower, but I wanted to have a couple of different “looks” available, even if they weren’t all that different. To make the comparison tough, I used both lenses wide open all the time.
Size and weight
The D850 body is heavier than the Sony, and the lenses I favor for the Sony are smaller and lighter than those I use on the Nikon. I think that’s a matter of configuring each body to take advantage of its strengths. The a7RII doesn’t feel right with really big lenses (there’s a grip available that helps there), and feels delightfully diminutive with small, light lenses. The D850 is already pretty heavy, and if the grip weren’t seriously back ordered, I’d be using it with that and heavy, fast lenses.
Impressiveness
Throw a 105/1.4 on a D850 and you’re going to impress your friends; the combination screams photographer. With the Batis on the Sony, you’ll have a lower profile. Call that good, or call it bad, depending on your ego and goals.
Ergonomics
I have complained long and hard about the Sony mirrorless camera user interface (UI), starting with the NEX-5 and NEX-7. There was a noticeable improvement with the introduction of the first generation alpha 7x’s, and another with the a7RII. Then came the a9, which was even better. The a7RIII UI is pretty close to the a9, but missing the shutter mode and focusing mode controls on the left part of the top deck. The dials aren’t so flimsy-feeling. But, compared to the D850, with its UI that Nikon has incrementally evolved for more than a decade, the a7RIII is still well back in second place in this two-camera race. Although there is room for one on the left side of the top deck, Sony still has no reflective status panel, which means that you have to go to the menus a lot. With the Nikon, you hardly ever do. By the way, my favorite such panel is the one on the GFX, but the Nikon’s LCD one is perfectly serviceable. There is one feature that mirrorless cameras have that DSLRs don’t that makes the lack of a top status panel tolerable, and that’s the fact that you can navigate the menus structure using the EVF when the ambient lighting washes out the LCD back panel.
One thing I don’t like about either camera is the way that the lockable controls work. You have to hold down a button and twist a dial at the same time, and sometimes that’s an awkward and slow move. As an example of how I think this should work, I give you the GFX, in which you press a button which locks the dial if it was unlocked, and vice versa, and the dial stays either locked or unlocked until you press the button again. I use the exposure compensation control a lot, and I do like the fact that it’s right on top of the a7RIII, where you can see and adjust it without even turning the camera on. It’s pretty easy to adjust the equivalent function on the D850 though.
While Sony is clearly behind in some parts of the UI – I’ll get to some of the areas where they are ahead further down the page – they are moving fast in the right direction, and they are moving faster than Nikon, which is just doing minor tweaks to its already-refined UI.
Handling
Another aspect of ergonomics is the tactile experience of using the camera. Even though it has grown to a9-ish size, I find the a7RIII a little small in my hands. I use it with the Really Right Stuff (RRS) base plate (but not the companion piece that makes it into an L-bracket), and find the additional height useful. The new generation of RRS plates have a place to stow the Allen wrench. It’s a nice thought, and I didn’t have any trouble with it using the a7RIII on a tripod is slow-moving situations. But when hand holding the camera I found that the Allen wrench kept me from being able to quickly tilt the LCD panel away from the body, and I consigned the wrench to a drawer.
Two more shots from that series at 1:1:
The D850 is more comfortable for me to hold, but with large lenses, I prefer the D5. I think the D850 will be just fine with the grip, but I don’t know that for a fact since the grips seem to be virtually unobtainable.
I didn’t mind the weight of the D850 and the 105/1.4 when I was shooting, but the increased weight of my Nikon gear over the Sony stuff I have gives the a7RIII an advantage when I’m planning what to carry in my camera vest or on a trip.
Shutter sound
The mechanical shutter and the flapping mirror on the D850 combine to make a lot more noise than the EFCS-mode shutter on the a7RIII. Handheld EFCS is not practical – or particularly beneficial – on the D850. The D850 shutter seems louder than the D810 one. The difference in sound between the Sony and Nikon cameras was enough to distract people. Both cameras have an electronic shutter, and both scan full-frame single shot images at about 1/15 second. The a7RIII offers a scan speed of twice that in continuous compressed mode. I didn’t use the electronic shutter on either camera for any of these pictures. I could have done so with the a7RIII, but I don’t think there is any point to using the D850 electronic shutter handheld, at least for my kind of photography, since to use ES requires that you use live view, and there is no way to do that handheld except by holding the camera out like an iPhone. If I’d been using the a9 for these shots, I’d have used the electronic shutter almost all the time.
Electronics speed
The a7RIII is faster than its predecessor, and it’s fairly fast in an absolute sense. The D850 is much faster. You can turn it on as you’re raising the camera to your eye and it’s ready when you are. The Sony needs a couple of seconds to get its act in order. When you format a card with the D850, it’s over in an instant. The Sony can take 5 or 6 seconds for a 128 GB 100 MB/s card, which can seem like an eternity when you’re changing cards and things are happening around you (some of the earlier a7x cameras could take more than a minute to format those big cards). Fortunately, with either camera, you hardly ever have to change cards.
Autofocus use experience
This is one of the most critical issues for the kind of photography I was doing, and one of the most complicated to describe.
First, both cameras have a bewildering number of autofocus options, and I didn’t even try to explore them all. Instead, I set the cameras up similarly, using AF-C and allowing face detection, and giving the cameras a wide choice of what to focus on. I programmed the AEL button on the a7RIII for eye-autofocus; there is no similar capability on the Nikon. In order to concentrate on the differences in more automated autofocus systems of the two cameras, I chose not to use the spot-autofocus features, even though there were many times when they would have been preferable. The a7RIII has a new joystick to control the spot position, which is a huge improvement over the two-step mess of the a7RII, but I think the D850 haptics are better.
When you give the camera a good deal of freedom in picking the focus point, it’s important to know just what it’s doing, and in this realm, the Sony is a clear winner. It shows you groups of green squares when it is focusing on something other than a face, big green rectangles to show you the faces it’s favoring, and a tiny green square to show you which eye you’re focused on win eye-AF. The Nikon is nowhere near as communicative; it shows you a gray square where it’s currently focused and call that it. By the way, I like the red squares the D5 uses better; they’re easier to see.
Once you’ve decided what the camera is focusing on, you can then decide if that’s what you want it to focus on. Usually, it is, and all you have to do is trip the shutter. If it’s not, and you want it to focus on a face, with both cameras the trick is to move your chosen target nearer the center of the frame, try again, and reframe your subject while slowly moving it where you want it. The Nikon will follow it quite well until you get near the edge or unless it is distracted by another face that got moved to the center. The Sony plays the same game, but not quite as well. But the Sony has a trick up its sleeve: eye-AF. Invoke that, and it will track the eye that it picked quite well.
In practice, the Sony system is easier and faster to use. The better visual feedback is the thing that makes the difference.
Autofocus accuracy
The D850 uses phase-detection autofocus (PDAF) all the time you’re not in live view, and I didn’t use live view at all for these pictures. PDAF is fast, but it’s not very repeatable, and can suffer from systematic errors that vary with f-stop and subject distance, and are thus hard to calibrate out (with the 105/1.4, I used corrections derived from earlier testing). For active subjects with constant velocity, the D850 uses a prediction algorithm that is quite effective.
The a7RIII uses a combination of PDAF and contrast-detection autofocus (CDAF). It uses PDAF at first, because it’s faster, then trims up the focusing with CDAF. There is no calibration required (or possible, with native lenses). The Sony does not use predictive autofocusing but relies on tweaking speed and the fact that the AF sensors are not blacked out by the swinging mirror.
The D850 AF is better for violently moving subjects such as you encounter in sports photography. For the kind of work I was doing here, the Sony system is far better. The reason is the keeper ratio.
It’s not that the D850 AF is inconsistent by DSLR standards. It is very good and isn’t far behind the D5, which has arguably the best DSLR AF systems in the world. It’s that the a7RIII CDAF tweaking takes accuracy to a whole new level. When you take a series of shots with the D850, you have to go through them and pick the sharpest ones. With the a7RIII, most of the time (assuming the camera is focusing where you want it to focus), they are all sharp. This makes editing much faster and more stress-free. Instead of constantly zooming in and out to check focus, you pick the best shots from low-magnification displays, check them briefly, and toss the rest. And you’re hardly ever choosing between two slightly out of focus shots like with the D850. When I say slightly out of focus, I’m talking about distinctions that most DSLR shooters aren’t used to making, but using the a7RIII (and the II) raises the bar for what’s in focus, and it’s hard to go back.
Autofocus and finder modes
All the autofocus modes of the a7RIII are available when using the electronic viewfinder (EVF) or the liquid crystal rear display (LCD). They work the same way, and they display the same amount of information. PDAF is only available on the D850 when you’re using the optical viewfinder (OVF). When you want to use live view, you drop back to slow and inflexible, but quite accurate, CDAF. For the kind of shooting I was doing here, this makes the D850’s live view useless. It is very convenient with the a7RIII to be able to move the camera away from you and flip up the LCD when the EVF proves awkward. For the kind of work I was doing, that option is effectively foreclosed by the D850.
Autofocus in difficult light
Both cameras do about the same in dim light. The Sony eye-AF does not work well with strong backlighting. The eye-AF in the D850 does not work in any circumstances. ;<)
Stabilization
The a7RIII has in-body image stabilization (IBIS). I turned it on for all the shots in this series. However, I didn’t miss it much in the D850, since almost all the time I was sufficiently concerned with subject motion that I picked fairly fast shutter speeds.
Continuous shooting speed
Without the (so far unobtainable) grip, the maximum continuous frame rate on the D850 is 7 fps. The a7RIII can shoot at 10 fps. The difference is noticeable, and welcome sometimes. At full cry, the D850 is pretty noisy.
Buffer size
From a practical point of view, getting to 10 fps with the Sony requires that you use compressed raw, and it drops the digitizing precision to 12 bits, but at the ISO settings and subjects I was using for this set of images, neither of these affects image quality. When you do that, you’ve got about an 80-shot buffer. I never managed to fill it. Using 14-bit lossless compression, the D850 is supposed to have a 50-shot buffer. I did fill the D850 buffer on two occasions. I don’t think I took that many pictures, but maybe it was that I was using 150 MB/s SD cards in both cameras, or maybe the buffer wasn’t empty when I started paying attention. You could argue that to make the playing field level, I should have used 12-bit lossy compression for the D850, which would have made it the winner for buffer capacity.
Image noise
Both cameras employ Aptina DR-Pix technology, and both switch to the high-conversion-gain mode 2 2/3 stops above base ISO, so that the conversion gain ratio of the two modes is the same with each camera. The a7RIII has very slightly less noise at ISO settings around 1000, but the difference is insignificant for pictures like these.
Battery life
Comparing the a7RII and the D810 battery life resulted in a big win for the Nikon. Not anymore. With the new cameras, I call it a tie. The a7RIII uses the a9 battery, while the capacity of the battery that ships with the D850 is only marginally higher than the D810 battery (you can use either Nikon battery in either Nikon camera).
Keepers
At the end of the shoot, what matters most is how many god images you got, and in that respect, this match ended in a tie. Here’s the breakdown of the lenses used in the images that I thought worth keeping from the first few days, when I was using only the 85 on the a7RIII and the 105 on the D850.
I admit to liking the “look” of the 105/1.4 wide open more than the Batis 85/1.8, so some of this has nothing to do with the bodies.
Voting with my bag
At the end of the family gathering, we all went to Santa Cruz for 3 days. I picked a Tamrac rolling bag to carry all my camera stuff. The question was, what should I put in it? I considered packing both the D850 and the a7RIII and continuing to carry on my comparison. But when I considered what that would mean, the weight got to be too much, and I had to choose one camera system or the other. That wasn’t a hard decision. I took the a7RIII, the 12-24/4, 35/2.8, 55/1.8, and 85/1.8 lenses, and an a9 with the 100-400 (I never used either the a9 or the long zoom). The key factors were weight and the greater focus accuracy of the Sony system.
Netting it out
The D5 and its D-single-digit predecessors have always been my go-to event cameras. The D850 can do most of what the D5 can, and some stuff the D5 never thought about doing. But for available-light, no-modifier event shooting, I think there’s a new sheriff in town: the a7RIII with an a9 backup. When the action is so fast that you’ve got to turn the camera loose to pick the focus point with no fiddling, the D5 is the winner, and the D850 is close to that. But if you’ve got the tiniest bit of time, you can do the job better with the a7RIII, and your keeper rate for print and prints will be much higher (the D5/D850 PDAF is accurate enough that your keeper ratio for low-res web shots will be about the same.
When I plan to use a lot of lenses at an event, I put them in a Domke (or, if I’m feeling the need to be a little dressier, a Billingham) photo vest. Carrying E-mount lenses that way is a lot easier than if I use F-mount ones, at least with the F-mount lenses I use. Admittedly, I tend to pick smaller and slower lenses for the a7x cameras than I do for the Nikons.
In case it’s not obvious, I think these are both great cameras.
Jim,
Happy New Year and glad to see you had a good time with family over the holidays.
Would you consider adding crops of the areas in focus? I was unable to see the quality of any of these shots by clicking through them – in fact they got smaller.
From what I can tell in these small sizes, none of these photos have particularly ‘write home to mother’ sharpness in them.
AM
PS – What about adding the capability for readers to attach photos to posts ? Nice upgrade for 2018
Done. Thanks.
Not sure I could deal with the spam implications. Also concerned about yet another WP plugin. You can post links to your images, and several people have.
Jim
but go to foraa like dpreview-something and D850-whatever dSLR owners will line up to tell us that it nails eyes every time with 105/1.4 @ 1.4 🙂 , each and every shot …
Well, I for sure are having a higher keeper rate on my 105/1.4E wide open adapting it to my A9 than I had with my D4s or D700, even though I believe that it mostly due to my lack of skills.
But still Sony current eyeAF implementation is really amazing for candid portraits with fast primes, both native and adapted.
“ISO: 400 for the Nikon, and 640 for the Sony. I use the exposure compensation dial to get the shutter speed I need.”
I don’t think I ever thought to shoot like this. And I certainly haven’t read enough about it. I tend to shoot the A7r2 and now r3 using auto iso base 100 and 6400 top. Then either shoot S or A mode depending on situation.
I find that too many of my shots are dialed in at 6400 and I am a little disappointed in the quality even when I nail focus and everything is good.
Can you either describe how this method works differently or point me in the direction (assume it’s on your blog) of a place that does?
With gratitude for this entry. My never still kids are my primary subjects.
Justin
I’ll just address the a7RIII, since that’s what you’ve got, but much of what I’ll say applies to the D850.
Above ISO 640, the input-referred read noise of the a7RIII in fairly independent of ISO setting:
http://blog.kasson.com/a7riii/sony-a7riii-photon-transfer-curves/
This means that from a noise perspective, that you are just as well off pushing in post as raising the ISO, and you’ll get more headroom and better-looking highlights if you push in post.
Here’s a summary of the exposure strategy I used with the a7RII:
http://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/cruising-with-the-sony-a7rii-exposure-strategy/
Auto ISO is quite likely to select one of the ISO settings just below 640 that are IMHO virtually useless.
Excellent. This could change a lot for me. Thanks!
Justin
Justin,
I am not nearly as sophisticated as Jim but in my own experience, I’ll do anything to stay as close to base ISO as possible. It really affects everything when you drift up.
AM
Agreed. But it’s hard to figure out how to get away from it when I need 1/250 or faster inside in poor light shooting kiddos. This gives me an alternative.
There is not question that best IQ is obtained at ETTR exposure at base ISO. I’m addressing what you do when that is not practical.
JK,
Here’s a manually focused (D850 and Otus 55) through the OVF.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/154615910@N02/27683742719/in/dateposted-public/
While not stunningly sharp – it is what I consider the lower limit of resolution as a keeper.
This also has the advantage of not selecting the rearward eye – which seems like an easy function for the auto-eye people at Sony to implement – just pick the closer eye as we most often see in real time – real life.
And the Otus 28 @ f2 – not an easy shot to make!
https://www.flickr.com/photos/154615910@N02/39461532471/in/dateposted-public/
AM
I (like most) often keep a less than stellar shot if the feeling is there.
Me, too.
Both look plenty sharp to me, assuming they are 1:1.
If the rest of shot is right, I’d take a lot less sharpness than those.
>Here’s a manually focused (D850 and Otus 55) through the OVF.
Can you do that for every shot? If so, my hat’s off to you.
No, not every shot but I would say that the hit rates (for the quality I posted is about 50%) and that the misses are maybe only slightly worse or equal than the photos you posted 40% of the time and 10% of the time really bad.
By the way, I don’t ever mess with the sharpening tab in C1 although there import sharpening is turned on.
Like anything else – lots of practice and lots of use. There probably isn’t a day when I don’t shoot a manual lens and mainly because the Otus does just a fine job of it every time.
Uncropped toddlers eyes – https://www.flickr.com/photos/154615910@N02/39461728261/in/dateposted-public/
When I know I have a difficult subject (toddlers) I will use an AF lenses first and pull out the manual lenses later.
I also like using the Nikon 300mm for ‘portraits’ – it really makes some special photos.
I envy you your 20/10 vision, although I’m not far behind now. I correct to 20/15 in my dominant eye since cataract surgery. You’ve got something that works for you; go with it.
Are you talking about the 300/4E PF lens? That’s a great lens. I sold mine because I prefer the Leica 280/4 Apo, but that’s much heavier.
The uncropped version of the picture makes it look like it wasn’t taken at f/1.4 — or even f/2. All the 105 and 85 shots I posted were wide open.
Those are screenshots taken from Capture 1 – they feature the critical info down at the bottom left corner.
They don’t look clear as screenshots.
Actually the 300mm 2.8 vrii
PFs have CA outside the center.
Full disclosure – had an eye test before the NY and now a 20/20. They also did a special scan where they photograph the back of the eye. Seems I need to lay off the sugar some.
Hi Jim,
First want to say that I love your site and articles! How you manage to keep doing very exacting and time-consuming tests is a bit unbelievable to me.
I’m in a similar situation as you regarding Nikon and Sony (though I wish I could justify getting the extra bodies and lenses you have on hand 🙂 I’ve been shooting my D800 since it was first released and never felt the need to upgrade to the D810 for the type of shooting I do (mostly events and family/kiddie pictures.) I got the A7R2 when it was first released, hoping that it could replace the D800, but the camera’s controls, buttons, UI, interface and haptics dashed those dreams quickly. But it had enough going for it that I kept the A7R2 as a secondary camera. My ‘go-to’ camera for events and portraits still was the D800 + 85 f/1.4 and 24-70 f/2.8.
When the D850 and A7R3 were announced, I was in a bit of a quandry as to which one to upgrade to. The D850 seemed like the perfect DSLR, it just lacked the stuff that the mirrorless Sony cameras could offer. The more I saw video reviews of the A7R3, the more I was convinced that it would address the major short-comings of the A7R2:
* Slow focusing (need a joystick at a minimum to quickly select focus point when shooting wide open)
* Inconsistent face/eye-AF
* Single card slot (I’m an IT/programming nerd and you always need backup)
* Piss-poor battery life
* General sluggishness when switching modes and selecting focus point to take pictures
At this point, the A7R3 basically addressed all those issues. The autofocus (face and eye) are rock solid enough that I can get more keepers wide open with the A7R3 + eye-AF than I can get on my D800 with small single-point manual focus (I got pretty good shooting events and portraits this way.) I can’t keep up using the D800 wide open and shooting fast moving infants/kids. The A7R3 has no issues getting a high keeper rate here.
I’ve not tried the D850, but I can say that the A7R3 can finally replace my D800 and is trustworthy and nimble enough to use in a “pro” setting.
I drive my wife crazy with my pixel-peeping, zoom-to-one-to-one-on-the-eye to check for razor sharp eyelashes. I don’t consider a picture a real “keeper” unless the eye lashes are perfectly sharp and have zero blur (bonus points for being able to see my own reflection in the eye itself :). Using this criteria, the A7R3 easily bests my D800 in almost all scenarios.
Good article. Your experiences mirror my experiences, though I haven’t had access to these latest cameras form Sony and Nikon. One ergonomic aspect of Sony that I like is the generous amounts of custom buttons enabling me have the settings I need quickly accessible.
Great review.
I saw you mentioned for available-light, no-modifier event shooting the Sony is the new sheriff in town. But what about those event where you do need flash?
I have been a long time nikon shooter and added a a6500 to my kit a while back. My biggest issue with mirrorless has been low light focusing in nightclub or events that did not have much lighting. With my nikon the AF assist light on my flash would save me every time in situations like this. I know the a6500 has an on body af assist light but it is very distracting when compared to the red pattern u would normally get from a on camera flash and it easily gets blocked depending what lens you use. From watching videos online it looks like the a9 is close to solving this issue but dishing out almost 5000 bucks for a body is a hard pill to swallow. I also say videos of the a9 and possibly the a7riii utilize the led video light on the Sony HVL-F45RM as a af assist light. Definitely a step in the right direction but once again very distracting. I would love to switch completely over to sony but I feel like there flash system isn’t there yet. Plus I’m a huge godox fan and none of there af assist lights work with sony
At this point, if I had to do an event using flash, I’d use a Nikon.
Jim I can’t thank you enough for keeping it real. I have talked to a lot of sony shooter and their answers has either been shoot with primes and shoot wide open. I read that mirrorless cameras relie on how fast the glass is when it comes to low light focus. When shooting events my go to lens are a 24-70 and 70-200. I really couldn’t see myself shooting groups of people with a prime lens wide open cause I know some people will be out of focus.
I love where mirrorless is going I just hope all the loose ends (flash 🙂 get tightened up soon.
What I don’t get is if mirrorless cameras can’t register the red laser type af assist light, why doesn’t some one make a flash that use a red led with some type of Cross pattern in front of it.
Excellent comparison Jim, thank you! I very much enjoyed your article. For me as someone who sold off all Nikon DSLR’s 3 years ago to switch to Sony mirrorless after using Nikon professionally for 25 years, I just cannot use optical viewfinders any longer and feel EVF’s offer a superior experience. Especially as my near vision is getting worse I need to use reading glasses to even see the LCD monitor on DSLRs and with EVF’s it’s not an issue at all. Besides that, I like the smaller and lighter cameras that can have grips added for better ergonomics if desired. Plus IBIS, eye-AF, wysiwyg view with no chimping necessary, plus incredible image quality, innovation that keeps coming, high-quality lenses, etc., I just find the Sony mirrorless to be the better photographic tool from a pure results point of view. That’s coming from someone who shoots a diverse amount of subject matter from commercial photography, occasional events, to stock, to travel to landscapes to outdoor adventure. And a quick comment on durability. The Sony system is the most durable I’ve used. When I shot Nikon, I would say about 4-5 times a year I had to send equipment in for repairs. I’ve had zero issues with any of the 4 Sony cameras I’ve owned over the last 3 years as well as zero issues with any of the Sony lenses as well.
I’m just curious and a bit surprised that you still hold onto and keep investing in DSLRs for what you’re doing as well. Thanks, love your analytical insights on photography.
My recent experiences with the a7RIII and a9 have driven me to a tentative decision: after buying every single-digit D camera there was except the D4s, I don’t think I’ll be in the market for the D5s or D6.
What keeps me in the Nikon camp? Inertia, and lenses. Lenses I own, and attractive lenses that Nikon keeps introducing, that won’t work to their full capability on a Sony body.
Hi Jim,
Have you tried nikon to sony lens adaptor such as COMMLITE CM-ENF-E1 PRO V06 ? I really like to know what is the difference when you use 105e with Sony RIII vs d850, focus speed and accuracy wise. Thanks!
I have the Vello. I hate it. Makes me feel like an unpaid alpha tester. I’ll try it again when and if they get all the bugs worked out.
Not sure about Nikon converters, but both the Commlite and Vello were very hit or miss with Canon lenses on the A7R2. The Sigma adapter was better but still unusable for many lenses like the 85 1.2 and 70-200 2.8. None could do eye AF though on the A7R2.
The Sigma on the A7R3 is much much better for Canon and Sigma lenses and now even works with eye AF. It’s not as good as native Sony lenses though and any burst shooting modes really don’t track focus after the first shot. It’s usable though and I shoot with the A7R3 and Sigma 35 1.4 (Canon version) using Sigma MC-11 adapter all the time. Just know the limitations.
I’d love to use my Nikon lenses on the A7R3 if someone trusted has info on the adapters there. Would love to hear your experience.
Hey Jim what’s your take on the a99ii.
I know there’s alot of worry in regards to sony ditching the A mount. As I mentioned in my 1st post the AF assist light on my hot flash is very important. Was thinking I would get best of both worlds in regards mirrorleas/slt and dslr.
Im not to bent out of shape about lens selection cause tamron covers what I need.
I have no opinion on the a99II. It may be the last gasp for A-mount, or it could be the first stage in Sony’s continuing evolution of that line. But it’s clear that they are putting the lens-making wood behind E-mount, and I have only one A-mount lens (the 135 STF), so I’m not interested in the camera.
Good balanced insight that avoids all the usual ‘winner-loser-smashes-destroys’ hyperbole. This is how prospective buyers should think (and existing owners of either mirrorless or DSLRs): a balance sheet of pros and cons that will impact their real world results. Which shoe fits best will depend on the individual.
…. that said, I am increasingly finding the benefits of an EVF tips the balance for my own work. It’s so much harder to mess up exposures with mirrorless, or leave the exposure compensation set incorrectly for a series of shots without realising in the heat of the moment. I tend to feel that I’m either getting the shots I want, or I know I’m not getting them and that live realisation is crucial. AF with the best mirrorless is now so good that I’m not finding myself wishing for a DSLR back in my hands.
Looks like the Sony ‘eyes are so sharp’ bug has infected Lloyd also.
He posted a few photos of his daughter the other day and these photos aren’t sharp.
Lloyd used to pretty good at discerning this stuff but not anymore.
https://diglloyd.com/blog/2018/20180115_1400-ReaderComment-Nikon-Sony-shooting.html
For easy comparison – here are my manual lenses on a D850 and using the OVF.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/154615910@N02/27683742719/in/dateposted-public/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/154615910@N02/39461532471/in/dateposted-public/
JK,
I just noticed that the guy in the hat photo is very sharp. The reason it doesn’t come across is the ISO.
AM
The Nikons do have a “lockable”/unlockable setting for button control. Two different options actually:
1. Press button (such as Metering) then you can use dials. Press again to lock.
2. Purely for Exposure Compensation: You can activate “Easy Exposure Compensation”, which means that in A and S modes, one dial controls either Aperture or Shutter, and the other controls exposure compensation. This is actually how the Olympus OM-Ds work by default. I use it.
Isn’t the keeper rate a bit skewed in favor of the Sony, as the Batis 85mm f1.8 lens has more depth of field than the Nikon 105mm f1.4? Also, isn’t focusing on eyes a bit problematic in evaluating focusing accuracy, given that eyes and eyelashes may be in motion, depending on the exact instant the photo is taken?