hussain_al_lawati

Congratulations, Hussain, and I'm glad to hear you're happy with your decision. Thanks for letting us know - and sorry to hear about your injury (have a speedy recovery!)

Thanks a lot Andrew!

Congratulations on your decision and your purchase!

Thank you <3

Welcome back everyone!

I am really sorry for disappearing from the forum for more than a month; I had a severe injury that caused me to care on nothing. Now, am finally back again, but not as what I was before ;)

Before the injury, I was leaning towards the D850, and once I recovered, I said : Come on I must end this up and finish this endless debate!

I finally got the D850 last week, with a Nikkor 70-200 f2.8 (newest version) and a Nikkor 24-70 f2.8 non vr.

Thankfully, Nikon's agent in my country (Oman) had the three beasts (camera and 2 lenses) in stock !

I can't be happier ! The camera is AMAZING, as are the lenses. The dynamic range and low light performance is insane!

I have liked the controls much more than Canon's full frames.

Thanks to you all guys for you faithful support in my decision. I really benefited from all of your valuable input, and it is really appreciated.

LOL, you comments made me laugh alot xD "If he waits much longer, someone will buy one and rest it on his chest when he passes!" :)

I wouldn't be surprised that the OP is no longer reading this thread :), but I wonder whether he has come to a decision, though.

Don't worry, i've not gotten a camera last weekend xD

BTW, you all contributed in making this thread a valuable source of knowledge and opinions for me and for everyone. The amount of details is amazing! Thanks for that!

Finally, excuse me if I have used wrong grammar or vocab (am not a native speaker of english)

Easiest solution, buy one each of 5D Mark 4 and D850, and use both for a while to see which one you prefer. :)

 

IMO there is no better way to come up with an answer. And in case you still can't decide, keep both.

Get me the $$ and I will do so :)

Dieter Schaefer:

"Looks like you are no closer to making a decision between the D850 and the 5DMKIV than you were before you started this thread."

I agree

"Moreover, from you first post I got the impression that you liked the Canon control layout better, now it seems that is not the case."

The case is that, I am used to Canon control layout, ofcourse because i have been using it for years, but i dont see it better than Nikon controls.

"I can't get a sense of what is and isn't important to you or whether anything of what has been mentioned by others has swayed you one way or another or is even important to you (for example, video)."

TBH, the main concern making me overthink currently is the future, and the video :)

For the future, its almost impossible to say what might happen.

I am worried how Nikon's video would be. Would it be awful, or good but not excellant. (I won't do a lot of video, but some occasional video shoots.)

Andrew:

As u said

Hossein: Have you? I only read the other thread belatedly, but it wasn't clear to me that you'd given up on the idea. That one seems to be discussing frame rate and low light performance, at which point we should start talking D5 (or 1Dx-II), but it's not really a landscape camera.

 

I agree that, given the rate of advances, the reasons for switching system have to be really good reasons. But I'm afraid I'm going to be with Hossein that having a relatively budget camera and one moderately cheap full-frame lens doesn't - by the standards we're talking about - really constitute "being in a system", especially given how much the ergonomics will change between those cameras. I'd start from scratch EXCEPT that Hossein has expressed an attachment to Canon. Which says to me that switching might always leave a nagging feeling of doubt. In contrast, by the time I'd switched systems from Canon, Canon had annoyed me so much with the artificially crippled firmware on the 300D (compared with 10D) and their delay in releasing a 5D2 that I was prepared to switch just to spite them!

.

Yes, I have made up my mind not to think about sony, and that made the decision much more easier!

As you said, i also dont consider what i currently have as a "system"

and for the "attachment to canon" its not a big deal!

You're overthinking this. You already cleared one hurdle in the process as you seem to be fine with either control layout and ergonomics. Rodeo_joe's and Ben's remarks on optical performance of the lenses you are considering initially should clear another: there are differences but they hardly matter.

I completely agree that i am overthinking! But I see this as a major big step in my photography life, and i should overthink, to choose a system that i am really convinced in, so that even if the grass looks greener at the other side of the fence, i should not care ;)

None of us have a crystal ball here. We do not know what the future will bring. Some will argue mirrorless is the future, but one can also argue that DSLRs will stick around for quite some time. And do you know your own future needs? Things do change over time, and so will your needs.

So, you cannot really plan for the future, and most certainly that planning will not depend on the camera you buy today, because next year something better will come out, and the year after somebody else may again raise the bar, etc. etc.

 

If you have no reason to switch brands, don't. And for all you've described, you've got no reason to switch brands.

Agree. But by studying both companies' history/past, we could understand their visions and make up an idea what can come next (just some anticipations)

Actually i don't count my situation as "switching brands". Its rather "entering to FF" since the investment i have is really minor and can be neglected.

To me, Nikon currently have an advantage in dynamic range (and resolution) at low ISO (for landscape), and Canon have a video advantage due to PDOS. They're both extremely capable cameras. The handling philosophy is somewhat different - but then so is the handling difference between the Canon consumer (such as Eos 650D and my old 300D) and pro (e.g. 5D series) bodies (and between the Nikon D3x00/D5x00 series, D7x00/D6x0/D750 series, D300/D500/D700/D8x0 series and the single-digit Nikons). I, too, switched from a consumer camera knowing the handling was going to change anyway (in Canon's case, gaining the vertical rear wheel).

 

The Canon vertical wheel always seemed more logical to me, but when I've tried it it slightly dislocates my thumb. I'm sure I'd get used to it. I prefer the Nikon "index finger on the shutter, middle finger for the front dial" approach, but as I described in another recent thread, I believe Canon's design lets you make changes faster, but Nikon's lets you change them without moving away from your shooting position. Take your pick.

 

(Sorry, now seen the more recent post.)

 

Nikon's current 70-200 f/2.8 ED is probably the best 70-200 on the market, but Canon are very close with the previous generation. Canon's 200-400 is probably better (but much more expensive) than the Nikkor version. The differences aren't huge - though I'm vaguely considering upgrading my 70-200 for better performance at f/2.8. Nikon's 14-24, which was an amazing lens at launch, is getting on a bit now (compared, slightly, to the Canon 12-24 f/4) - but any lens that's significantly behind the competition is likely to be high on the list for a revamp. I'm not especially sold on the Nikkor 24-70, but the Tamron versions are pretty good anyway.

 

Canon can do autofocus f/1.2 lenses, if that bothers you. They're not usually optically all that good, however.

 

I'm obliged to mention the Sony A7RIII. Sony are getting there with their lens selection, and at a reduced frame rate can use Eos lenses via an adaptor. There are things it can do that the D850 can't (sensor-shift resolution enhancement, phase detect video autofocus) and it's a bit better at high ISO. The D850, by reports, is a bit more responsive, writes data faster, may track autofocus better (but has less coverage and is much worse in video), has a tiny edge at ISO64, etc. There are arguments both ways on the EVF vs OVF debate. I'm still looking at a D850 upgrade for my D810, but I'm going to see a friend who's considering switching from his Eos 350D ("because my TV is higher resolution than my photos") and my advice to him would mostly be between the D850 and A7RIII - unless he has a good reason to go with the 5DIV.

 

You have to try to have a bad system these days, and you'd expect significant changes in all the line-ups over time (though Canon have gone a long time with a bit less low-ISO dynamic range than Nikony). We might expect Canon and Nikon to produce high-end mirrorless cameras within the next few years, so bear that in mind if you're buying into a system - although it also won't suddenly turn a good camera into a bad one.

 

That probably doesn't help. :)

Same here, the change between the 650d and 5d series in button layout is big, and it took me time to get used to it. TBH I liked the Nikon's D8xx button layout way more than the 5D series.

I am not bothered about f1.2 lenses at all.

And for sony, I have read and discussed tons, but am not convinced with sony. Thanks tho for mentioning it

 

When it comes down to it, the only real reason I see to select one of the big two over the other is if there's a PARTICULAR special purpose lens that one doesn't make or is clearly better in one system than the other. If you fall into that category, choose the system that serves you best with regard to that lens(or lenses).

 

Otherwise, for the major lenses-fast midrange and tele zooms and mid-range fast primes, as I said I'd consider them effectively equal.

Fortunately, all the lenses i have kept in mind are available with both manufacturers

The thing that made me to ask "is the canon lens out stands its nikon counter part / or vice versa " is because when people talk (maybe in my photo community only ) they count the red line L-series as if it is something superior to other brands.

I agree.

If possible, I'd go and fondle both cameras in a real camera store and see which feels most right and natural. Finding a D850 in stock might be difficult(my local store has one on the rental shelf, but it's probably out more than in) but the D810 is at least passingly close to give a feel for the controls and general operation.

I have tried both. I was comfortable to both control-wise (and that is a big problem since it made the decision more tough!)

One more concern is the lens performance. Will any of a Canon or Nikkor lens of same level (focal length and f/stop) outstand one another in a big manner?

(thinking mainly about the 2407- and 70-200 both f2.8)

I think any good photographer can use either Canon or Nikon or Sony ..., either DSLR or mirrorless ... to achieve excellent results.

Completely Agree

If you have been using Canon, I would just continue using Canon unless there is something you really dislike, but in that cast you wouldn't be asking on these forums.

For me, it is not a matter of disliking something in canon. Its just a critical turning point in my photography life since its a big purchase, and its sequences will be with me for at least 10 years (think about lenses)

I know that both cameras are beasts, but the issue is that I want something that will be better in future (as well as now) for my needs.

What was your conclusion from this previous thread a little more than a month ago?

Can the 5d IV Still Compete in Pro DSLR Market?

I still didn't make up my mind to any system.

I posted this thread to hear new responses and thoughts.

From all the search I have done for more than 2 months, I see that if the D850 had an EF mount and DPAF, I would blindly buy it!! But unfortunately that is not the case

I wonder how D850's video capability is, is it not usable or usable, i.e poor or good?

Hi all.

First of all, thanks to every one who reads and replies to this thread. You are highly appreciated.

I am looking to upgrade to a full frame system with some marvelous lenses and that would be a serious purchase that would cost me around 7000 $ , so I believe I should wisely and carefully choose which system to go for, since it will last years with me, and mostly the lenses!

I currently own a canon 650d (t4i) with two crop lenses, a canon 50mm f1.4 and 2 canon speedlites (for almost 5 years!) I shoot events, studio, fair amount of sports, family and travel, and some landscapes. I need a good low light performance. I further plan to enter the field of BIF, and macro.

With the marvelous 5div and D850 in mind, it's difficult for me to choose among them. It's obvious that the Nikon out stands its counterpart at least on paper, but I am pretty accustomed to canon controls and ergonomics as I have used my friends' 5d iii at a fair rate, and I have a kind of 'emotional attachment' to canon bodies and lenses (thats not a big deal!). I have tried both systems (5diii and an aging D800) and it doesn't seem a big deal in switching systems since both are well ergonomically designed.

Yeah .. then lenses. I plan to initially get native 70-200 2.8 and 24-70 2.8 along with the body, and after almost a year or less I would pick either a macro prime or something on the taller end; depending on the needs.

The used market in my country is not so good, so I don't think I could buy new//sell old equipments and a good rate.

Your responses are appreciated

PS: Sorry if i have any grammar mistakes since am not a native speaker.

Cheers,

Lawati

When thinking about the D850 and the 5dIV (leaving the sony aside),

Which body is preferable and why? keeping in mind that i have a canon 50mm 1.4 and am comfortable with its ergonomics and use (and kind of emotionally attached to the canon).

I think the OP is trying to make a system choice; hence, the focus on including Sony. A year ago, I don't think that Sony would have belonged in this discussion.

 

With the G Master 24-70mm, 24-105mm, 70-200mm and 100-400mm, one can argue that they do have a system, only missing a super-telephoto or two. They've committed to be at the next Olympics and they are very seriously courting wildlife and sports photographers, so I think the super-telephotos are in the near distant offing. However, most photographers don't need those super-telephoto lenses. When I put my Canon 500/f4 on my Sony, I don't lose any functionality over the same lens on my Canon body, I only lose the extra capabilities (693-AF points, lock-on tracking, eye-detection) of the a9.

 

The FE 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 GM OSS, plus the FE 1.4x teleconverter is an incredible sports lens.

The thing that lets me stick to sony is their outstanding focus performance that i will need for sports

(693-AF points, lock-on tracking, eye-detection)

as well as the blackout free viewfinder.

Otherwise I don't see big differences between the 3 bodies

(correct me if i am mistaken, keeping in mind my uses are sports and events mainly)

For the OP, basically it puts way too much emnphasis on the body. You make a choice for an entire system - lenses, flashes, services, availability of rental lenses etc. etc. Today's most advanced body will be overtaken tomorrow, and so everything moves on an on. So you cannot know which company is going to be the best in a few years, nobody knows (and any claim otherwise is fanboyism).

Great Reply!

Totally agreeing to what u said

Do you really need the latest and greatest, or can you actually get the job done with whatever you already have? Spending a lot of money on gear isn't going to make you a better photographer, having the latest and greatest body isn't going to make your photos any better than those made with much cheaper and older gear. It may improve your chances of getting the right image, but at the centre of it, all bodies mentioned in this thread are absolutely great tools - if you cannot ge

But in my case, I need high fps rate (for action shots) and good low light performance (for night sports and events) so a decent body will be essential.

Sure Sony moves at a solid speed, yet in some areas they're still catching up, the completeness of the system cannot yet compete with Canon or Nikon, and the Sony professional services are brand new - the other two, for better or worse, have solid experience in that area. So blank statements like "sony is the future" and camera X is a "game changer" - let the future do its thing, and we'll see where the pieces fall.

 

For the OP, basically it puts way too much emnphasis on the body. You make a choice for an entire system - lenses, flashes, services, availability of rental lenses etc. etc. Today's most advanced body will be overtaken tomorrow, and so everything moves on an on. So you cannot know which company is going to be the best in a few years, nobody knows (and any claim otherwise is fanboyism). And does it really matter? Do you really need the latest and greatest, or can you actually get the job done with whatever you already have? Spending a lot of money on gear isn't going to make you a better photographer, having the latest and greatest body isn't going to make your photos any better than those made with much cheaper and older gear. It may improve your chances of getting the right image, but at the centre of it, all bodies mentioned in this thread are absolutely great tools - if you cannot get a decent photo with any of these cameras, the problem is certainly not the gear.

 

Given you already have a Canon system, assuming you already have Canon lenses which work for you, the obvious choice is sticking with Canon. The only serious reason to change systems would be if you really dislike the way your Canon handles and feels, or that you find you cannot get an essential piece to work with your gear (extremely unlikely with Canon, frankly). Dumping a lot of money on switching to Nikon or Sony because today they have a body that may have better specs (on paper at least) is short term thinking, and a costly joke - next year, when Canon releases a new body, will you switch back again?

 

Have you held any of these bodies in your hands, tried them for yourself? If not, that should be the very first thing to do. In my hands, the Sony cameras are too small, and I still find EVFs not as nice as OVFs - this is a thing you can only decide for yourself, and see for yourself. So, start there, and then see if it makes any sense to move away from Canon at all.

I really love canon and am comfortable with it. But the only full frame lens i own is the 50mm f1,4 so its not a big deal to change systems. I have tried a 5diii and an a7rii and both were great.

The Nikon 70-200/f2.8 is $2,800, the Canon is $1,900 and the Sony G Master is $2,600. They all have excellent image quality and weight 3.1 to 3.2 lbs. What's your thinking in that regard?

I will go for the native lens of the camera i will buy

This morning, I took street shots with my a9, a Metabones EF-to-E T-adapter MkV and my EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II. I peaked at the results and they look great. If you want to save money on lenses, buy used, top-line lenses.

Great! How does canon lenses work with metabones adapters on sony? (auto focus/speed)

You keep worrying about the prices of lenses. What lenses do you plan to use?

I plan to begin with a 70-200 2.8, that will be useful for events, studio and will help in sports but not that much. 70-200 will be bought with the camera body.

After 6 months or so, i plan to get something either wide (24-70 or 24-105) or a super telephoto (100-400)

Exactly. He mentioned the a9, so he obviously thinks there's something to it. He seems to be at an important juncture of his photography life, so I didn't want him to save a few bucks now which could lead to a costly transition later..

Really Appreciated

I own the 5D MkIV, the 5DS-R and the a9. The S-R is best for 72" prints, which I do, very occasionally. The 5D4 is a champ (not, THE champ)of an all around camera, with a really nice balance between AF performance, resolution and high-ISO performance. For sports and events, particularly when silent-shutter would be a plus, the a9 blows away everything else. With it's native G Master lenses, like the FE 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 GM OSS, it'll grab focus and lock on, where ever the subject might go in the frame. With people, it'll face detect at 50+ yards and lock-on eye at any portrait distance. If I could have only one body, it'd be the a9. In fact, I'll probably buy a second a9 by the beginning of 2018.

 

The a9 is not a mere incremental move up from the Canon and Nikon DSLRs, it's a total disruptor. Advantages include astounding AF capacity. The EVF has no discernible latency, with incredible resolution. What you see in the EVF is what the sensor is seeing, at the exposure that the sensor sees, so WYSIWYG. There's no excuse for under or over-exposing. Silent shutter, with no blackout, at 20-fps is mind blowing and game changing. Did I mention 693 AF points, covering 93% of the viewfinder, with lock-on focus that'll follow the subject to the edge of the frame. Excellent high-ISO performance? Oh yeah, it's smaller and lighter and the G Master lenses are sharper than the equivalent Canon L-Series, as well as lighter. A 5D4, plus an EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II will set you back $5,500, while the same all-Sony a9/100-400 setup will set you back $7000. If you can afford the difference, you won't regret it.

 

Don't buy high end Canon, Nikon or Sony and put Sigma and Tamron glass on any of them. I know at least a hand full of people that tried to save money with something like a Sigma 150-600mm instead of going with native, top-line lenses and all ended up switching to native lenses, as soon as they could afford it. With all of these bodies that you're considering, less than top quality lenses will make themselves known, in a negative way.

 

Oh, ergonomics of the a9 seem custom made for Canon shooters. I had no trouble at all with the transition and now prefer the Sony layout.

Thanks for ur helpful reply

When comparing a9's focus with the mark 4, are there noticable differences for sports or BIF?

Thanks everyone for ur responses

But i have sum updates..

UPDATE TO OP

I had a talk with my university's photographers community. Lots of them own the a7rii and advised me to go for it. They added that the max fps with a fast memory reaches to 9fps, that is 4 frames greater than the theoretical value

I have read a lot reviews and comparison regarding the 4 beasts: 5div, d850, a9 and a7rii. Out of the 4, ofcourse the a9 is the best but will be too expensive when paired with Sony or Zeiss lenses.

Other options remain the mark iv, d850 and the a7rii. I still can't decide between them, because I cant know which company will be superior in the next years..

Next day after the talk, Sony announced their a7riii with 42 mp - 10fps - and various awesome features.

So i think the debte will be now "A7riii vs D850 vs 5DIV"

What do u all say?