One thing of note: Nikon has a whole line of F mount glass which through a FTZ adapter can be used on any Z camera and often produces BETTER results on a Z camera than on native. I achieved some beautiful results using a 28-70mm AF-S f2.8 (discontinued in 2007) on a Z5. This isn't meant to bash Sony but give potential Nikon buyers more options.
@@TheSlantedLens not to my eye. To be fair the Z5 is not the Z9 but I was amazed and how sharp, mind this is an older mid-range zoom, the pictures were. I was at f 5.6 as well. I want to clarify that when I stated "native" I meant a Nikon camera body with a F lens mount. I hope this wasn't confusing to anyone.
@@TheSlantedLens There is no loss of light or sharpness whatsoever with the FTZ adaptor as it is a pass through adaptor with no optics of any kind. All it does is increase the flange distance to 44mm from 16mm to compensate for the removal of the mirror box. It has electronic connections so that all functions and metering/exif data are transferred - other than that it is literally a hole. It has been proven in tests time and again that an F mount lens via FTZ adaptor with a Z7 has identical IQ to the same lens on a D850. The upside is that the F mount glass actually is performing better on the Z cameras than they did natively on the DSLR's - not in IQ (which is equal) but in usability. On the Z system they now enjoy focus points across the screen, not just clumped in the middle, and they also benefit from 3 axis IBIS - so lenses that were not stabilized from the past are now stabilized. Furthermore, on the Z9 specifically, F mount lenses are actually auto focusing faster than they did on DSLR (this was not true for the Z6/7 series - although it was very close). So, the F mount lenses are in every way better on the Z system than they were native on the DSLR's. This fact goes a long way to negating the perceived advantage of Sony having "so many" lenses for the E mount. In truth, Nikon has over 100 lenses that are available and have 100% compatibility with the Z system (something like 93 F mount and 20 something native Z lenses). Nikon is scheduled to have another 10 or so Z lenses in the next year or so. Additionally, there are 200+ lenses form the past that work in some capacity with the Z system (the D series for example lenses work in all ways except they only manual focus). There are lenses for every possible shooting style, genre or need now available to the Nikon Z system. To be clear, I am not saying this to suggest that Sony isn't good. To the contrary, Sony makes incredible cameras for what they are. I am just making it clear that Nikon is now a full competitor with Sony and Canon and the lack of lenses notion is fairly outdated at this point. The simple fact is that all three systems are now incredible - each are better than the other in some respects and worse than the others in other respects, but there is no longer any clear leader. Any photographer worth anything can get the shot with any of these systems. It is a good time to be a photographer - from a gear stand point at least :)
Adapting isn't a replacement for native glass. The DSLR lenses aren't designed for modern focusing systems, their AF motors are too slow to keep up. I have a Z6 II with my adapted 105 1.4 and an a7 IV with their 135 1.8 here for testing right now and while image quality on both combos is great, the Sony kit does way, way better in real world use. Not only is the af on the body itself much better, but the Sony lens also offers much faster AF motors. It pulls from close to far nearly instantly, while my Nikon glass takes a second or so. If all you do is static portraiture, you won't mind. But for moving subjects, there's really no replacement for native mirrorless glass.
I was a Nikon shooter starting in 2001 and swapped to Sony for the A7RIV. The only Nikon options at the time for mirrorless were the Z6 and Z7. The A7RIV was a better choice at the time. So I dumped my Nikon gear and jumped in with both feet. Overall I loved the Sony but hated the ergonomics (large hands). The files were fine but I missed what came out of the Nikon cameras. In the end I went back to Nikon with the Z6II in hopes they would one day catch up with the technology (autofocus). When the Z9 came out I was extremely excited and being a NPS member I was able to get one in February. It is an incredible camera but so are the Sonys... It is a great time to be a photographer especially if you like gear!
I just sold Sony A1 after using it for 11 months...back to Nikon Z9. Just love the colors of my photos from my previous Nikon cameras compared with Sony. For bird photography...it seemed that my Sony A1 also struggled to have good focus in low light situation
I'm with you. Too much invested in Sony (A1, a7r3 and a handful of GM lenses) and it is more than enough for my needs. I realize my needs and priorities are different than lots of people but much of my reason for moving to mirrorless was to reduce the overall size of my entire kit. (Along with action sports I do a lot of outdoor landscape and wildlife photography.) So I prefer not having the larger body or at least I prefer the option of having the smaller body (without the battery grip) when I don't need it. With the Z9 that unnecessary (for me) bulk would be there all the time which also has implications for my camera bags, storage and backpacks.
Re your many comments on the Z9 images being warmer than the sony-a1. Well there are 3 reasons for this - 1- white balance not identical; 2-different impact of picture control and fine tuning of picture control (you said you used Standard on both); and finally Camera Calibration differences --- I currently use Adobe V5 - but have done everything including making my own calibration profiles for each set-up. Re high ISO shooting -- I shoot Lossless RAW and have not suffered anywhere near the graininess problems you showed. Unless the shot was exceptional I would struggle to sell an image for use on a full page to a print magazine shot at ISOs above 6400. I shoot wildlife and am staggered how good the Z9 is in low light AF. I use 22 Nikon AF-S and S-line Lenses -- from 600mm to 9mm. As Z mount lenses come out I buy them if I will use them frequently otherwise I keep the F-mount versions and use the Nikon FTZ II adapter and it is flawless. Nikon Sell a f/0.95 and f/1.2 50mm as well as the cheap f/1.8 and more f/1.2 Z-mount S-line lenses will come this year.
The interesting thing about Nikon files is that even with a wrong profile and wrong WB with a minimal editing you can make the colors look good. When I'm dealing with Sony files, even after fixing the WB, and trying every profile I had, there is still something unsatisfactory about the colors.
Both are great but Nikon in colours blown the Sony out of the park. You can see the advantages of Nikon over Sony. I much prefer Sony's outer design because it is smaller (personal preference). But with the 4:2:2 now becoming the standard, and same with 4K shooting up to soon 8K. It is just as important to keep up upgrading the technology of our equipments to meet the use-cases. Whether that'll be sony or nikon, or any other. To me, I would be pretty happy with the photos straight out of the camera on the Nikon. Little post editing. I agree, Sony has a different theme to it in some photos which makes me prefer their clear look but the colours on the Sony comparing to Nikon is so off putting, that Nikon is superior. Thank you for comparing these, it is good to get better insight and reminder that not expensive cameras are keeping up to date with the newer standards
@@giovanniprado3887 -- you are speaking from ignorance. I've had Sony and Nikon at the same time, made huge number of comparisons. There is no doubt in my mind colors from Nikon are a lot better looking than from Sony. No amount of editing, and I tried everything, solves that issue. I wanted Sony to work very hard. I finally sold my latest Sony A7Riiia and kept Z6ii. It's not worth fighting the camera.
@@USGrant21st you can't say Sony colors because Sony has different colors in every single camera xD I work in a Photo Camera Shop and see this every single day, its a shame, but I must say that the z9 has more noise then the a1
The other fantastic thing on the Sony Alpha 1 is you have the option for a vertical grip so you can have the same form factor as the Nikon or a small compact camera. The Nikon is just big and heavy all the time....
I have to agree with this 10000% haha. I had and used a GFX 100 Medium format (I've owned the D800/D850 previously too). The Sony with the battery grip is still smaller than the Nikon and with the double battery slot on the vertical grip you'll get the same battery performance as the Z9. Its nice to see Nikon making a Pro mirrorless body. But for days I want something smaller and/or lighter (or if I need to mount on a gimbal or rail for video work) the "transformer" solution is nice.
While it is nice to have the larger and smaller form factor, the Nikon battery system is superior if you need the power. On a remote, distant location, the ability to shoot longer is appreciated. (1) You do not have to charge or keep track of 4/2 batteries, only 2/1. (2) The built in grip is SUPERIOR to a screw on grip. Less problems! Additionally the larger size of the camera enables better heat dissipation...which enables FAR SUPERIOR card options (CF express A is x3 more expensive, 1/3 as fast and much lower capacity 4TB vs 256GB). Good point none the less about a smaller form factor, which is crucial in many situations.
I dont care. I use both the A1 and Z9 for my Wildlife work. Both are great performers with A1 leading in terms of Autofocus performance, especially Animal Eye Autofocus.
thank you for your video, your comparison seem unbiased, both comparing pros and cons of each camera! I started with a D600 about 10 years ago as my first DSLR, now owning 50mm 1.4, 14-24 2.8, and 24-70 2.8... i love my camera as far for taking photos but d600 is not for recording, so i have been in the dilemma of switching brand, it would be a big investment if i do, but if this Z9 can fix my needs around the same budget I think I might be staying.
Not really a big surprise that they performed so evenly, since Z9 uses Sony designed and manufactured sensor. On ISO and dynamic range test Sony maintained consistent colors through out the test, when I think Nikon shifted a little bit. A question: How do justify saying that Z9 is more durable? Is weight and size indication of better reliability? Have you tested this out somehow? Does Nikon have higher IPX rating?
07:30 Nikon has a built-in feature called *STARLIGHT*. When turned on, this feature enables Z9 to turn night into day. Autofocus starts to work like it does in the Sunlight.
I've been a Nikon shooter since my first digital camera. It was a Coolpix point and shoot. Then it was a Coolpix l810, then it was the d3200, then d7100, then the d810. And I have to say, I love the color of Nikon sensors, and I believe until now they have outperformed other cameras in almost all areas. But one of the biggest areas, ISO, Is clearly a win by Sony. If I decided to upgrade to a flagship, between the z9 and the a1 I would chose the a1. It handles low light a thousand times better. Clear and sharp images all the way up to 12800ISO. And if you're that high in ISO its because you're trying to document an important event and you don't care about quality. No actual photoshoot would require that.
Great to hear your thoughts. I love the A1 and I was super impressed with the Z9 as well. It would be hard to switch if you have a big selection of Nikon Lenses.
The 8K video on the Z9 looked better to me than the A1. Both were fantastic, but the Z9's video looked slightly more punchy, with greater contrast deatil to my eye.
Which is a bad thing. The results straight out of camera should be as flat as possible to provide the best flexibility for grading in post. If that's not what you're after, it's very easy to dial in an extra +1 to contrast and saturation in camera.
@@youknowwho9247 Well, that's where you and I differ. I was trained to make everything look great (in camera), so that the colorist has an easy job in post. Basicly, what you're advancing is you don't have a look in mind when you shoot. You approach it just like a scribe taking visual dictation, faithfully recording, but not shaping anything. OK. This is one way to approach it, but I prefer to create a look in the camera. To my way of working, this is what seperates a real DOP from a camera man.
There is literally nothing useful as far as video performance coming from that single clip. Both cameras looked bad in that situation and the Z9 certainly was not 'better' in fact more highlights being lost. I've seen people try to test $30k Red cameras on here and made them look worst than a A6400.
Please make a detailed video where you compare 8K videos from Sony A1, Canon R5C, and Nikon z9 side by side. And while the comparison, on Nikon, use the 105mm f2.8 MC lens. Please...!
I still have a 1. I was disappointed they abandoned it. I like using it for light duty stuff like walking around where I didn’t want to carry a heavier DSLR.
quote from wiki ' The first mirrorless camera commercially marketed was the Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1, released in Japan in October 2008.' I dont know about the Nikon 1 series personally, but it looks as though it wasnt until 2011 for Nikon.
I use the Sony A1 and the Nikon Z9 for wildlife, mainly birds. If it is getting serious, I choose the A1 any time. The A1 has a much more reliable and consistent autofocus when it comes to recognition and tracking.
At this point, I'm sticking with my D810. If I needed a mirror less, I'd go with the Z9, just because of the lenses I have. My major gripe with Sony, is that small form factor.
I did not like the green cast on the Nikon but I think price wise it’s a better deal! but the lenses and ergonomics goes to Sony so as u said it depends on what’s your Ecco system already
Did you ever hold the Z9 in your hands? The internal grip and the whole design fits like a golden gloves in your hands, We can talk about the spec but definitely not about the ergonomics 💡
Interesting video. I am looking to upgrade my 10 year old D800, in the next 6 months and I truly am not sure what to do. The Z7II is a non option as I hate the ergonomics with a passion. I could go with the D850, which a lot of my professional friends have done but I also use a lot of manual lenses and an EVF makes life so much easier. Unfortunately, this just leaves me with the Z9, which is a great price for someone who needs the specs but as a portrait photographer, never shoot more than 1 frame, every 2 or 3 seconds, which makes the Z9 complete overkill for my needs. What is worse is over the years of doing photography I now have photographers elbow, which gets worse with heavier cameras, like the Z9. So all in all it is a little frustrating. Ideally I would love for Nikon do release a Z7III which feels like a D850 but I am not sure Nikon is going to do something like that.
The D850 is a great camera for portraits and currently there are good bargains out there for DSLRs. Get the Z9 if you need the speed, the video or silent shooting
I think comparing f 1.8 to f 1.4 Is not fair. f 1.4 would definitely have better focus, dynamic range, low light capabilities and so on. 1.4 is more expensive than 1.8 for a reason.
The Nikon looked consistently better to me in both colour and sharpness. If I were buying a new camera today, I'd probably go with a Nikon (currently own a D5600 and A6400).
Nikon z9 autofocus (AFC) in low light a person walking towards you does not work properly it detects the person's eye but it is not in focus this does not happen with Sony Alpha 1 or Canon R5 this problem many people have with the z9 that costs 5700 dollars, my nikon D850 does not have that problem. if that continues i will make a switch to sony, the nikon z7, and z7ii same problem.
Good video. Of course the flip side of your comment about the built-in portrait grip on the Z9, is that the A1 gives you the option of a lighter, smaller body when you remove it's optional grip.
It looks like the Sony's autofocus in low light is better. I have the Z7ii and was hoping Z9 could do better. Mine really struggles in the studio where it's using the the modeling lights of my strobes to focus. I wish they would do the focus test in dimmer conditions to compare, but going off the high iso test The Nikon is struggling.
i have the same combos like a1 85mm 1.4 and z9 85mm 1.8 and the z9 has so much more noise... im angry and sell it, I want to switch to Nikon because of the colors. and what I hate so much is that Sony have so much different colors in faces, when you only bring up the saturation, on Nikon its great, on Sony you see the different colors in the face, ugh but what's interesting, the a1 have the much better monitor display, Sony said it has 1.44mio dots but its not true, it has the 2.36mio dot display from the a7RM4-A. Sony wanted to ship the a1´s with the 1.44mio display but they don't. because of the chip problem? I don't know
The problem you are facing is that there is no perfect camera. You just have to decide what is most important to you. Good luck with your camera purchase!
I've had my Z9 for 3 weeks now. I've never really wanted to own a Sony mirrorless camera but was most interested in the comparisons. I had a definite favourite from these tests - The Sony a1. The difference on paper regarding resolution is not much but the Sony just seemed to show more such as the model's eyes & pores. The colour also seemed very yellow with the Z9. Where I disagree is with noise - it has never bothered me as much as does many people. What does bother me is clipped highlights that's often only on one channel that causes an unpleasant colour shift in highlights. Both these cameras are quite frankly amazing. Both seem to have ISO Invariant sensors so will probably settle on -1ev under-exposure to keep highlights without upsetting AF too much.
@@TheSlantedLens 👍The handling of the Z9 & its menus are both extremely good. No more contorting for portrait mode - just remember to flick the switch to off when in landscape! The Z9 needs the option to disable those functions until the camera is tilted - saves shots when you forget to turn that switch out of lock!
When you an expert and say lenses is bit issue what are you implying have you forgotten 100+ that Nikon already has as well F mount third party lenses it’s a much bigger collection than Sony could ever imagine all you have to do is buy a mount adapter Sony buyers did the same thing for the longest and a lot of user still adapt Canon or Nikon lenses stop giving notion that we will be waiting for a lens if there is a special need all major focal length have already been covered as well. Other than that good review.
I see you addressed this but your answer is questionable There is is no Loss of imagine quality and some lens even perform much better example the legendary 200 F2. That early reviews when Z line came out spoke about speed/latency difference that’s not the case anymore as also don’t forget Sony native lenses are exceptionally good at autofocus but when you use third party lenses most suffer with little lagginess also keep in mind the Sony bodies are more expensive now as well it has been the case Sony native lenses are more expensive compared to Canon or Nikon.
The review starts with the claim that no mechanical shutter is better. Sure the future will bring cameras with no mechanical shutter, but as long as a sensor is no a global sensor the lack of a mechanical shutter is really silly in a PRO camera that needs to be general purpose. Th Nikon z9 sufferers from banding with some LED lights and sufferers from banding with all flash and strobe used in HSS. In the same situations turning on a mechanical shutter eliminates or improves problems with banding. The z9 can only flash sync to 1/8000 of a second in HS or HSS flash modes. It also has a slow flash sync for conventional high powered flash used either on location or in studio and that speed is 1/200s The Sony a1 has a backup mechanical shutter and it can flash sync with high powered flash upto 1/400s (1/500s in APS-C The Sony a1 can HS and HSS flash sync all the way upto 1/32000s. Thanks to the ability of combining electronic front curtain and mechanical second curtain the Sony a1 has better HS flash performance with a more even HS gradient. Most importantly he Sony a1 can do more with it's more advanced electronic shutter than the z9 can, but if any limitations of electronic shutter become an issue you can turn on the Sony mechanical shutter. Also the Sony a1 mechanical shutter is the most silent mechanical shutter ever made for a FF focal plane shutter camera. As far as the "dynamic range" test goes you cannot compare a Nikon 1.8 prime with a faster prime for several reasons. First the actual t Stop of most lenses does not correspond to the actual f stop. The stopped down apertures of lenses have a more accurated T-stop to F-stop. Add to that the fact that a 1.4 prime even stopped down to match a slower lens will not have the same optical result. The lens still lets in way more light to the elements before the aperture. The test as done in the video has little to do with dynamic range. Oh and one last thing... the so called dynamic range test does not take into account the vignetting of the lens. At 1.8 the Nikon lens vignettes more then the Sony lens. That is why you are seeing more tonality on the blurred background in the window far from the center of the image A true dynamic range test is done with measuring recovery of shadows and highlights. Then there are a whole load of things left out in the review such as Sony's pixel shift function that produces much higher image quality. Sony ergonomics are far better and more flexible thanks to the gripped or gripless option. The Nikon z9 can't shoot RAW at 30 fps. The nikon EVF is the same old tiny little peep hole. The Sony a1 has larger rear element in the EVF and is also twice the resolution. It also has two options for the eyepoint. Most important ergonomic interface with a camera is the EVF. Nikon remote control is not reliable. Sony with the a7sIII and the A1 have very very solid remote control. The LAN remote on the Sony a1 fully supports wireless LAN networking. It does not work with Nikon LAN. The Sony a1 has a much wider range of fast lenses.
Indoor photos with the bright backgrounds, Nikon you say looks warmer. I think it looks saturated more with a green tent and light green chromatic aberrations seem visible in the edges, especially the strands of hair. I think the higher saturation in Nikon is apparent in the ISO examples with the color pallets too. I think the color is more favorable in the Sony which surprised me as I was leaning to maybe adding the Z9 to my collection but I think will stay with the Sony. Otherwise they are very close and If I didn't have all Sony glass now and was picking a camera from the beginning, I'd have a tough choice to make. I wouldn't have switched from Nikon originally if they would have been more serious with mirrorless way back when.
To my eyes, the images at 1600 and 3200 ISO looks much sharper, less noisy with better colors on the Sony. Also, look at the focus breathing in the background at 11:11. Saying that the Z9 is a more durable camera is speculation and personal impression. It could be, but the reviewer can't know.
@@TheSlantedLens How can it be common knowledge? The Z9 has been out for a couple of months. Plus the A1 has passed the winter Olympics challenge with flying colors.
@Derrick Spurrier You can't even make a comment like that unless shooting in exactly the same scene/lighting. Shrink these images down to your tiny 16MP and see how you can go then. They'll smoke your D4. They are just under and just over 3x the megapixels of your camera. When shrunk 3x, the noise also shrinks 3x. These cameras focus significantly better than your D4 and shoot at multiples of your relatively slow 10fps.
on 3.19, nikon is too yellow or greenish...i love the sony's color....it reminds me of my canon 5d, when i compared it with old sony cameras, usually sony was a lot greener or yellowish like this Nikon.
Love Nikon colors, don't like Sony colors. I've had several Sony bodies tried all raw editors, lots of profiles, some made myself, some got from others, and never was able to get as pleasing colors as from Nikon. I'm staying with Nikon, though the lens selection is a pain.
Confirmation bias dare I day. Maybe it’s just me but I was seeing the opposite nearly always from the results. The grain in the Sony is much better to my eye and the Nikon colour shift is obvious. I’m a Nikon shooter myself but anyway just my observation.
Sony doesn’t look neutral it looks washed out and Nikon video quality is way better than Sony as well NIkon colors are just better it feels like the picture pops out.
@@TheSlantedLens I do not like SONY for years because SONY made video camera as I bought it on 1989 that its quality of picture was bad if it was comparative with other like Canon, RCA video camera etc.. Since, I never touch SONY , even look at it. One more thing, SONY do not live with their lenses were made as SONY made new production like mirror less camera body during Nikon Z with FTZ or FTZII adapter that you can usee all of Nikon lenses made from 30 years ago. That is why difference between doctor and nurse.
Where is lens an issue seriously change that statement at your experience level you should be saying something else Nikon just has a better line for options than what Sony can ever provide
In Mark Smith's recent video, only half the respondents could correctly pick between images taken with the a1 and Z9. He even threw an image taken with the a7IV, which fooled more respondents. Not scientific (whatever you want that to mean) but proves that, brand prejudices aside, any modern camera is capable of incredible images.
I doubt any subject/talent would appreciate you describing their image as showing "every eyelash, every WRINKLE", perhaps every Pore, or every Detail? Just for future reference 😏
Like you said it depends on if your invested into each brand what to pick. I have so many high end Sony lenses the A1 would be perfect addition to my camera bag. But for the time being my a7riv and A9 are getting the job done.
to make comparison more accurate and meaningful, you should use same lens in both bodies in order to get a real sense of difference between two sensors. different lens made huge difference, so with your current settings, we can’t identify what difference comes from lens and what from sensors. this is basic common sense for any comparison.
I agree with everything you’ve said and it really is all down to what you need or like now rather than what it can’t do. I’m so glad that we have a choice because that’s good for everyone.
My Z9 just arrived yesterday and I got all the banks set up. Focus system is amazing, and my F lenses work seamlessly. The 105mm 1.4 prime has IS with the Z9 (yay!), and the hit rate has dramatically improved when shooting wide open. It's a whole other level when compared to the D850.
Good review but i think that small is not always best just looking at your Video at time stamp 1.47 min your hand cant even go round the grip. Top plate all the buttons must be a nightmare with gloves on . The Nikon color is far better straight of the bat at minus 2 to me. Apart from that both are good cameras I would pick the Nikon over the Sony as my hand would not fit the small frame Sony I like a camera that you can grab and feels as if you could'nt crush it solid bulit camera i have never had that with the Sony line. Auto focus on all cameras today are very good one should not complain about this compaired to early DSLR from just 8 yerars ago . Sony has had a lot more time to bring out their lens line give Nikon another 5 years till Nikon build up the lens choice to make a level playing field .As far as 8K not interested way to much PC power and storage needed and thats before you take 4K from file 4K is just fine as it is cant see any reason to keep on about its got 8K who cares, if you cant be happy with 4K get the eyes tested. or you will all fall it the trap spend more money and lets all get 8K television ????.
Finally, Nikon has a good sensor. I have never liked the colors of the D1, D2, D3, etc... not accurate at all--way off. And now I am SOOOOOO happy they are using a Sony sensor, it's wonderful, what a perfect combination, I love it. the Z9 is awesome because of the Sony sensor. the best of both worlds.
I love my Sony A1 with the 35-150. I also have the 150-600 and a couple others. Sony a1 i think will be the top camera for a while still. I think it is so advanced that there's no need to upgrade. The af alone is far more superior and now with the new af and steady firmware update I'd say its extremely hard to beat. If your pictures are not turning out with either camera it's the photographers error. Even in most literature and real world reviews sony af among other things keep coming up on top. With unbiased reviewers ofcourse. I think the Sony is a little power house and if you need that extra grip you can put it on. You don't have to carry that extra weight especially when your hiking taking pics of wildlife and you have one of those huge lenses to capture your subjects. Plus with it's compact size it's more versatile so you can use it with most gimbals. If we're talking about serious videography that's huge plus. You dont have to spend more money for a larger gimbal plus all the add-ons you would use with a cage. This compact size would help keep the weight down which people dont realize how cumbersome these all that can be. So that compact body is perfect.The Sony a1 body alone is extremely versatile. And don't forget Sony makes sensors for most of these cameras including Nikon. So where would Nikon be without Sony tech. As for working in the dark i don't need gimmicks to get the job done. It's called muscle memory. It's not hard to memorize the buttons. Plus all the third-party lenses. Nikon to call this it's flagship i think is a huge error considering the z8 is rumored to come out.I just think people like to jump on the next new not necessarily the best thing. Although you can't go wrong with either in the end.
Nice video and it’s nice to have a pretty subject, but if you do another comparison could you use two tripods and remotes so that we get the same expression and angles please? I find myself always preferring the smiling photo...
Oh my Gosh, I watched this video again today and the 8K quality on Nikon is UTTERLY ASTOUNDING!!! Now I know why RED Camera Company is going after Nikon Z9. At 5500 USD, Z9 is endangering the very existence of cameras that cost well in excess of 30,000 USD.
Your personal head shot in the studio looks great! It’s a very strong shot. Nice warm skin tones against the blue background. Looking stylish. You might consider raising the camera a couple of inches so as not to shoot up on you so much . Thank you.
If you already own Nikon DSLR lenses then it does not matter which camera you chose, either way, you will need to buy an adaptor. I'd rather have the more versatile Sony which also has a MUCH larger range of native mirrorless lenses. Also look at lens technology. XD (Extreme Dynamic) Linear motors are the way of the future.
For sports shooting, Nikon has the 200mm f2.0, a tremendous choice, which Sony does not make. For outdoor sports under the lights, this lens is quicker and captures great detail than the 2.8 lenses of either company. Edge goes to Nikon for sports photography.
Olympus and Panasonic released the micro 4/3 standard two years before the Sony NEX-3 was released. Perhaps the intended statement was about full-frame mirrorless cameras?
One of the main applications for these cameras is a sport. Multiple subjects move in different directions at a fast pace, sometimes towards the camera (depending on where you shoot from). Sporting events happening in the evening, with not-so-great lighting. How do these cameras perform in those conditions? High ISO at high shutter speed (over 1/2000 sec)? You should do this type of test.
@@TheSlantedLens try shooting high school soccer or football in the evening. The stadiums are usually not very bright. Or tennis doubles, in the evening.
Loved the high ISO test. It just shows how much BS some reviewers spread when they'll have you believe you can shoot at 12800 & still crop & print large & go beserk.
One thing of note: Nikon has a whole line of F mount glass which through a FTZ adapter can be used on any Z camera and often produces BETTER results on a Z camera than on native. I achieved some beautiful results using a 28-70mm AF-S f2.8 (discontinued in 2007) on a Z5. This isn't meant to bash Sony but give potential Nikon buyers more options.
So you didn't experience loss of light or sharpness with the adapter?
@@TheSlantedLens there’s no loss of IQ.
@@TheSlantedLens not to my eye. To be fair the Z5 is not the Z9 but I was amazed and how sharp, mind this is an older mid-range zoom, the pictures were. I was at f 5.6 as well. I want to clarify that when I stated "native" I meant a Nikon camera body with a F lens mount.
I hope this wasn't confusing to anyone.
@@TheSlantedLens There is no loss of light or sharpness whatsoever with the FTZ adaptor as it is a pass through adaptor with no optics of any kind. All it does is increase the flange distance to 44mm from 16mm to compensate for the removal of the mirror box. It has electronic connections so that all functions and metering/exif data are transferred - other than that it is literally a hole. It has been proven in tests time and again that an F mount lens via FTZ adaptor with a Z7 has identical IQ to the same lens on a D850.
The upside is that the F mount glass actually is performing better on the Z cameras than they did natively on the DSLR's - not in IQ (which is equal) but in usability. On the Z system they now enjoy focus points across the screen, not just clumped in the middle, and they also benefit from 3 axis IBIS - so lenses that were not stabilized from the past are now stabilized.
Furthermore, on the Z9 specifically, F mount lenses are actually auto focusing faster than they did on DSLR (this was not true for the Z6/7 series - although it was very close). So, the F mount lenses are in every way better on the Z system than they were native on the DSLR's.
This fact goes a long way to negating the perceived advantage of Sony having "so many" lenses for the E mount. In truth, Nikon has over 100 lenses that are available and have 100% compatibility with the Z system (something like 93 F mount and 20 something native Z lenses). Nikon is scheduled to have another 10 or so Z lenses in the next year or so.
Additionally, there are 200+ lenses form the past that work in some capacity with the Z system (the D series for example lenses work in all ways except they only manual focus).
There are lenses for every possible shooting style, genre or need now available to the Nikon Z system.
To be clear, I am not saying this to suggest that Sony isn't good. To the contrary, Sony makes incredible cameras for what they are. I am just making it clear that Nikon is now a full competitor with Sony and Canon and the lack of lenses notion is fairly outdated at this point.
The simple fact is that all three systems are now incredible - each are better than the other in some respects and worse than the others in other respects, but there is no longer any clear leader. Any photographer worth anything can get the shot with any of these systems.
It is a good time to be a photographer - from a gear stand point at least :)
Adapting isn't a replacement for native glass. The DSLR lenses aren't designed for modern focusing systems, their AF motors are too slow to keep up. I have a Z6 II with my adapted 105 1.4 and an a7 IV with their 135 1.8 here for testing right now and while image quality on both combos is great, the Sony kit does way, way better in real world use. Not only is the af on the body itself much better, but the Sony lens also offers much faster AF motors. It pulls from close to far nearly instantly, while my Nikon glass takes a second or so. If all you do is static portraiture, you won't mind. But for moving subjects, there's really no replacement for native mirrorless glass.
I was a Nikon shooter starting in 2001 and swapped to Sony for the A7RIV. The only Nikon options at the time for mirrorless were the Z6 and Z7. The A7RIV was a better choice at the time. So I dumped my Nikon gear and jumped in with both feet. Overall I loved the Sony but hated the ergonomics (large hands). The files were fine but I missed what came out of the Nikon cameras. In the end I went back to Nikon with the Z6II in hopes they would one day catch up with the technology (autofocus). When the Z9 came out I was extremely excited and being a NPS member I was able to get one in February. It is an incredible camera but so are the Sonys... It is a great time to be a photographer especially if you like gear!
Glad you worked out which system you prefer. And I agree, they are both great systems and the ergonomics are a personal preference!
Sigo en Reflex y quiero seguir en Nikon asi que tu comentario me ayuda!.
Saludos.
I just sold Sony A1 after using it for 11 months...back to Nikon Z9. Just love the colors of my photos from my previous Nikon cameras compared with Sony. For bird photography...it seemed that my Sony A1 also struggled to have good focus in low light situation
That is interesting. Nikon does have great color. Sorry your a1 didn't work out. Hope the Z9 works better for you.
I'm with you. Too much invested in Sony (A1, a7r3 and a handful of GM lenses) and it is more than enough for my needs. I realize my needs and priorities are different than lots of people but much of my reason for moving to mirrorless was to reduce the overall size of my entire kit. (Along with action sports I do a lot of outdoor landscape and wildlife photography.) So I prefer not having the larger body or at least I prefer the option of having the smaller body (without the battery grip) when I don't need it. With the Z9 that unnecessary (for me) bulk would be there all the time which also has implications for my camera bags, storage and backpacks.
Very good points. The smaller size of the Sony makes a lot of sense for a lot of people!
Re your many comments on the Z9 images being warmer than the sony-a1. Well there are 3 reasons for this - 1- white balance not identical; 2-different impact of picture control and fine tuning of picture control (you said you used Standard on both); and finally Camera Calibration differences --- I currently use Adobe V5 - but have done everything including making my own calibration profiles for each set-up.
Re high ISO shooting -- I shoot Lossless RAW and have not suffered anywhere near the graininess problems you showed. Unless the shot was exceptional I would struggle to sell an image for use on a full page to a print magazine shot at ISOs above 6400.
I shoot wildlife and am staggered how good the Z9 is in low light AF.
I use 22 Nikon AF-S and S-line Lenses -- from 600mm to 9mm. As Z mount lenses come out I buy them if I will use them frequently otherwise I keep the F-mount versions and use the Nikon FTZ II adapter and it is flawless. Nikon Sell a f/0.95 and f/1.2 50mm as well as the cheap f/1.8 and more f/1.2 Z-mount S-line lenses will come this year.
I couldn’t have said it any better, spot on. Should pin this comment to the top.
Lots of great points. Good to hear you experience with the Nikon!
Capture One are great for Sony RAW files !
The interesting thing about Nikon files is that even with a wrong profile and wrong WB with a minimal editing you can make the colors look good. When I'm dealing with Sony files, even after fixing the WB, and trying every profile I had, there is still something unsatisfactory about the colors.
@@USGrant21st I have no problems in Capture One !
Both are great but Nikon in colours blown the Sony out of the park. You can see the advantages of Nikon over Sony. I much prefer Sony's outer design because it is smaller (personal preference). But with the 4:2:2 now becoming the standard, and same with 4K shooting up to soon 8K. It is just as important to keep up upgrading the technology of our equipments to meet the use-cases. Whether that'll be sony or nikon, or any other.
To me, I would be pretty happy with the photos straight out of the camera on the Nikon. Little post editing.
I agree, Sony has a different theme to it in some photos which makes me prefer their clear look but the colours on the Sony comparing to Nikon is so off putting, that Nikon is superior.
Thank you for comparing these, it is good to get better insight and reminder that not expensive cameras are keeping up to date with the newer standards
Lots of great things to think about. Thanks for your comment!
i love sony’s color it’s very neutral. unlike nikons image quality is always on warm.. also in the dynamic range sony is way better than nikon
@@giovanniprado3887 -- you are speaking from ignorance. I've had Sony and Nikon at the same time, made huge number of comparisons. There is no doubt in my mind colors from Nikon are a lot better looking than from Sony. No amount of editing, and I tried everything, solves that issue. I wanted Sony to work very hard. I finally sold my latest Sony A7Riiia and kept Z6ii. It's not worth fighting the camera.
@@TheSlantedLens I'm curious which one had the more true to life colours as you were seeing it with your own eyes. 😁
@@USGrant21st you can't say Sony colors because Sony has different colors in every single camera xD I work in a Photo Camera Shop and see this every single day, its a shame, but I must say that the z9 has more noise then the a1
The other fantastic thing on the Sony Alpha 1 is you have the option for a vertical grip so you can have the same form factor as the Nikon or a small compact camera. The Nikon is just big and heavy all the time....
I have to agree with this 10000% haha. I had and used a GFX 100 Medium format (I've owned the D800/D850 previously too). The Sony with the battery grip is still smaller than the Nikon and with the double battery slot on the vertical grip you'll get the same battery performance as the Z9. Its nice to see Nikon making a Pro mirrorless body. But for days I want something smaller and/or lighter (or if I need to mount on a gimbal or rail for video work) the "transformer" solution is nice.
Another good point El Deane! Thanks for your comments!
While it is nice to have the larger and smaller form factor, the Nikon battery system is superior if you need the power. On a remote, distant location, the ability to shoot longer is appreciated. (1) You do not have to charge or keep track of 4/2 batteries, only 2/1. (2) The built in grip is SUPERIOR to a screw on grip. Less problems! Additionally the larger size of the camera enables better heat dissipation...which enables FAR SUPERIOR card options (CF express A is x3 more expensive, 1/3 as fast and much lower capacity 4TB vs 256GB). Good point none the less about a smaller form factor, which is crucial in many situations.
I would also think that the larger battery on the nikon has more voltage to drive the autofocus faster
bigger is always better Z9 for me
I dont care. I use both the A1 and Z9 for my Wildlife work. Both are great performers with A1 leading in terms of Autofocus performance, especially Animal Eye Autofocus.
Good to know. Thanks for sharing!
thank you for your video, your comparison seem unbiased, both comparing pros and cons of each camera!
I started with a D600 about 10 years ago as my first DSLR, now owning 50mm 1.4, 14-24 2.8, and 24-70 2.8... i love my camera as far for taking photos but d600 is not for recording, so i have been in the dilemma of switching brand, it would be a big investment if i do, but if this Z9 can fix my needs around the same budget I think I might be staying.
The Z9 is an incredible camera. If you already own the lenses that makes total sense to stay with Nikon!
Fair amd honest opinions expressed. I find the Sony colours to be more muted than Nikon plus Nikon looks sharper.
Yes, the Nikon colors were richer on the warm end and the Sony Colors were richer in the greens.
I always love the colors and quality. Hope Z9 Will be the top line of the camera
The Z9 is a great camera with great color science!
Hello. congratulations for the video. Does the nikon z9 have ibis better than the nikon z6ii?
I haven't tested the Z6 II, but everything I am hearing says it does.
Use Capture One for Sony RAW files, "Sony colors" are great !
Sony is very connected to Capture One and it does work great.
Love the Z9, in daylight.
And in lowlight A1
That is a good take on it. Thanks for sharing your opinion!
Not really a big surprise that they performed so evenly, since Z9 uses Sony designed and manufactured sensor. On ISO and dynamic range test Sony maintained consistent colors through out the test, when I think Nikon shifted a little bit. A question: How do justify saying that Z9 is more durable? Is weight and size indication of better reliability? Have you tested this out somehow? Does Nikon have higher IPX rating?
Just based on the feel of the camera. The Nikon seems more sturdy.
07:30 Nikon has a built-in feature called *STARLIGHT*. When turned on, this feature enables Z9 to turn night into day. Autofocus starts to work like it does in the Sunlight.
Thanks for sharing you knowledge!
I've been a Nikon shooter since my first digital camera. It was a Coolpix point and shoot. Then it was a Coolpix l810, then it was the d3200, then d7100, then the d810. And I have to say, I love the color of Nikon sensors, and I believe until now they have outperformed other cameras in almost all areas. But one of the biggest areas, ISO, Is clearly a win by Sony. If I decided to upgrade to a flagship, between the z9 and the a1 I would chose the a1. It handles low light a thousand times better. Clear and sharp images all the way up to 12800ISO. And if you're that high in ISO its because you're trying to document an important event and you don't care about quality. No actual photoshoot would require that.
Great to hear your thoughts. I love the A1 and I was super impressed with the Z9 as well. It would be hard to switch if you have a big selection of Nikon Lenses.
The 8K video on the Z9 looked better to me than the A1. Both were fantastic, but the Z9's video looked slightly more punchy, with greater contrast deatil to my eye.
Which is a bad thing. The results straight out of camera should be as flat as possible to provide the best flexibility for grading in post. If that's not what you're after, it's very easy to dial in an extra +1 to contrast and saturation in camera.
@@youknowwho9247 Well, that's where you and I differ. I was trained to make everything look great (in camera), so that the colorist has an easy job in post. Basicly, what you're advancing is you don't have a look in mind when you shoot. You approach it just like a scribe taking visual dictation, faithfully recording, but not shaping anything. OK. This is one way to approach it, but I prefer to create a look in the camera. To my way of working, this is what seperates a real DOP from a camera man.
Great points for both points of view. Everyone has their own approach.
There is literally nothing useful as far as video performance coming from that single clip. Both cameras looked bad in that situation and the Z9 certainly was not 'better' in fact more highlights being lost. I've seen people try to test $30k Red cameras on here and made them look worst than a A6400.
Please make a detailed video where you compare 8K videos from Sony A1, Canon R5C, and Nikon z9 side by side. And while the comparison, on Nikon, use the 105mm f2.8 MC lens. Please...!
Camera reviews made to order. We will do our best.
@@TheSlantedLens Thank you, Sir
But can you remove the battery grip from the z9 🧐
No, that is part of the camera.
Mirrorless cameras was started by Nikon with the 1 series with a 1 inch sensor but Nikon screwed up by underestimating the market.
I still have a 1. I was disappointed they abandoned it. I like using it for light duty stuff like walking around where I didn’t want to carry a heavier DSLR.
The only wanted to protect their DSLR line. If they even put an apsc sensor in there, they would be No 1 manufacturer today.
quote from wiki ' The first mirrorless camera commercially marketed was the Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1, released in Japan in October 2008.' I dont know about the Nikon 1 series personally, but it looks as though it wasnt until 2011 for Nikon.
@@kalisti2323 if you say so I 🏳️
Thanks for sharing your knowledge!
I use the Sony A1 and the Nikon Z9 for wildlife, mainly birds. If it is getting serious, I choose the A1 any time. The A1 has a much more reliable and consistent autofocus when it comes to recognition and tracking.
Thanks for sharing your experience with the cameras!
Your model is absolutely beautiful. Gorgeous eyes and smile. Just stunning all around.
She was great to work with. Thanks for watching.
At this point, I'm sticking with my D810. If I needed a mirror less, I'd go with the Z9, just because of the lenses I have. My major gripe with Sony, is that small form factor.
That Z9 is a really nice camera. Maybe some day!
Another awesome video.
The model in this video looks like Scarlett Johansson...!
Glad you enjoyed it. Thanks for watching!
Every time I watch your videos I’m left thinking about it for a few days 😂
I hope that is a good thing and that you are learning some good stuff!
@2:05 when outdoor, I think I like the Nikon color looks better. But then when it's indoor @6:11 the color seems too yellowish.
That is a good observation and may be influenced by ambient light.
I did not like the green cast on the Nikon but I think price wise it’s a better deal! but the lenses and ergonomics goes to Sony so as u said it depends on what’s your Ecco system already
Did you ever hold the Z9 in your hands? The internal grip and the whole design fits like a golden gloves in your hands, We can talk about the spec but definitely not about the ergonomics 💡
It really is a personal choice on which one works for you.
nikon will feel better in hand to most people
I enjoyed this. TY
You are welcome! Thanks for watching!
SHOUT out to Nikon for the loaner finally!!! (...or is it "Nikk-on"??? ...I say Nikon too) Thanks, Jay P.
Yes, Nikon was great to lend us the camera and lens!!!
Interesting video. I am looking to upgrade my 10 year old D800, in the next 6 months and I truly am not sure what to do. The Z7II is a non option as I hate the ergonomics with a passion. I could go with the D850, which a lot of my professional friends have done but I also use a lot of manual lenses and an EVF makes life so much easier. Unfortunately, this just leaves me with the Z9, which is a great price for someone who needs the specs but as a portrait photographer, never shoot more than 1 frame, every 2 or 3 seconds, which makes the Z9 complete overkill for my needs. What is worse is over the years of doing photography I now have photographers elbow, which gets worse with heavier cameras, like the Z9.
So all in all it is a little frustrating. Ideally I would love for Nikon do release a Z7III which feels like a D850 but I am not sure Nikon is going to do something like that.
The D850 is a great camera for portraits and currently there are good bargains out there for DSLRs. Get the Z9 if you need the speed, the video or silent shooting
I think many of us are waiting for the Z8(50)
It will be interesting to see what Nikon releases in the next year!
I think the Z8 will just be the Z7III
I feel like when you compare the dynamic range, the lack of detail in the background is bc of the larger aperture...
That is an interesting point.
I think comparing f 1.8 to f 1.4
Is not fair.
f 1.4 would definitely have better focus, dynamic range, low light capabilities and so on.
1.4 is more expensive than 1.8 for a reason.
We try to make these comparisons as far as possible. Sometimes we are limited to the lenses the manufacturers send us.
The Nikon looked consistently better to me in both colour and sharpness. If I were buying a new camera today, I'd probably go with a Nikon (currently own a D5600 and A6400).
Sounds like a good plan!
Nikon z9 autofocus (AFC) in low light a person walking towards you does not work properly it detects the person's eye but it is not in focus this does not happen with Sony Alpha 1 or Canon R5 this problem many people have with the z9 that costs 5700 dollars, my nikon D850 does not have that problem. if that continues i will make a switch to sony, the nikon z7, and z7ii same problem.
The Z9 has been a great improvement over previous models yet Sony is still more advanced with the autofocus.
But I have many problems focusing on light events with the Nikon z9, my Nikon D850 does not have it, I see in me a possible change to Sony A1, thanks
I have to say both out of my budget!
Yep, they are a bit pricey!
sony alpha one... Always 😊
Thanks for sharing your choice!
Good video. Of course the flip side of your comment about the built-in portrait grip on the Z9, is that the A1 gives you the option of a lighter, smaller body when you remove it's optional grip.
Very good point. And that lighter body is really nice!
I use sony but I think nikon is the winner on this comparison 🤔
Gracias señor
Nikon did look great, except for the color shift.
Nikon has the best SOOC colours in the industry.
Thanks for sharing your opinion!
4:48 / 17:00
Nikon is out of focus i this scenario . Sony is much sharper. Dinamic range is also better for Sony.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts and thanks for watching!
It looks like the Sony's autofocus in low light is better. I have the Z7ii and was hoping Z9 could do better. Mine really struggles in the studio where it's using the the modeling lights of my strobes to focus. I wish they would do the focus test in dimmer conditions to compare, but going off the high iso test The Nikon is struggling.
The Z9 is way better than the Z7ii.
@@OkwyUgonweze Have you used them both?
@@camcorderjocky I have both.
@@OkwyUgonweze thanks, that is reassuring. 🙂
@@camcorderjocky he didn't put it in to low light focus setting on the z9, so his test wasn't correct.
i have the same combos like a1 85mm 1.4 and z9 85mm 1.8 and the z9 has so much more noise... im angry and sell it, I want to switch to Nikon because of the colors. and what I hate so much is that Sony have so much different colors in faces, when you only bring up the saturation, on Nikon its great, on Sony you see the different colors in the face, ugh but what's interesting, the a1 have the much better monitor display, Sony said it has 1.44mio dots but its not true, it has the 2.36mio dot display from the a7RM4-A. Sony wanted to ship the a1´s with the 1.44mio display but they don't. because of the chip problem? I don't know
The problem you are facing is that there is no perfect camera. You just have to decide what is most important to you. Good luck with your camera purchase!
I've had my Z9 for 3 weeks now. I've never really wanted to own a Sony mirrorless camera but was most interested in the comparisons. I had a definite favourite from these tests - The Sony a1. The difference on paper regarding resolution is not much but the Sony just seemed to show more such as the model's eyes & pores. The colour also seemed very yellow with the Z9.
Where I disagree is with noise - it has never bothered me as much as does many people. What does bother me is clipped highlights that's often only on one channel that causes an unpleasant colour shift in highlights. Both these cameras are quite frankly amazing. Both seem to have ISO Invariant sensors so will probably settle on -1ev under-exposure to keep highlights without upsetting AF too much.
Great to hear your experience and decision about cameras. Thanks for sharing!
@@TheSlantedLens 👍The handling of the Z9 & its menus are both extremely good. No more contorting for portrait mode - just remember to flick the switch to off when in landscape! The Z9 needs the option to disable those functions until the camera is tilted - saves shots when you forget to turn that switch out of lock!
When you an expert and say lenses is bit issue what are you implying have you forgotten 100+ that Nikon already has as well F mount third party lenses it’s a much bigger collection than Sony could ever imagine all you have to do is buy a mount adapter Sony buyers did the same thing for the longest and a lot of user still adapt Canon or Nikon lenses stop giving notion that we will be waiting for a lens if there is a special need all major focal length have already been covered as well.
Other than that good review.
I see you addressed this but your answer is questionable
There is is no Loss of imagine quality and some lens even perform much better example the legendary 200 F2.
That early reviews when Z line came out spoke about speed/latency difference that’s not the case anymore as also don’t forget Sony native lenses are exceptionally good at autofocus but when you use third party lenses most suffer with little lagginess also keep in mind the Sony bodies are more expensive now as well it has been the case Sony native lenses are more expensive compared to Canon or Nikon.
Thanks for sharing your opinion. We will have to agree to disagree on some of these points.
Great Video >> very interesting >> I just happen to be a Nikon Guy since 1972 = 50 years .. but I enjoy discussing other cameras and lenses
Good to hear. Nikon does make great cameras!
The review starts with the claim that no mechanical shutter is better. Sure the future will bring cameras with no mechanical shutter, but as long as a sensor is no a global sensor the lack of a mechanical shutter is really silly in a PRO camera that needs to be general purpose.
Th Nikon z9 sufferers from banding with some LED lights and sufferers from banding with all flash and strobe used in HSS. In the same situations turning on a mechanical shutter eliminates or improves problems with banding.
The z9 can only flash sync to 1/8000 of a second in HS or HSS flash modes. It also has a slow flash sync for conventional high powered flash used either on location or in studio and that speed is 1/200s
The Sony a1 has a backup mechanical shutter and it can flash sync with high powered flash upto 1/400s (1/500s in APS-C
The Sony a1 can HS and HSS flash sync all the way upto 1/32000s. Thanks to the ability of combining electronic front curtain and mechanical second curtain the Sony a1 has better HS flash performance with a more even HS gradient.
Most importantly he Sony a1 can do more with it's more advanced electronic shutter than the z9 can, but if any limitations of electronic shutter become an issue you can turn on the Sony mechanical shutter. Also the Sony a1 mechanical shutter is the most silent mechanical shutter ever made for a FF focal plane shutter camera.
As far as the "dynamic range" test goes you cannot compare a Nikon 1.8 prime with a faster prime for several reasons. First the actual t Stop of most lenses does not correspond to the actual f stop. The stopped down apertures of lenses have a more accurated T-stop to F-stop. Add to that the fact that a 1.4 prime even stopped down to match a slower lens will not have the same optical result. The lens still lets in way more light to the elements before the aperture. The test as done in the video has little to do with dynamic range.
Oh and one last thing... the so called dynamic range test does not take into account the vignetting of the lens. At 1.8 the Nikon lens vignettes more then the Sony lens. That is why you are seeing more tonality on the blurred background in the window far from the center of the image
A true dynamic range test is done with measuring recovery of shadows and highlights.
Then there are a whole load of things left out in the review such as Sony's pixel shift function that produces much higher image quality.
Sony ergonomics are far better and more flexible thanks to the gripped or gripless option.
The Nikon z9 can't shoot RAW at 30 fps.
The nikon EVF is the same old tiny little peep hole. The Sony a1 has larger rear element in the EVF and is also twice the resolution. It also has two options for the eyepoint.
Most important ergonomic interface with a camera is the EVF.
Nikon remote control is not reliable. Sony with the a7sIII and the A1 have very very solid remote control. The LAN remote on the Sony a1 fully supports wireless LAN networking. It does not work with Nikon LAN.
The Sony a1 has a much wider range of fast lenses.
Are you a Sony salesperson?
Nikon color so much better. Is this not a complete game changer. The picture is the entire point
The Nikon color was great until it fell apart in the dynamic range test.
Nikon colors don’t lose.
The Nikon does have really nice color.
Price?!?! Nikon beats Sony by $1000, $1400 if you count a grip!
Yes, very true. And really something to consider!
What lenses is the Z mount missing? This is pretty lazy, Joe.
There is just a huge selection of lenses for the Sony E mount.
@@TheSlantedLens Nikon has native Z lenses from 14 MM to 800mm. As a working wedding and portrait photographer, I cannot imagine what else I’d need.
Indoor photos with the bright backgrounds, Nikon you say looks warmer. I think it looks saturated more with a green tent and light green chromatic aberrations seem visible in the edges, especially the strands of hair. I think the higher saturation in Nikon is apparent in the ISO examples with the color pallets too. I think the color is more favorable in the Sony which surprised me as I was leaning to maybe adding the Z9 to my collection but I think will stay with the Sony. Otherwise they are very close and If I didn't have all Sony glass now and was picking a camera from the beginning, I'd have a tough choice to make. I wouldn't have switched from Nikon originally if they would have been more serious with mirrorless way back when.
I think you are right in staying where you are at. I think Sony's color has improved a lot the last few years.
To my eyes, the images at 1600 and 3200 ISO looks much sharper, less noisy with better colors on the Sony. Also, look at the focus breathing in the background at 11:11. Saying that the Z9 is a more durable camera is speculation and personal impression. It could be, but the reviewer can't know.
The Nikon is definitely a more durable camera. That is a common knowledge thing.
@@TheSlantedLens How can it be common knowledge? The Z9 has been out for a couple of months. Plus the A1 has passed the winter Olympics challenge with flying colors.
We need another comparison now that firmware 2.0 is out.
Great idea, we should do that.
Sony is the best 👍💯
Thanks for sharing your preference!
Nikon has the biggest lens library. It can use more lenses than any other manufacturer-with adaptor. Meanwhile no one else can use Z lenses.
Thanks for sharing your comment about lenses!
I like the sony more here because i prefer cool colors. I cant stand yellow
Thanks for sharing your opinion!
Wow, you would think these sensors would perform better in hi ISO. My d4 smokes both of these.
Thanks for sharing your experience!
D4 is 16MP. Would be interesting to see comparison after A1/Z9 downsampled to match that resolution.
@Derrick Spurrier You can't even make a comment like that unless shooting in exactly the same scene/lighting. Shrink these images down to your tiny 16MP and see how you can go then. They'll smoke your D4. They are just under and just over 3x the megapixels of your camera. When shrunk 3x, the noise also shrinks 3x.
These cameras focus significantly better than your D4 and shoot at multiples of your relatively slow 10fps.
One other thing I noticed with my a1: the 8K when played on a 4K is much cleaner than the comparable 4K because noise is compressed beyond perception.
That is interesting. We will have to check that out!
Where did the other guy go ?
He moved and he is working making films.
@@TheSlantedLens ok good to hear. Your doin great 😁
For crying out loud when we they invent the camera that gets out and takes it’s own photos for me, tech is not up to par yet
LOL. Yes, we certainly are spoiled!
To me, the Nikon appears more true color. I’m seeing what appears to be a slight over-saturation of cool magenta in the A1.
The Nikon does have nice color!
on 3.19, nikon is too yellow or greenish...i love the sony's color....it reminds me of my canon 5d, when i compared it with old sony cameras, usually sony was a lot greener or yellowish like this Nikon.
Yes, we noticed that the a1 color science is warmer than other Sony cameras we have tested.
Z9 not C9 - c'mon, you can say it
C'mon you can hear it!
Sony seriously needs to change the body of Alpha cameras, they are ugly and ergonomically bad.
It definitely is a personal preference!
Love Nikon colors, don't like Sony colors. I've had several Sony bodies tried all raw editors, lots of profiles, some made myself, some got from others, and never was able to get as pleasing colors as from Nikon. I'm staying with Nikon, though the lens selection is a pain.
There is always a trade off. Nikon does have really great color.
I wouldn't zoom in on the girls face and say "you see all the wrinkles its beautiful"
Good point. She had minimal wrinkles.
Confirmation bias dare I day. Maybe it’s just me but I was seeing the opposite nearly always from the results. The grain in the Sony is much better to my eye and the Nikon colour shift is obvious. I’m a Nikon shooter myself but anyway just my observation.
Thanks for sharing your point of view!
The images from the Nikon are clearly sharper.
They did seem a bit sharper.
Neither! Not made in Japan!
LOL. We can tell what camera you have.
Sony doesn’t look neutral it looks washed out and Nikon video quality is way better than Sony as well NIkon colors are just better it feels like the picture pops out.
I think both cameras produce great colors and I like the Sony Colors. The Sony A1 looks neutral to me or should I say more natural.
Color is a personal choice.
Whatever you said, I do not trust SONY.
Why not? Love you hear your reasons.
@@TheSlantedLens I do not like SONY for years because SONY made video camera as I bought it on 1989 that its quality of picture was bad if it was comparative with other like Canon, RCA video camera etc.. Since, I never touch SONY , even look at it.
One more thing, SONY do not live with their lenses were made as SONY made new production like mirror less camera body during Nikon Z with FTZ or FTZII adapter that you can usee all of Nikon lenses made from 30 years ago. That is why difference between doctor and nurse.
@@duckhanhpham4753 you can use 30 y old old minolta lenses with sony a1 with ea5 adapter. Sony bought minolta cameras in 2006.
@@vads4683 Thank you. Good to know.
Where is lens an issue seriously change that statement at your experience level you should be saying something else Nikon just has a better line for options than what Sony can ever provide
That would be with adapters.
commercial as usual.
We weren't sponsored by either camera company!
@@TheSlantedLensMind is corrupt enough.
The Nikon 8k blows the Sony away. Sony looked terrible.
Thanks for sharing your vote!
In Mark Smith's recent video, only half the respondents could correctly pick between images taken with the a1 and Z9. He even threw an image taken with the a7IV, which fooled more respondents. Not scientific (whatever you want that to mean) but proves that, brand prejudices aside, any modern camera is capable of incredible images.
Very true. Thanks for sharing that perspective.
I doubt any subject/talent would appreciate you describing their image as showing "every eyelash, every WRINKLE", perhaps every Pore, or every Detail? Just for future reference 😏
Good point. And we all have wrinkles no matter what age.
Did you do starlight mode on Nikon for low light focus
Good questions. I did not change the mode for the low light focus. Thanks for watching!
@@TheSlantedLens think you may need to do the testing again....
To my eye, I found the Z9 sharper when testing the auto focus. I found the red sweater washed out on the Sony.
Agreed, the Z9 did seem a tiny bit sharper when zoomed in on the images.
yes i said the same thing the sweater in the sony a1 looked kinda dead and washed when it comes to the red color.
Like you said it depends on if your invested into each brand what to pick. I have so many high end Sony lenses the A1 would be perfect addition to my camera bag. But for the time being my a7riv and A9 are getting the job done.
Those are both great cameras as well!
to make comparison more accurate and meaningful, you should use same lens in both bodies in order to get a real sense of difference between two sensors. different lens made huge difference, so with your current settings, we can’t identify what difference comes from lens and what from sensors. this is basic common sense for any comparison.
Not so. The use of a native lens is much superior to having to use an adapter. The theory sounds good, but people complain either way.
I agree with everything you’ve said and it really is all down to what you need or like now rather than what it can’t do. I’m so glad that we have a choice because that’s good for everyone.
Excellent point. It is great to have so many options of great digital cameras!
My Z9 just arrived yesterday and I got all the banks set up. Focus system is amazing, and my F lenses work seamlessly. The 105mm 1.4 prime has IS with the Z9 (yay!), and the hit rate has dramatically improved when shooting wide open. It's a whole other level when compared to the D850.
So great to hear. Glad you are happy with your purchase!
What is IS?
@@matthewu2520 Image Stabilization
Good review but i think that small is not always best just looking at your Video at time stamp 1.47 min your hand cant even go round the grip. Top plate all the buttons must be a nightmare with gloves on . The Nikon color is far better straight of the bat at minus 2 to me. Apart from that both are good cameras I would pick the Nikon over the Sony as my hand would not fit the small frame Sony I like a camera that you can grab and feels as if you could'nt crush it solid bulit camera i have never had that with the Sony line. Auto focus on all cameras today are very good one should not complain about this compaired to early DSLR from just 8 yerars ago . Sony has had a lot more time to bring out their lens line give Nikon another 5 years till Nikon build up the lens choice to make a level playing field .As far as 8K not interested way to much PC power and storage needed and thats before you take 4K from file 4K is just fine as it is cant see any reason to keep on about its got 8K who cares, if you cant be happy with 4K get the eyes tested. or you will all fall it the trap spend more money and lets all get 8K television ????.
Great points. And true, autofocus today is amazing on all these different brands!
Finally, Nikon has a good sensor. I have never liked the colors of the D1, D2, D3, etc... not accurate at all--way off. And now I am SOOOOOO happy they are using a Sony sensor, it's wonderful, what a perfect combination, I love it. the Z9 is awesome because of the Sony sensor. the best of both worlds.
It is a great camera! Thanks for your comment!
I love my Sony A1 with the 35-150. I also have the 150-600 and a couple others.
Sony a1 i think will be the top camera for a while still. I think it is so advanced that there's no need to upgrade. The af alone is far more superior and now with the new af and steady firmware update I'd say its extremely hard to beat. If your pictures are not turning out with either camera it's the photographers error. Even in most literature and real world reviews sony af among other things keep coming up on top. With unbiased reviewers ofcourse. I think the Sony is a little power house and if you need that extra grip you can put it on. You don't have to carry that extra weight especially when your hiking taking pics of wildlife and you have one of those huge lenses to capture your subjects. Plus with it's compact size it's more versatile so you can use it with most gimbals. If we're talking about serious videography that's huge plus. You dont have to spend more money for a larger gimbal plus all the add-ons you would use with a cage. This compact size would help keep the weight down which people dont realize how cumbersome these all that can be. So that compact body is perfect.The Sony a1 body alone is extremely versatile. And don't forget Sony makes sensors for most of these cameras including Nikon. So where would Nikon be without Sony tech. As for working in the dark i don't need gimmicks to get the job done. It's called muscle memory. It's not hard to memorize the buttons. Plus all the third-party lenses. Nikon to call this it's flagship i think is a huge error considering the z8 is rumored to come out.I just think people like to jump on the next new not necessarily the best thing. Although you can't go wrong with either in the end.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
Nice video and it’s nice to have a pretty subject, but if you do another comparison could you use two tripods and remotes so that we get the same expression and angles please? I find myself always preferring the smiling photo...
That is a good point and a better expression can give some bias.
Oh my Gosh, I watched this video again today and the 8K quality on Nikon is UTTERLY ASTOUNDING!!! Now I know why RED Camera Company is going after Nikon Z9. At 5500 USD, Z9 is endangering the very existence of cameras that cost well in excess of 30,000 USD.
It is a really nice camera. Thanks for your comment!
Z9 any day...the moment i get right price for my kidney
I hear you. Save up, save up!
Your personal head shot in the studio looks great! It’s a very strong shot. Nice warm skin tones against the blue background. Looking stylish. You might consider raising the camera a couple of inches so as not to shoot up on you so much . Thank you.
Thanks for the tip. We will look into that!
SONY SONY SONY SONY 👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
Thanks for watching and sharing your preference!
So green out there which compliments the colors she is wearing. It's so much more drab here.
That is the beauty of Southern CA, we can shoot outside all year long without getting too cold!
If you already own Nikon DSLR lenses then it does not matter which camera you chose, either way, you will need to buy an adaptor. I'd rather have the more versatile Sony which also has a MUCH larger range of native mirrorless lenses. Also look at lens technology. XD (Extreme Dynamic) Linear motors are the way of the future.
Great point. Thanks for sharing!
For sports shooting, Nikon has the 200mm f2.0, a tremendous choice, which Sony does not make. For outdoor sports under the lights, this lens is quicker and captures great detail than the 2.8 lenses of either company. Edge goes to Nikon for sports photography.
Olympus and Panasonic released the micro 4/3 standard two years before the Sony NEX-3 was released. Perhaps the intended statement was about full-frame mirrorless cameras?
Thanks for watching and keep on clickin!
Z9 is a better camera. The better ergonomics, better 8k Quality, cheaper cards, No overheating, more rugged, $1000 cheaper, vertical screen orientation, backlit buttons, maybe better battery, maybe brighter (albeit lower res) viewfinder...!
Thanks for sharing your preference and thanks for watching!
Do love my Z9 for sure.
Great to hear. Keep on clickin!
i have only just watched this video and half way in 8:21-22 the grain defo higher with the Nikon...
Maybe so, could be that the Sony is darker thus not as apparent.
They’re some bloke talking next to the good looking girl in the red top. You may have noticed this.
Hope you learned a thing or two. Keep on clickin!
One of the main applications for these cameras is a sport. Multiple subjects move in different directions at a fast pace, sometimes towards the camera (depending on where you shoot from). Sporting events happening in the evening, with not-so-great lighting. How do these cameras perform in those conditions? High ISO at high shutter speed (over 1/2000 sec)? You should do this type of test.
Great suggestion. That would be fun to test!
@@TheSlantedLens try shooting high school soccer or football in the evening. The stadiums are usually not very bright. Or tennis doubles, in the evening.
@Text me on telegram 👉@TheSlantedLens Thank you! I hope this is not a prank though :)
Loved the high ISO test. It just shows how much BS some reviewers spread when they'll have you believe you can shoot at 12800 & still crop & print large & go beserk.