Considering an upgrade. Nikon Z6 II or Canon R6 Mk II? An Endless Internal Dilemma

[gryffinwings]

Hi guys, I've been having an ongoing internal debate on upgrading for a while now from my Nikon D7100 with my Nikkor 16-85mm and Nikkor 80-200mm AF-D f2.8.

My use cases are shooting photos of my family which includes my son, who's 3 years old now. I'd like to do a bit more with wild life, which I know will need a longer lens. I do enjoy doing landscape and street photography, which my Nikkor 16-85mm is fine for.

Future use case: Will want to do video eventually.

Current issues with my current bit of kit is that it is a bit slow for what I would like to use it for, maybe this is a setting issue and maybe an available lighting issue, but the camera is a little slow to lock on and I can't seem to get a lot of keepers in higher tempo events. Could use some ideas to mitigate until I upgrade.

In any event, I can take this 2 ways. Since I would be switching to a new mount and full frame, there isn't any benefit to staying Nikon from my current kit. So I'm looking at the Nikon Z6 II or Canon R6 Mk II.

Nikon Z6 II:
Pros:
-I am more familiar with Nikon.
-I have batteries that would work with the Nikon.
-Cheaper Initial Investment.
-Able to buy older G mount AF-S lens to use with FTZ adapter to save money.
-Kit lens is an F4 lens

Cons:
-Native Z mount lens are really expensive.
-AF isn't as good as Canon.
-I've heard reports that AF in low light is not so great.
-I've heard reports that Adapted glass is a little slower than native z mounts in AF.
-Older G mount lens can be more expensive in general than Canon EF lens from my research.
-Needs a CF Express Type B card (more money)
-Kit lens does not have as wide a focal length as the canon kit lens.

Canon R6 Mark II:
Pros:
-Excellent Auto Focus.
-Uses Dual SD Cards.
-More Native RF Lenses.
-More Budget friendly EF lenses.
-More options that I will likely use from Canon glass, EF or RF, in terms of focal range.
-EF to RF adapting is really good from the reports I've seen.
-Kit lens has a wider focal length of 24-105mm.

Cons:
-Brand Switch, not familiar with Canon.
-More expensive initial investment than Nikon.
-kit lens has variable aperture f4-7.1


That is currently what I am looking at in terms of what I am debating. Feedback and thoughts are much appreciated.

 

[JoeW]

I'd go with the Nikon. And it's not because I have a Z6 plus multiple other Nikon bodies.

1. Canon and Nikon are extremely different ergonomically. If you like the feel of a Nikon and find it relatively intuitive, your initial response to a Canon won't be good. And vice versa if you were going from a Canon to a Nikon.

2. The Canon R6 is going to cost you more. Both for the body but also a completely new set of lens. Don't view this as you're buying a Canon body. You're buying a Canon body plus probably 3 new lens. And mirrorless battery performance sucks so you'll want a battery plus spare for your mirrorless (so a minimum of 3 for a Nikon Z6ii plus D7100 or at least two batteries if you just get the Canon). Price out that package (2 batteries, 3 lens, 1 Canon body).

3. If you are serious about wildlife (like say....an African Safari), you'll want two bodies. You can put your kit lens on your D7100 and use it for the time the Lioness walks 20 feet behind your Land Rover. And the Z6ii is the body with your long lens on. I'm serious--if you're really out doing a dedicated wildlife shoot, you'll want two bodies. It doesn't have to be Africa--when I go to the Conowingo Dam to shoot Bald Eagles I take two bodies. Your D7100 will therefore make a decent backup. And you can swap lens between the cameras (as long as your lens aren't DX versions).

4. Low-light performance of the Z6 is fine, it's not a problem.

Look, you can compare and contrast a lot of different criteria and I think they just muddy the decision. To me, the biggest factor that potentially works against the Nikon is the Canon will (from what I've read) give you superior video performance. So if that's a BFD for you, I mean you're really going to focus on video on the future (rather than an occasional time), the Canon looks better.

But otherwise, I think in terms of transition, you want to keep the D7100 as a backup or when you are going to be someplace that will drain batteries (a long low-light shoot. Or cold weather. Or a trip that lasts a week and you can't take spare batteries or chargers. Because both mirrorless options will suck at this). And because it will be much cheaper than the Canon, you'll be able to afford a Z-long lens plus the FTZ adaptor. And you'll be in great shape. And because you are clearly comfortable with Nikon, you'll find the transition to be very easy.

And I'm not saying this because I'm a Nikon shooter. If you had a Canon body and were looking at a Nikon mirrorless, I'd recommend you go with Canon for mostly the same reasons.

 

[Strodav]

What is right for others, may not be right for you. There are so many online reviews out there for those two cameras to help you. If you can't make the decision, wait until the information YOU need comes to you.

 

[gryffinwings]

I'd go with the Nikon. And it's not because I have a Z6 plus multiple other Nikon bodies.

1. Canon and Nikon are extremely different ergonomically. If you like the feel of a Nikon and find it relatively intuitive, your initial response to a Canon won't be good. And vice versa if you were going from a Canon to a Nikon.

2. The Canon R6 is going to cost you more. Both for the body but also a completely new set of lens. Don't view this as you're buying a Canon body. You're buying a Canon body plus probably 3 new lens. And mirrorless battery performance sucks so you'll want a battery plus spare for your mirrorless (so a minimum of 3 for a Nikon Z6ii plus D7100 or at least two batteries if you just get the Canon). Price out that package (2 batteries, 3 lens, 1 Canon body).

3. If you are serious about wildlife (like say....an African Safari), you'll want two bodies. You can put your kit lens on your D7100 and use it for the time the Lioness walks 20 feet behind your Land Rover. And the Z6ii is the body with your long lens on. I'm serious--if you're really out doing a dedicated wildlife shoot, you'll want two bodies. It doesn't have to be Africa--when I go to the Conowingo Dam to shoot Bald Eagles I take two bodies. Your D7100 will therefore make a decent backup. And you can swap lens between the cameras (as long as your lens aren't DX versions).

4. Low-light performance of the Z6 is fine, it's not a problem.

Look, you can compare and contrast a lot of different criteria and I think they just muddy the decision. To me, the biggest factor that potentially works against the Nikon is the Canon will (from what I've read) give you superior video performance. So if that's a BFD for you, I mean you're really going to focus on video on the future (rather than an occasional time), the Canon looks better.

But otherwise, I think in terms of transition, you want to keep the D7100 as a backup or when you are going to be someplace that will drain batteries (a long low-light shoot. Or cold weather. Or a trip that lasts a week and you can't take spare batteries or chargers. Because both mirrorless options will suck at this). And because it will be much cheaper than the Canon, you'll be able to afford a Z-long lens plus the FTZ adaptor. And you'll be in great shape. And because you are clearly comfortable with Nikon, you'll find the transition to be very easy.

And I'm not saying this because I'm a Nikon shooter. If you had a Canon body and were looking at a Nikon mirrorless, I'd recommend you go with Canon for mostly the same reasons.

Thank you for your input, which makes a lot of sense. I actually have four EN-EL15 batteries, some are aftermarket, so that is helpful from a battery standpoint. The lens I would consider getting would be the Nikkor 200-500mm f/5.6 E ED VR and probably the newer Nikkor 70-200mm f4 to replace the Nikkor 80-200mm f2.8 AF-D lens, since it isn't compatible with the adapter for the Z mount. This will be something I need to consider....

What is right for others, may not be right for you. There are so many online reviews out there for those two cameras to help you. If you can't make the decision, wait until the information YOU need comes to you.

Hence the reason I'm posting, to get more information.

 

[MitchP]

From the wildlife perspective the Canon R6 Mark II is much faster and more accurate than a Z6 II. For family photos either one will surpass your requirements.

If you already know your Nikon, maybe stick with Nikon. I just did the opposite and sold my Nikon DSLR and Z6 and switched to a Canon R6 Mark II.

BUT... I already had Canon glass and am already familiar with the Canon universe. Also, my priority is bird/wildlife photography.