Whenever someone asks me if one camera, lens, or an entire system is better than another, I always reply the same way: “well, what kind of photography do YOU do? What is YOUR style, artistically?”
Honestly, what you photograph, and how you approach it creatively, makes a world of difference when it comes to which cameras and lenses are “perfect” for you. And, truth be told, literally every camera system out there right now has certain major advantages that can make it a top choice, if you mostly shoot a certain type of photos/video.
Today, my case-in-point is going to be the following statement: For serious landscape photography, Nikon still reigns supreme. In fact, as a traditional landscape photographer and also an astro-landscape and timelapse photographer, I absolutely still prefer Nikon’s bodies, lenses, and many specific, unique features, hands-down.
Why? It’s not just the image quality of one or two of their latest bodies, it’s the image quality (from megapixels to dynamic range to lens sharpness) of their whole entire lineup for the last 10+ years, with both DSLR and mirrorless systems. It’s not just the features or weather sealing of one or two of their latest bodies, either. It’s the overall reputation for making nearly indestructible cameras that can take a beating from the elements, (AND the idiot behind the viewfinder!) …for decades, too.
Without any further ado, here’s the breakdown of five of the biggest reasons why, if you’re serious about landscape photography in particular, or a few of the other things that a landscape photographer might get into such as nightscapes or timelapse, …you absolutely should consider Nikon to be one of the best choices around.
1. The Base ISO 64
Okay, first let’s admit the truth: for many types of photographers, both serious and casual, ISO 100 is perfectly fine as a base ISO. Nobody who barely gets their exposure right half the time even deserves to quibble over 2/3 EV worth of improved image quality, either! So, if you’re not nailing your exposures as a landscape photographer, then you need to go practice checking your histogram, and comparing how it looks on your camera to how it looks in Lightroom or Capture One!
However, here’s the second honest truth: landscape photographers, in particular, can indeed utilize every last bit of image quality and exposure range/latitude they can get, if they do expose perfectly. Or, even if they miss the perfect exposure that balances highlight preservation with shadow recovery, or if they bracket very often for safety, it can still be extremely useful to have the most dynamic range and the cleanest shadows possible.
To this end, Nikon reigns supreme with their D810, D850, and Z7 which offer not only incredibly high resolution, but also incredible image quality overall at ISO 64.
It’s true that Sony’s A7Riii and A7Riv come very close, when shot at ISO 100, and it’s also true that if you’re “shooting sloppy” on any camera you will see far better results by simply getting your exposures right, than by actually jumping ship from one system to another.
Having said that, the bottom line is that Nikon has demonstrated how serious they are about serving landscape photographers and any other type of photographer who wants to capture as many photons as possible.
And, who knows, maybe Nikon’s next camera will have a new base ISO of 50, or 32!!! You never know. (We don’t have any info; this isn’t a rumor, just a wish!)
[Rewind: Nikon D850 Review | The Last Titan?]
2. The Most Versatile NEF files
Okay, so you’ve got a ton of megapixels and great dynamic range. However, if you’re a really prolific outdoor photographer in general, you might cringe to see just how many megabytes are being consumed for a single raw file. Of course this isn’t a problem if you’re like those Youtubers who spend three days just to click a single photo; you’ll be fine with a couple 32GB memory cards no matter what!
But, if you ever get bit by the timelapse bug, you’ll quickly find yourself coming home from just a day or two of adventures with many thousands of shots. Whether you’re a full-time pro or just a serious hobbyist who makes time to shoot raw timelapse frames every single week, you’ll fill your memory cards and hard drives filling up very quick shooting 36-40+ megapixel raw images. Throw in a few 4K video clips here and there, and you’ll look for any way to reduce storage consumption!
This is where Nikon’s NEF file options completely destroy the competition. No, I’m not talking about the silly “mRAW” options, either, those are a waste of resolution and many times a timelapse can capture individual frames that you want to print huge, even if you’re not going to worry about turning the timelapse itself into an 8K video.
What I’m talking about is their bitrate and compression options. Nikon’s are the best in the business, period. You can switch almost any Nikon from 14-bit to 12-bit NEF, which saves a huge huge amount of space and yet barely shows any difference in overall image quality. (We’ve tested this, repeatedly!)
Also, unlike the competition which either have just one or two compression options, Nikon allows you to choose between all three: uncompressed, lossless compressed, and (lossy) compressed NEF. Yet again, this comes at no perceptible quality loss, especially when your raw images are only going to be a single frame in a 4K timelapse.
It gets better: unlike any competitor, you can combine any of these raw options to suit your exact need. So, for example, if you’re shooting single frames of epic landscapes, you can shoot 14-bit lossless NEF. Then, if you decide to rattle off 1,000-2,000 raw timelapse frames in a few hours, you can shoot 12-bit compressed NEF, and more than double your memory card capacity.
(NOTE: when shooting lossy compressed NEFs, the remaining frames estimator is very conservative; you can expect to fit an additional 20-30% more onto your memory cards!)
Last but not least, for those who are really quirky and picky about getting their shots exactly the way they want in the field, Nikon offers the most diverse range of in-camera cropping. It may sound crazy to crop your photos to 4:5 or 16:9 aspect ratios while you’re in the field, but it can be a neat creative tool that actually helps you compose your shots more carefully. It’s not for everyone, but I find it to be useful at times.
[Rewind: Nikon Z7 Review | Full-Frame Mirrorless Landscape Photography Camera]
3. The Best Weather Sealing Around
Just ask any landscape photographer what their craziest story is, and it will undoubtedly involve getting stuck in a sand storm, torrential downpour, or maybe even getting hit by a wave on the beach.
One way or another, landscape photographers are often finding themselves actively seeking out very tough, demanding conditions. Sub-zero sunrises are often the most clear, crisp, and beautiful sights to behold. A clearing storm can transform a boring landscape or seascape into a jaw-dropping image.
Whatever the challenge, Nikon usually has got your back. As long as the rubber on your ports and grips is perfectly in place, (that’s another story for another time!) a flagship or high-end Nikon is built with some of the highest durability possible.
Yes, most high-end cameras and lenses these days are weather-sealed, and you’re unlikely to “kill” a high-end camera from Canon, Sony, or any other brand unless you are both truly abusive, and downright unlucky. Still, Nikon’s track record is awesome. In fact, the Z7 has received the honor of being the most professionally weather-sealed full-frame mirrorless camera as inspected by the thorough, highly experienced repair folks at Lensrentals.com.
If anything, by the way, the other contenders for “most weather-proof system ever” are Pentax and Olympus, not Canon or Sony, simply because Sony has only begun to thoroughly weather-seal their latest few cameras, and Canon has been known to reserve it’s best weather-sealing standards for its topmost flagship cameras, letting its middle-tier options slide with “moderate” weather sealing, whatever that means…
4. The Best Lenses For Landscape Photography
This is another one that goes back more than a decade. Simply put, Nikon does landscape photography lenses RIGHT. They’ve always had, on average, sharper wide-angle lenses, and their image quality at all focal lengths is superb.
While Nikon shooters were criticized in the past for being stuck with a small, sub-optimal F-mount that didn’t allow ridiculous amounts of glass and super-creamy bokeh like Canon could offer, they made up for it in sheer resolving power, corner-to-corner, with legendary lenses like their 14-24mm f/2.8 G, or the modern marvel that is the Z 14-30mm f/4 S.
Indeed, the original Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8 G lens, which Nikon released in 2007, was so good that it took competitors nearly a decade to start matching its corner sharpness. (For many years, it was also a zoom that utterly destroyed competing primes!)
The fact that it was designed when the only camera available was 12 megapixels, and yet held up on 36-45 megapixel sensors, is a testament to just how good of a long-term investment a Nikkor lens can be.
Now, we have Nikon’s “Z” full-frame mirrorless mount, and the stakes have absolutely been raised. Not only is 42-45 megapixels the new standard for landscape photography, but we’re likely heading to 60 megapixels!
Not one to shy away from a challenge, Nikon did the impossible: They created a new 14-30mm f/4 lens, and they did it in a tiny package that boasts of the “mirrorless advantage” for portability, …and yet the lens is still impressively sharp in the corners.
Suffice it to say, Nikon’s forthcoming 14-24mm f/2.8, a truly flagship lens, is likely to be the next gold standard for ultra-wide landscape photography when it arrives.
Oh, and what about those landscape photographers who want to use ANY lens, from ANY system? Here’s a “secret” awesome thing about Nikon’s Z-mount: It has both the shortest flange distance and the widest diameter mount, so you can adapt pretty much any other lens, including mirrorless lenses, to it. Want to take advantage of the amazing Sony 24mm f/1.4 GM on a Nikon Z7, or the Sony 12-24mm f/4, or the new Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 that is only available in FE mount? No problem, there’s already an adapter for that!
Of course, it’s not just the exotic lenses that Nikon does well. Remember, their 14-30mm f/4 is quite affordable compared to most of the other exotic options out there, and their lineup of f/4 zooms and f/1.8 primes in general has been superb, for those who are on a budget. Oh, and those f/4 zooms and f/1.8 primes are often far lighter and smaller than their f/2.8 and f/1.4 or f/1.2 competitors, by the way. Very few lens makers try to balance flagship-grade sharpness with affordability and portability like Nikon does; most other lenses are either just plain mediocre, or downright over-the-top enormous if they’re truly sharp.
5. Similar Performance & User Experience For Both Mirrorless & DSLRs
As I’ve mentioned a few times already, it’s not just the latest one or two generations of high-tech mirrorless cameras that offer these advantages to an aspiring landscape photographer who might be looking for an incredible kit, but on a used or refurbished budget. Nikon’s been doing right by landscape shooters for many years. In fact, you can buy a used Nikon D800e for well under $1,000, ($800-900) and you can buy a used Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8 for about $1,000, too. This would give you an absolutely incredible, flagship-grade landscape photography setup for well under $2,000. That’s less than a brand-new Sony A7iii or Canon EOS R, (or Nikon Z6) …and without any lenses.
It also bears mentioning that for landscape photography in particular, if weight isn’t a concern then many of the other potential advantages of mirrorless are completely irrelevant. Because with landscapes, you spend most of your time shooting from a tripod, so things like in-body stabilization (or stabilization in general) are less crucial. You also don’t need cutting-edge autofocus technology, either, since most of your shots are manual focus. Lastly, ironically, with many outdoor adventures, you’re always trying to conserve battery power, so the near-zero power consumption of an optical viewfinder can actually be highly preferable to the WYSIWYG of a fancy electronic viewfinder. Just something to keep in mind!
One more thing that I’m almost embarrassed to mention is this- Somtime, when the conditions are truly abysmal or when you need to leave a camera un-attended while setting up another camera, …you really would rather have dirt-cheap cameras (and lenses) at your disposal, juuuuuust in case they get, well, destroyed. Hey, sometimes it happens, in high high winds or other nasty weather, but in my experience, the images are always worth it. And in this regard, yet again, Nikon’s dirt-cheap options, both new and especially used, both FX and even DX, are a great choice for when you want a “throw-away” camera that still delivers amazing image quality. In fact, quite a few of my favorite images were captured on a Nikon D5300, a ~$500 DX camera body, often while I was actually shooting other pictures nearby with far more expensive gear!
Of course, if you’ve got a fair amount of money to spend and are already considering the latest-and-greatest mirrorless tech, (and hopefully take great care of it!) …then that’s fine, but it’s still something to think about if you ever find yourself giving advice to anyone who is on a serious budget, yet looking for a truly serious setup. Nikon’s legacy of awesome gear is perfect for an aspiring landscape shooter on a small budget.
Bonus/Rumor….16-bit RAW???
Okay, I couldn’t resist throwing this last one in, even if it’s totally unfounded and likely untrue. If it is true, however, this could be the next big step towards keeping Nikon at the top of the podium for serious landscape photographers.
For those who do crave every last bit of image quality, from landscape shooters to high fashion or other big print (or severe cropping) situations, having the next step in raw bit depth could be highly welcome. So, we’ll have to wait and see.
I’ll leave you with one additional wish, too: This is not even a rumor, it’s just a random hopeful thought: What if Nikon lowered its base ISO to 50, or even 32, too? That would be absolutely incredible, and landscape photographers would be foolish not to strongly consider such a camera. Just imagine a ~60 megapixel, 16-bit, ISO 64/50/32 camera. I would definitely be interested, wouldn’t you?
Conclusion | Are You A Serious Landscape Photographer?
If you’re really into any one type of photography more than others, then you should keep that in mind when shopping for any type of gear. In fact, sometimes you’re shooting a very specific type of photography, for example instead of just “traditional landscapes” you might be interested in adventure/travel photography, or astro-landscape photography, or something else that could benefit greatly from specific, specialized lenses and camera bodies.
Simply put, if you’re really serious about landscapes, from the traditional to the obscure types, keep these five (six?) things in mind. There’s a lot of great options out there, to be sure, but hopefully the images shared in this post speak for themselves.
If you have any questions, (or objections!) please do leave a comment, I enjoy giving honest, fair advice about camera gear.
46 Comments
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Very nice article Mike, really enjoyed the points. Its funny how posting articles like this are almost on oar with posting religious or political views…lol. People get “testy” about what brand is better..etc. But as you mentioned, the brands out there today are all great, but it really depends on the “type” of photography you shoot. Ive loved photography most of my life but didnt get really serious until 5 years ago. I have had Canon AE-1, Minolta Maxum, Nikon, etc.. and my fave genre’s are Landscape and Wildlife. So i have owned the 850 and 500 for a while (since they came out), and i love them, for the very reasons you mentioned. The dynamic range and sharpness of their images is just top notch. I wanted to add another reason to your top 5 and that is what contributes to the image sharpness….”No AA filter”. Most other brands have that to eliminate Moire, but i would rather have the sharpness. So, again, great article! Im hoping to get the Z7 ii soon!
Good Eyeballs and good shoes and a lot of time. That’s all you need. And some sort of camera. Any brand.
So as I read this (and the comments), I had a few thoughts.
1) People have to justify their purchases, so unconsciously they make their brand better and the others worse (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Choice-supportive_bias). This explains why this article is the most commented one on SLR Lounge in a while. Got to make controversy to get clicks ;)
2) Are you going to do a strengths article for the other major brands? I’m thinking Canon has the Sports market mostly cornered and from what I’ve heard, CPS is a big point on why people haven’t left. It’d be interesting to hear your thoughts.
3) I wonder what camera I’d be on if I stayed with Nikon at the very beginning instead of going over to Canon (My mom had a D60 that I used until I bought a T2i. I could have stolen my mom’s lenses with a new Nikon body, but I hated using her camera and the ergonomics of the Canons just made sense to me. That and I knew more Canon users, so I could borrow their gear). I’m guessing a D750 and then do a holding pattern for another gen or 2 of mirrorless.
Yes, I could spend all year talking about every single type of photography that I’ve ever shot, and which brand (or even which exact body and lens combo) is truly the ultimate choice for that type of photography… Any suggestions that are more specific than just “weddings” or “portraits”??? I feel like this much generalization is always going to spark controversey, even if all I’m doing is presenting facts for people to use in making their own decisions. But I’m also betting that something very specific such as “this camera and two lenses are the best family portrait setup ever” …would also still get tons of debate. (BTW, I don’t even call this “hate” commenting, it’s been very civil in this discussion!)
Also, if you want to get into landscapes but are OK with waiting a generation or two, Canon will be just fine to stick with. Their RF lenses are incredible, and they’re probably going to offer a few more “ultra exotic” options compared to Nikon, since Canon still has the status of being the biggest brand in the camera market, and the top choice for pros in general. Having said that, it really does depend on your budget. You can count on Nikon often being the more value-based choice, while still offering incredible image quality, as opposed to Canon where if you want the truly great image quality, you gotta pay the premium price. But then again, that’s what Sigma and Tamron and many others are for; the Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 for Sony FE is absolutely incredible, and much more portable than Sigma’s DSLR version of their 14-24 2.8…
Interesting, it seems our system may have not allowed my comments to appear in this reply, since you used a URL it was initially flagged as spam…
Anyways, YES, there could be a whole year’s worth of articles about every specific type of photography, and which system overall or which exact body and lens is perfect for it. An article like this is definitely the tip of the iceberg…
Also, if you want to get into landscapes but are OK with waiting a generation or two, Canon will be just fine to stick with. Their RF lenses are incredible, and they’re probably going to offer a few more “ultra exotic” options compared to Nikon, since Canon still has the status of being the biggest brand in the camera market, and the top choice for pros in general. Having said that, it really does depend on your budget. You can count on Nikon often being the more value-based choice, while still offering incredible image quality, as opposed to Canon where if you want the truly great image quality, you gotta pay the premium price. But then again, that’s what Sigma and Tamron and many others are for; the Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 for Sony FE is absolutely incredible, and much more portable than Sigma’s DSLR version of their 14-24 2.8…
I’m actually thinking of getting a Sony a7iii, use the Sigma adapter, with 1 or 2 Sony lenses (Or that new Tamron or the Laowa) and then see how the market is in 5 years… :D
Nikon is great camera system…..lately due to adopting sony sensors
Now, Canon does have a superior lens lineup, and better lenses in most cases
As far as weather sealing, Olympus is ahead; not sure if ALL nikon cameras have the best weather sealing, the canon’s pro level do and it’ pretty good
In sum, a lot of bias in this article, but that’s ok, the tool is producing good results and keeping the user happy
No bias here, just facts that you can take and make your own choices with.
Every brand, especially Olympus and Pentax, have a lot to offer a serious landscape shooter. But Nikon’s variety of options, including both full-frame and crop-sensor, both mirrorless and “old” DSLRs, is what makes them such a good choice overall.
The EOS R is a great choice if you’re going to be shooting both regular landscapes and milky way stuff, but mostly because the lenses that Canon is making for that RF mount are incredible, and there are even more crazy ones coming, allegedly. Based on body comparisons alone, a Nikon Z6 or a Sony A7iii would be a better investment, since their image quality is more versatile at both low ISOs and high ISOs. Let alone, a Nikon Z7 or a Sony A7R3, but those are quite a bit more pricey than an EOS R.
Having said that, if you go with Canon for the awesome landscape lenses that are coming, be ready to spend quite a bit of money on L glass. The RF 15-35mm f/2.8 that is coming soon is likely going to be amazing, but it’s going to be $2300 at first. And I bet if they ever make a 16-28mm f/2, it’ll probably be $3K! Such a lens would be a unicorn of a lens for nightscapes, though.
It also comes down to just how picky you are. If you never pixel-peep the extreme corners of your images, or go nuts with +100 on your shadow recovery or other crazy stuff in Lightroom, then honestly an “advantage” that might make Nikon or Sony a better choice will vanish behind the simple fact that you’re comfortable with Canon’s interface, and when working in the field, familiarity with your gear can be worth a whole lot more than a small difference in image quality or something.
I actually decided to play with an old Nikon D60 file I had on my computer. I’m shocked with the lattitude that dumb little camera had. I pushed the shadows +100 and the highlights to nearly -100 and there was less noise than my 6D in the shot. Too bad I hated using it and people like Trevor Dayley got me on the Canon train early on. Otherwise, I might have been a Nikon shooter ;)
Darn those silly wedding & portrait photographers who encourage you to go with the best portrait camera system instead of the landscape camera system…
Wow, the D60,that’s an old camera haha! My two D70’s were awesome, but it was the D200 and D300 that really took a huge leap forward in terms of dynamic range. That was when I realized my NEF files had enough image info in the shadows that I could throw away all my GND filters and stop treating digital photography like I was shooting Velvia transparency film… ;-)
To be fair to Trevor, it was a basics AND portrait photography workshop… I also have made most of my camera spending money from weddings and portraits compared to the little I’ve sold in landscape. Any recommendations on selling landscape photos? I’m trying to get money for a a7iii before Christmas ;)
Yup, and to be honest, like I said, for portraits and weddings, Canon is the best choice for many reasons, though maybe not /every/ reason…
Recommendations on selling landscape photos? Oy, it’s a tough biz. Calendars are a good idea this time of year though. In general, you either charge a fortune and do the printing & shipping yourself, or charge a bit more affordable rate and use an automated print sales engine online (I use SmugMug) to handle everything for you…
But no 11mm Zoom for landscape so that when I come earlier than you I will be closer to my subject and in front of you?poor Nikon Sony etc
Oh, but don’t forget, there’s the Irix 11mm which is available in Nikon F-mount. ;-)
Matt, did you ever review the Irix? I bought the 15mm 2.4 but was disappointed comparing it to the Rokinon 14mm and sent it back after a week. Wondering if there’s a lot of copy variation in that brand…
I’ve reviewed both the 11mm f/4 and the 15mm f/2.4, and while neither of them are flawless in the corners wide open, they’re both legendary when stopped down a bit. Of course this isn’t helpful for astro-landscapes on the 15mm, but it makes the 11mm a truly major contender against the likes of the Canon 11-24mm or the 12-24mm’s out there. I would definitely recommend checking out the Irix 11mm if you’re interested in reaching that wide. My review of the 15mm is coming soon, BTW, here on SLR Lounge, in addition to the Laowa 15mm f/2 which just became available for Nikon Z and Canon RF…
Yeah, I was getting the lens as a mostly nightscape lens… I’ve played with the Laowa 15 on an a7iii and I think that would be my go to night lens. I’ve seen some used ones pop up at a much more wallet friendly price.
Yeah, if you want portability and don’t pixel-peep the extreme corners too much, then the Laowa 15mm f/2 is a major winner because it’s so tiny and yet all-metal. It’s solid at f/2 and amazing at f/2.8.
Great article, agreed everything you said here.
Oh dear this going to be short… well as short as I can make it…
Wedding photographer dictates what a landscape photographer should shoot with.. NICE start.
I’m not qualified to dictate to someone – I will advise but in all reality its up to the individual.
I mean I’ve only got as high as 3rd in world for wedding photography, only received 30 or 50 awards – I can’t remember exact number and at this hour of the night I really couldn’t care less. BUT,,,, when some wet behind the ear Nikonos shooting greenhorn tries to dictate play well seriously questions and statements have to be thrown around. Wake up my friend – each to their own, I really couldn’t care less if you shot that 3 headed shark with a Cankon or Nikanon – ability in seeing the light and SHOOT MANUAL dudes that really sorts the boys from the men.
“Dictates”? Methinks the grouch doth protest too much. Good to know about all those awards though….
Hi @disqus_3Kgj565jfF:disqus, this is Matt, the author of this article.
I’m sorry if my author bio misled you into believing that I’m ONLY a wedding photographer. Surely you can understand the difference between having a day job that just pays your bills, and having a creative passion that you are just as serious about? Besides, if your only qualification for being a master of landscape photography is prioritizing light and shooting in manual, then I think a whole lot of landscape photographers are highly qualified, myself included. Like the late Galen Rowell said, “My first thought is always of light…”
Either way, I stand by my assertions in the article- if you’re serious about landscapes, the sum of Nikon’s advantages do add up to more than the sum of another brand’s advantages.
We can say “to each their own” and play nice, but the bottom line is that inferiority and superiority do exist, when you specialize instead of generalize. It’s true that a casual photographer can afford to choose a system based on personal preference or familiarity. HOWEVER, very serious photographers choose the best tools for the job, and some tools are better for certain things than other tools.
Great has-been status! Congrats!
There are some halo around the edges in the milkyway photos.
Are you referring to the very topmost image? That might be an older, slightly more heavy-handed edit. Either way, not bad for the now “ancient” D800e, at ISO 12800 or 6400 if I recall correctly!
1…2….3…..and the attack from Sony fanboys is about to start.
By the way, the points you have mentioned are accurate and is pretty well known among serious landscape photographers all over the world. Most use Nikon gear because of these reasons.
This.
What can you say about a user culture that drives this type of comment?
When everyone who reads a nice article like this rolls their eyes and says “Ah jeezus, wait for the comments from the obnoxious Sony fanbois.”
I’ll NEVER own a Sony for this reason. I’ll never want to be associated with their user base, which, in all honesty, is becoming universally reviled for their troll behavior.
In this regard, I beg to differ. Unless you own a Pentax, your brand has probably had its fair share of “trolling fanboy” armies within the last 10-15 years. That’s just a side-effect of social media, it’s not fair to blame the brand itself. In other words, there are a whole lot of Canon and Nikon users who I would not be proud to know…
I attended Sony’s Kando Trip event this year, by the way, and met innumerable amazing photographers, from everyday “random” photographers to official ambassadors and “collective” members. Not one tiny bit of trolling or bashing the whole time, of course. So, I definitely blame the internet at large for that, and every brand has had its obnoxious cult followings in recent times…
Recently-converted Sony “fanboi” here who enjoys wide- angle photography shooting. I do think both the Sony 24 1.4 and Sony 16-35 2.8 can give any competing lens serious competition.
While pixel-peeping the 16-35 on my A7R4, with indoor lighting, I can see an okay reflection of my living room in my dogs eye.
On the 24 1.4, I can start to make out a lot of detail in the reflection of her eye, to a rather mind-blowing degree.
I can’t wait to take it (A7RIV + lenses) on vacation soon and take landscape shots.
Correct me if I am wrong, but it seems to me that whether 60 megapixels or ISO64 is a more important spec is a matter of opinion rather than fact.
Hi again, thanks for commenting here as well as the other question…
You’re totally right about how dynamic range versus resolution will come down to personal preference and specific needs. If you print huge, though, both can be important. And, rumors have it, the next Nikon landscape camera will have ~60 megapixels. If it also has ISO 64 to boot, that’ll be pretty crazy, indeed.
The 24 GM is definitely a winner, and I’m also a big fan of the Sony 16-35 2.8, though I don’t think it’s as perfect in the corners as I’d like it to be wide-open for nightscape photography. Stopped-down, though, it’s a venerable “traditional” landscape lens indeed.
But, once again, we come back to the other point- if you really want to use one particular lens of more than one brand, Nikon is the one with the most adaptable lens mount, now.
With the A7RIV and those two lenses, you honestly have almost no reason to be tempted by Nikon. That’s a legendary setup! However, it’s also an incredibly pricey one, for anybody who may just be getting started in landscape photography, and would like buy older, maybe even used bodies and lenses instead.
Or maybe you want a dirt-cheap 2nd or 3rd camera that, one that is still extremely durable for leaving out overnight to shoot a timelapse or something. The older Sony bodies aren’t nearly as indestructible as the older Nikon bodies, that’s for sure.
Anyways, like I said previously we could discuss different preferences and needs forever. This article is simply what it says: five reasons why Nikon is champion of landscapes. There certainly can be different reasons why Sony or Canon could be champion, for you and your specific set of needs and habits… ;-)
Points taken. Thank you for writing ?? ??
Thank you. So much.
Nothing I could have replied with could have done a better job than your post to drive home my point.
Thank you.
The hostility is all yours ??♂️
And when one’s first thought is the fanboys of another brand, what does that really say about your mindset?
Fanboys abound, period.
Each system has its own list of pros and cons, looks like you left that part out. Somehow, this list seems to come from a fanboy, as most other systems, cover most of the above points (except for 64 ISO), plus have better lenses.
Please choose a system that works for you, and don’t claim that one system is better than the other. Now a days, it looks a norm to post gear specific information, rather than shooting techniques, and actual thought process behind the image.
Hi “A”, this is Matt, the author of the article.
You are incorrect to assume that this list is coming from a fanboy. I’ve actually sung praise of other systems plenty of times, for their various strengths, and I’ve also criticized each brand as equally as possible too. Indeed, I tried to make it clear right off the bat that each system has its own pros and cons.
You are right to point out that, NOW, after many years, other systems can match most of the strengths that Nikon offers. For example, Sony’s latest cameras have great weather sealing.
However, note that I made one side point in this regard- if you’re on a tight budget, you can’t just get an original Sony A7R and expect the same weather sealing or overall reliability, like you can expect to get from a mint condition Nikon D800e. With that in mind, and since not all serious landscape photographers have an “exotic” budget, I tried to highlight the fact that Nikon’s longer history of offering these five points is its own selling point!
I’m not sure how you have come to the conclusion that “most systems have better lenses”, though. Simply put, Nikon has indeed always excelled at creating phenomenal lenses for landscape photography. The only thing they currently lack might be an 11-24mm f/4 or 12-24mm f/4, but as I mentioned you can adapt those lenses to Z.
Like you mentioned, I try to personalize my advice for people’s own style, and not just the “gear info” itself. Some people don’t pixel-peep image corners, others do. Some people never print larger than 8×10 or 16×20, others want to make six-foot wall art. Some people can’t lug around an extremely heavy kit or spend a fortune, but others can. Last but not least, some people’s brains just jive well with one camera’s controls more than another.
Having said all that, I do think it’s fair to argue that there is indeed an element of superiority or inferiority when it comes to specific photography subjects, and shooting techniques. It is not just 100% a matter of familiarity, and “chose what works for you”. There is definitely such a thing a one system being cumulatively better at something than other systems. And, honestly, there’s nothing wrong with that, because each brand has plenty of very strong advantages that we could spend the rest of the year talking about. In the meantime, I’d love to hear your continued thoughts!
Just my .02 cents; it would be a more valid POV if you made More comparisons. Is the Nikon equivalent better than Sony’s new 24 1.4? That seems like a good lens for landscape shooting. Perhaps it it isn’t a good comparison point; you tell me.
I’d also welcome your thoughts in regards to iso 64 vs the A7R’s 60MP.
Ah, someone after my own heart!
I would have loved to rattle on for 5,000 words about which lenses of every category are better!
The bottom line now, however, is also that Nikon, with the shortest flange distance and widest mount diameter, is now the catch-all for adapters. For example, I already know one friend who is using the Sony 24mm f/1.4 GM, the hands-down champion of 24 1.4 primes indeed, …on their Nikon Z7 with the TechArt adapter. A bit Frankenstein, I know, but hey, Sony landscape shooters who converted from Canon have been doing the Canon 11-24mm f/4 L on Sony’s A7R series since day one, so I think all’s fair…
It is indeed still a very, very complicated subject, though, and just on 24mm alone I’d have to spend an entire article expanding on the different types of landscape photography you might want to do. For example, if you care more about portability and durability, but don’t pixel-peep the extreme corners of your images very much, then an old Nikon AI-S 24mm f/2.8 is probably all you’ll ever need, on a D750 for lightweight travelers, or a D850 for Z7 w/ adapter. Then of course there’s the Nikon Z 24mm f/1.8 S, which we don’t have just yet but if it’s anything like the existing Z/S primes, it’s going to be absolutely nuts, and anyone who doesn’t specifically shoot nightscapes and desperately need f/1.4 instead of f/1.8 will probably find that the Nikon mirrorless 24mm could very well surpass the Sony 24 GM, if only in the extreme corners when stopped down.
I could go on for a few more paragraphs, but I’d better stop. Like I said 24mm (or any focal length) is an entire article all by itself, for landscape photography…
Regarding 60 MP versus ISO 64, well, we already have quite a few rumors that Nikon is also getting a ~60 MP sensor for their next high-MP camera, so I’m wishfully thinking that we’ll see BOTH ISO 64 and 60 megapixels, or maybe even 60 megapixels and ISO 50 or ISO 32, if that’s even possible! Who knows, we may not see a Nikon with ~60 megapixels, or we may see them jump to ~60 but lose ISO 64 and go back to 100, I don’t know. But my suspicions are that Nikon knows they’re a landscaepe photography juggernaut, so they’re going to try and maintain at least one slightly more attractive spec compared to whatever Sony is doing with their “similar” sensor… Again just a hunch, but it’s based on 15+ years of keen observation.
Really appreciate your comments. I might have to sell my 16-35 GM and get the canon! I probably won’t though- don’t want to have to deal with adapters. Changing lenses is enough for me.
Unfortunately, you won’t be able to mount a Canon RF or Nikon Z lens on a Sony FE/E mount, because the flange distances on both are shorter. If I’m not mistaken, Nikon’s is the shortest, so that’s why you could mount a Sony FE or Canon RF lens on Nikon Z, and maybe you could mount a Sony FE lens on Canon RF, (not sure) …but that’s about it…
Who cares if the author is a fanboy or not? It’s a great piece.
I don’t see the sense in shaming people for being enthusiastic about a camera.
This article shares some valid points that I’d value if I were choosing a camera system. It is concise and resourceful.
I’m not bashing you, but the author did a good job writing about the use of a specific brand for landscape photography. The article wasn’t about technique and thought process–and who’s to judge that part, anyway?
It’s always cute to see a fanboy justify their choices.
So, have you used each brand for extended periods of time in order to claim your know which system is best?
Before claiming Nikon has the best weather sealing, have you looked at Pentax?
I could name Pentax also thanks to their better dynamic range and use of DNG.
AF speed and flashes, two areas where Nikon excels, are not needed for landscape.
Hi Bernard, Matthew Saville here… (The author of this post)
It’s also cute to meet new readers who have not yet seen my past reviews of all the other latest (and much older) camera gear, indeed!
To answer your question, I’ve been using Nikon and Canon gear for 1-2 million raw images over the last ~15 years, and I’ve been using Sony gear for nearly 1M images since they started making full-frame mirrorless cameras ~6 years ago. I’ve shot full-time, paid gigs with all three brands, and with all five of their lens mounts.
By the way, I did mention Pentax and Olympus in the weather sealing category, because you’re right, if any brand can give Nikon a run for its money in terms of weather sealing, it’s not Sony or Canon, it’s Pentax, or Olympus… In fact, I’d absolutely love to own (and would highly recommend for others’ consideration) …a Pentax K-1, that is if I shot specifically in below-freezing conditions a lot and also didn’t mind the exceptional weight of such a massive setup as a K-1 and the Pentax 15-30 which is also one of the best landscape lenses around.
However, I do not think that Pentax’ aging K-1 or K-1 ii sensor can match the DR of ISO 64 files, though, despite being very impressive indeed at ISO 100. Personally, I don’t subscribe to the DNG workflow, I think proprietary raw files are just fine, and I’d rather have the various raw file options that Nikon offers, as both a landscape and timelapse shooter.
Thanks for taking the time to comment. I appreciate your input!
Lol, Matthew is one person who truly has used all the systems an enormous amount.