Thanks to the vast number of mirrorless camera choices we have available today, many photographers get confused with picking the best one. Often times, it is hard to pick a camera that has all the features you need that also aligns with your budget.
We have been able to test many different mirrorless systems in the past few years, so we decided to provide our top recommendations in this article.
What Is a Mirrorless Camera?
Basically, the name “mirrorless” comes from the fact that such a camera does not contain the mirror mechanism that is seen on DSLR cameras, hence the name. Because of this, mirrorless cameras are typically smaller, lighter and contain fewer parts than their DSLR counterparts.
With light passing directly through onto the image sensor, a mirrorless camera has an electronic viewfinder (EVF) instead of an optical viewfinder (OVF) and typically has either contrast-detection autofocus system, or a hybrid autofocus system with on-sensor phase detection pixels.
As a result, these cameras are able to perform direct image analysis off their image sensors, which allows them to provide useful information overlays, the ability to track subject faces and eyes, as well as allow for much better autofocus analysis and focus point coverage. Without a doubt, mirrorless technology is going to be a big part of photography in the future, as we detailed in our Mirrorless vs DSLR article.
In short, it is a matter of time until they replace DSLRs for most photographers.
Although with DSLR cameras you are limited only to a handful of camera manufacturers like Canon, Nikon and Pentax, mirrorless opens up a variety of different options from many brands including Panasonic, Olympus, Fujifilm, Sony, Leica, Canon and Nikon.
Mirrorless Camera Considerations
As of 2020, with the exception of Olympus, all camera manufacturers offer more than one mirrorless system. For example, Panasonic offers Micro Four Thirds and full-frame systems, while Fujifilm offers APS-C and medium format.
This means that mirrorless camera options today vary by brand, sensor size (from Micro Four Thirds all the way to medium format), camera features and price. Smaller Micro Four Thirds and APS-C systems will typically have weight, size and cost advantages, while medium format systems are going to be big, heavy and quite costly for many photographers out there.
While most mirrorless cameras offer advanced EVF screens, some come with a detachable EVF, while others don’t come with one at all (typically cheaper mirrorless cameras). If you choose a budget option without an EVF screen, you will be forced to compose images with the rear LCD, which might not be ideal, especially if you are used to composing with a viewfinder. At the same time, if you are an architecture or a landscape photographer who heavily relies on a tripod for your work, you might not care about an EVF at all, so you will need to evaluate such specific features based on your particular needs.
Some of the biggest drawbacks of mirrorless cameras include poor battery life (due to EVF and LCD screen being constantly used), inferior autofocus for fast-action photography (with some exceptions), complex menu systems (due to more features and options) and limited lens options for some of the manufacturers who recently entered the mirrorless arena. We expect most of these issues to be addressed in the future, so these deficiencies are mostly temporary.
Despite all the differences, most modern mirrorless cameras are exceptionally good, and offer superb image quality and autofocus performance that can rival their DSLR counterparts.
Best Mirrorless Cameras in 2020
We decided to put together a list of the best mirrorless cameras to purchase as of 2020, ranking them based on our personal experiences and preferences. Please note that we prioritized the list based on overall value and not particular features. While the list is subjective, we hope that you join the discussion and let us know what you think. Without further ado, here are our top 10 mirrorless cameras for 2020.
1. Sony A7 III
When thinking about the top mirrorless camera that in our opinion has the best balance of features, lens selection and price, it was clearly the Sony A7 III.
With its 24 MP sensor (that is good enough for most needs) and a fast processor capable of recording 4K videos, an amazingly quick and accurate autofocus system, a great selection of native and third-party lenses (as well as accessories), a large capacity battery, and a great sub-$2K price, the Sony A7 III is a highly capable full-frame camera that should be able to satisfy most photography needs.
Copyright © Dvir Barkay
A number of Photography Life team members had a chance to use the Sony A7 III in the field and we all agreed that it is a highly capable camera. Our biggest complaints have to do with the complex and cluttered menu system, lack of some basic features (such as intervalometer, lossless compressed RAW shooting, etc) and overall ergonomics of the camera, as detailed in our article “10 Issues Sony needs to address in its Mirrorless cameras”. However, considering how many areas the camera excels in, we still decided to award this camera the top spot on our list.
2. Nikon Z6
Nikon’s launch of its mirrorless system in 2018 was very exciting for many Nikon shooters, including some of the team members who have been shooting with Nikon DSLRs for many years. And now that Nikon is releasing more and more lenses for the Z system in 2020 and beyond, these cameras have the potential to be one of the best mirrorless camera systems on the market.
Although Nikon announced both Z6 and Z7 cameras at the same time, the release of the Z6 was delayed, so we have not had a chance to write a full review of the camera yet. However, considering how similar the Z6 is to the Z7 (identical camera build and ergonomics and very similar features), which we found to be an amazing camera (see #4 below) and considering that Nikon put it at the sub-$2K price point, we decided to award it the second place in our list of top Mirrorless cameras.
Copyright © Nasim Mansurov
Thanks to a 24 MP BSI CMOS sensor, a fast EXPEED 6 processor that can handle 10-bit 4K video shooting, exceptional 5-axis in-body image stabilization (IBIS), proven Nikon ergonomics, organized menu system and an exceptional electronic viewfinder (EVF), the Nikon Z6 is a superb choice for not only photography, but also serious videography needs. Although at the moment Nikon only has a total of three native lenses available for the Z6, the camera can be used with hundreds of existing Nikon F mount lenses (Nikon as well as third party options) using the optional FTZ adapter.
Copyright © Nasim Mansurov
Our biggest complaint about both Nikon Z cameras has to do largely with the autofocus system, specifically when it comes to tracking fast-moving subjects. Considering that Nikon DSLRs have traditionally been some of the best camera systems for photographing action, we expected its mirrorless system to be close to DSLR focusing capabilities. We expect Nikon to put some effort into refining the AF system on the Nikon Z6 and add specific tracking capabilities, such as being able to track and focus on a subject’s eyes in the near future.
3. Sony A7R III
The Sony A7R III tops our list as the best overall tool for those who need a high-resolution camera.
Thanks to its 42 MP BSI CMOS image sensor capable of superb dynamic range, an excellent autofocus system, a great selection of native and third-party lenses and a long-lasting battery, the Sony A7R III has established itself as the top choice for many photographers. Although it is a bit more specialized than the Sony A7 III and is geared more towards landscape, fashion, studio and architecture photographers, it is still one of the best mirrorless cameras on the market today.
Copyright © Nasim Mansurov
Our comments about its weaknesses are very similar to those of the Sony A7 III – a rather complex and disorganized menu, lack of a built-in intervalometer and sub-par ergonomics are perhaps the biggest challenges that Sony engineers should work on. In addition, considering that the Sony A7R III is likely to be used more often in outdoors environments, Sony should have made sure that the camera is properly weather-sealed (reports from independent resources showed weaknesses in weather sealing on the bottom of the camera, while we experienced fogging issues of the EVF when shooting in humid conditions).
4. Nikon Z7
Considering how new Nikon’s mirrorless system is, it is impressive how many areas Nikon hit right with the release of the Z7.
If it wasn’t for the limited native mount lens selection and the challenges we experienced when tracking fast-moving subjects, we would have perhaps put the Nikon Z7 higher in our list. Still, with its superb 45 MP BSI CMOS image sensor that is capable of yielding very high dynamic range, excellent built-in features, superb ergonomics and a very bright EVF, the Nikon Z7 in our opinion is one of the best cameras on the market today for landscape, product and architecture photography.
Copyright © Nasim Mansurov
Having shot with the camera extensively for the past few months while traveling both domestically and internationally, we have been very impressed with what the camera is able to offer. It is a very easy camera to transition to for any Nikon shooter and when coupled with the native Z-mount lenses, it offers exceptional image quality and a new level of clarity and sharpness, even when using the compact 24-70mm f/4 S kit lens.
Copyright © Nasim Mansurov
We have provided the results of our extensive research about this camera in our Nikon Z7 review, so you can give it a read for a lot more information. Similar to the Z6, the Nikon Z7 also has its own challenges that we would like Nikon to address as soon as possible. This list is provided in its entirety in our Nikon Z7 firmware update wishlist and we really hope that Nikon will start addressing the highlighted issues in the near future.
5. Sony A9
The Sony A9 is the first mirrorless camera release which proved that mirrorless cameras can indeed compete with DSLRs for shooting fast action – the one area that where DSLR cameras have always reigned supreme.
After testing the Sony A9 in the field, we were very impressed by its autofocus capabilities, its insanely fast continuous shooting speeds of 20 FPS and a large buffer, something you normally don’t see on most mirrorless cameras. Although at the time of its release Sony only had a 100-400mm lens to show off its capabilities (which turned out to be a very sharp lens, as our Sony 100-400mm GM OSS review details), the company later released a 400mm f/2.8 super-telephoto lens for those who criticized the company for not having any super-telephoto prime options – it is planning to release more super-telephoto lenses in the future.
Copyright © Nasim Mansurov
Sony wanted to market the A9 as its “top-of-the-line” mirrorless camera for shooting fast action, so it was priced higher than all other Sony A7-series cameras at the time of its release with the $4,500 MSRP. However, the camera has seen huge price drops recently (dropping as low as $3,500), which makes it much cheaper than its direct competitors, the Nikon D5 and the Canon 1D X Mark II. Our biggest complaints with the Sony A9 have to do with lack of super-telephoto lens options, the same cluttered Sony menu system, small buttons that are hard to reach with gloves in the field and overall ergonomics.
Copyright © Nasim Mansurov
If Sony wants the A9 to compete with the big two in the future, these issues should be addressed on the next release. Still, despite its flaws and lack of lens options, the Sony A9 made into our list of top mirrorless cameras on the market today.
6. Fujifilm GFX 50S
Another specialized tool and the only medium format mirrorless camera in our list is the Fuji GFX 50S, a 50 MP monster designed specifically for landscape, architecture, fashion and studio photographers who need as much resolution as possible for their work.
Although since its release Fuji announced two more medium format cameras, the GFX 50R (smaller, lighter and cheaper than the GFX 50S) and the GFX 100S (high-end, expensive 100 MP model with IBIS, on-sensor phase detection pixels, 4K video recording), the former has some ergonomic limitations (small grip, no top OLED display, few buttons, two-axis LCD tilting), while the latter is still in development and likely to be in the $10K price range once announced. This puts the GFX 50S in the sweet middle, as the most balanced medium format camera among the three.
Copyright © Nasim Mansurov
Although the GFX 50S might not have all the bells and whistles of modern full-frame cameras and its contrast-detection autofocus system is not particularly fast, especially for tracking subjects when compared to Fuji’s own X-T3, it is still a remarkable medium format camera that is capable of stunning image quality. And while the Hasselblad X1D 50c is another medium format mirrorless option on the market, we found it to have a number of issues when compared to the Fuji GFX 50S, such as very slow start up time, lack of some basic features, etc., which is why we are giving Fuji our vote.
Copyright © Nasim Mansurov
Since its release, the Fuji GFX 50S has seen a number of firmware updates that have fixed many bugs and added more features to the camera, such as the ability to perform focus stacking. This shows Fuji’s continuous commitment to its line of cameras, something we unfortunately don’t see among other camera manufacturers. See our in-depth Fuji GFX 50S review for more information about this camera.
7. Fujifilm X-H1
A mini-version of the GFX 50S, the Fuji X-H1 stands out as my personal favorite among all X-series cameras that Fuji has made to date.
This is largely due to the overall balance of features this camera offers, including amazing ergonomics and the superb 5-axis IBIS, the first of its kind on a Fuji X-series camera. Having used the Fuji X-H1 extensively earlier this year while traveling in Colorado, Morocco and Uzbekistan, I fell in love with the camera and decided to upgrade to it from my aging X-T1.
Copyright © Nasim Mansurov
I found IBIS to be invaluable for my travel work and although the X-H1 does not have all the latest features and improvements from the X-T3 (better AF, 10-bit 4K video recording, etc), I still decided in its favor, as I found it to suit my needs better. For me, the X-H1 is also superior ergonomically. It handles perfectly in my hands, thanks to a much larger and deeper grip and it has a very useful top OLED display that the X-T3 lacks.
Copyright © Nasim Mansurov
That’s not to say that the X-T3 is not a good camera – as you will see below, if it wasn’t for the smaller grip and lack of IBIS, the X-T3 would have certainly come out on top! Anyone who owns a Fuji camera will tell you that the best part of owning a Fuji system has to do with the amazing lenses. Fujifilm engineers know how to make amazingly sharp, lightweight and weather-sealed lenses that you can take with you everywhere. Simply put, the X-series lenses are good examples of how APS-C lenses should be designed.
8. Fujifilm X-T3
The newest high-end tool from Fuji is the X-T3, the most advanced and sophisticated X-series camera produced to date.
With its 26 MP X-Trans BSI CMOS sensor capable of producing excellent image quality, a fast X-Processor 4 with Quad CPU that is capable of pushing up to 400 Mbps of 10-bit 4K video at 60 FPS, F-Log gamma for extended dynamic range when shooting video, an insanely fast and accurate autofocus system with a whopping 2.16 million phase detection pixels, a bright 3.69 million dot EVF with an impressive 0.75x magnification ratio, the Fuji X-T3 is an impressive stills and video camera.
Copyright © Nasim Mansurov
In fact, its movie features make it one of the most feature-rich video cameras on the market, putting it face to face with such advanced cameras as the Panasonic GH5 / GH5S. So if you need a video camera, the Fuji X-T3 might be the perfect tool for the job.
Copyright © Nasim Mansurov
While it is also an exceptionally good camera for stills, as I have already pointed out above, I personally find the X-H1 to be my top choice among the X-series cameras thanks to the amazing 5-axis IBIS and superior ergonomics. However, if you don’t care for IBIS and the ergonomic differences, we find the Fuji X-T3 to be a more capable tool overall.
9. Canon EOS R
Similar to Nikon, Canon also released its first full-frame mirrorless camera in 2018, the Canon EOS R. And like Nikon, Canon is planning to release several more lenses in the coming years to make this a more fully-fledged system.
Sporting a 30 MP CMOS sensor, a fast DIGIC 8 processor that can handle up to 30 FPS 4K 10-bit video, Dual Pixel CMOS AF that can quickly and accurately focus on subjects and actively track them, a solid 3.69 million dot OLED EVF, built-in WiFi + Bluetooth and new features such as the Multi-Function Bar, the EOS R is a solid first release for Canon, especially at its price point of $2,300. Although so far our team has enjoyed using the Canon EOS R, we found some of its features to be rather limiting when compared to the competition. For example, when compared to the Nikon Z6, the Canon EOS R lacks IBIS, has a single SD card slot (vs XQD card slot on the Z6) and its 4K video shooting is cropped at 1.8x, which is far from ideal for shooting high-quality video, especially in low-light situations.
Copyright © Nasim Mansurov
However, it does have a few benefits when compared to the Z6: it has a fully articulating LCD screen that makes it very useful for vlogging, has a much larger buffer and its Dual Pixel CMOS AF is very impressive for tracking moving subjects. I also like the ability to move the focus point with the LCD screen while looking through the EVF – I wish Nikon also implemented such a feature on the Z-series cameras. What Canon did right at launch is inspire confidence to working professionals by releasing high-quality lenses such as Canon RF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM, Canon RF 28-70mm f/2L USM and Canon RF 50mm f/1.2L USM. Having used the camera on a recent trip to New Zealand, I found the 24-105mm f/4L IS USM and RF 50mm f/1.2L USM to be both excellent, showing superb sharpness and clarity that is expected to see from high-end Canon lenses.
10. Panasonic DC-G9
Our top 10 list of the best mirrorless cameras so far has only included APS-C, full-frame and medium format cameras, but what about Micro Four Thirds? Although it has been a while since we’ve seen a flagship product from Olympus, the Panasonic G9 is a mirrorless camera that certainly deserves to be included in this list.
Thanks to its 20 MP Digital Live MOS sensor, fast Venus Engine Image Processor that can handle 4K video shooting at up to 60 FPS, excellent 5-axis IBIS that allows the camera to shoot 80 MP high-resolution stills, superb 3.68 million dot OLED EVF with very impressive 0.83x magnification, high-resolution 3″ Free-Angle Touchscreen (great for vlogging), built-in WiFi / Bluetooth capabilities and exceptionally good ergonomics, the Panasonic G9 stands out as one of the best Micro Four Thirds cameras on the market today. It has a great balance of features to make it desirable for both stills and video shooting, and there is a wide selection of lenses that are available for the Micro Four Thirds mount. Panasonic put a lot of effort into making the G9 a superb camera to handle – the thumb joystick (which is also available on the optional battery grip), the Mode Wheel / 4-way switch, as well as all the properly placed buttons and dials along with a well-organized menu system make the G9 a pleasure to use in the field.
Click here to check out the current prices of the above cameras and see if there are any good deals on them.
Let us know what you think about our list in the comments section below!
What???? Do you think the Nikons are better than the XT3??? What are you smoking? And please don’t come with the “duh they are full frame” because we are so advanced that the difference is negligible!
My take:
1. Fuji GFX 50R
2. Sony A7Riii
3. Sony A9
4. Fuji XT3
5. Sony A7iii
6. Fuji XH1
7. Panasonic DC- G9
8. Nikon Z6
9. Nikon Z7
10. Canon eos R
Jose, the difference is not negligible – full-frame will always be better than APS-C, no matter what sensor color array is used (similar to medium format being always better than full-frame). The GFX 50S is #6 because it is expensive and has other limitations (no 4K video, no phase detect AF, etc) when compared to the rest of the cameras. Please read the introduction section which states that the cameras are not ordered based on resolution, sensor size or other particular features. Each camera does certain things better in its own way, but we provided the list based on what we believe are the cameras that offer the best value for the features they provide.
I’m agree that the fuji GFX is a way way better then the sony when it come to image quality. For me the fuji and Nikon are better then sony since sony colors are not good. So in every shoot there is a feeling like something need to be fixed. But that is my opinion only
Golan, please see the article again – I specified that the ranking is not based on one particular factor such as image quality. GFX has the best image quality in the group, but it has no IBIS, no phase detect AF and has a lot of other factors to consider. That’s why it cannot be #1 in the list.
Have a look at the blind test of 1,500 people that Tony Northrup conducted comparing colours from Nikon, Canon, Fuji and Sony. Sony colour was the most preferred by a substantial margin with Fuji a different second. The Fuji “colour science” myth truly exposed.
The caveat of the Fuji it’s huge. Whether or not many consider it the best camera of the year, it’s still an APS-C sensor. Cropped sensors makes no sense to get into now until you’re already completely invested in the glass. It’s not future proof at all With expensive glass and good light, sure it can produce excellent results that can compete with fill frame, with slightly less impressive bokeh, etc.
It may be impressive enough of a piece of hardware that it’s winning a lot of best camera of the year awards and indeed may be better overall for video than the A7iiib for example, but it’s in an inferior format and isn’t future proofed at all. You could always get into Fuji medium format of you want to invest in glass that has a future.
why should it not? APS-C is lightweight. period. Most of the times it’s cheaper too, and last but not least, for 90% of the photos out there i doubt you would see any difference. the marketing departments did a good job to tell people they need full frame, even if they only can afford a body with 1-2 kit lenses ^^
Sandro, there is room for both. Where it goes wrong is when FF people say that APS-C is dead, and the same goes for the other camp that says APS-C has gotten as good as FF. There will always be a difference in IQ between the two, period.
Instead, we should just say that both formats have their purposes and uses. Those who consider APS-C to be good enough should stay with it, while those who want better IQ should go for FF.
Nasim, you’ll never satisfy the Fujihadis. The fact that you (rightly) placed 2 Sony cameras well before the Fujis will be doing their heads in. Though I’m actually thinking of trading my A7RIII for a Fuji becuase as a seascape photographer, I suspect that the camera can (in addition to all it’s other miraculous qulaities) walk on water if I ever dropped it …
Aps-c perform weaker than FF always. Especially in low light given the same size in Mpx. There is a reason why Aps-c have lower dynamic range and not a sensor with high resolution. But it is cheaper and lighter and that is a good thing of course. Without those benefits it is a dead and in camera evolution in long term.
Spencer, the camera is as big as the end users want them to be. The X-H1 is perfect for my hands and it is not huge, especially once coupled with amazing future glass. There will always be room for APS-C, just like there has always been room for M43. Smaller formats won’t die off, because they are always going to be physically smaller than their larger format counterparts. M43 will always be smaller than APS-C, which will always be smaller than FF, which will always be smaller than MF. That’s how it goes. For many photographers, M43 or APS-C are good enough – that’s all that matters.
Most of the people here are scientists, researchers. Therefore the ranking. Nothing related to art here, like color, tonality, usability. Because these are not measurable.
That’s simply not true. Clearly you’re not a regular on the site. Nasim is an exceptional artist, as are the majority of contributors on this website (I myself have been visiting this site for a decade or more).
If your argument is that it’s the creator that really matters, we can agree. If you’re trying to say that one single tool will allow all artists to create better photos, well, I question your credentials.
The best cameras get out of your way and allow you to realize your vision with the least amount of distraction/nuisance.
Nasim knows how to make a beautiful image with whatever tool he’s working with. He’s proven that over many years. Having shot with essentially every camera of note over the past decade or more, he’s also one of the most qualified photogs to identify which cameras make it easier to realize his vision.
Nasim, please keep up the great work – you’re a voice I’ve trusted for many years and you’ve never steered me wrong.
No one question Nasim as a camera and lens reviewer here, I’m myself a fan of his camera reviews. And I certainly don’t think any tool is responsible for creativity. My argument is exactly the opposite of this. We are judging a camera based on purely technicalities. So, Leica M10, without AF, no evaluative metering, should be regarded as junk? These set of criterias to measure how good a camera is too biased towards technicalities. As you said, a good photographer can take good photos with any camera. Look at how the photography world has become, more megapixel, sharper lenses, more storage size, more computing power, and there is less and less talk about the art side of photography and also practicalities. Take the Nikon Z mount for example, anyone who has used the camera should know how bulky the lenses are. Why should we think large mount is good? Does corner sharpness really matter? Isn’t better if we have lenses which are much smaller so that we can travel further ? Why weight is not mentioned in the criteria? Why should we dismiss superzoom lenses, when resolution has nothing to do with how good a photo is? We don’t peep at a Van Gogh’s painting or we don’t need to know what brush he used, or do we? Sorry for straight talking, the artistic aspect of photography in this web needs improvement.
Zeissiez, I know what you mean exactly. I think it is important to clarify that if a camera is not included in this list, it is not a “junk” camera by any means. None of the Leica cameras were included in the list, because they are niche products that come with a huge price premium. If cost was not part of the equation, I would have included Leica SL. But this camera with a single Leica lens would outweigh most options in the list, including the Fuji GFX 50S…
Yes, the world has become more technology-driven and we can see it clearly in the photography world. Mirrorless cameras lead in innovation and we will see more of it in the future. There will be lots of firmware-based improvements that will become must-haves for some of us in the future. Less than 10 years ago we all had to walk around with shutter release cables and use a special gadget for doing timelapses. Any time we had to focus bracket, we had to calculate where and how to focus. Today, thanks to built-in intervalometers, focus bracketing and other options, we can do it all in-camera. Lenses made today can resolve lots of detail even in the extreme corners and we now have cameras with 45+ MP of resolution. Why any of this is bad? Yes, corner sharpness does matter for an architecture and landscape photographer. Smaller lenses are made for those who want to keep it light, but we also have expensive f/2.8 lenses that can offer almost prime-like sharpness and detail. All this does matter for many of us. If it is not important for some photographers, that’s OK, they can continue shooting with whatever tools they deem to be sufficient for their needs. But technology will keep moving forward and we will see lighter, more capable camera systems in the future. In regards to Nikon Z, have you actually had a chance to use the system? I can’t remember shooting with such a lightweight setup as the Nikon Z7 + 24-70mm f/4 that can deliver that same level of sharpness, detail, clarity and color – ever. How is that not an amazing thing? The 35mm and 50mm f/1.8 S lenses might seem large and heavy compared to their f/1.8 DSLR counterparts, but have you actually take a single picture using these lenses? We are talking about a new level of sharpness for an f/1.8 lens – something we have never seen before. I am sure we will have cheaper and lighter options in the future, that’s all a matter of time.
In regards to photography as art, of course a camera is just a tool. Nobody says that if you shoot with the latest and greatest that you will be able to somehow become an amazing artist. But if a tool can make your life easier, why not take advantage of it? Trust me, those who want to focus on photography will continue doing so using whatever tools they have at their disposal. I have a bunch of friends who shoot film and love their collection of vintage glass and their expired film. I myself have fallen in love with Fuji Instax and I am teaching my kids to use basic tools to take photos. Do you really think they care about what camera has IBIS or a focus stacking feature? Of course not. For some of us, these kinds of discussions and gear talks will always be useless. But let’s not dismiss the latest technological advancements as something unnecessary and unimportant, as they do give us a lot of great things. We have amazing cameras and lenses today. Our post-processing tools are absolutely mind-blowing. It all keeps getting better and better. Why not embrace it?
Nasim,
The reason why I voice my concern is because the photography society is too tech-oriented. I run photography tours and workshops, I find many hobbyists are too concern about lens sharpness, ISO invariance, and all the technical matters which are much less important than image making itself. Today most cameras are better than most photographers, sharpness, noise DO NOT matter. Yes, they make a diff when viewed 100% on the monitors, but do we need to do that all the time? Most of the photos I see here were captured by high megapixel cameras like D800, D810, D850, but the pictures were mostly flat and boring, due to non-ideal lighting, lack of good content and uninspiring composition. Look at photos of the great masters, those by Capa, Salgado, Bresson, McCurry, many of them are soft, noisy, and some even not in focus, but these imperfection doesn’t affect the outcome one bit. You can do an experiment, make A3 prints of photos by different cameras, see if anyone can tell the difference. Only colour and tonality differences are visible, but these artistic qualities are barely mentioned in reviews. Pixel peeping won’t do any good. I was a pixel peeper when I had a full time job as an engineer. After I became a full time pro, I realised how unnecessary that was.
When I tried the Z7, and I compared it with Sony A7, I thought, the Sony mount makes more sense, because they are smaller. But the technical nerds will argue about how superior the Z mount is over Sony. I’m not bias towards any brand, but I find hobbyist don’t care about practical matters, because they only have time to use their gear during weekends, and they don’t know much about practical issues. The people who spend their time in the “battle field” cares about practical issues, and NONE of those flange distance, diffraction, purple fringing trivial matters. For pros, only visual stories, contents, lighting, composition, timing, and characters of their tools matter.
Yes, we can go on and use the best tools we can afford. But we will look like fools, when someone with a superzoom takes better photos.
Zeissiez
As I working photog I have to disagree with you on a few points. If I delivered an out of focus photo to my clients I would be out of a job! Times have changed, clients and people expect better results and using up to date equipment helps to that end. Sure I don’t need my D850 to deliver 45 MP, just about all of my images are delivered in two formats, 16mp for print and less than 1mp for web use. However for personal use, landscapes etc it is an enormous benefit to be able to record at full resolution and have that file for safe keeping and future proof.
If someone is in the early stages of leaning about photography all of your arguments hold true, however as a “pro” I need my images as sharp as possible when I need them sharp so I buy the best lenses I can afford! You’re right, colour and tonality is subjective and can be manipulated to various tastes in editing software.
I tried the Sony but found it way too small for my hands, the Nikon grip suit me much better.
And purple fringing can drive me mad. Hardly a trivial matter!
Having said that I personally wouldn’t have put the GFX of the A9 in this list….too pricey
You ask 1000 readers and will get 1000 opinions. I would go with Nasims list.
How many Nasims are there?
LOL!
…..so true!
I got the Z6 right after it came out and as a landscape only photographer I really love it. I have nothing to complain about
José, which of these cameras you actually used?
For sports and wildlife shooting features such as PreBurst or PreShot are invaluable. Ticks for the G9 and XT3. The G3 will do 20 fps without blackout which can give you poses few other cameras can. It is however let down a little by its CAF.
The work that has gone into generating this list is well appreciated and is likely to evoke a mix of reactions. As someone who has engaged in detailed comparisons of things using multiple account methodologies, I know that any ranking is highly subject to the comparison criteria used, as well as the relative weight/importance of the various criteria. Without knowing what criteria you used and what their relative importance was, it is hard to make a judgement, particularly as I have handled only a small number of these cameras. To that point however, I have handled both Sony and Nikon mirrorless and found the ergonomics and menus of the Sonys highly annoying to the point of being deal breakers, had I been serious about a purchase.
A second observation I’d offer about the list is that it surprises me that you combined cameras of various formats in the same list. In past articles and comments you have been quite adamant about not comparing FX and crop sensor cameras, as you have referred to them as different animals (my paraphrasing).
Thanks for providing an interesting read and seasons greetings to you and PL contributors.
HMS
HMS, thank you for your feedback! The list is subjective and is largely based on what Spencer and I compiled together. Some of the criteria is hard to explain and add weight to, simply because it would be too complex. For example, how does one decide if Sony A7 III is better than the A7R III? The former is a general purpose camera that is reasonably priced, while the latter is a more specialized camera at a much higher price point. If this article specifically listed the best mirrorless cameras for landscape photography, the A7R III would come out on top. But since it lists all mirrorless cameras, we decided that the A7 III should come out on top since it applies to most types of photography. The same with Nikon Z6 and Z7. If this list was titled “Best mirrorless camera for landscape photography”, the list would have started with the Fuji GFX 50S, followed by Sony A7R III and Nikon Z7. Hope this makes sense.
In regards to multiple formats, since we are talking about all mirrorless cameras, we decided to mix different formats, similar to what we have done with our “top DSLR cameras” article. If we did it based on a particular format like full-frame, I don’t think we could have gotten to 10 cameras. If we did a similar list for medium format mirrorless, it would have only included three cameras, the Fuji GFX 50R, Fuji GFX 50S and the Hasselblad X1D 50c :) You are right, formats should never be directly compared – and we are not comparing them in this article either. We are simply listing our top mirrorless cameras for 2018, irrespective of their sensor sizes.
Hi Nasim,
Thanks for taking the time to reply; your rationale sounds very reasonable. All in all what the article and your photos show is that the current crop of cameras gives photographers ample gear choices to take high quality images. The best part of the article for me were your photos; remarkable indeed! Was the picture with the balloons taken in Cappadocia?
Cheers
HMS
Hello Nasim,
Thanks for the great article.
Do you mind if I put a link to this article (as-is) in English on my (Dutch) website www.fotohulp.nl ?
Please let me know if you are ok with this.
Kind regards,
Hans.
Hans,
Yes, linking is not a problem – copying content is.
With sensor tech improving constantly difference between FF and m4/3 will reduced to negligible levels if not disappear.
FF will extinct like dinosaurs. The system with better and smaller glass will beat them all. OM-D is a number 1 camera, you can flash your list down the toilet.
Sorry, but that will never happen. If M43 improves, so will FF…
No need to get defensive about your choice.
Nasim, what he means is, now even every non-FF camera is good enough, there’s no need to go after the most high resolution, best in dynamic range. There’s no need to do comparison like Car & Driver, comparing the latest 1000bhp models from Lamborghini, McLaren, Ferrari. We don’t need the best to take good pictures. There are other much more important practical and artistic aspects in photography. Working class and family people need a car with cub holders and roomy cabin space than a 1000bhp super car. I totally agree with this article: fstoppers.com/origi…ist-321359. This is how working pros think. Another fav photographer of mine Mitchel K, with top quality work, prefers a small m43 camera: youtu.be/uwAm5A52ELw.
APS-C or m43 has one better feature than FF, the weight and size, which many reviewers have failed to mention. Because we have got lost in technicalities. And many people have been misled to follow this path.
Au contrair, I disagree. Hardware beats Software. Are you referring to the latest google smartphone where the sw emulates dynamic range? Or double lense mobiles that do sw bokeh? It’s not the same. They have their place as always available always in the pocket.
I wouldn’t swap a D500 for any mirrorless. But then my priority is autofocus, buffer etc plus a good-enough landscape capability. If you gave me a few £000 to buy a mirrorless system, I suspect I’d spend it on a 300/f2.8 instead (to replace my 300/f4D).
Nigel, excellent point. One should choose a system based on their needs. If I were a wildlife / action photographer, I would stay away from mirrorless at the moment. Until we see 400mm, 500mm, 600mm and other super telephoto options, as well as a superb AF system that matches or even surpasses DSLRs, there is no point in discussing mirrorless for action photography…
Zeissiez, yes, most modern cameras are very capable today. My iPhone has a great camera and I use it quite a bit when I am outside and I don’t have my camera with me. Pretty much all modern cameras are highly capable and can do great things. And we know that the smaller the format, the smaller the system size, so we should always pick the right camera system for our needs. Is APC-S or M43 sufficient for professional needs? Absolutely – why not, when some magazine covers have even been shot with a smartphone. But there are still lots of photographers out there, including pros, who go for FF or even MF. Nothing wrong with those choices, since they know what they are doing. Every system has its uses. For my type of work, I wouldn’t want to use M43 or 1” cameras, but APS-C is just fine, especially when traveling. For landscape work or paid assignments, I am going to use FF or MF.
If I were a non-professional, I would probably settle down on Fuji X mirrorless as my only system. Again, it all depends on one’s needs!
Zeissiez,
I respect your point of view, but this page is directed mainly for people that like sophisticated technical aspects, and that enjoy to have a state of the art equipment. Not everybody can be a fine artist. So your speech ins landing on the wrong side. Greetings.
Our Leica Q and Hasselblad X1D are probably not good enough :-(
Any reason Fuji got the ticket?
Michael, I would have included Leica products if they were not so expensive / niche. I tried out the Leica SL and really loved everything about it, except for its insane price. And the Hasselblad does not deserve to be in this list – please see my review of the Hasselblad X1D for more details on why. The long camera start up time is a deal breaker for me personally – it is something that Hasselblad should have addressed as the #1 priority. Also, it is disappointing to see that it took so long to add basic intervalometer and exposure bracketing features into the camera through the May firmware update. If it wasn’t for Ming Thein, who continues to push Hasselblad engineers to bring more features into the camera and fix the bugs, I don’t know where the X1D would have been today. Hopefully the next release (X1D 100c?) will be much better. In comparison, the GFX 50S is a much more refined camera, which is why it made it into the list.
Nasim, thanks for a good read. I find it interesting that the Nikon Z7 made it with all of the shortcomings that were deemed critical in a prior “wish list” of yours. Does Nikon really control the market that much?
Paul, having a wishlist doesn’t mean that it is a bad camera – I could compile a similar wishlist for all cameras listed here. Despite some of the shortcomings and issues, I consider both the Z6 and the Z7 superb cameras. Nikon got a lot of things right, but there is still plenty of room to grow.
NAsim, thanks for the explanation.
Z7 ….. need I say more.
Robert, I assume you haven’t had a chance to use that camera…
I think you shouldn’t confuse “best” with “best value”. The price proposition has a tendency to confuse “best of” lists. It’s hard to argue that the Z6 for example should truly be higher on a “best” list than the Z7. Your list should be either “best …” or “best … ranked by value”. However I suggest that you should just stick to your ranking of best and leave the value judgment to the consumer since everyone has his or her own view of this.
Thank you again for another very interesting article.
John, I think those who look at the list can make a decision on what they consider to be best. We ranked the Z6 higher than the Z7 due to its low price point and the fact that it is aimed for most types of photography needs. Those who need more resolution will obviously opt for the Z7 or something like the GFX 50S – for them, these cameras are going to be the best. Those who need a lighter system will choose something like the Fuji X-H1 or the Panasonic G9.
I own each of the top three cameras you listed, and by far, the sony A7RIII is at the top of the list. Yes, the menus are difficult to navigate for lazy people who don’t want to put any effort into their photography, but the resolution, dynamic range, and overall ability of the camera to take breathtaking pictures is unmatched by anything, including the Nikon d850 and D810 (both of which I also own), which I would consider to be at the same level as the A7RIII. Anyone who owns a Sony A7RIII knows exactly what I am talking about.
Why do you own 5 FF cameras from 2 different company?
yes I do. I also own two Canon ff cameras. Nothing else to do with my money I guess!
Mike, please keep in mind that the A7R III is a specialized camera when compared to something like the A7 III, which is priced much lower and appeals to most types of photography needs. That’s why we put it as #1. The same with the Z6 vs Z7 – some might argue that the Z7 is a better camera, but once you factor in the price, you also have to think of the total value. The Z6 delivers more value than the Z7, being $1400 cheaper, and it appeals to any kind of photographer. If we listed best cameras for landscape photography, the A7R III would have topped the list.
I appreciate the very helpful content on your web site.
It’s a good list to pick from, but budget will play a role, perhaps different lists for different budgets may be useful for readers? Also, what you shoot will affect your choices. I am an “enthusiast” and take pictures and videos of family, kids, and photos while traveling. I have a full time job (not photography) and a lot of work to do at home and although I shoot raw (for photos), I don’t have a huge amount of time to spend post processing photos / videos.
I have been a Canon user for years. Even though some feel “color science” / skin tones is not important, at least for me, dealing with portraiture of kids, it is very important. I have tried Sony in past (original a7), but very hard to get the green skin on kids to normalize in post production, they looked like they were ill / nauseated green color / had anemia. I recently decided to upgrade from my aps-c canon eos m6, as my camera budget increased and I was very disappointed by the video quality, mainly sharpness. It looks blurry even though it’s in focus. I was looking for a camera with good 4k video.
Therefore, I rented the 5DmarkIV, Fuji XT-3, Sony a7iii, and nikon z6. It cost way too much to rent all this gear, but I didn’t feel the reviews online were enough to help me find the best camera for my needs, and I would be spending a lot of money and buying into a new ecosystem for the long term, so I wanted to be sure of my decision.
I ended up purchasing the z6 and the 24-70 f/4 and love it.
Here are my main reasons:
1. I did notice a huge difference in low light indoors with kids. The Sony a7iii, Canon 5div, and nikon z6 low light capabilities were awesome compared to Canon m6 and the fuji xt3. The xt3 was similar to my apsc Canon eos m6. At least in my experience (as opposed to the 1st post above), taking photos and videos of people with above cameras side to side, I did notice a huge difference full frame vs apsc with respect to high iso quality.
2. 4k video quality on the z6 and a7iii and xt3 with respect to sharpness were incredible compared to the canons. The lack of ibis on the xt3 was an issue for me shooting handheld. As above, worse low light performance and lack of ibis on the xt3 led me to not buying it (although the fuji prime lenses are awesome, and I liked the 60 fps) (also skin tones are a bit too saturated for my taste) (also flash options for fuji were suboptimal). Colors on a7iii were really bad, kids looked actually very pink this time (better than green Sony a7, but still not accurate) , and although I have tried to post process video for the first time on premiere pro, it is not easy, takes a lot of time, and I can’t get normal looking skin tones. For professionals, with a lot of time and experience, I’m suspect this may not be a big issue. Same with photos on the a7iii, just too much work to get the skin colors looking “normal”. I would certainly consider the Sony if I was only taking photos of nature and not humans. The z6 fulfills all of my needs with excellent low light quality, excellent 4k video quality, ibis, and skin tones that look fairly accurate.
Best regards,
Gus
Thanks for your summary, Gus.
I recently purchased a Z6 but eventually returned it and went with the A7iii instead. To provide some background, I’m a Nikon lifer and was coming from a D750, so it really pained me to jump ship. I put off a move to mirrorless for over a year, simply to wait and see what Nikon came up with.
My primary reason for dismissing the Z6 was the AF tracking/response… specifically during candid photos and portraiture. I found it really difficult to acquire critical focus on the eyes at shallow DoF, so I’m surprised to hear you went with a Z6 for portraiture of children in particular.
Are you primarily a video shooter? If not, how are you working around the focus shortcomings during stills?
Cheers,
Ben
How well the Z autofocus works depends on who you ask. Which makes me think Nikon needs to be putting a lot more effort into explaining to us all how to achieve the best results. I don’t doubt your experience, Ben. But my Z7 autofocus seems to be precise and fast for candids and portraits—static subjects. That’s using single-servo and acquiring focus with the AF-On button. I only shoot stills, and it’s been better, actually quite a bit better, than my D810 at hitting focus on the nearest eye shooting the 105 wide open at f1.4. Not that I do that much. I tend to like portraits and candids with a bit more depth of field.
I have had to pay more attention to technique because of all those pixels. Even with ibis. I recently switched to electronic front curtain shutter when shooting slow (well, actually up to 1/2000, it’s limit). It removes the problem of shutter slap. A side benefit is that an already quiet camera makes even less noise.
Those are some great points, George! Thank you for your feedback.
I should clarify that I agree with you about the Z6’s/Z7 and static subjects… I also found the focusing on the Z6 in AF-S to be quick and highly accurate (substantially better than my D750 in most cases).
Where I personally ran into trouble was with making photos of more animated subjects – my kids, in particular. In more dynamic situations, where the subject is moving or speaking, I tend to rely on AF-C (and sometimes dynamic AF) to lock on to the subject’s eye, which the Z6, in my use, did not perform very well at. The Sony, on the other hand, excels in that type of situation. Eye-AF in some ways feels like cheating… perhaps it is ;-)
So I suppose I’ve taken the easy way out, or the path of least resistance, if you will, to best accomplish my kind of photography (which tends to involve more animated, movement-filled, candid-style portraits, if that makes sense?).
To be perfectly honest, I’m still torn about handing the Z6 back. As Gus pointed out, the Nikon, SOOC, does a much better job with skintones, at least for my taste. The 50mm 1.8S that I bought with it was the sharpest, most contrast-y lens I can recall owning – it rendered images beautifully. The Nikon’s files at high ISO are superior to the A7iii as far as maintaining consistent colours (especially under artificial light). The ergonomics of the Z6 were very, very good and the build quality, for a $2000 camera, exceeded my expectations.
Frankly, I loved everything about the camera, save the AF-C performance. I’m still no 100% certain I won’t return the A7iii and re-acquire the Z6.
But, like many have said, each camera on the list above are phenomenal… all are capable of making a exceptional images… it’s a good time to be a photographer :-)
Ben,
I probably shoot photos & videos equally. I knew from the start that af-c was suboptimal, based on reviews. I just use af-s with single point (and low light mode on, which uses contrast detect) and ask the kids (around 6 yrs old) not to move or I wait until they are still (requires some luck) and I use higher shutter speeds, and that seems to work well for me. For eyes (e.g. If I’m at 70 mm f/4 and close to subject), sometimes I change to “pinpoint” af point (which uses contrast detect), which works well albeit slower. When I get the native nikon 85 1.8 z lens next year, with much more shallow depth of field, we’ll see how that works out!
I have tried af-c, with the “face track” af mode, with rapidly moving kids and it is slow. I agree that if you are shooting a lot of motion, sports, etc., nikon z6 may not be best.
I did try eye detect on the xt-3 and a7iii and I loved it. I wish z6 had it, hopefully nikon will be like fuji and provide helpful firmware updates.
Gus
Gus, thank you for sharing your experience with us, that’s very interesting! I love the Nikon Z6 – considering its capabilities, I think it is a phenomenal camera. I haven’t been a huge fan of default colors with Sony cameras either, but I find that it is not all that important for my type of work, because I can tweak colors to my liking in post. However, if I were a portrait photographer and skin colors were important, I would definitely choose a system that requires the least amount of effort. My wife has done wedding photography and I remember how angry she would get when she had to post-process images from different camera systems.
I appreciate the very helpful content on your web site.
It’s a good list to pick from, but budget will play a role, perhaps different lists for different budgets may be useful for readers? Also, what you shoot will affect your choices. I am an “enthusiast” and take pictures and videos of family, kids, and photos while traveling. I have a full time job (not photography) and a lot of work to do at home and although I shoot raw (for photos), I don’t have a huge amount of time to spend post processing photos / videos.
I have been a Canon user for years. Even though some feel “color science” / skin tones is not important, at least for me, dealing with portraiture of kids, it is very important. I have tried Sony in past (original a7), but very hard to get the green skin on kids to normalize in post production, they looked like they were ill / nauseated green color / had anemia. I recently decided to upgrade from my aps-c canon eos m6, as my camera budget increased and I was very disappointed by the video quality, mainly sharpness. It looks blurry even though it’s in focus. I was looking for a camera with good 4k video.
Therefore, I rented the 5DmarkIV, Fuji XT-3, Sony a7iii, and nikon z6. It cost way too much to rent all this gear, but I didn’t feel the reviews online were enough to help me find the best camera for my needs, and I would be spending a lot of money and buying into a new ecosystem for the long term, so I wanted to be sure of my decision.
I ended up purchasing the z6 and the 24-70 f/4 and love it.
Here are my main reasons:
1. I did notice a huge difference in low light indoors with kids. The Sony a7iii, Canon 5div, and nikon z6 low light capabilities were awesome compared to Canon m6 and the fuji xt3. The xt3 was similar to my apsc Canon eos m6. At least in my experience (as opposed to the 1st post above), taking photos and videos of people with above cameras side to side, I did notice a huge difference full frame vs apsc with respect to high iso quality.
2. 4k video quality on the z6 and a7iii and xt3 with respect to sharpness were incredible compared to the canons. The lack of ibis on the xt3 was an issue for me shooting handheld. As above, worse low light performance and lack of ibis on the xt3 led me to not buying it (although the fuji prime lenses are awesome, and I liked the 60 fps) (also skin tones are a bit too saturated for my taste) (also flash options for fuji were suboptimal). Colors on a7iii were really bad, kids looked actually very pink this time (better than green Sony a7, but still not accurate) , and although I have tried to post process video for the first time on premiere pro, it is not easy, takes a lot of time, and I can’t get normal looking skin tones. For professionals, with a lot of time and experience, I’m suspect this may not be a big issue. Same with photos on the a7iii, just too much work to get the skin colors looking “normal”. I would certainly consider the Sony if I was only taking photos of nature and not humans. The z6 fulfills all of my needs with excellent low light quality, excellent 4k video quality, ibis, and skin tones that look fairly accurate.
Best regards,
Gus
Great selection!
Nasim, what do you think about Canon EOS M50?
And the future of the M-mount?
Not everyone can afford most of the models in this list.
Personally, I think the M50 is a fine camera and does many things right. However, with less than 10 lenses to choose from (most of which are slow zoom lenses), Canon is not showing that it has much interest in developing the M mount. Canon now has three mounts to support: EF, EF-M and RF. Add EF-S to the list and things look even worse. I am not sure how all this can be properly managed. I hope EF-M doesn’t follow Nikon 1’s path…
Reading through the comments, it is clear that the brand and equipment ownership has become a very emotive issue. To the extend where people’s comments really reflect their hatred for any opinion that might differ from their own pride in their own equipment. The issue about reviews and list like this into use them as a part of your decision information base. I will not even dare to state that I think, DSLR’s in my line of work is still the best available tool. That all the ML bodies + Lens combination does not offer me what I need. So I will be called an old fart or something worse. Fact is I have been testing different ML systems for the past yr including M43 but not one system offer a solution that works for me. I am sure it will in future. So what does the list mean. That Sony, Nikon, Fuji, Canon all offer ML cameras that are fantastic. They have all been tested. Sony work for some, Fuji for others, Nikon is a great extension to their current equipment and so is Canon. M43 has its own following due to the size of the system and good enough IQ. But really, to me the biggest lesson form this list is how easily people are offended if their piece of equipment or brand is not listed as the best…
Jacobus, I agree – and it is unfortunate how defensive people get about their choices. So what if your camera is not #1, or not even in the list? Does that make your camera bad? Of course not! :)
I already had an A7 III pre-ordered, but then had the chance to test it and found the evf to be terrible. I couldn’t imagine to look through this evf 10 or more hours per wedding. So I cancelled my order and went with Fuji instead. I sometimes wonder, if I should have gone with full frame, but to be honest, for most of my photography the Fujis are perfectly fine and the price performance ratio of the complete system is really good.
Michael, thank you for sharing your experience! If the Fuji X system works for your needs, why look elsewhere? Don’t regret your purchasing decision – the grass always looks greener on the other side.
I’ve had the a7r iii, fujifilm gfx 50s, sony a9, and the fuji x-h1…
I now have the x-t3 and am about to buy the fujifilm gfx 50R due to the size of it (compared to the 50s).
They have all been extraordinary cameras in one way or the other, but I’ve found out that for me, the x lenses is fantastic and the primes are reasonable small, especially compared to sony fe g-master lenses. The fact that the lenses for the sony system was so close to the gfx lenses in size, made me sell my sony systems… The IQ was fantastic, but fujifilm gfx is better. And when it comes to fuji x, I’ve chosen the x-t3 over the x-h1 mainly because of size.
But, they are all excellent cameras!
Exactly what I thought too. Like fanatic
supporters of a football team.
There’s no way the Nikon mirrorless beats anything Sony, sorry but you got that so wrong. I switched completely to Sony from Nikon a few years back. Recently I borrowed the Z7 for two weeks from NPS. I was completely unimpressed with the camera and it only reinforced why I left Nikon. From the cheap feeling 24-70 S lens and its lens hood to the ridiculous XQD (single) card (much prefer SD and had to buy XQD special just to try camera out), to viewfinder blackout, to klunky and too big with un removable tripod mount FTZ adapter, to image quality and color science to overall experience just was more frustrating than anything. You rated Nikon Z6 above Sony A9? That’s funny ?
You are kidding me. What do you mean there is no way the Nikon beats the Sony? This article is idiotic because it brings out comments like yours. I’ve shot with both too. I prefer the Nikon over the Sony. Honestly though, who cares? I prefer to look at photos than argue over gear.
Further, if you don’t understand the advantages of XQD over SD then you should hang up your camera strap. Certainly the Z7 and Z6 cameras are not clunky and the lens you mention is tack sharp. Are yo sure you are not working for Sony?
Hi Nasim,
Great and thoughtful article as always. But regarding the comments about Sony’s color science and skin tone rendering, what do you think about the “starting point” in Capture One vs Lightroom? I’ve heard that Capture One, especially the version made for Sony cameras, requires far less color tweaking compared to Lightroom.
I know this isn’t really in topic, but I was wondering, wouldn’t it be quite interesting to have the members of the PL team to make each a “what was in my bag for 2018, and why” kind of article? Obviously just with bodies/lenses that they have bought with their own money. It could include also bags/filters/accessories but I think that’d possibly get a bit too long. Just an idea, as much as one might give an enthusiastic review of a piece of kit, there might be other reasons why, even though he/she could afford it, they’d rather stick with something else (and naturally, as readers of the website, I think more than a few of us are curious about such choices too).
Happy holidays!
Tomas, that’s a great idea – if I can get everyone to do it, it would be a pretty cool article to publish. Let me send an email out and see where it goes :)
I am happy to see, that the Fuji X-H1 has some friends. IMHO the X-H1 is a really nice camera, but it got a lot of bashing. Partly due to the fact, that it was always compared to the Sony A7 I III.
In contrast I find the x-t3 to be overhyped. It is also a nice camera, but in my opinion it is not that much better than the X-H1. But this is only my perception and I don’t use my cameras for stills only.
And before someone asks, I own an X-H1 and an x-t3.
Michael, I am not sure who bashes the X-H1 – in my opinion it is the best X-series camera at the moment. With the recent firmware update that made IBIS even better, the X-H1 is simply phenomenal! I am in the process of writing the review of the X-H1 (working on images right now), but it is going to get a bigger praise than the X-T3…
It’s a shame that this site now seems eager to promote cameras based on the brand rather than how the camera performs. The Z6 is placed 2nd despite the admission that it hasn’t been fully tested but because it’s so similar to the Z7 then that’s ok (even with the tracking issues) – it’ll be fine. The Z7 despite it’s issues tracking fast moving subjects manages to get to 4th. I find it strange that both the Nikon cameras rate so highly given their current number of native lenses and the not so small problems with tracking given their price points and the price of the lenses. Surely they are both works in progress which need some refinement before they are both included in anyone’s Top 5 given the quaity of the other brands’ offerings that have had most of their problems ironed out.
Piete, that’s not true – we are not promoting anything by brand here. I have been testing the Z6 for about a month now and I haven’t seen anything drastically different from the Z7, so it is functionally the same, with just a few small differences here and there. Yes, the Z-series cameras might not have the best tracking system out there, but on balance they are phenomenal cameras that offer incredible handling / ergonomics, one of the best EVFs on the market, superb battery life, etc. Native lenses would have been an issue if Nikon only had 3 lenses to offer. But with the FTZ adapter, you can pretty much use any modern Nikon F lens and the cameras give life to old manual focus Nikkor glass, the glass that was very difficult to use with DSLR cameras (thanks to the ability to instantly focus on a subject within the EVF). Other camera systems have their own set of problems, including Sony…
Nasim,
I’m curious to know what AF settings you use with the Z6 for candids/informal portraiture? Have you had any luck experimenting with Face tracking?
I owned the Z6 for only a week and I gave up fairly quickly trying to use face tracking, but I’ve read subsequent reviews saying it works reasonably well (albeit less-so than Sony’s eye AF).
But will my Zeiss lenses work with the FTZ mount adapter?
Frank, yes, they will. Zeiss lenses are all manual focus, so they will have no problems with the Z6 or Z7.
Hello,
This article leaves me cold. And it is the first time I can say that about an article on the photography life site.
The ten best mirrorless. Honestly. Who cares?
Second. Why, if you did not test the Z6 adequately, did you even write this article.
Why pull down the quality of this site for a “Best of….” article?
This is interesting
fstoppers.com/origi…018-322776
Piete, not sure how you find an article interesting, with the author writing about gear that he has never even handled…
That article in fstoppers by Alex Cooke was just horrible and just click bait made to get people all stirred up in a hobby that gets people stirred up pretty easy. It’s pretty arrogant to say those camera are the “worst”.
Now days really all modern digital FF, crop, M43 and just really good as is all glass by the major camera and lens manufacturers. Each has there strength and weakness but they all will take a great image if the person behind the shutter knows what he is doing. Some may not print a great 30×70 print and some may not be conducive to take on a 20 mile hike.
I personally use Nikon gear and am happy with it so I will NOT be adding to the 7942 on line articles and YouTube videos about how I am switching to Sony. Not really sure why people that switch to Sony feel the need to broadcast it to the world. I recently switched from a Toyota truck to a Ram 1500 truck……maybe I should have written a story about why I switched truck brands.
DG, thank you for your feedback. I have now handled the Z6 for over a month and my conclusions remain the same – it is practically identical to the Z7, so the comments from our Z7 review still stand. As for ranking mirrorless cameras, these are our subjective conclusions based on using the above cameras. If they don’t match someone else’s ranking, that’s OK. And if this particular article wasn’t to your liking, please accept my apologies – we will do our best to improve going forward. Please keep in mind that “best of” articles always get some positive and negative reactions. Unfortunately, people feel very protective about their purchasing decisions.
When I look at the heated debate, I am glad I have a G9. Kinda goes unnoticed from all this childish “mine is better than yours’ type discussion. Nasim wrote an excellent article. The criteria applied and their weighting is always a bit subjective, but this is not about dogma, this is just a helpful list for anybody out there interested in getting a camera, not an apologetic piece to defend everybody’s choice of camera. Some here really need to grow up.
Pretty decent list, although to nitpick I don’t see how you can say the EOS R has better buffer performance than the Z6. Z6 buffer is practically impossible to fill as long as you are using a G series card.
Easy to overcome your perceived A7R III/7 III weaknesses:
Intervalometer: Coming soon via recently announced firmware update along improved AF with Real Time Eye AF + Animals.
Ergonomics: Use battery grip for larger lenses or RRS base for smaller lenses makes ergonomics PERFECT!
Menu: There all a little quirky in there own way especially if your migrating from Canikon – you adapt – and use My Menu and Fn button religiously … done & done, NEAR PERFECT!
What a ridiculous article. I shoot action. Therefore the Sony A9 is the best mirrorless camera FOR ME by a wide margin. Nothing else in mirrorless can touch it. How the heck could I or you possibly rank cameras for anyone else if you don’t know what features are important to them.
Also isn’t it fun to write your own bio “he is is recognized as one of the leading educators in the photography industry.” Really ? By who ? Himself. The BS we are subjected to every waking moment from POTUS down to random blog authors. It’s going to ruin us. STOP.
Hmmmm.
Is this ranking and commentary old? I didn’t look at the date(s), but the poster above who stated ‘as well as a superb AF system that matches or even surpasses DSLRs, there is no point in discussing mirrorless for action photography’ must have miraculously been shielded from the Sony a9. Wake up and look around at all the former CanIkon users who have switched. The a9 was a rare super bellwether in photography.
I owned 1DXii for two years, overlapping with the a9 for two months. In short time I realized the a9 could do anything everything the 1DXii could do but way way faster (and lighter)=1DXii sold.
A7iii #1, well if based on price. A7Riii if based on logic. The A7Riii can do anything the A7iii can do but has detail gathering the A7iii can never do. A7Riii is the best all around camera available today. The only advantage the A7iii is higher ISO pushes but downsizing with the A7Riii negates that. Shooting in crop mode and the hidden A7iii inside the A7Riii comes out (like having a hidden D500 inside the D850).
I sense some serious Nikon devotion (or worse) ranking the Z6 and Z7 as high as they were. Granted for a first stab Nikon did OK, but serious serious AF issues plague both bodies. Number of card slots forgotten? I realize Nikon has been bread-n-butter for this write for a long long time but hard logic has fallen to either emotional attachment or commision.
p.s. I also own D500 and D850. Both outstanding camera. Neither a9 level for AF/AF-C tracking.
If the ranking was truly made by a writer owning/using extensively the a9, then please disavow any of my thoughts.
Dear,
So many opinions as there are camera’s…I believe you must use the camera that makes you happy so you make beautiful pictures…
I do photography, it is my job…I use fujifilm X series and it makes me happy…beautiful results make 800.000 euro a year….I am happy
A camera must be a camera and not a vcr or computer….
Regards
The best camera for me is my smartphone, it is always with me and is a breeze to get photos with. I also love the big screen to compose with. It’s good enough for my internet needs and occasional prints.