How Do You Define a Flagship Camera?

In our never-ending search for the perfect camera, we often bandy around a common term to describe the ultimate in performance: flagship. But what really is a “flagship” camera?

I’ll start by pointing out that this is one of those open-ended questions without an objective answer. So, if you’re reading this thinking that I will offer you the definitive explanation for what makes the ultimate flagship, you may be a bit disappointed. Rather, I just want to talk about the very concept, open up the discussion, and hear what you have to say in the comment section.

The reason this question is on my mind is because I recently got a chance to test out Canon’s excellent R1 flagship camera. You can see the review here. It’s a strong tool that serves its target market well. But I’ve also been shooting for the past four years with Nikon’s flagship Z9 as my daily driver. And, while I am not even going to begin to start a commotion in the comments by choosing a side, the two cameras' similarities and differences forced my brain into a conundrum. What even is a “flagship” camera anyway? How has that term changed over time? Is it even still relevant?

A little background to start. The Nikon Z9 is the first “flagship” camera I’ve ever owned. I’ve been a Nikon shooter for a couple decades now and my sweet spot was always that camera that slotted in just beneath the flagship in the lineup, specifically the Nikon D800/850 series cameras. They weren’t as fast as the flagship D5/D6/etc. but they had a higher megapixel count. And, because I work in advertising, not photojournalism, my use case was better served by a tool that could provide larger blowups and more cropping options as opposed to higher burst rates and autofocus speed. So, it wasn’t so much a matter of me not wanting to spend the extra money for the D5/D6 line. Rather, the D850 was just a more appropriate tool for my needs. Yet, despite my personal preference, there was never any question what the “flagship” was in the Nikon DSLR line. It was the lightning-fast D5/D6 branded cameras. They were tough as nails and had best-in-class autofocus. They also had the price tag to match their title, doubling down on the idea that you really had to be a legitimate pro to even consider the investment.

Canon seems to be following this same strategy with its mirrorless cameras. The R1 flagship I tested tops out at 24 MP but is the fastest camera in its class, in terms of burst rate with raw files, and sports a revolutionary autofocus system. The R5II sits where the D850 sat in the Nikon DSLR lineup—a little less rugged than the R1 but with twice the megapixel count.

Nikon went the other way. For their mirrorless line, they opted to give the “flagship” Z9 45.7 megapixels instead of capping it at 24 MP. When the Z8 was announced, it also had 45.7MP. So, different from their approach in the DSLR days, in the mirrorless world, the separator between 1st and 2nd in the Nikon lineup was not megapixels. In fact, both cameras used the same stacked sensor, the same autofocus system, and contained many of the same functionalities. So much so that some buyers wondered why they would even buy a Z9 over a Z8 aside from the added benefits for photojournalists such as the Ethernet port and more rugged body.

As a side note, I’ll just mention here that the one thing that makes me love my Z9 more than I thought I would is the simplest: the size of the battery. It means I can basically shoot all day, video or stills, and maybe have to change batteries at most once for a longer shooting day. I know that doesn’t seem like a lot. I mean, you could always just throw a battery grip onto a Z8/R5 II as well. But something about having it all in one body does really make my day appreciably easier. It’s a small thing, but that built-in battery grip is worth the price of admission for me.

Then again, what about Sony? Their “flagship,” the a1 II, doesn’t even have a built-in battery grip. They’ve tried to differentiate their flagship from the rest of the line based on autofocus and burst speed rather than physical build and ergonomics. So, is that how we define a flagship?

I think this question has only gotten more perplexing in the mirrorless age. Like I said, the Z9 and Z8 are essentially identical other than the ergonomics and build quality. This may change as Nikon continues to roll out excellent firmware updates that make the Z9 better and better. But, for example, if, back in the day, you always bought the D5/D6 cameras because of autofocus speed, the Z8 is now perfectly capable of keeping up with the Z9 in that category. I’d still argue that the Z9 is the flagship because it can do everything the Z8 can do and adds ergonomics, build quality, and better heat management due to the larger body. Nikon is also smart in that it seems to be releasing the key firmware updates, like the new addition of shutter angle, to the Z9 first so that, from the consumer side, it always feels like the company is giving it attention worthy of the price tag.

I have not shot with the Sony flagship yet, so I’ll pass no judgment based on firsthand experience. I have heard, however, that Sony doesn’t always make a point of adding their latest features to their flagships via firmware. Instead, they release new tech in new bodies, but that tech doesn’t always find its way into the existing flagship bodies on the market. Sony users can correct me in the comments if that’s incorrect. But it does seem to me that the flagship camera should always have, at a minimum, the latest advancements a company has across their line (assuming it is technically possible to upgrade via firmware) prior to users needing to purchase an entirely new body. Surely, if you invest at flagship prices, you should have peace of mind to know that you will always be first in line for technology updates.

Then, there’s Canon, who is responsible for putting this question in my head to begin with. By following the traditional trajectory of releasing their flagship with more speed and fewer megapixels, the delineation between the R1 and R5 II is far more distinct than between the Z9 and Z8. By doing so, they’ve allowed for the camera to have amazing speed advantages over the competition. But this also limits the users that might purchase the R1 purely on the basis of the megapixel count. What makes it awesome is that it’s purpose-built. But if that’s not your specific purpose, the higher pricing gives you permission to consider other options.

I mentioned that the Z9 was the first “flagship” camera I ever owned. This is simply because it had both the speed and the megapixel count in one body. The D5/D6 didn’t fit my business needs because of the lower megapixels, even though I loved the machine-gun speed with which they shot. The Z9 gave me that machine-gun speed at the megapixel count of my D850. So, for me, it was the best of both worlds. And, as I’m sure you are sick of hearing me say, I am a filmmaker. More of my business these days, in fact, is from filmmaking than stills. Not only did the Z9 give me the file size I needed along with the speed I never knew I wanted, but it also gave me top-of-the-class video features. Better yet, it keeps adding to those features via firmware. Add to all that the battery life I mentioned earlier, and suddenly I have a dependable, fast tool that can literally do anything and allow me to serve multiple tiers of customers with the same camera body.

In a way, my experience with the Z9 has redefined what a flagship camera is supposed to be for me. It used to just mean the absolute fastest camera in terms of frame rate and autofocus. But, in the mirrorless age, so much happens on the sensor itself that even the $2,000 cameras in each of the brands’ lines are as fast as the flagship DSLRs used to be. So this leads me to question whether the flagship term should not be reserved for speed, but versatility. Perhaps it’s not the absolute fastest product in the line, but it is the tool that can serve every market from advertising to journalism to weddings to personal work. Maybe it’s versatility that defines the modern flagship.

Just like the term “professional photographer,” a lot is in the eyes of the beholder. When I say “professional photographer,” my brain defaults to other commercial artists like myself who are creating campaigns for the advertising and editorial market. Others think first of wedding photographers. Others may think of professional photographers as photojournalists shooting on the sidelines of an NFL game. All those are professionals, really. At least as long as the IRS says so at the end of the year.

But, of course, all those different types of photographers are going to have different types of needs and use cases. So the “best” camera for each might be completely different. So, we can’t really define “flagship” as the best because that will mean different things to different people.

So, who knows? Maybe autofocus speed and burst rate really should be our quantifiers for flagship status. But, wait, that would mean the Z8 and Z9 are both flagships. Heck, at 24 MP, even a Z 6III is pretty darn fast compared to what was available a few years ago. Or, maybe it requires a built-in grip. But, then again, that would mean Sony doesn’t have a flagship at all. Thankfully, I am a happy owner of the Z9 and do think it qualifies as the company’s flagship for the reasons I mentioned earlier. But, regardless of your brand of choice, it seems as though the separation between price points in a camera line is closer than ever. This is, of course, a good thing. It means that we live in a world where you can get an amazing “professional” camera that can perform flagship duties for a lot less than we used to. This is a win-win for consumers. It just makes actually defining a “flagship” camera all the more difficult.

So, what do you think? How do you define a “flagship?” Is there a specific metric you are looking for? Is there still value in investing the additional money? In a world of amazing options, does the term even matter anymore?