I've been sitting here for a bit, wondering what the worst gear release by a major manufacturer was in 2018, then I realized the answer was crystal clear.
We talk a lot about the best gear of the year, but that got me thinking: what was the worst gear of the year? I could easily go for something hideously bad, but then I thought that "worst" should also be measured by expectations and context. When a company you've never heard of sends you a camera that clearly shows they've bit off more than they can chew, the results are hilarious, but I have a hard time calling that the "worst," because expectations were never high for that camera. Rather, the more I thought about it, "worst" should be a label applied to products put out by companies that know better, that can do better, and that know their customers want (and would mostly happily pay for) better. That's the type of gear that you feel truly let down by.
When I thought of it that way, the answer to the question was blindingly obvious: the Canon EOS R and Nikon Z 6 and Z 7 cameras. These were by far two of the most highly anticipated pieces of photography gear not just in 2018, but of the last several years. Finally, Canon and Nikon were responding to the ever-growing success of Sony and Fujifilm. Finally, after years of consumer frustration, migration to different brands, and rumors flying about, the real deal. Finally, we were going to see what the two oldest photography companies with the most history would be capable of when they threw their weight behind mirrorless technology seriously. Except, it turns out they were only sort of serious.
Let's get something out of the way first: yes, they're capable cameras that you can take great pictures with. I'm not disputing that. What's so frustrating, though, is that Canon and Nikon could have done so much better. They have the experience and the funds to do so. Rather, what we got was almost an insult to photographers: the bare minimum to appease the growing chorus demanding a response to the companies that have made great strides in the mirrorless realm. These are the cameras released by companies with the hubris to believe that the inertia of their market shares, brand names, and photographers being invested in their systems will keep them in the game. They've chosen wringing every last bit of momentum out of the old state of affairs over leveraging their market positions to push forward all the more.
Perhaps particularly infuriating was Nikon's ad campaign leading up to the release of the Z 6 and Z 7. If you don't remember it, it was a series of YouTube teasers steeped in melodrama, as silhouettes danced and Nikon dropped grandiose hints about how 100 years of camera experience were going into this revolutionary device. They dragged on for weeks, teasing photographers into thinking that whatever Nikon was planning, it was going to be something that officially put Sony on notice. At that point, it seemed like Nikon was not only going to match Sony, but blow them clear out of the water, and given Sony's progress (the remarkable a9, the a7R III, the first camera that doesn't make one pick between resolution and fast frame rates), we expected something spectacular. The teaser video below seems really silly in retrospect.
Canon didn't go so overboard with the buildup to their release, and while we've all come to expect Canon to build solid cameras that evolve at a glacial pace, we hoped that with them finally acknowledging a paradigm shift led by a company with the polar opposite philosophy that they might recognize the need to at least meet them at the same level if not surpass them. That, of course, did not happen. They tripped over their own shoelaces just like Nikon did.
A lot of people make the argument that Sony has been at the full frame mirrorless game longer than Canon and Nikon and thus has the advantage of several generations of development. I don't buy that argument. Sony may have a couple years up on Canon and Nikon in full frame mirrorless development, but Canon and Nikon have decades on Sony in camera development. And were the issues highly technical things — things that take intense research and development to solve and integrate into a complete system, I might give them a pass. Thing like dynamic range and sensor architecture? I might be inclined to give the companies a pass.
But those weren't the issues. The issues were the most basic, fundamental sorts of things — common sense to the point that most people had assumed they were now unquestionable standards at this level. Things that Canon and Nikon had watched Sony make mistakes with and evolve from. The most glaring? The single card slots. It's not exactly a secret that cameras of this level are used by professionals and serious amateurs for whom in-camera backup is not a luxury, but an expectation and often, a dealbreaker. To make matters worse, Nikon inexplicably went with the expensive and proprietary XQD format.
Then there's the ludicrous 1.83x crop factor for 4K on the EOS R. Middling autofocus performance from all three cameras. No IBIS in the EOS R and a lack of IS in some of its lenses. Lackluster continuous rates on the Canon. A limited buffer with long write times and exposure lock on the first frame on the Nikon. The battery life of mirrorless camera two generations back. As Tony Northrup put it regarding the Z 7: "they promised me my D850 in a mirrorless form, and that was not my experience.”
This is what I like seeing.
I will give credit where it's due. One thing that does excite me is seeing Canon and Nikon (to a lesser extent with the 58mm f/0.95) taking advantage of their new mounts to push the boundaries of lens development. Seeing a 28-70mm f/2L zoom and the spectacular albeit ludicrously expensive 50mm f/1.2L is awesome. More of those, please.
That doesn't change the fact that these cameras felt like getting a gas station gift card that your brother picked up on the way to the house on Christmas morning because he waited until the last minute and had to address the occasion somehow. And it's upsetting because big bro has plenty of money and knows you well enough to put thought and resources into something that will really wow you. Let's see if Canon and Nikon can do better in 2019. I know they can. Come back to the forefront, Canon and Nikon. Excite your customers again. Make the market more competitive. Show us what you're really capable of.
The great and famous and omnscient Yin Ze has said Z7 is crap, period. By then , you know nothing about the real life photography business as many influencers are saying Canikon FX mirrorless are all the crapiest devices ever released so far, only SONY Alpha line is the saviour of the pro photographer... Or a childish idea !
Years too late for me! I moved to Sony full frame in 2013 and have never looked back; Sony A7S, A7R, A7 II and A7R II, as well as a RX10 III & IV.
Canon and Nikon lost the race and it will take a huge amount of effort to catch up!!
I hope Nikon and Canon catch up. Sony reduced the A9 by $1000 and I wonder if that was in response to the N/C releases. I hope so. Competition is good. I still prefer Nikon/Canon bodies but Sony has it right for what counts most: AUTOFOCUS. And 20fps is icing on cake.
For those of considering switching to the Sony... how well do the adapters work for Canon lenses? Do you get all the features of the lenses (image stabilization, etc)? How's the AF speed?
Really varies lens to lens. Any specific lenses you want to know about?
100-400 L, 70-200 L, 24-70 L, Mostly concerned about the telephotos lenses as I do a lot of wildlife stuff. But some portraits as well. Thanks!
So mostly the wildlife stuff I'm worried about with IS and AF. That's where any speed difference will make a big difference and you don't get second chances to take the shot.
strange this 'feature' is not over rated, but praised in the SONY camp, but trashed for Nikon FTZ by many asking for native lenses only... I know, pro photographers don't care, they have to own the latest SONY camera available to be a pro ! And amateur have to own the latest and l broadest datasheet to feel being a pro.
I agree with Alex on this article though the title is very click baity. I went into reading this thinking it was just going to be another click bait article but he makes very clear that both cameras take excellent images and he puts into perspective the issues present vs the expectations of these two cameras. There were high hopes for both cameras and they are both huge let downs and are sub-par for the (very expensive) price defined by quantifiable facts. These are not opinions. I my self was looking into a Z6 until I learned of its garbage auto focus and the massively expensive XQD format. My D700 has better auto focus and having a proprietary memory format from Sony has a huge roll to play in what killed their VITA portable gaming platform. Not a lot of people bought one because the cards were too expensive. This entire article is correct when viewed in the perspective that was well outlined by Alex. Nikon and Sony can do better but they chose not to. That should tell you something about these companies as a consumer. If this is how they are going to treat their product lines moving forward I will chose Fuji going into the mirror less future seeing as how they actually listen to their consumers.
HEY KALE: FT-Z adaptor doesn't even work properly TRY TELLING CLIENT "SORRY image it out of focus' but not my fault because i have "good shooting and better marketing" to make my images stand out from the "ignorant" Sony shooters who depend on gear for overrated in-focus images. CHRIS: I had z6 on preorder and thank god I cancelled. I tested out Z6 sample and was not impressed especially after using 850 and D5. Kaleb thinks this is ok as long as you have good skills and marketing lol. FUJI is also amazing -- XT-3 is a truly devastating camera for Nikon and Canon pride.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMIAV-exl_o&t=1s
Aw come on, you can't say the z cameras are the worst of 2018 without even using them. It is really quite ridiculous. It's like me saying, I didn't read your article, but some people on a website told me it was rubbish so I am going to parrot their opinion.
As a professional photographer and an owner of a Nikon Z 6 I .
You criticize a camera you have never used , what a stupid statement .How can anyone take you seriously ?
If Sony a9 and a7iii didn't exist then the article would be stupid.
I've got two Canon eosrs and a Sony a7iii and they are both better at different things. As a Professional Wedding Photographer I love my Canon eosrs and they are have been working like trojans since I purchased them. Now for video Sony wins hands down, and I use that for Videography when clients want to include that in their packages.
Personally I think the Sony has an absolutely horrible menu system and the camera feels really cheap for the price (which is disappointing), but I have it attached to a gimbal at all times (Zhiyun Weebill), so I rarely have to touch it. Furthermore, I absolutely hate the a7iii for photographs and much prefer the Canon eosr and the fully articulating screen (and a whole bunch of other features).
But hey, ...if people actually reviewed the Canon for stills and all the hidden little features instead of jumping on the 4k crop bandwagon, then it would have been a better representation of what the camera is all about.
So, I own the Sony & Canon mirrorless cameras and I prefer both for different things, so all the vs nonsense is ridiculous in my opinion.
I love both for different reasons.
Just like I loved the Super Nintendo & the Sega Genesis for different reasons :D
Mouahahahaha !
Anothe lame and stupid rant from a lame but self called 'PRO' and genius. You should stop photography and work in marketing, it would be better suited to your ill skills.
Seriously, I don't want any of thoses MILC, but spiting such poor article is a waste of time for all us, you included.
Click bait title, lame arguments... Like a trash tv/magazin seeking for audience filled with oversized ego. Berk.
I do not agree with the title of your article because it would be easy to just change Canon and Nikon to Sony and Fuji in the title and make a case for that. I would be able to support Sony and Fuji as bringing out the worst cameras of the year based on Sony's difficult handling, confusing menus, and refusal to do anything about those issues over three generations of bodies. Or Fuji's glaring omission of IBIS and high base ISO, things they could obviously fix if they wanted to.
What I do think is appropriate to say is that Nikon and Canon's EOS-R & Nikon's Z6-7 were less than you and a lot of other people hoped for.
Wow. Bravely said!
I think you (and a lot of other pro reviewers) set wrong standards to measure "the best" or "the worst".
In my opinion a camera should be about photography, about its ergonomics, about its ease of use. But in almost every review I read "4K crop" and second card slot.
Let me tell you that: I have a single slot 6D since its release, I haven't had a card breaking ONCE and also I haven't used its video functionality ONCE.
Reason: I'm a photographer. What I care about is: Can it do photos, do the photos have a good resolution, can it use a vast array of lenses, does its autofocus work flawlessly? Things where the R has big check marks.
I don't care about video and honestly I don't get this obsession about 4K video when most people don't even have a computer with enough processing power to edit it. Let alone a 4K monitor.
I wouldn't call a camera "worst" cause it implies its bad. But today any camera you buy above $1000 is good.
So I call it "not ideal". Not ideal for me is a camera that still has a NOT fully articulating screen in its 7th successor. Not ideal for me is a camera that still has 24 megapixels, while every APS-C offers the same. Not ideal is a camera that has no space for my fingers and is front-heavy. And a camera that has more bugs than a Russian hotel (talking bout overheating, stareater, pinstriping and the latest Sony bug: weird circles).
UVD Dood: Please head to a deli right now and buy 10 megamillions tickets since you and Gherry Jionis have such good fortune and have probably shot 27,000 weddings without one under/overexposed/out of focus frame.
R AF slows down to like 5 or less frames a second in continuous af. canon seems to have turned the clock back to 2000 when the d30 had a whopping 2-3 frames a second.
not going to even mention that horrible 1.7x crop factor for 4K video.
Dear Alex, I always appreciate your articles. But in this case I don't agree with you. What Nikon did this was starting with a complete new system which is designed for the future of lens design. The Z 7 and the Z 6 are two great tools which came with new lenses that set standards. If you you need it, the slower AF can be an issue. But as a still photographer I am interested in image quality. EOS R image quality is no match for the Nikon with it's ancient sensor. Even a Nikon D700 is better. Yes, it is very interesting to offer new system with very expensive lenses, I don't think so, changing a system is always a risc with high prize. Besides that the quality of these lenses is not visible due to the old sensor. Yes Sony has the advantage at the moment, because they started earlier. Besides their horrible human interface and ergonomics, this system (E-Mount) will come to an end soon. Where Canon, Leica and Nikon designed a new lens mount for future lens disign: larger mount and closer to the sensor; Sony is stuck with a mount designed for APS-C. Their only way out is a new lens mount, which means that the investments their clients did are wasted effort.
Canon and Nikon put the least they could into their full-frame mirrorless cameras to justify the price they wanted to charge. In large part, I think they equipped and priced their new full-frame mirrorless cameras in such a way as to avoid cannibalizing sales of their existing DSLRs. Not necessarily a smart move.
I am a professional. I love my Z6. I don't give two hoots about card slots since I shoot tethered. Image quality is outstanding, AF on Z lenses is fast. And, I have less to worry about with regard to AF Fine Tune (which was always concerning with most Nikon DSLR's). Just my 2 cents, no harm no foul! 😀
I was surprised that both Cannon and Nikon didn't raise the bar in the mirrorless camera world. After years of criticism of issues with the Sony system (one memory card slot and poor battery life), it seems that neither company learned from Sony's growing pains. I haven't used either camera so I can't comment directly on how good they are, but from all accounts they are good camera bodies which I'm sure users of both brands will welcome. I just had hoped they would push the mirrorless market farther forward making Sony pick up their games a well.
I hope Sony will push their advantage and really blow our minds away in 2019 by beating our expectations. I love the A mount and hope an A99iii will soon come out !
For 150 years "professional photographers" didn't have a second card slot, 10 years with a second slot and now it's mandatory?
Yes.
Cars were invented in 1885. Yet three-point seatbelts were not standard in cars until 1959. Title 49 of the United States Code, Chapter 301, Motor Vehicle Safety Standard, which took effect on January 1, 1968, required all vehicles (except buses) to be fitted with seat belts. FOR 83 YEARS NO DRIVERS WERE KILLED, INJURED OR MAIMED ON THE ROAD(According to Nikon historian) BECAUSE OF A LACK OF SEATBELTS. SO WHY ARE SEATBELTS MANDATORY?
Additionally, Is the rumor true that Nikon ambassador Janny Ghioanis has driven 14.37 million miles to 27,393 weddings without a three-point restraint and has not had one frame of film ruined by fogging, underexposure, xray, bad processing,....?
Is it true HE ALSO drove all those miles without a spare tire in the trunk?
You'd make a great Washington Post or New York Times reporter... ;) ;)
You say "they're capable cameras that you can take great pictures with. ..<snip>.. Canon and Nikon could have done so much better." So you choose to see the glass 1/2 empty. That is your choice. I choose to see the glass 1/2 full. I will take happily take a capable camera that I can take great pictures with.
It's so easy to talk without knowing sh*t. And when someone talks about the XQD in the way you do, Alex, you don't know a thing. First of all, XQD (or better CFExpress) is THE NEW F*CKING STANDARD for high performance high reliable, high speed cards for professional uses. Why someone would choose it? "I don't know!". Wink, wink.
Second, IT'S NOT A SDCARD! It's been designed to be very reliable. You want 2. Fine. But do you have to SDDs on your laptop? Better start thinking about buying one with 2 (why laptop manufacturers. WHY?).
It's the proper thing to do when you're shooting weeding photos at Chernobyl and you're afraid of losing them!
Take into account that the same technology (and cards) are used in aerospace and healthcare uses. But are not secure and reliable enough to store pictures? XQD/CFExpress uses a f*cking bunch of technologies to prevent data corruption and, even, to let you access your data even if it happens. Remember, is good enough to be used on a plane, where HUMAN LIVES depend on it.
Please, for God sakes, STOP talking about a technology (and stop making judgments) if you don't know anything about it. Why Nikon has choose to put just one XQD/CFExpress slot instead of making the camera bigger and putting 2? 'cause, simply, you don't need it anymore!
The reliability, and speed, that XQD/CFExpress gave us makes the 2 slots superfluous.
Instead of writing sh*tty click-bait articles, like this one, that gave us 0 knowledge and have 0 relevance, it would so much better if you're write about this technology (and so many others) that are coming to the camera market. It would better that instead of writing comments we would start LEARNING something useful.
what if someone would say "Fstoppers is the worst photography related site of the 2018! They do post some good articles, but there are just too many clickbait articles which are really upsetting me and they really did disappoint me this year!!" And then you would find out, that this person who said this statement heard this and did not even read the "fstoppers" in 2018, but the people who said it were trustworthy and reliable ... well it doesn't work like that!
firstly - actually go and grab one of these three cameras and then write a new article. and not just for a few hours to go out and take a few shots of neighbours doors and beautiful trees - no, go and shoot some serious stuff! I was lucky enough and had Z6 for almost two weeks, shot with it extensively (F1, interviews, daily news), I have the Z7 now for almost two weeks and did some low light shots, New Year's celebrations - and, what is more important and telling - I am using it alongside the D850 - you know, the DSLR version of Z7. and they go perfeclty hand in hand, and the Z family is really great, it really did impress me. the only difference is the form of the camera, otherwise there are no differences - reliability, felling that camera gives you when you shoot with it, no thinking - "will this camera be able to capture this scene?" ...
yes - only one XQD slot, but then again - how many XQD cards did fail? I still have all my XQD cards in rotation, and the oldest one is 6 years old and still working. cannot say that for my (newer SD and CF cards, unfortunately).
I did have the opportunity to shoot with Canon EOS R as well, it is also a great camera, but to be honest, the weakest of the three (but then again, it's been 7 years since I used Canon cameras on daily basis and not being accustomed to the new Canon settings layout might be quite a setback for me and this could be the reason I did not like it so much) ...
bottom line - these three cameras are far from perfect, but then again - can you show me the perfect camera? is it fair to call these cameras the worst of the 2018?
One of the worst articles I read here!
I got the chance to have a play with the Z6 at a local camera store. Found the AF to be as good as my D750 if not better. AF in video mode was miles better and actually usable.
I believe the EOS R and Nikon Z were made for one audience: Canon and Nikon DSLR shooters at risk of trying out a Sony, loving it, and jumping ship. These were meant to compete with Sony on price, not so much against the existing DSLRs as replacements.
Canon added the extra part of making really interesting RF lenses. I think that's to sink the hook. You buy an EOS R to play with mirrorless wuth existing glass -- a reversible decision made cheap because it works with your Canon batteries and speedlights. Once the get you to buy a lens, you now have one foot fully in the murrirless pool.
Fact is, even at their best speeds, Canon and Nikon won't have complete-enough systems to compete with Sony, Fujifilm, Micro Four Thirds, and maybe even L-Mount as attractive systems for those not invested in Canon and Nikon. I expect they'll expand both up and down to fill out the systems, but it'll take time.
2016 - Canon releases the 5D4, a camera that got lots of praise, high scores, gold awards and is still one of the most used cameras by professionals today (Rank 2 of Canon cameras on Flickr, based on daily average users).
2018 - Just 2 years later, Canon releases the EOS R, essentially a mirrorless, modernized 5D4.
OMG wOrSt CaMeRa eVeR!!! 🙄💁♂️
LOL, just LOL...