Achieving this level of sharpness (Page 2): There are three things that come to mind that might make the Z8/Z9 produce sharper pictures than the D850. 1. IBIS 2. Better autofocus...

therwol Loc: USA

Retired CPO wrote:

You're comparing apples to pineapples! To answer y... (show quote)

There are three things that come to mind that might make the Z8/Z9 produce sharper pictures than the D850.

1. IBIS
2. Better autofocus, though the autofocus of the D850 is outstanding. It just doesn't match what the Z8/9 can do.
3. Better lenses. Most of the Z lenses test better than their F mount counterparts, though not all, and some third party lenses match the Z lenses pretty well.

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

Sharpness is one thing IQ is another. Do not forsake IQ for extra sharp.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

zacksoccer wrote:

This image is from Scott Wells...He uses a Nikon z9 with a 600mm lens...I have a Nikon D850, D500, and am using a Sigma 150-600 lens...is it every possible to get this level of sharpness without a mirrorless camera and a prime lens? These images are amazing...

Sony a9, 200-600mm lens, at 100 yards, only 5% of image used. I guess the answer is no.

Jack 13088 Loc: Central NY

revhen wrote:

Wells's eagle is weird. No background. It's like a cartoon.

I’m glad someone else thought this.

tcthome Loc: NJ

zacksoccer wrote:

No. His was done in LR and then Topaz DeNoise...

I was going to ask about Denoise. I use it once in a while but think it works better for already reasonably sharp images & when needs to be used heavy gives a wax figure type look from it lessening the fine detail. I am using an older ver of TPZ-DNZ & the newer software might work better.

tcthome Loc: NJ

revhen wrote:

Wells's eagle is weird. No background. It's like a cartoon.

It is a hazy white sky. I have photos like this. And if you use + EC (I do sometimes with dark bodied birds) it makes it whiter.

ABJanes Loc: Jersey Boy now Virginia

zacksoccer wrote:

This image is from Scott Wells...He uses a Nikon z9 with a 600mm lens...I have a Nikon D850, D500, and am using a Sigma 150-600 lens...is it every possible to get this level of sharpness without a mirrorless camera and a prime lens? These images are amazing...

I like yours better!

Over sharpening does not look real or natural......IMHO

Haenzel Loc: South Holland, The Netherlands

billnikon wrote:

Sony a9, 200-600mm lens, at 100 yards, only 5% of image used. I guess the answer is no.

If this is true I need an upgrade....I need an upgrade immediately.

agillot

This light issue maybe could be helped with a better beamer on a strong flash , I once knew a man that used a flash / Fresnel lens on all outdoor pictures with a prime nik 600 lens[ $ 12k ] , got some amazing shots .

Tomfl101 Loc: Mount Airy, MD

Linda From Maine wrote:

Did Mr. Wells suggest he did no editing to the shot, and that he photographs in jpg only, no raw?

Zack, a lot of the issue with your photo is exposure. You were in a tough location for light, but had you shot in raw and edited, perhaps there'd be details to pull out?

It doesn’t seem possible to have such high contrast and sharpness without post processing here. The background is completely void of detail while the eagle is well saturated. I’m skeptical.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

zacksoccer wrote:

.is it every possible to get this level of sharpness without a mirrorless camera and a prime lens?

No .....there is a reason why the Z9+600 f4 =$15K or there-a-bouts !

You can get fairly close tho if you are experienced and knowledgeable ..... Is the Z9 and 600 f4 $14K better ??

Canon 80D and Canon 400 5.6 prime cost = about $ 1K today used

(Download)

therwol Loc: USA

Tomfl101 wrote:

It doesn’t seem possible to have such high contrast and sharpness without post processing here. The background is completely void of detail while the eagle is well saturated. I’m skeptical.

Vastly different cameras. Different lenses. Different lighting. Different post-processing. The second photo really doesn't address the question. Personally, as a D850 owner, I would say that you don't need a mirrorless camera to achieve the same sharpness that is shown in the first picture, but there are more things that can go wrong with the older DSLR technology such as a lens that needs calibration, autofocus that is more likely to fail (compared with the Z8/9), lack of IBIS with a non-VR lens etc.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

Haenzel wrote:

If this is true I need an upgrade....I need an upgrade immediately.

One difference is that a DSLR focuses on a mirror and the sensor is directly behind it, yes, you can fine tune but that is a difficult process and does not always turn out correctly. With a Mirrorless, you focus directly onto the sensor, no middle man, no fine tuning.
Another big difference is the silent shutter, not always necessary but in some situations you do not want wildlife to hear the shutter.
Another big difference is the fact that you can see, before you shoot, exactly how the final image is going to look, if that matters.
The final difference for me is that I can shoot at 30 fps in RAW and it's hard to fill up the buffer. I cannot do this with a DSLR. For me, with wildlife, it makes a big difference.
And lastly, EYE FOCUS, that is a biggie, most DSLR's are not programmed for that.
Good luck and keep on shooting until the end.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

Haenzel wrote:

I don't think it is possible to get a picture of an eagle that is sharp from beak to tail with a 600mm tele lens?
I can't with a 450mm...

It appears that most of the Eagle is at the same distance, wing tips to head. If your shooting at a distance, even wide open, the depth of field is easily enough to cover the entire Eagle. Remember, this is a prime lens, not a zoom. Big difference, below is a Male Kingfisher taken from 200 yards with a very small section of the image used. It was taken with a 600 f4 prime. And yes, you get what you pay for, Primes deliver at a distance. And by the way, that is a minnow in it's mouth. And yes, above the minnow you can see a water drop coming off the minnows tail.

pithydoug Loc: Catskill Mountains, NY

zacksoccer wrote:

This image is from Scott Wells...He uses a Nikon z9 with a 600mm lens...I have a Nikon D850, D500, and am using a Sigma 150-600 lens...is it every possible to get this level of sharpness without a mirrorless camera and a prime lens? These images are amazing...

He is using an f4 600mm prime roughly $12,000 vs a $1,000 zoom. Answer no, purely for the lens. DSLR vs mirrorless is less important. If the bird was close and on a stick you may get close.