Written by 
Now that Canon has released the R1 and Sony has updated its a1 II platform, the Nikon Z9 has stiff competition. The title of “flagship camera” represents the pinnacle of each company’s technological abilities and becomes the outward face of that company for all to judge. Should a flagship camera be able to handle anything that is thrown at it? And is there such a thing as a “best” right now?
We usually do a ranking system with a very Olympics-like third place, runner-up, and winner in each category but we are going to move away from that system. Cameras are far more nuanced machines and I feel it is more important to simply give you my opinions based on the experience that I’ve gained by using these three cameras. With that being said, let’s get into our first category.
2024 Flagship Camera Review: Landscape Photography
Landscape photography is a genre that encompasses many different applications of the camera. I want to make this section more about photographic pursuits that don’t require fast autofocus but rather need to have detail for large printing purposes and dynamic range to capture varied and challenging lighting conditions. I’m going to talk about the cameras starting in no particular order but will maintain said order throughout the article.
The Nikon Z9 is the oldest of the bunch but it still represents an awesome flagship that delivers plenty of detail and dynamic range for most situations. The Nikon’s 45-megapixel sensor is ideal for printing large wall-sized images or allowing for room to crop if needed. I have always enjoyed Nikon’s color palette and rendering of white balance and the Z9 body can survive pretty much any outdoor weather conditions that you can throw at it.
The main criticism is going to be the lack of a mechanical shutter system only in so far as the dynamic range does suffer slightly. Compared to the Canon and Sony, a slight amount of range is given up but in the end, the Z9 makes for an excellent landscape and adventure camera.
The Canon EOS R1 has a rugged body design that can handle the outdoors and the dynamic range is excellent. However, there are two factors worth considering. Firstly, the dynamic range does deliver excellent shadow detail with very good control over noise levels but this is partly due to Canon always baking noise reduction into its files. Even shooting RAW will not prevent the subtle loss of detail to achieve clean shadows.
The second issue will be the obvious difference in megapixels. The 24-megapixel sensor is excellent overall but there is no denying the inability to print as large as Nikon or Sony or to crop as far, and this is further compounded by the above noise reduction being applied. This leaves space for Canon to release a higher megapixel version of the R1 but as it stands now, it would not be my ideal choice.
The Sony a1 II uses the same 50-megapixel sensor as the older a1 but luckily this sensor was way ahead of its time. There is plenty of detail to print with and dynamic range is the same as the Canon without any noise reduction applied. The a1 II body is by far the most compact and this is a nice advantage when hiking and traveling to far-off locations.
Sony claims that the new body design borrowed from the a9 III is more rugged than ever and I have no reason to doubt that claim. However, their earlier cameras did have issues with the egress of water through the battery door and I haven’t been lucky — or unlucky — enough to have tested this fully. Regardless, I would happily choose the a1 II for any sort of landscape or astrophotography pursuits.
2024 Flagship Camera Review: Portrait Photography
Portraiture tests a camera’s ability to focus on eyes accurately and maintain proper tracking even while the subject is turning or facing away. Using studio flashes, especially outdoors, is also an important consideration. Color accuracy and skin tone rendering are also important but I believe that we are past the point where any of these cameras are at an advantage or disadvantage in this regard so I won’t mention it further.
The Nikon Z9 has no issues tracking and following a portrait subject and 3D tracking is one of the simplest and most effective setups available. I also like the automatic subject detection so I can go from people to pets to something else entirely without having to select something beforehand.
The Z9 features a fairly fast scanning electronic shutter as well, so if I want to sync flashes outdoors I can use up to 1/250 of a second. This cuts a good amount of ambient light without having to use high-speed sync modes but there are better options in this regard.
The Canon EOS R1 will deftly track the eye of almost any creature you can find and will track the head, body, or torso if the eye can’t be seen. The lower megapixel count isn’t as big a hindrance with classic portraits as we often don’t want the sharpest of unflattering details as possible but obviously, where detail and capability are desirable, the Canon will suffer.
Flash sync speeds are excellent though and the Canon can sync with its mechanical shutter up to 1/200th of a second, but a blazing fast 1/320 with manual flashes in electronic shutter mode and 1/400 with TTL flashes. These faster speeds really allow you to cut ambient light down when using flashes outdoors or against bright interior lighting.
The Sony a1 II has a similar story with its straightforward real-time tracking AF which follows subjects tenaciously. The a1 II has notably added an automatic subject detection feature which works very well. As for sync speeds, the a1 II has a decently fast 1/200 of a second sync speed in electronic flash mode but where it really shines is with its 1/400th of second flash sync speed in mechanical shutter mode, with TTL flashes. The mechanical shutter cuts ambient light while also maintaining dynamic range and can still manage a 1/250th sync speed with manual flashes.
2024 Flagship Camera Review: Sports and Action Photography
Sports, wildlife, and photojournalism are the intense arenas of photography that the flagship camera is most often associated with. The cameras need to be rugged and be able to take punishing abuse. They also have to be able to focus with speed and precision in the most stressful situations. Whether it’s professional sports or a bird in flight, having the option to fire multiple images per second can increase the chances of capturing the decisive moment. I want to focus on how these three cameras handle focusing and sustained burst rates.
The Nikon Z9 provides a full suite of focusing modes from more classic zone focusing to its 3D tracking mode, all of which work in conjunction with subject detection modes. The Z9 can automatically decide what the subject is and hold on tight. Early experiences showed the Nikon Z9 to lose focus when encountering rain or heavy snow within the frame, but firmware updates since then, have improved the hit rate significantly. I had an opportunity to test one of the earliest models at a track and field sporting event, and despite the teething issues, it was accurate and reliable in most situations.
The Z9 does have a decent burst rate although it only achieves its fastest speeds by resorting to jpeg-only modes and cropping. The maximum sustained frame rate in raw mode is 20 fps and going above this places the camera into jpeg shooting all the way up to 120 fps. It’s absolutely rare for me to shoot above 20 fps anyway, but there will be some situations where some extra frames can ensure the shot happens. Nikon also incorporates a pre-release buffered shooting mode which I find very helpful to capture the right moment, although this is limited to jpegs again.
Sports and action are the preferred realm of the Canon EOS R1. Canon has done much to improve its autofocus performance and even shooting an intense hockey game, I had a good success rate and accurate eye-detection on helmeted players. The results are even more successful if you get to use the action-priority modes for basketball, volleyball, or soccer. Here the Canon can use AI-based learning to predict where players or the ball will be and adjust accordingly.
This all makes the R1 highly effective at shooting any kind of professional sport or action. They have also always had a very effective animal detection mode for wildlife shooting. Unfortunately, I had less success getting the eye-control AF to work on the R1. It is not as consistent as the R3 experience was and I hope that we see this improve in the future.
The R1 is also an incredibly fast-shooting camera with a maximum burst rate of 40 fps using uncropped, lossy-compressed raw files. The buffer can handle well over 10 seconds of sustained fire at this rate too, so there should be no issue getting the shot. At 20 fps the Canon delivers uncompressed raw files for a slight boost to overall image quality. This is all possible at the lower 24-megapixels that the R1 gives, but for most sports and action photography where high megapixels are not necessary -or even desired- the R1 is king.
The Sony a1 II might not seem like it has a body design that supports longer lenses but a battery grip can add the extra weight and vertical grip if needed. I tried out the a1 II at an NFL football game which turned out to be an incredibly dynamic and challenging shooting event. The autofocus was very effective and I had a very good success rate, even considering my inexperience at shooting football. Sony has also added auto subject detection and a pre-burst shooting mode to bring the A1 II up to speed with its contemporaries.
Burst rates fall right in between the Z9 and R1. The a1 II can push up to 30 fps using lossy compressed raw files with minimal quality loss. I still found 20 fps to be plenty for most sports situations which all three cameras can easily handle but it is nice to be able to push further when needed.
2024 Flagship Camera Review: Videography
Video is the last category to discuss because the role of videographer has been thrust upon the photojournalist more and more in recent years. Each of these cameras has to handle high-quality video production and be able to capture the action as a hybrid tool. The first thing we can say universally is that all three cameras actually focus reliably in video mode and are able to track most moving subjects as they traverse the frame. Jordan tested out all three cameras in various video situations and found them to be roughly equal in this regard.
The Nikon Z9 has a very useful compressed raw record mode that requires no external recorder. This gives you plenty of flexibility over noise reduction, white balance, and exposure. The Nikon Z9 can also deliver this internal raw recording up to 8.3K which dominates over its competitors. The Z9 can also record oversampled 4K up to 60P which is ideal for capturing the realism and energy of professional sports. This is also handy when you want high-quality slow-motion footage. It turns out that the Nikon Z9 is still the most capable video camera of the three and also the lowest price.
The Canon EOS R1 also has internal raw recording modes which give plenty of malleability to the file but it can only go up to 6K levels of resolution due to the 24-megapixel sensor. The Canon still is able to deliver excellent-looking video. The EOS R1 is also able to capture oversampled 4K 60P footage just like the Z9.
The Sony a1 II is quite lacking compared to its competition because it does not support any internal raw record modes. You can output raw to an external recorder but you are limited to 4K resolution and this clearly puts the a1 II at a disadvantage.
The a1 II does deliver excellent 4K record modes which are very usable and it does have an internal 8K option, however, the 4K footage is subsampled out of camera and loses a fair amount of detail. You can shoot 8K and oversample 4K footage out of it in post but this is far less convenient than either the Z9 or R1.
Recording 8K on either the Z9 or a1 II does utilize the full width of the sensor and when recording in a native log format provides lots of room to crop or reframe if necessary. The fact that the Canon R1 has no option for a high-resolution video mode may limit its flexibility. Shooting raw at 6K is as close as you can get with the Canon R1.
2024 Flagship Camera Review: To Each Their Own
The Z9 is an awesome camera despite being slightly older than the others, and there is no arguing that it represents the best value for the dollar at just under $5,000. It has an excellent sensor, can handle any kind of photography, and is still the most capable video/photo hybrid of the bunch. In fact, the camera that gives the Z9 the most grief is really the Nikon Z8. It provides effectively the same experience as the Z9 in a smaller package and although it gives up dual CF Express Slots, GPS, and Ethernet connectivity, many users won’t mind.
The Canon EOS R1 is undoubtedly pricey at $6,300 and is clearly more specialized as a dedicated sports and action kind of camera. Canon has certainly made an innovative body with a fast-scanning sensor and state-of-the-art autofocusing. It’s a decent video camera as well but I feel like if I’m paying the high price of admission, I want a camera that can tackle more types of photography. The R1 leaves room for a higher resolution version of this same body in the future but I feel like many users will simply look to the smaller and still capable R5 mkII.
The Sony a1 II is proving to be a controversial camera. On the one hand, it borrows technology already present in the Sony lineup as a basic mashup of the a9 III body and the older a1 internals without providing much innovation. On the other hand, the camera still ends up being incredibly capable and delivers fast shooting, high burst rates, and more megapixels than anyone else. It’s a testament to the original a1 for being so ahead of its time but any updates like pre-capture and auto subject detection are fairly minor. The video capabilities should have been improved substantially and the processing ability seems to be largely unimproved from a flagship that is four years old now. Throw on top of that a very high $6,500 price tag and the a1 II looks like a camera that is high on performance which should have delivered more improvements than it does.