Why I Use Two Camera Systems—And What Each One Does Better
Canon R1 and Sony A1 II aren’t rivals in my bag. They’re teammates.
Like many wildlife photographers, I’ve spent years in the endless gear debate: Canon or Sony? Sell and simplify? Stick with what I know?
I was close to going all-in on Sony. After shooting with the original A1, the speed, resolution, and autofocus performance convinced me it was the most advanced wildlife camera I’d ever used. I seriously considered selling off all my Canon gear.
Then Canon announced the RF 100–300mm f/2.8.
And everything changed.
Today, I shoot both the Canon R1 and Sony A1 II. Not out of hesitation, but because they serve different purposes—and together, they give me a broader, more capable system than either could alone.
This is how I use them, and why I believe it’s the right setup for the work I do.
Canon R1: Rugged, Responsive, Fully Dialed In
The R1 is the body I trust when conditions are unpredictable or extreme. If I’m heading into snow, rain, sand, or anything that might push a camera to its limit, this is what I reach for.
It’s built like a tank. The ergonomics are rock solid. More importantly, Canon’s customization options are in a different league. I can assign a wide range of functions to buttons exactly where I want them. The tactile confidence that gives me in the field is hard to overstate—when something happens fast, I don’t think, I just shoot.
And then there’s the RF 100–300mm f/2.8. This lens is the main reason I stayed in the Canon system. It’s an extraordinary combination of reach and speed—essential for action wildlife work in dim or variable light. Nothing else like it exists.
Sony A1 II: Resolution, Speed, and Autofocus That Tracks Like a Predator
The A1 II is a technical powerhouse. It gives me 50 megapixels, which is valuable for tight cropping and large prints, but it’s the autofocus system that really sets it apart.
For birds in flight, Sony’s AI-based subject tracking is still the best I’ve used. It locks on and sticks in situations where other systems struggle. When paired with the right lenses, it’s nearly unfair how easy it is to get sharp, dynamic results.
Sony’s lens lineup has also matured into something unmatched in certain focal ranges:
- The ultra light 300mm f/2.8 is so easy to hand hold.
- The Sigma 300–600mm f/4, which I recently added, is on the heavier side at just under 4 kg—but the zoom range is excellent, especially for safaris where flexibility matters. I haven’t tested it in the field yet; its first real outing will be in South Africa next month. If Canon or Sony eventually release a native lens in this range, I’ll likely make the switch.
- The 400–800mm is a huge advantage on safaris or open landscapes. It’s versatile, surprisingly easy to handle, and eliminates the need for converters.
- The 50–150mm f/2, which I recently added, looks incredibly promising—especially for wildlife video. I haven’t tested it in the field yet, but it could become a staple for close encounters and cinematic sequences.
“With eagles, I run the Canon R1 for speed and flexibility, and the Sony A1 II with the 400mm f/2.8 for reach and that cinematic bokeh. It’s a two-system setup that leaves nothing on the table.”
Michael ahlén
Why Not Just Pick One?
Because no single system gives me everything.
Canon gives me ruggedness, control, and a lens that simply doesn’t exist anywhere else. Sony gives me resolution, superior bird tracking, and access to uniquely innovative glass.
When I’m in Africa, I often run Canon R1 with the RF 100–300mm f/2.8 on one shoulder, and the Sony A1 II with the 400–800mm on the other. That setup gives me fast, responsive midrange coverage with Canon, and reach, detail, and speed with Sony.
When I’m photographing eagles, I often run the Canon R1 with the RF 100–300mm f/2.8 on one shoulder, and the Sony A1 II with the 400mm f/2.8 on the other. I keep a 1.4x converter handy for the Sony when the birds are a bit more distant or shy. This lens gives me incredible reach and absolutely stunning bokeh.
I didn’t choose one over the other—I chose both, because they each bring something the other can’t.