Leaderboard

I initially dismissed the Nikon ZR. The compact body and odd I/O layout made it seem like a prosumer crossover rather than a serious tool. After spending real time shooting with it, that impression completely changed. The huge integrated display transforms the experience. It feels intuitive, immersive, and for the first time a Nikon mirrorless seems built for video operators. Pair with a Leica M lens and it delivers this uncanny mix of smartphone agility and FF cinematic depth, a combo that feels surprisingly liberating (think sigma FP but with IBIS). The body is metal and feels rock solid. The flip out screen isn’t ideal for low angle work, but that’s about the only ergonomic miss. The stills side remains capable and thoughtfully separated from the video mode. The redesigned video interface finally feels modern, with waveform, quick exposure tools, and four customizable banks all within reach. The main system menu still feels like a maze, but the dedicated video page is a major step toward a proper cine oriented workflow. I just hope Nikon will pull more from the RED side (traffic lights, open gate, 17:9 etc) in a firmware update. Despite its understated design, the ZR stands out as Nikon’s most forward-thinking hybrid yet. The 32-bit float audio, internal R3D recording, and that massive touch display all combine into a package that feels disruptive and modern at a mid-tier price point. Haven't been this tempted by a camera in a while.

I have been a pro photographer for 20 years now and live in a tropical island with lighting ratios you can't even imagine in most countries. This is why I have been always very sensible to Dynamic range result/progress/testing for the last two decades, as most of the population including me are darker skin and we have very hard light. During that time I saw the first digital cameras (I would say from 2 to 3rd generation) depending on how you count, go from about 10 to 14-15 (SNR) DR test in RAW, as contrary to most videographers, photographers been shooting in raw for decades. I have seen what a 10 stops DR camera image look like and my ZR is no way as bad as this. Last week I had to film some B rolls for the launching of an international car brand here, where we had to mix some of our country shots with their own media. And as I had little time, I had to go around and shoot in less ideal conditions with harsh middle day shoot and some with harsh backlight and I had to dig deep into the shadows. This is start of the summer in the southern hemisphere, so the light was already hard even not quite as from December to March. So to come back to CineD, I have enough experience to know their numbers/conclusion are just BS. In fact they are some of the reference that have educated me, mostly with the latitude test, which I consider the best test today. But when you take RAW numbers and pit it against mostly compress/NR based codec, guess what, it is disingenuous. Because if you had watched DR test for the last decade with Xyla charts and Imatest, you would know that Raw data tend to score much less because of noise, but in that noise is still a ton of Data. Gerald Undone who is himself not a Nikon Fan, does the explanation very well in the ZR dynamic range test. First he got 10.9 stops at 0.5 medium noise rating, which strangely jumps just a little bit to 11.1 on a normalized 4k timeline, and just adding a little NR, where as he says the details in the shadows are still very high he reaches 12.6. This is in the RED Komodo X range. I have seen other test from french (I am a french Speaker) to even Korean which were around same numbers and which corelate with multiple side by side test. And no way their are 2.5 stops difference between the KX and the ZR!!! But it is not the first time I see them cooking their numbers to support some kind of narative. But this time it was the exact opposite for the Sony A9iii. The one with the Global shutter that even with your eyes could see with a bad DR, but I remenber the guy putting so much NR to get 9STOPS of exposure latitude, to say it had great latitude. Yes it is a 1080p image, but doesn't mean it has 1080p details, which I pointed in the comments.

The C50 is a $3,900 camera. It's quite good and I'd love to have one, but there's a LOT of competition in the $4,000 space. It shouldn't surprise cined that not everybody's talking about it. Ultimately, it will probably be a good seller for Canon. On the other hand, adding something with "Redcode" in the name as a feature for the ZR was a fantastic marketing decision on Nikon's part. With a decent colorist, the differences in a final image between the Redcode NE and Nikon raw are likely to be negligible - but it doesn't matter because people can now say that they have a camera that records Redcode RAW. These days, used Komodos are not that much off the ZR in price - and lensrentals.com has their early BF special on off-rental gear where you can get 15% off one of their Komodos which are still in decent condition - putting them almost equal to the ZR in price. But getting an OG Komodo means a bigger camera with a smaller sensor, much worse autofocus, worse/less flexible built-in screen, much ergonomics, worse media (Cfast vs CF Express), and probably buying a v-lock battery plate so you don't need to source older/expensive Canon camcorder batteries (I did exactly that), and a less flexible lens mount with fewer third-party lenses available. But you do gain global shutter and 16-bit raw with better test chart performance. So yeah, of course everybody's talking about the ZR. Not sure why anybody, cined included, should be mad about it. People are welcome to use whatever hammer they like - and more competition in the cinema camera space, especially affordable (in comparison) competition is great for us as consumers of those cameras.

It's been a while since I had to film on land, and I'm using many lenses that I had almost forgotten about. For my rare terrestrial shooting, I always used old Yashica ML lenses in manual mode, and then I got an opportunity where an entire Panasonic kit came almost for free. - Panasonic Leica DG Macro 45mm f/2.8 - Panasonic Leica DG 12-35mm f/2.8 - Panasonic Leica 35-100mm f/2.8 - Panasonic Lumix G 100-300mm f/4-5.6 But I only used the 45mm macro a lot, which is superb underwater. After two days of shooting (I have a GH5 and a GH5MII, and my buddy has a GH5S), I wanted to throw them all down the toilet. Actually, the image quality of the Panaleica lenses is stellar for my taste (maybe even too clinic), but what really gets on my nerves is the impossibility of using manual focus creatively. They all have focus-by-wire, which means it is not linear, and the focus changes with the speed you turn the ring. I know, I'm stating the obvious. But let me vent, and then I'll get to the point. I rummaged through the GH5MII menus and discovered that since it has a similar firmware to the GH6 and GH7, in theory, it would be possible to choose whether to have linear focus and also set the focus throw. But—and here's the fun part—only on some types of Panasonic lenses. Finding the list is like looking for a unicorn, and when you finally get it, you discover that few of the listed lenses (which would almost be a basic kit) have this capability. It's crazy. Basically, it doesn't matter how many new camera bodies Panasonic makes (personally, I think the GH7 is the last of its kind) if you then have crappy lenses that haven't been updated for 15 years. Playing with continuous AF, I discovered that the 45mm Panaleica macro can't even keep the focus in AFC in basic scenarios. And it should be the king of macro in the M43 line and it doesn't support linear focus. In the end, I had to do some relaxing therapy by mounting the Yashica ML 50mm f1.4 and enjoying turning the manual focus ring. Out of curiosity, what is the situation with Panasonic FF lenses? Is it the same situation there too?

I found a false color LUT for ZR in a chinese forum. It was on a Chinese cloud host unavailable for foreigners, so I got it and uploaded to jotta: https://jottacloud.com/s/433167a024c75694baa94438259ee5d1b8e

Regarding Andrew's original post, unfortunately for many of the camera companies, not just Panasonic, I'm a consumer that feels pretty comfortable being behind the curve in exchange for bargains. Meaning, I only buy older used cameras. Just bought another GH5 for $350, for instance, to help my wife do YT content creation. Not only is that cheap, but it's still better than anything else I could buy brand new for under $400. Are there enough people like me? Combine like-minded-folks and typically obtuse Japanese attitudes about the global market and the magic 8-ball sez "Outlook Not So Good"

No reason that the iJustine channel can't publish a great video..... Well done to the film-making team that created it: Strange that there's no credit for editing. Maybe that was also Nathan. Well done to Apple for creating a phone that can produce results like this when used competently. Any YouTuber with the desire and sufficient resources should be able to replicate such a thing. It is a nice example of what the tech can do when used correctly by competent film-makers. The night shots were pretty good. I've found it to have impressive DR and low-light capabilities, but this was slightly more than I was anticipating. Those areas of Tokyo are probably quite well lit though, and I bet there was a healthy dose of NR in post for select shots. The results are still good though.