Danyyyel

I don't give a shit about 8k and to a certain extend 4k. I remember countless discussion with people lecturing me how 4k would take the world in 2-5 years because it was so superior etc and it was in 2010-2012. I told them that it took more than a decade or two (because we are still a lot in the SD-720p) world than 1080p even now. Even if it was a big jump in quality from SD and FHD. Even 720p was a big leap from SD. So that if it took that much for such an advancement, moving from FHD to 4k will take much more time, because the leap now would be minimal. For me the ideal resolution would be 3k for pristine 2k (Alexa). But I am ok with 4k at least for dslr milc that have higher megapixel generaly as they don't resolve as good as native video camera. I cannot even stop laughting about those people saying... hey we need 6k scaled down to get true 4k etc... it is as if anyone can see... now 8k LOL

What until now I don't understand, not judging you in particular, but there are quite a lot of low light test, I guess by nw we know that we can use 6400 ISO and go to 12800 or even 25600 ISO. But no one was able to do a test with what is the real innovation of this camera and it is 10 bit log profile. That is the first test I will do with this camera when I get it start of next year, put it at 800 ISO, log, 10 bit and shoot some people and landscape. Just to know what is the ultimate quality of this camera.

I remember when you where saying that Nikon first gen would never compete against Sony third gen. You know what the Z6 is better than the A73 Sony MILC, better viewfinder, rear screen, ergonomic, 10 bit, construction weather sealing, 10 bit etc. The only thing it looses is Continous autofocus in.............. photo and not video. So what I expect is at least 1 or 2 firmware update for continuous autofocus to get it better. That does not mean that its photo autofocus is bad, it is just not at the same level than the Sony in Continous autofocus. I can't understand people thinking, Sony sensor division is number one in the world, why would they handicap their reputation to protect 13% Milc Dslr market. They would alienate 90% of their own customer.

Yep and that is the reason Nikon decided to put small buffers in the Z (mostly noticeable in the z7 than z6 in photography). Because Buffers might become nearly redundant when you can write at those speeds. But , I never saw anything about internal 10 bit., which would have been nice.

I think you are mistaken on that, XQD is already much faster than SD card and should easily be able to do 10 bit it is only 2 bit more and about 20-25% more data.

People are getting 4k TV by default , its not like they really really want it, it is just that you can get a 4k TV for 5-10% more than a 1080p one, or no more 1080p model. In fact if 4k was successful in anyway, there would have been a premium on that, but like 3D, no one cares. The reality is that young people are watching movies on their mobile phone or tablets. We are living the MP3 audio transition but for video. It is really sad for people like us who are a bit passionate about image quality but that's a big trend. The TV manufacturers and as a lot of other consumer electronic product are experiencing a shrinking market because people just can't see a big difference between 1080p and 4k at normal viewing distance. The only thing that for me would push big sales again would be a cheap tech for much bigger screen size. If you could get 80+ inch screen for 1k etc, then people will go back buying TV. Display size does make a difference in the viewing at least for me. Sincerely there is about 100 pixel difference between a 1080p and 2k screen. If you can tell me how there is a huge difference, i am happy to hear that. When I am talking about 1080p, I am not talking about Canon 5d style 1080p which is barely 720p, but true 1080p-2k from camera like the Alexa. In my country most screen are still 1080p-2k and until now I have never seen a pixel on 10 meter wide screen.

I am still waiting for 4k next year for the last 5 years, oh wait I am still waiting for 1080p, because 90% of the world is still on 720p and SD. Japan and Korea are some kind of tech lab experiment that never represent the world. In fact 1080p is good enough and in a good sense for any normal viewing distance display for our human brain. Over and above that is really pushing it in terms of diminishing return. it is like moving from a 100 hp car to a 400 hp one to get .2 second better from 0 to 100, now that's for 4k, I don't even know what will 8k bring.

I don't understand the logic of this conclusion at all. I mean why should... "almost exclusively" be people with a large selection of Nikkor AF glass chose the z6. It is nothing outrageous to say that the z6 is the best video MILC for now and only behind the XT3 if you really want 4k 60 fps and don't care about IBIS. So why should only Nikon users be interested in the top 2 best video MILC. As illustrated by the video below, the guy finding himself so much liking the z6 that he doesn't know what to choose between it and the A73 which he already has. What some will point out is the native lens selection. If someone starts from zero for sure the Sony has more lens but Nikon has already put out a roadmap. By this time next year we will have most of the pro quality lens to cater for 80% of use, and in two years 90% of what most people use. We already have FTZ adapter which caters for everything. The only grippe with the Ftz is video, because of motor noise. But as seen by most account the F mount lens work very well with the z6 ftz adapter combo. But if you are serious about video you will never use the internal microphone but get an external one. Another thing with the FTZ adapter, waiting for native lens, I could buy new or even better used, a bunch of quality Fmount lens for the price of one new Sony lens. The other thing about the Z lens mount is, do you buy into Sony system (which is already very costly) or buy into a new system that is planed to be future proof. With that bigger mount we can already see with Nikon and Canon that it opens new possibilities with higher quality fast lens and completely new formula as F2 zoom. Other innovation like third ring that can be programmed for smooth aperture or Iso change. So my conclusion of this conclusion, why should the z6 "almost exclusively" be people with a large selection of Nikkor AF glass, when ultimately it is at least as good and potentially much better than the competition.

If I am not mistaken, Tamron has issued firmware update for about 5-6 lens and from user report they work well as with other Nikon bodies. Now , these were for the more recent lens with some kind of system to update firmware. I think they have been quite reactive and can be a hint that reverse engineering the S mount is not that complicated. Now people are questioning what will happen to the older lens.

I think it is your beta software, You have got this test between D750 and Z6 and surprisingly when you consider Dpreview lab test, the z6 is better than the D750. I don't doubt the test because the pink shadows is typical of the older Nikon camera and it has been better since the latest ones.

Its is a bit of a stretch I think to judge footage from a camera like posterisation from a youtube clip. Second wedding video from z6.

Kai, review of the Z6

Nice example of AF video tracking and use on a gimbal.

I will never understand, do you shoot or are you just some kind of geek. Because I will never understand people that says thing like that. I mean, can someone at real viewing distance even see more than 2k. The perfect example is the Alexa 2.8k sensor, I don't see anyone complaining about lack of resolution. It is just the geek that might find it sexy to be able to count every pores in an actress face when stopping the image.

So it will be 8k 4.1.0 Hurray... I just saw Samsung advertising 8k TV, my guess they are not selling anymore TV, 1080p was aready plenty and a lot of people did not move to 4k, now they have to the next gimmick 8k to try and sell cameras and TV.

Video comparing Log profile on skin tone between Canon Eos R and Nikon z6. At first I would say the Canon is better because it is at the right level of contrast I would say. From highlight to shadows the right contrast ratio. But looking a little bit more the Canon seems to suffer from a harsh clipping shadow compared to the z6 and it is confirmed by the log non graded sample side by side. Somehow their is one thing hat I am witnessing is the very green tint Nikon Nlog. I don't know if it end up in the grade it (it doesn not look so in this video). Video

I think it was in this test but the when applying NR at different level (losing some detail in the process) the z7 became exactly as the Sony, my guess is that Sony is applying NR by default.

Camera lab review part 2, with a big part on video. Again very nice autofocus in video but what impressed me the most was the IBIS.

Under full moon test

Brandon Lee review seems really nice, it looks like it quite good. As a user of the Zhiyun crane 2, I am not very satisfied by its stabilization and sincerely those heavy gimbal are very hard to use because you get fatigue very fast.

Yes, nothing more distracting after bad audio than watching a film or documentary where the focus is on the background or foreground of the actor or interviewee.

Yes, in theory, I myself just experienced that even using a Ninja Flame, the peaking at this distance start to get unreliable, everything start to peak while with those ultra fast lens the DOF is still quite thin. Its only when you get back home and watch it on a 27 inch monitor that you find that the focus was a little behind the subject. You would need a focus puller with a 20+ inch screen to see this.

The thing is that for photo I can understand shooting at these type of apertures like 1.4 because even if you get 1 out of every 2-5 photos in focus it is ok. There is no continuity in photography, you can do 10 out of focus image, if you get one it is ok, more so in our digital world where you can take hundreds if not thousand of photos during an event. While in video you need continuity, you would need at 5 to 10 second for every scene , and unless you are shooting static subject it is near impossible to keep your subject in focus during those take, more so when using FF. For example I do interviews at least at F4 with FF at about chest level and it is still problematic. The person just has to move some cm in front and the focus is gone, so he just as most people move little bit in front or back as he is talking and gets out of focus. If it is only for some fraction of second it is ok, but if half your interview it is the case then it is a big problem. The second thing is what I would translate as subject attachment to his surrounding. Just after the large sensor revolution with the 5d ten years ago there was that craze to use very shallow death of field that your subject is like floating in an abstract universe that was completely blurry. That's why sometime I think that cine 35 mm was perhaps the rel best medium, because it gave you enough shallow DOF for subject separation and nice bokeh, but not that crazy that it becomes artificial.