Danyyyel

I understand your point your point about manual focusing, my guess is that those lens are not necessarily meant for manual focus for movie use. I know it is a sacrilege for some but with those new autofocus, manual focusing might really become a niche thing like in photography.

With the coming CFe cards buffer shouldn’t really be an issue. Especially on the Z6. 

I think that whatever Nikon decided to do it would have been heavily criticized. If ever they had done a bigger body everybody would have said that either they could not match Sony tech or that the idea about MILC was small size and portability, which was true at least until now. Since Nikon and Canon launch of their new mount with much wider size (more for Nikon), that give the possibility of faster lens, we are hearing that MILC can get you better and faster lens regardless of size.
Some part of Nikon PR mess was that they showed up only days/weeks before the Canon EOSR and eventual Pana S1. For example, they got ten times the negativity because of the 1 card slot than the Canon R. While they are giving a much better and robust XQD/CFexpress compared to Canon SD card.
For me when you look at the price and size of the Canon 28-70 F2, I am glad they stuck with the 2.8 aperture. Another thing people don't discuss is the 24 vs 28mm starting zoom range. I like the 24-70 because of its flexibility and loosing the 24 is a big compromise. With the higher ISO we can shoot now, for me the f 2.8 is the best compromise, anything lower would warrant a prime lens. In fact this f 2.8 looks at least shorter than todays 24-70 and with the size/weigh gain, you could even carry another camera prime combo easily.
That's the promise of the mount. The F4 kit lens (S is considered super for Nikon) being higher resolution than the top of the line older F-mount lens. The z7 already broke the record from the D850 with the 35mm f1.8 lens and by a margin in terms of resolution. That is why Nikon has been defending their 1.8 zoom as real professional primes and not just typical affordable primes for those that could not afford 1.4 primes. These things are more usable at 1.8 than some of the 1.4 primes at 1.8 and even beyond that. They say that their 1.8 lens are more reminiscent of 1.4 primes in capturing the light and I guess it is about the overall sensor plane and not just the center, with less curvature/distortion and I guess vignetting. 

I understand your point your point about manual focusing, my guess is that those lens are not necessarily meant for manual focus for movie use. I know it is a sacrilege for some but with those new autofocus, manual focusing might really become a niche thing like in photography.

I don't understand that supposed edge in native lens. From everything I have seen the adapted lens worked as good as they did on native F mount cameras. Have people not seen the video from Ricci Talk and BH, one was the 105mm F1.4 and the other 70-200 2.8. The 70-200 2.8 was tracking in very low light in the BH video. I dare to say that after the lens rental review of the build quality of the z7, that the z6 might be more weather proof with the FTZ adapter than Sony cameras. I personally don't know, but can someone tell me how many Sony, Pana or Fuji have in terms of video centric lens (silent, no breathing etc)
The second thing is that Nikon said they were dedicated to video now and the development of the S line of lens was from the ground up done with video in mind. We can already see it with the fast focusing , silent and zero breathing lens they have released. If you think that the treatment they gave to their 24-70 f4  kit lens in terms of video, you can be sure that they were not joking when they said that. Another thing, they already published lens roadmap, by next year we will get nearly the trifecta of Nikon 2.8 zoom and two new f1.8 prime lens plus the f.95 prime. Again I just saw a mock up of the F 2.8 Nikon zoom and it had a third ring. I guess we will have smooth step-less aperture control with this lens as the Canon, if I am not mistaken. So tell me how many Sony, Pana or Fuji are have thee type of video centric features to their lens line.

But you illustrate a good point. Lots and lots of shooters aren't good colorists, for various reasons. That's why good color science can be very helpful for some people. 

I don't know exact skin tone colour of the man and the lighting, i would say the fuji must be the closest followed by the Nikon and then the Canon and Sony. Unless the light is golden hour in this case, if I was the guy I would immediately go to hospital to check if I any liver or bladder problem.  

So auto focus test from Max, for me z7 is best in this test. That's so great that Nikon who was dead last is at least for me, the best now. Again for the test, many strange thing, because it is the Sony and Canon who are the greenish skintone, he did use auto white balance this time. Another thing of note is it is the Fuji which looks super soft, much softer than the Canon.

Many valid point, but he is not doing this test for them because anyway those photographers will buy the z7 anyway because of its photographic qualities and the video in full auto will be plenty enough for them. Where is test is valid, is for hybrid shooters or video shooters who wants to know if the first full frame camera with 4k log and 10 bit is good or not. Because just before that you would have to buy a Canon C700 for more than 30k to get at least 10 bit FF.

That's why I always take people like Max test with a pinch of salt. Imean if ever you have worked with a Nikon camera you know that this is not the kind of skin tone you would get. The second thing, I am not saying that the z7 can have more detail, but you have NR settings in the z7. Did he use it, or is it set up from standard to be high, I guess we will never know. The problem is that he has never worked with a Nikon camera and his first test was already revealing that because he could have easily decrease the sharpening in camera setting before concluding that it was oversharpenned. If you don't know a camera at least ask some people for help or spend a bit more time testing it, rather than being the first and getting clicks.

For lowlight, these results are pretty much as expected
The A7iii is full frame supersampled from 6k to 4k, the BMPCC is M43 (-2 stops), EOS-R FF sensor heavily cropped (-2 stops), XT-3 APSC (-1 stop) and the Z7 is high resolution sensor with pixel binning (a comparison with a Z6 would be fairer.)

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2018/10/teardown-of-the-nikon-z7-mirrorless-camera/
Best MILC construction.
 
"This is not marketing department weather resistance. This is engineering department weather resistance. Anything that can be sealed has been sealed. I’m impressed, and I will say for future cut-and-paste blurbs: this is as robustly weather sealed a camera as we’ve ever disassembled.
I don’t believe in weather resistance myself. I believe like life; water will find a way. I believe in plastic baggies and rubber bands. I am, however, a great believer in the idea that if you claim to do something, then damn well do it right. This is done right.
I’m impressed by the very solid construction of the chassis and IBIS unit. I’m impressed with the neat, modern engineering of the electrical connections. Yes, I’m aware that soldered wires carry electricity, but to me, there’s something reassuring about seeing neat, well thought out, 2018 level engineering.
I’m not here to tell you which camera is best to use or has the best performance. I’m just here to say this is a damn well-built camera, the best built mirrorless full-frame camera we’ve taken apart. (For the record, I haven’t torn down a Leica SL.)"

In what way does the z7 disappoint, perhaps if he did take a little time and test the camera a little bit more he would know that every camera does not have same basic settings. You have sharpness settings on every Nikon camera and it can be dialed down, same for DJI drone for example where the default setting is too high and people know they should just dial it down. For me getting such a detailed and moire/alias free image from a 45 megapixel sensor is extraordinary and a win for Nikon.
Now lets go the meat of that test, looking at a 400% enlargement  of a 4k image is like looking at a 100 - 200 inch screen from about 15 inch. It is completely unrealistic, just good for geeks and not shooters, thats why all these cameras are very good resolution wise. Even the Eos-R would pass a lot of people eye without a side by side. What will make a difference when those camera rez are good enough now is colour, DR, noise, motion cadence and rolling shutter, with Colour and DR being the most important in normal shooting condition.

Care to elaborate on that? I have not seen you talk about the source for that anywhere?
Also, why not just answer the question? Or better yet, just tell the source on the same post with those spec sheets and rumors you post. Not trying to hate on you, I'm just genuinely interested what the deal is with all this stuff.

Still waiting for that super dumper Sony announcement, oh wait it was one week ago.

@androidlad where you getting this info? I also asked you TWICE for a source on your "leak" about a 4k 12-bit/2k raw canon rf mount camera on the eos r thread and you don't seem to have an answer. Seems like you're pulling this stuff out of your arse mate..

Kai very positive review of the z7
 
 

Kai very positive review of the z7
 
 

Kai very positive review of the z7
 
 

Kai very positive review of the z7
 
 

Questions on N Log recovery of highlights have been answered for me ...
https://vimeo.com/296302172
Password : daysend
Up for a short time.

I prefer this version ....
https://vimeo.com/296214409
Password : daysend 
Same proviso ....

How about some 4K ... external recorder 10Bit ProRes HQ ....
Went to a favorite place to capture some migratory birds ... turns out a weekend for a waterski tournament. So I captured some birds of a different sort.
This is a short clip from the Cavanaugh Flight Museum, Addison, Texas.
https://vimeo.com/296206092
Password : daysend
It will be taken down in a day.
 

That's what the network ask for  practicality and image quality. Many people don't gasp the amount of data which goes into a production. I am doing a reportage now which will be between 21-25 minutes. Just the interviews is between 2-2.5 hours, in total it might reach 5-6 hours of footage. No one wants to deal with 4x the data for just marginal gains.                                     I

That's what the network ask for  practicality and image quality. Many people don't gasp the amount of data which goes into a production. I am doing a reportage now which will be between 21-25 minutes. Just the interviews is between 2-2.5 hours, in total it might reach 5-6 hours of footage. No one wants to deal with 4x the data for just marginal gains.                                     I