Django

Yep that's the kind of intermediary codec that the ZR needs. But only if Nikon doesn't cook it with that aggressive noise reduction. You know the drill, Fuji had similar issues I seem to remember you pointing out. Thing is, I don't buy cameras based on promised or wishful features anymore. Been burned too many times waiting for "coming soon" updates that arrive late, incomplete, or not at all. So as of right now, the ZR is off the table for me. It's not just the codec situation though tbh, the unreliable view assist/exposure tools and first gen quirks also give me cold feet. Good to know LT is officially on the roadmap, though.. great for early adopters but I think I'm done gambling on "maybe later".

Yeah I haven't seen any C50 reviews really mention let alone showcase the digi zoom feature. I kinda stumbled upon it when menu diving and was shocked how effective it was, especially the range! The RF lens system actually isn't that expensive when you look at the STM range. The new 45mm f1.2 being priced under $500 is especially enticing and will be the first one I cop. The L primes are pricey AF and don't have lens IS so I'll probably stick with STM's and maybe even venture back into EF as they're so cheap these days and work like native RF. Some interesting third party cine RF lenses have also appeared (Canon is ok with licensing RF mount to manual glass manufacturers).. But as far as adaptability Nikon Z mount is killer and one of the main reasons I was so tempted to join that system. R3D RAW is also a great image pipeline, if only Nikon would offer lighter version. I mean REDs RAW compression is the whole purpose of their patent and ironically them suing Nikon. It feels such a waste to not offer it here but ok gotta remember it is a first gen product!

Yeah, I'm still torn between the C50 and R6 Mark III (ZR is lingering but fading). C50 wins big on the XLR handle for clean audio, tally lights, active cooling, and all the cine extras. The real killer is the zoom rocker up to 4x digital zoom via the levers, turning any prime into a smooth parafocal telephoto. That's massive for run&gun when you can't swap lenses; Sony/Nikon hybrids top out around 1.5x in 4K. But no IBIS is a legit worry: digital + gyro + lens IS might work, but I need to rent and test further to see if it's a deal-breaker. R6 Mark III gives me IBIS, open gate for post cropping/vertical, hybrid stills/video balance, and an EVF. FX3 is still solid (clean 4K up to 120p, great high-ISO, gyro stab) but buying one this late feels off when open gate is high on my list. Short version: C50 for XLR, cine tools and that crazy digital zoom reach, R6 III for IBIS + open gate + reliability. Renting the C50 soon to settle the stab question. Oh, and the ZR is likely getting the axe.. too many quirks for my needs.

I am currently doing my own ZR image testing with footage I shot in every codec and the R3D RAW is beautiful, super rich, super detailed. Probably the best image you can get from a mid priced mirrorless. But then the h265 log conundrum. I just messed around with some log files and they're terrible. Reminds me of 8bit FHD 5D3 footage. Actually the whole camera reminds me of my C200 which had either Canon RAW or 8bit. I hated not having an intermediary codec and its the same scenario with the ZR. Quite a shame as I love the design, form factor and huge display. But it's basically a massive RAW file camera which isn't going to be practical for a lot of people. I'm headed back to Canon as Sony is in limbo and I don't do L-mount.

I dunno this is the same company that released an FX2 couple months ago with a 4 year old A7IV sensor. The A7V hasn't caught up to the competition either. Sony are in their own bubble, too comfortable being in leadership position. Don't forget they also have a cine line to protect, so unless they're planning an entire FX refresh, I wouldn't expect too much from them at this point. In any case I can't wait any longer so it looks like I will be headed back to Canon, closed lens system but it checks all the boxes.

The ZR with its ultra thin smart adapter is making more and more Sony users switch including a major YT camera bro.. the FX2 got horrible press and A7V has not outperformed the competition so I think its in Sony's best interest to announce the FX3 II sooner than later but the big question is will it finally give Sony users things like +4K, Open gate or even internal RAW? The recent releases make me very doubtful they'll include all of that... Speaking of ZR, I got to do some more testing as I await my C50 rental. I really like the camera. R3D RAW is phenomenal. But the file sizes are absolutely insane. I did notice that shooting in SDR compressed doesn't ruin the footage the way N-log does. My theory is that to keep such a compact camera from overheating, they baked in heavy NR and made the bitrate light to not heat up the card. If so, I'm not sure an update will fix the h265 log mush. Also the fact that shooting in R3D RAW changes the color science is a little jarring. Like Casey from camera conspiracies noted, the ZR feels like multiple cameras in one. The image quality and color science is all over the place depending on settings. I value consistency so not sure this appeals to me.

Thanks for the honest take and rig photo. I can see how ZR probably isn’t ideal once you build it out like that. I’m also a bit skeptical about the cinema positioning. Nikon pushes R3D hard, which is great for high-end grading, but H.265 should be solid and dependable at this level, not an afterthought. Hopefully some of this improves via firmware. Better bitrates, cleaner encoding, more mature UI. The FX3 launched pretty bare and evolved a lot over time, so there’s precedent. For me, the appeal of the ZR is the ultra-compact body with that big screen. I wouldn’t want to over-rig it. On bigger sets with serious monitoring needs, I'd say something more modular like the C50 makes more sense. I've decided to rent the C50 to see if it really meets my needs in client situations. Wish I could do the same with ZR but it isn't available for rental around here. Really appreciate you sharing the unfiltered experience. It helps a lot.

true! speaking of which: ..would you mind expanding on these quality of life issues, CFB extraction aside?

I walked out of testing yesterday completely sold on the Canon R6 Mark III as the reliable hybrid for pro stills and video jobs. Solid AF, dependable IBIS, a proper EVF for tough lighting and that familiar Canon workflow I already know inside out. Seemed like the safe, no surprises choice. Then I spent the afternoon shooting with the Nikon ZR and Canon EOS C50 side by side, and the shift happened faster than I expected. The ZR surprised me with how compact and genuinely portable it feels. Easy to carry all day without fatigue, and the build quality gives that premium, confidence inspiring solidity. The large bright 4" flip-out screen is a real advantage for quick solo framing and monitoring, especially on location shoots where you need to stay discreet and move fast. Handheld footage stays smooth thanks to strong IBIS, colors and dynamic range deliver right away, and the RED integration could bring noticeable client appeal for higher-end branded or narrative pieces. Adapting my existing Sony Batis lenses works seamlessly too, so no immediate lens spend to get productive. The C50 brings serious post-production flexibility with 7K open gate, which is hard to ignore if heavy cropping, vertical deliverables, or aggressive grading are regular parts of the job. It is a proper cinema camera with useful pro connections. Still, the smaller screen and lack of EVF makes composing on the move feel more constrained, and the lack of IBIS means EIS or gyroflow post time. So yesterday I was set on the R6 III. Today I find myself quietly checking ZR deals while weighing whether the everyday portability, big screen usability, and RED workflow edge tip the balance over the open gate capability of the C50 (and the balanced hybrid strengths of the R6 III). Not decided yet. Need a few more real client-style tests to see which one actually streamlines deliverables without adding friction.

Economics aside, GAS is real and it’s gotten out of hand. The constant hype from camera bros on YouTube and social drives it. Every few months there’s a new “GAME CHANGER” video, clickbait thumbnail, sponsored “first look”, and comment sections full of upgrade questions and system switches. It creates endless FOMO where current gear suddenly feels obsolete, while most “must-have” updates are marginal and don’t matter for real work. Manufacturers love this however this cycle has the opposite effect on me: I keep waiting. Something new is always around the corner, so I drag my feet and keep changing my mind .. That being said there are game changers from time to time, and for me open gate is that kind of benefit for my workflow I’ve been waiting for and it’s why I’m going back to Canon. I’ve seen a lot of Sony users claim it’s not important, and anamorphic shills overblow it’s relevance but truth is for me it makes sense when doing multi-platform content. Extracting high-res stills from video takes is another practical bonus that adds real value instead of just another spec bump. That’s what matters to me, not another 0.5-stop DR , marginal AF tweaks, extra IBIS stops, or RAW flavour of the month. Cameras have been more than good for a while now and all the feature creep and size reduction brings other issues like overheating when reliability should remain a priority..

Quick follow-up after spending more time with the R6 Mark III at the shop. The R6 Mark III is pulling ahead strongly. IBIS is very effective and reliable for handheld shooting, and the EVF proved extremely useful, especially in bright exterior conditions where the small 3" LCD on the C50 felt noticeably inadequate for precise framing and focus. Flash sync and mechanical shutter add useful flexibility for occasional stills. It delivers most of the key video features I liked on the C50 (7K open-gate, LUT support, S&Q) but with better overall hybrid handling and a lower entry price since I’m starting fresh on RF lenses either way. The R6 Mark III menu feels more comfortable to read overall (the C50's cine UI isn't well adapted to the small 3" display, text and icons can be hard to parse quickly). Switching between photo and video modes is instantaneous, and the mode dial with independent custom settings (C1/C2/C3) is much handier for fast-paced environments where I need to jump between setups without diving into sub-menus. Overall this makes the UI feel better suited to quick, dynamic shooting. Downsides: consumer body look (a cage + handle will address that), no XLR top handle, no dedicated digital zoom rockers like the C50. I’ll miss some of the C50’s cine-specific features and the built-in fan for absolute thermal reliability, but tests show the R6 Mark III has fairly good thermal performance in real-world use. I’m now leaning strongly toward the R6 Mark III. At roughly €1000 less than the C50, it packs a mean punch for the solo run&gun content I’ll be shooting. The open gate capability for multi-ratio work and stills extraction, combined with solid IBIS, the EVF, and overall usability, feels like the best balance. Price to feature ratio is hard to beat in the current hybrid market. I still need to do more comparative tests as this is too important an investment to wing it and I still low-key want the C50. Thanks again for all the input, it’s helped narrow things down a bit.

@kye Thanks for the thoughtful take, two solid points. On the first one: I don’t really have emotional attachment to camera bodies anymore. They’re just tools that either help me get the shot or get in the way. Lenses are the emotional part for me (the rendering, the character, the way they feel when I look through them), but the body is basically a computer with a mount and some buttons. That said, ergonomics and UI matter hugely. If I’m constantly fighting menus, fumbling controls under pressure, or the grip feels wrong after 20 minutes, my mood tanks and it bleeds into the set. I’ve shot with cameras that technically should be fine but never clicked with my hands or brain. The day always feels harder and the results flatter. So if the C50’s cine OS with shutter angle, proper exposure tools and XLR top handle let me stay in flow instead of menu-diving or second-guessing, that’s worth a lot more than specs on paper. Reliability is primal too. A body that fails on set (AF hunting in low light, overheating mid-interview, battery dying unexpectedly, corrupted file, flicker issues, or weird grading artifacts) is a disaster, especially solo. I’ve had shoots go sideways because of exactly that. So even if a camera is technically capable, if it can’t be trusted in the field for hours, it’s not a tool, it’s a liability. On stabilization: I’m with you. I’m not chasing perfectly locked-down gimbal shots or overcooked EIS. I actually like natural camera movement, it feels alive and human. The stuff that kills the vibe for me is the micro-jitters and tiny breathing shakes on small-body cameras. Those little floating tremors look nervous and amateurish. Big intentional camera motion (shoulder rig sway, handheld energy) can be beautiful and add to the scene, but those small unintentional artifacts from inadequate stabilization are just distracting. That’s why Gyroflow plus shooting with EIS off (or Standard only when needed) feels like the sweet spot. I get to keep the organic handheld character I like, but I can surgically remove the annoying micro-shake in post without turning everything into a locked-down special effect. If a shot is so dynamic that even that isn’t enough, I’ll reach for a gimbal or shoulder rig anyway. But for 80 to 90 percent of the lifestyle, interview and observational stuff I’m shooting, I’ll be on sticks with handheld B-roll. Appreciate the nudge. It’s always good to be reminded that mood, flow and reliability matter more than specs.

I hear you, they are great lenses, especially L series and it was actually hard selling them.. but if I go back to Canon it will be the affordable RF STM series (mostly have IS) and who knows maybe I'll venture back to EF for the more exotic ones like tilt shift etc. Sure it is. Just wishful thinking they put the A9iii GS sensor. Gotcha, I'm trying to test it out but it looks like the C50 test footage mxf files I got don't have the meta data in them 😞

Interesting, I'm usually not a fan of post stabilisation as it often crops a lot and you get weirdness depending on the shot. Gyroflow seems so much smarter thanks to gyro data. Of course IBIS on the R6 mk3 would actually be enough in most case scenarios so sure I agree IBIS is a plus vs no IBIS on C50, however I feel GF somewhat alleviates the lack of IBIS, and I'm gaining a whole lotta reliability with the C50 fan etc. The top handle on the C50 is really really nice and helps keeping the cam steady, especially with body contact point. I was actually all set on the R6 mk3 as it checks just about every box on a hybrid.. and then I tried the C50 and it immediately reminded me of my C100/C200 days, except in a so much lighter package with so many more specs. Now the C50 feels like the 5D mk3 after I upgraded to the C100. Still great but photo centric body and UI. I still have about a week to make my mind so keep the feedback coming!

I've been mainly Canon/Sony shooter these last years but only have an FS7 left (which I'd sell but has depreciated so much I'd rather keep for gigs demanding a big cam with NDs etc). Lens wise I've just sold my remaining EF glass and as stated still got my Zeiss Batis (E-mount) set. Also have manual Leica M glass. I guess the FS7+Batis and no EF is what is making me hesitate jump back into Canon. Its going to be an investment. If only Sony had an FX3 mk2 with global shutter, open gate and tilt EVF I'd be going that route. But that isn't the case and I now have to make a rather quick decision. That is where ZR feels like good middle ground: e-mount adaptability, 6K, tons of codecs, FX type body. Affordable. But that soft NR ridden h265 makes me pause. R3D RAW file sizes is also just not doable for fast turnovers. Plus no open gate on neither Sony/Nikon is a real bummer. Like I said I'm going to have to deliver both 16:9 & 9:16. Having the option of either OG or dual format recording on C50 is mega clutch. The 4X digi zoom option is also killer, it would turn the 24mm f1.8 into a parafocal 24-96mm f1.8 zoom lens! Having tried it, its butter smooth using the rocker lever with various speed velocities. Gyroflow support is also a BIG plus for C50. Free open source and tests I've seen shows it being better than any type of other stabilisation done before wether mechanical or digital! If I do go the C50 route, I do plan on getting a second R body for IBIS but also mech shutter stills for flash photography. All in all the upfront investment is what is giving me second thoughts but since its for paid work I'm telling myself its worth to swallow the cost..