Jump to content

Django

Members
  • Posts

    2,431
  • Joined

Posts posted by Django

  1. 2 hours ago, Emanuel said:

    Why Z9 and not Z8? Overheating? According to @Django there's nothing major against that one : X

    Yeah don’t quote me on overheating, I didn’t push the Z8 by any means so yeah that’s a real valid concern. But the fact it has 2 USB-C ports, one for power and one for data is pretty dope, and if using a powerbank extends battery life and circumvents overheating then that’s killing two birds with one stone. 
     

    Z9 is of course the better choice when it comes to battery life and overheating plus it’s lighter than Z8+battery grip. It’s definitely a solid alternative for a pro shooter, and for all I know I may go that route. I’m just afraid of the weight. Z8 is already up there but you can rig it up or strip it down. I guess I’ll have to try a Z9 next but I’m close to pulling trigger on Z8.

  2. Being in a similar dilemma but having actually used both R5/R5C & Z8 here are my thoughts.

    R5 pros: Good battery life, IBIS, AF, 8K30p, RAW

    cons: h26x, low DR, sub-sampled 4K60p

    R5C pros: 8K60p, XF-AVC, dual base ISO, Cine line features (LUT support, assist tools etc), active cooling.

    R5C cons: poor battery life (better in latest firmware but still not great), no IBIS

    Z8 pros: 8K60p, compressed RAW, ProRes, stacked sensor, lockable IBIS. 2X zoom/crop modes.

    Z8 cons: aside from some AF issues nothing major! 

    Right now as far as specs, the Z8 is in my opinion the clear winner. Side by side, the IQ on the Nikon is substantially cleaner (less noise) and has superior DR. With ProRes, IBIS and a fast stacked sensor its just a really powerful all-rounder. My only gripe with it is the AF isn't as sticky than Canons and with portrait stills it often misses the eye if you shoot wide open with fast glass.

    Color wise, Nikon is more neutral and less contrasty. This is good if you like to grade/paint. Canon is better if you want SOOC results and the skin tones are the best in the game. C-log is more filmic than other logs including N-log but C-log3 on the R5/R5C has less DR than N-log. 

    Lens/system wise is where things get specific and personal. Different rendering & price points with native lenses.

    But where Z-mount wins is that you can adapt pretty much any glass to it, including EF. RF is a lot more closed so if you wanna adapt, Nikon is the way to go. RF has some fantastic unique lenses but they are so expensive!

    FWIW I've been shooting Canon since the 5D mark 1. C100/C200. EOS R, R6. I'm a Canon guy.

    I'm seriously considering switching to Nikon after trying out the Z8. The 8K/4K IQ is simply stunning and with ProRes it cuts like butter on my intel iMac Pro. I could adapt all my current lenses: EF, E-mount, Leica M and Nikkor AI-S. And the new S line lenses are pretty great too. 

    Either way you can't really go wrong, I got amazing results out of the R5/R5C. You just have to be more careful with exposure because of the limited DR and they aren't low-light champs either. Ergonomics and menus are also better with Canon, its a more intuitive shooting experience. And you can get away with minimum tweaking in post, slap a LUT and you're good if you're on fast turnover.

     

  3. 17 hours ago, Eric Calabros said:

    As a Nikon user you really need to follow these two men on YouTube: Hudson Henry and Steve Perry. They're wildlife photographers 99% of the time, and don't shoot video a lot, but they have a tone of info to offer about how your camera works. 

     

     

    Thanks. FWIW I'm not yet a Nikon user just doing research on the Z8. The menu system is so dense and confusing to me, I had to skim through that video. Its great there are so many custom options, it just sucks the UI is like a Y2K Nokia with all the nested list items. Anyways so there are 4 custom banks (A,B,C,D) I'm assuming they are also present for video settings.. is that an extra 4? Are they easy to recall, I don't think he goes over how to quickly access them?

  4. Yeah well its funny because I initially had mixed feelings about the Z8 but it has really grown on me, especially the files it produces. Really clean footage, easy to work with. Good DR, snappy AF. All kinds of codec options. High-resolution stills. Basically a workhorse camera. Will get even better when the LoISO update gets implemented.

    The R3 has imo the best ergonomics. and the video specs are quite nice too albeit not that flexible with either 6K in RAW only or 4K h26x. And 24MP stills. DR on Canons is also kinda mid, especially with no Clog2. 

    The Z8 gives you 45MP stills and 8K, 5K, 4K in RAW. UHD & FHD in ProRes & 8K, UHD & FHD in h26x. Plus 2X crop modes and digital zoom. All for about two thousand less than an R3. It's just much more bang for the buck imo. Plus the Z mount opens up compatibility to my entire various mount lens collection. Tilty screen which I miss. And lockable IBIS which I don't think anyone else is doing. It's almost a no-brainer for me personally. Paired with a Zf for more casual shooting, that would be a sick combo.

    The Nikon Z f1.8 primes are also super silent and optimised for video with minimal breathing, compact and fairly priced. So after so much hesitation on where to go next I think I'm pretty set on Nikon after all. 

     

  5. Just thought I'd mention I've revisited the Z8 with now better understanding of how the camera operates (read the manual beforehand) and of how to work with N-log (using color management bypassing the awful official LUTs) and well I guess all I can say is it is my new favourite camera! 4K ProRes HQ on an SD card edits like butter on my ageing iMac Pro and the IQ gives so much room for grading. Neutral & Flat profiles are also great SOOC profiles and 8K60p is of course top notch and I haven't yet even explored RAW. 

    I guess ultimately the switch back to Nikon would be quite effortless as Z mount has smart adapters for my Sony & Canon EF glass and even my Leica M glass. Alongside my old Nikkor AIS, every single lens I own could be supported!

    I do have a question for Z8/Z9/Nikon users: does the camera have custom banks like C1/C2/C3 etc where you can have various custom settings like codec/frame rate/resolution settings and recall them quickly?

  6. "Global Shutter" kind of feels like a buzzword from Sony marketing doesn't it? And the usual suspects on Youtube sure are running with it.. "FIRST GLOBAL SHUTTER CAMERA" "This Changes EVERYTHING". "ZERO DISTORTION!!!". I mean cmon if you wanted to avoid distortion up until now as a stills shooter you could simply use mechanical shutter. And yeah 99% of cinematographers use CMOS sensor based cameras with minimal RS. 

    Again not trying to downplay the tech advancement of this new sensor but it ain't really the game changer revolution it is hyped up to be. The read-out speed sure seems incredible but I personally can't imagine combing through 120fps of RAW images. I'm not even sure pro sporting events shooters have that luxury in their time race with FTP transfers. So who exactly is the A9 target? Wealthy amateurs that shoot birds/golf/tennis? Videographers doing 360 degree rotations at 100mph? Serious question.

  7. Yeah while GS in a FF consumer camera is a nice tech feat, I'm not sure many people will be rushing to "upgrade" to a $6K 24MP/4K h26x camera. Clearly this is a niche action/sports hybrid mainly aimed at still shooters. Sony is smart when it comes to marketing and they put this out just ahead of the Summer Olympics.

    But in reality for video shooters if you absolutely need a GS cine cam, the Komodo already exists and does up to 6K with ProRes/REDcode etc. 

    And for your average hybrid shooter, I doubt they would really notice the difference with the already fast 8ms RS of the A7S3/FX3. And those have better DR & low-light for half the price. 

    Personally, I find the Z8/Z9 are still much better rounded hybrid packages with 8K60p, RAW/ProRes, 45MP. And fast stacked sensor readout speeds that are sufficient for most demanding situations. 

    Don't get me wrong, FF GS is a major tech accomplishment and I'm sure there is a market for the A9iii, I just don't think the entire package and price point is going to be that enticing in the already crowded FF segment once the hype does down.

  8. What's a little sus to me is all the "impressive" videos shared in this thread seem to be from LUT vendors. These videos are more ads for grades than the iPhone 15. I mean who knows the time/effort/power grades used to achieve these results. Not to mention the rigs, gimbals, reflectors and what not that are used. Its all fair game but I guess what I'm trying to say is it isn't a realistic look at what you're going to get out of the iPhone 15 SOOC or even using your average grading skills. 

    Its like the giant "Shot on iPhone" billboard campaigns you see in major cities with amazing pics:

    Gianpaolo-Casciano_Shot-on-iPhone-6S_1_M

    ..yet you know your average iPhone pic never looks as good, they've all been crazy boosted in Photoshop.

    In the end it is just another iPhone with similar specs, IQ and caveats as last years model. They added log which is great for grading your footage but nothing really that revolutionary especially if you're not that heavy into grading.

  9. Yeah I agree with the above, no matter these improvements at the end of the day it is still a smartphone with all its caveats. No way does it actually compete with rigged mirrorless or cine cams with quality glass, filters etc in actual use. So many limitations.

    I tested the iPhone 15 Pro myself the other day at the Apple store, shot some log footage and then airdropped it to my iPhone to test it out in Resolve. The result was rather sub-par, mushy IQ with lots of noise. I'm assuming this is mainly due to the indoor light conditions and the camera app shooting at high ISO. Notice how all the examples in this thread are shot outside in perfect bright daylight conditions. Shoot indoors with average lighting or on a dim day/evening and the IQ falls apart. That to me has always been the real downer with tiny sensor cameras. They need perfect lighting. And no ProRes/Log can fix that. At which point you may as well let the iPhone do its computational magic and fix the image!

  10. Don't forget the Pocket/BMCC6K cameras all have gyro data that result in solid stabilisation capabilities when used in tandem with Davinci. I've been pretty impressed with that "surprise" feature launched about a year ago. And now with FF 6K open gate, the crop applied shouldn't even be that noticeable. 

    On 10/14/2023 at 4:24 AM, kye said:

    I've seen quite a few videos from the BMCC6K now, and they all seem to shoot and edit in 3:2, which I find quite strange....   CAN doesn't mean SHOULD!

     

    All the footage so far is test footage from early access users so it makes sense it is all shot & delivered in full sensor highest resolution 3:2 open gate. Its kind of the stand out feature of this new camera too so not surprised one bit they are putting that forward. I know I'd pretty much be shooting 3:2 open gate exclusively with such a camera for all the reframing capabilities it allows.

  11. The nice thing is on the grey market there is less than 500 bucks difference in between Z8 & Z9. And second hand Z9 might even be cheaper than a new Z8!

    Ergonomics and battery life aside, the Z9 doesn't overheat AFAIK. And has a few extra specs. Superior build quality too.

    Just seems like the more pro option for not substantially more than a Z8. If weight isn't a concern of course.

    I'm still considering switching back to Nikon myself tbh. On paper the Z8/Z9 have almost everything: 8K60 RAW, ProRes, 45MP, battery life, stacked sensor, crop modes.. its really just missing open-gate and LUT support. But ProRes is a big one to me since my iMac Pro doesn't like 10-bit h26x files.

    In practice my short time with a Z8 was a bit of a mixed bag. The menu system drives me nuts, lots of OOF shots too because the eye-AF focuses on the eye lashes bit too much imo. Video AF while good was a bit jumpy but that could be settings, there are so many.

    As for the native lenses.. while they have good specs and performance, its true they are a bit clinical, lack character compared to RF/EF. But maybe that's just confirmation bias. They are smooth and silent which is great. And just like with Canon you can always adapt native Nikon F-mount glass, and even better Z-mount does open up adapting my EF, Sony Zeiss E-mount lenses as well as my Leica M & Nikkor AI-S glass. That is what is really pushing me towards going Nikon. I'm curious about that adapted performance, if Andrew could share his experience with that E-mount Megadap adapter it would be great! Because in the end it really is about the lenses. 

  12. 12 hours ago, Ty Harper said:

    I think IQ-wise the RF versions clearly spank their EF ancestors (as they should) - that said, I think we've just gotten to a place where the overall quality we're getting out of our equipment (particularly from the cam end alone) is so good that some shooters (maybe more than ever) are either satisfied with the older lenses they already have - and/or are even open to revisiting older ones. I never thought I'd see the day I was seeing shooters singing the praises of the OG EF 24-105mm f/4 IS, or that I'd have sold my OG EF 70-200mm f/2.8 IS to buy an EF 70-200mm f/4 IS - but here we are!

    EF-L lenses have their own look, I like the primes personally. Never liked the 24-105, massive barrel distortion and not a fan of slow lenses on medium wide focal lengths. 24-70mm f2.8 is usually my jam when it comes to zooms, and the RF24-70mm f2.8 does not disappoint aside from being big & heavy. And that is a concern, lenses keep getting bigger and bodies smaller. At least Canon has the R3 which is super light despite its mini sport-DSLR like body. And again that's where the RF70-200mm f4 comes in clutch. And yeah some older EF lenses too when it comes to weight/size ratio. 

    The nicest combo I've experienced was Nikkor AI-S glass on Z8, and I can only imagine on the new Zf. Also awesome to see that old glass resolve in glorious 8K when it didn't impress me so much in mushy FHD during D750 days. Same can be said for EF on R5/R5C..

     

     

  13. 1 hour ago, Ty Harper said:

    For sure! I should've said "more compelling, for some" bcuz alot of people refer the fixed length style. Especially run n gun shooters using a gimbal (which is another reason many have stuck with their EF versions). Personally I prefer fixed - but nowadays I also value an L-level zoom that is pocket-sized (i.e narrow/longer vs thicker/shorter). Also the RF versions end up being similar in length to the EF f/4 version once they're extended.

    All that to say, I think Canon missed a great opp to make that "narrow-enough to fit in your pocket" style, a continuing part of the appeal of the f4 versions of their 70-200mm L's. 

    I guess everyone has their own requirements when it comes to lens designs. Personally, I have never carried a lens in my pocket, not even a pancake so that is not something high on my list. However, storage in my camera bag is always somewhat of a puzzle so shorter/compact is always welcome. I also value discretion which is why 70-200mm are usually not my thing. Plus compact lenses pair better with mirrorless cameras. So the RF 70-200mm f4 speaks to me. I know for others, weight is the major concern and it wins there too. 

    Others do prefer fixed length mainly for proof reasons and that's valid although the RF-L extension zooms are weather sealed.

    Overall I think the RF 70-200mm F4 is a win. Maybe not to everybody but plenty of reviews out there give it praise and some even consider it their favourite lens:

     

  14. 13 minutes ago, MrSMW said:

    It's the No.2 combo on my list of 3 options.

    As I've said before, I could live with this kind of size and weight if it had enough merit...

    My current combo of S1H + battery grip + Leica 24-90 f2.8-4 is superb except in 2 areas and that is size & weight, plus that lens is a leeeetle slow in low light and I wish it was a constant aperture f2.8. The rendering in combo with the OLPF S1H sensor is stunningly good.

    The R3 and 28-70 beats it on weight, but not by much, - around 300g or something so 2.5kg vs 2.8kg, not that big of a deal.

    It will be faster re. AF for sure and probably slightly more accurate and has much better low light performance...but, sacrifices 20mm at the long end and that is a lot as I shoot 90mm a lot.

    The 24mm vs 28mm at the wide end...I actually prefer 28mm which for me is the point at which going wider, especially with people on the edges of a frame, it starts getting a bit meh for me.

    So as a combo, it is enough to beat out my current set up, but then it also needs a longer lens such as that compact 70-200 f4...but that then causes me issues during ceremonies when I want/need both long and wide.

    The bottom line is it could work, but the reality is there is a better option for me and as things stand, that is where I will be going.

    For me it's always this balance between number of bodies vs primes or zooms and the reality is that much as I prefer primes in principle, the reality is I need a zoom based set up or it's 4 versus 3 bodies.

    I started this year with 4 and finished (this weekend actually) on 3.

    2 is potentially on the horizon...

    I hear you, wedding photography is probably one of the most demanding types of shoot and you include videography which is even more taxing. I'm not even quite sure how you do it all but I can only imagine the math involved when it comes to gear. I'm sure every gram counts at the end of the day!

  15. R5 definitely opened my eyes to 8K. I freaking love it, its beautiful. But I also have a 5K iMac Pro display so I can actually see the +4K detail up close. Obviously it still trickles down when downsampled so that's a bonus plus everything else Andrew talks about. It does kinda feel like when we made the jump from FHD to UHD. After working with 8K files for a while its almost hard to go back to 4K lol.

    One thing I don't think is mentioned in the article is ability to extract 33MP stills from 8K footage. Its pretty cool and opens up some extra flexibility when doing hybrid shoots. I only wish it was open-gate to have a more stills framing extraction instead of 16:9. I think I'm more excited about open-gate than 8K so 6K open gate camera like XH2S or new BMD camera may ultimately prove itself more useful.

    But that Sigma-FP-L has crazy specs I wasn't really aware of. 9.5K RAW plus all those crop modes?! wow. Gonna have to take closer look at it, I keep forgetting it even exists.

  16. 19 hours ago, MrSMW said:

    But I think only the old Sigmas and Tamrons so nothing like the latest 28-70mm f2.8 from Sigma which I think is L and E only or the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 G2 which I believe is E only?

    I'm not personally interested in a system where I would need to adapt bigger and older lenses, but smaller/more compact and lighter though can understand why others might due to having the lenses or because older stuff can be bought 'cheap' used.

    That Canon RF 24-70 is pushing 1kg. I really want to get away from stuff like that.

    To be honest, I don't know that much about the cheaper/lighter RF primes other than that they are not that highly regarded whereas Nikon's Z 1.8's and Lumix 1.8's and Sigma's f2 Contemporaries are.

    As it stands, Canon have only 2 lenses in RF that interest me and to be honest, they are MORE than enough to build a system off and it's not totally out of the question; R3 + 28-70mm all day long except C&S flip to that 70-200 f4 and job done.

    But is that the best option for me based on what else is out there?

    It's on the list but I need hands on in Paris this Winter...

    The RF STM primes are really not bad for their price. 200 bucks for the nifty fifty, 300 for the 16mm f2.8. The 50mm f1.8 has aspherical element despite the giveaway price. Rockwell even claims "In actual use this Canon lens is as sharp as the Nikon Z 50mm f/1.8, but the foolish Nikon Z lens is 2½ times as heavy, over twice as long and three times as expensive! Is there any wonder why Nikon has fallen from number one in the 1980s to number three today? " of course sharpness isn't everything but that's still pretty funny hyperbole lol.

    The RF 35mm and the 85mm STMs cost a bit more but have IS and macro which is really nice. 

    They are kinda noisy and have breathing which is sucky for video. The Nikon primes are silent and have breathing comp so yeah advantage Nikon for hybrid use. Guess you get what you pay for!

    Now the RF 28-70mm f2 is considered a marvel/gem. Some say its a bag of primes in one lens. Heavy & expensive though.

    You almost have to pair it to an R3 for proper balance. I'm sure that combo would be deadly for ultimate versatility, IQ & performance.

  17. 18 hours ago, Ty Harper said:

    You're probably right - but coming from an EF 70-200mm f2.8 IS (MKI, II & III) the EF 70-200 f4 IS is still a massive difference on all fronts (I had no idea it was THAT much smaller than the f/2.8 models) - especially price-wise (picked mine up for like $500 CAD). Can the RF f/4 version fit in your pocket the way the EF f/4 version can?

    I own neither but specs indicate the RF f4 is shorter than the EF f4 (119mm vs 170mm) a little wider (83mm vs 76mm) and a little lighter. Its about the size of the EF 16-35mm:

    alex-armitage-70200-vs-1635-canon.jpg

  18. 2 hours ago, gt3rs said:

    Is also 1400 USD + tripod collar vs. 500 USD used.... and I think is a bit the point I'm trying to make this middle ground lenses are more hard to justify that cheap or the really expensive one.

    right yet my point is it depends! what you may find to be a "middle ground lens" may actually be a game changer to others just by the nature of its compact size and weight. this is actually the one RF lens that reverses what pundits complain about in RF, that they are usually bigger and heavier than EF. quite the contrary in the case of this lens! And to some that alone may make it worth the upgrade price (not to mention optical performance enhancements).

    case in point:

    55 minutes ago, MrSMW said:

    I really like this lens (on paper) for any fantasy Canon RF set up.

    I'm happy with an f4 at these kinds of focal lengths as the only time I have any use for such a thing (and I use an f4 70-200 in L Mount) is ceremonies & speeches at weddings which for me are mostly outdoors and if in the evening, I light them.

    RF mount for me, lack a compact 28-70/75 such as Sigma and Tamron offer.

    I really do not want to switch one big set up for another going forward. It would have to be something very special indeed to be anywhere near my current 2.8kg weapon system of choice.

    The Canon RF equivalent pairing this 70-200 zoom with an R3 body is a whopping 1kg less.

    So great lightweight (for it's size) camera body in the R3 and great 70-200mm f4, huge & heavy 28-70mm f2 and the rest is a bit meh to me.

    FYI there is a lighter and much cheaper RF option than the 28-70mm f2 and that is the 24-70mm f2.8 IS.

    And don't forget you can also adapt the EF versions, including Sigmas & Tamrons.

  19. Also a no for me. Micro pancake lenses on a 1 inch sensor simply can't rival with S35/FF + nice glass. 

    The DoF on an iPhone makes it look like everything was shot at f11. Don't even get me started on "cinematic mode".

    Then you have the handling/ergonomics. Dials, buttons, aperture rings etc are essential to me.

    I don't even know how you'd go about putting things like ND's on an iPhone or quality audio.

    Now for social media or vertical B-roll sure it sounds nice. 

    My biggest gripe I guess is that you have to buy an iPhone 15 Pro to have log. You know they could give you log in other models including older models. If anything pros would prefer to disable all the image processing. 

     

  20. Yeah when the first rumours of this project being shot on an FX3 came out that was my initial reaction, that this was more of a marketing promo angle. But after reading that article it seems like the directors ethos for this was to see how far down he could go "leaning on a new wave of affordable, lightweight filmmaking technology — Edwards stripped everything down to its essentials to inject more spontaneity and creative freedom into a process that felt needlessly rigid."

    Doesn't seem like it was so much a budget choice but more likely compact lightweight oriented. and while the FX6/FX9 aren't huge, once they get rigged up with V-mount, follow-focus, monitor, cine lens, matte box, wireless transmitters etc.. they aren't really super handheld anymore. I mean here is the FX3 fully rigged up and its not exactly compact at that point:

    1-1600-B.jpg?width=1200&height=630&fit=c

  21. Leica M glass is fantastic optically and build quality wise but manual and f1.4 summilux are incredibly expensive. Those lenses are in their own realm just like Cooke and other pricey cine glass. I don't really see how those formulas compare to the AF prosumer glass from CaNikon, Sony & Panny.

    This report from 2022 lens sales is quite interesting: 

    https://shuttermuse.com/the-best-selling-lenses-of-2022/

    Interesting to see the EF 50 f1.8 in the overall top 10 and not a single fast RF prime lens in Canon's top 10. 

    Whereas Sony has 2 GM prime lenses in its top 10 including the great 35mm f1.4 GM. That lens has excellent optical performance, size and build quality as well as great AF motors and neat hybrid features like a declick switch for smooth aperture control for video use. Meanwhile Canon doesn't even have a RF 35mm L series lens which is crazy although I've heard reports they've been hitting roadblocks developing a RF 35mm f1.2.

    Obviously Sony has a great head start when it comes to mirrorless lenses and it reflects on its sales of premium glass. 

    As a Sony user, I've invested mainly in Sony Zeiss lenses. I just love the Zeiss look and quality. But I keep reading rave reports about latest GM series.

    As a Canon user, I'm still using mainly adapted EF lenses. I have the RF 35mm STM which is ok for its price point as are the other STM primes but inferior to equivalent sub $1K primes from the competition. I have no intention in upgrading to RF primes any time soon. That said I have done a few shoots this summer with the RF 24-70mm & 16-35mm f2.8 zoom lenses and was very pleased with those. They are on my purchase list if I keep going with Canon. Great optical performance and lens IS which Sony for example doesn't provide in their equivalents. 

  22. 3 hours ago, MrSMW said:

    Agree with you there Django, but the Zf is a photo-centric camera and the folks that buy these kind of things are not really into rigging stuff out for external RAW etc. Or even video full stop in a lot of cases other than occasionally.

    I don't know about the overheating, that one remains to be seen, but definitely if video was my primary focus, this camera would not be on my list. Certainly not 'professionally'.

    As a 50:50 hybrid shooter, I have tried using the same bodies to do both and come to the conclusion I can do it, but I prefer having dedicated units to each.

    I have pretty much settled on the 3 body approach now, one for stills, one for (considered) filming and one for (mainly static) video.

    The downside with this approach is it really requires zooms in order to limit the compromises and I'd rather shoot primes so I might flip back with my next gen kit to having 3 identical bodies that can fulfil all 3 roles in a hybrid manner. If I do, the Zf would NOT be a contender for this. I don't think anyway...

    But I am considering the possibility of a pair of Zf's with some primes, purely for stills and go for that classic pairing of something like the 35mm f1.8 on one hip with the 85mm f1.8 on the other with something wider and something longer in the bag for those times when I need it.

    I'm going to be in Paris in mid November so hopefully some of the stores like FNAC will have at least demo units so I'll have a play if I can.

    Zf + Z8 might be a good pairing for your needs..

    As an old-school Nikon stills shooter myself the Zf is interesting to me. Paired with super affordable compact primes (such as the vintage AI-S series) it would be a neat almost rangefinder style experience. The video specs are also quite decent, they actually surpass the previous Z6/Z7 series. So this product actually does speak to me. Overheating though is definitely a concern and if severe would be a total deal breaker for any professional usage. It really seems to be the plague of current mirrorless systems.

×
×
  • Create New...