Castorp

After seven months with the Z6 the thing I like the most are the lenses. The 24-70/4S is so good. Crazy good value in the kit.

The 50/1.8S is incredible . One of my favourite lenses of all time. 

They don’t have as much metal on the outside as for example Fujifilm lenses but I find the build quality and construction better. The design of the sealing at the mount is the best I’ve seen. 

5 minutes ago, DBounce said:

The D5 and 1DXMk2 are sports cameras.... I'll go out on a limb and guess that AF is  pretty important for sports. That is if you want fast paced action shots to be in focus.

Nikon D5 or an Arri cinema camera. Any professional camera. The point is that pro level quality is expensive.

1 hour ago, DBounce said:

Those cameras have amazing AF systems. They are sports cameras. They have a professional lens lineup. The are fast and reliable workhorse cameras.

Would you use a S1/R V1 for professional sports? What 70-200 F2.8 will you use? Would you trust the AF? I’ll bet some money these will not be replacing the army’s of Canon bodies you see at national sporting events.

At $2500 - $3k this makes much more sense. But if anything near $6k, well, good luck with that!

Rubbish. It’s not just about autofocus performance. Ergonomics, build quality and reliability are equally or more important in a professional environment.

Autofocus isn’t necessarily important at all for professional use. Depends on the job. 

If it is a pro build top end video camera I don’t see why it should cost much less than a D5 or EOS1D?

The S1 is incredible value for money. 

I had no complaints with the previous firmware. That said, the AF, especially in dim situations, is faster more decisive. Eye AF was something I didn't even know I wanted but its very nice to not have to think about where the focus point is. Reminds me of working with manual focus in the way I am not being interrupted by having to consider AF focus points.

The automatic switching between mechanical and electronic first curtain is also very welcome. Another thing I now don't have to think about. 

12 FPS with full AE/AF auto is not relevant for me but should be useful for the thousands out there who apparently are forced to use the Z6 to photograph birds in flight  

Looks like an incredible camera! 

There is a sweet new option under custom function d5. The camera can now be set to automatically switch between EFCS and fully mechanical shutter where there is risk of shutter shock. 

Webrunner5 is basically trolling the thread right now. He doesn’t own the Z 6 neither does he have any genuine interest in owning one. It’s just a matter of making the thread turn according to his pipe and instead of having a constructive and positive dialogue it becomes a meaningless back and forth with someone who doesn’t even own the camera. 

Its jonpais all over again.

I don’t like Sony but I don’t continuously bait the Sony threads. Poor Canon users have had a lot of it lately and I feel for them. Can’t write anything positive without ten people showing up screaming “crop”. 

Doesn't look anything like Sony to me. I really dislike Sony colours. As has been said, I don't think there is nowhere near as many serious video shooters with Nikon yet. Nikon has not been a choice for serious video work until now. I love the look of the Z 6 and don't understand how they get such a fat image through so few mbps. But, webrunner5, if you don't like it that's fine, it's subjective at the end of the day. I think the only way you'll find out is if you rent one and see for yourself. No amount of online footage will do that for you. 

Just now, webrunner5 said:

Every bit of footage I have seen from it all looks like that. You must be the only one than can grade I guess. ?

No need to grade. Just lower the contrast and sharpening a notch or two.

1 hour ago, webrunner5 said:

It still has that Dark, crushed Blacks look to it. WTF. Depressing shit. It is like B&W that has been colored.

That’s a grading decision. I have a Z 6 and it certainly does not have crushed blacks. If anything it shows that youtubers don’t change the picture profile at all. Default contrast and sharpening in standard profile doesn’t look very nice, too contrast and sharpened. This was shot in Prores Raw so we’re looking at a graded image. I thought it was pretty nice to see a cool grade.

I’m getting tired of everything looking like it’s shot at golden hour in July even though it’s shot in the north in November. 

If you shoot in flat  or neutral picture profile the blacks aren’t crushed. If you dial down contrast and sharpening in the standard profile it gives a very nice image straight away. It’s a wonderful image in Nikon flat. Like the D750 but better. 

"A very short, quickly shot video on one of the coolest guys I know. Brooklyn based photog Mike Grippi. Shot with the Nikon Z6 Filmmaker's Kit, on a Z6 camera, recording into the Atomos Ninja V, which is a tremendous assist in making a film quickly while traveling light. This was shot in a single day, and recorded in ProRes RAW directly to the Atomos. Many thanks to Levi Arnold, our editor, who did a great job giving the piece a cool look. Hit the blog for more details! "

First footage I've seen with the yet to be released Prores Raw update. Great looking video I think!

18 hours ago, Django said:

FWIW.. Nikon's answer is the even bigger, even more expensive, manual-only 58mm f0.95

 

That’s not really a comparable lens. The 0.95 is a speciality lens which will excel for low light. It’s a specialised lens for a specific use, just as your 600mm telephoto or macro lens. It’s also a showpiece where Nikon wants to exhibit the state of the art.

The coming Z 50/1.2S would be a better comparison. Unfortunately also a large lens. Comparable in size to the Leica 50mm 1.4 SL or the new Panasonic 50mm 1.4.

The Z 1.8 primes are incredible and in my opinion a perfect balance between size, cost, build quality and performance. I also really like the look of the new F2 primes for the Leica SL. Out of my price range for sure but very nice design (I mean in terms of handling/performance not looks).

Would be cool if the coming non-S lenses are super compact with less resolution but still ok for most uses at an affordable price. 

Only you can know what works for you. Anything you read online is way less important to your own experience with a camera. I strongly suggest you rent or at least try out the cameras in a shop. They’re all great cameras and what little differences they have will be less important than how you gel with it.

that said

If you’re used to Nikon colours and ergonomics I’d say go with the Z6. The EOS R is really an amazing camera too. Much better than its specs suggest imo. 

 I follow news about Nikon, Fujifilm, Canon and Olympus. Whenever I read about  any of those brands on DPR the comments are flooded with Sony-fans. The scale of it is pretty incredible. Of course fans of all brands will troll each other occasionally but Sony is on another level. 

It is astounding. Its old. Can never have a discussion about anything without Sony-fans (or cockroaches as they’re called in Japan) flooding threads with destructive comments. 

The only positive thing is that there’s suddenly an unexpected camaraderie among all the others.

@Emanuel

I don’t understand how your link translates to the Q being made in Portugal. No doubt components are made in many places. But most of the manufacture will be done in Germany as is stipulated by German law. Otherwise Leica would be fined for using that label.

Sweden and Switzerland have similar laws. For a product to state “made in Germany” most of the manufacture needs to have taken place in Germany. 

And it’s not just about assembly. If majority of components are made outside of Germany it’s not made in Germany. 

For the same reason I doubt it’s a Panasonic lens. 

28mm is smartphone standard, making it the most commonly used field of view in the world. I think especially for the younger generation, those who are teenagers today, 28mm is really the new standard and what most people will be used to. 

14 hours ago, Django said:

I think an IMAX production shot by actual astronauts in space makes for an even better story/case!

They could have used anything and tested ARRIS/REDS/CINEALTA and even a $200,000 Phantom F65... only to settle with a 1DC & C500.

 

The keyword is ‘an’. That was _one_  production. Meanwhile NASA themselves have been using Nikon for four decades. Years and years. That’s reliability for you. 

It’s besides the point anyway. I don’t know why you need to make everything into a pissing contest? What is all this insecurity about? My first post was merely a reflection on the different institutions use all sorts of cameras and I don’t think there’s any question that Canon cameras are some of the very best. Someone in the thread replied to the initial moronic post about Canon and Apple being for ‘snobs’ with an equally silly response about ‘winners’ using a certain brand.

I only wrote that many artist I know and work with don’t care what they use, trying to make the point that at the end of the day it doesn’t matter. 

The NASA thing was supposed to be a tongue in cheek response to the obnoxious Oscars thing. I merely wrote that Canon cameras are great, and look! Other cameras are also great, it’s unnecessary and childish to speak of ‘winners’ and ‘losers’.

But I see that you’re mainly interested in playground style exchange. I don’t share that interest at all, and my dad’s bigger than your dad anyway btw, so I’ll leave it at that. 

6 hours ago, Django said:

Re: NASA..

Eye Piece: How I Trained Astronauts to Shoot the Stunning 4K Footage in A Beautiful Planet from Space

 

Thanks, it was a nice read. It’s a bit  different though innit? It’s a production team from outside that specified what they wanted to use for their video production, not NASA itself. 

On 2/27/2019 at 7:19 PM, webrunner5 said:

I don't think NASA has used a Nikon camera since the film days of the F4. Now they use a Panasonic camcorder it looks like. I am sure they use other brands though, maybe Nikon still? Can't find much New info. All the photos of the Astronauts are using REALLY old cameras that I have found.

https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/research/experiments/974.html

NASA uses Nikon. I think since the F3. I have seen footage from the space station with D3 and D4. They just bought a ton of Nikon D5.

https://petapixel.com/2017/08/25/nasa-just-ordered-53-nikon-d5-dslrs/

Also, food for thought, why would NASA use the lower resolution and heavier D5 when the D850 has such amazing specs?

Each gram brought is pricey on a space ship.

Reliability, robustness and handling.

Wow somebody wrote a silly comment about Canon and Apple users being for art snobs and suddenly the Canon people are losing it? hahaha If anything many artists don't care too much about what they're using and just go ahead and make the work. Cameras are being used over years and years and insecurity isn't  projected into what camera is being used and the need to have "the best". The Canon RP looks to be a great camera making great work. Canon's are great. I've never liked the colour or lenses myself but sure wish I did. Sigh, condemned to being a loser I guess *shrugs* As is poor loser-NASA and countless other institutions that rely on, for example, Nikon. 

The problem is that Northrup, unlike some other YouTube entertainers, makes claims to be fair, objective and unbiased.

If you make the claim to be fair and unbiased and in the service of the consumer who is trying to find the right camera, when actually the reality of what you do is completely different, that’s a big problem. It could be called misleading on a good day and outright lying on a bad day. 

Aye the Nikon clipped. But they had metered for her face, using a lightmeter, and the face was correctly exposed. Both Canon and Nikon have similar brightness and correspond well with lightmeter. I would be annoyed if I take a reading for her face and then it comes out underexposed (the Sony). Of course with any camera one will learn how it works and will adjust accordingly so it’s not a big problem.

Personally I prefer when the camera I’m using correspond with lightmeter standard. 

I didn’t find that slanted lens comparison of Z6 vs A7iii much better than the rest of the YouTube stuff.

I’m not sure the Nikon is over-exposing. Isn’t it more that Sony (and Fujifilm) are underexposed? They had to raise the exposure in post of all the Sony images since they weren’t correctly exposed with the lightmeter reading. 

Looks like they’re shooting the Nikon with its default sharpening (which is too high).

The Z 6 colour and white balance is to my eyes far nicer than the Sony.

PS And Canon too for that matter. I never liked Canon colour - much to warm and glossy-feeling. 

The thing with the Nikon Z is that it manages to have good specs but more importantly to me, has the best build quality, handling and feel that I’ve seen. It’s much more than it’s spec sheet. Love the thing.