DeMarcus Davis

I watched that video and he has some valid concerns and solid praising. Having said that, he is both right and wrong. He's correct in that to get the very best out of this camera, you need to utilize an external monitor to unleash the 10-bit 422 Apple ProRes. Then again, he's a cinematographer and for that line of work, he NEEDS that 10-bit 422 color space for proper color grading. However, he's also wrong, as for the average user, vlogger, or youtube content creator; an 8-bit standard color profile straight out of body image is MORE than enough. Especially for those who need to crank out videos fast. Odds are, if one is a serious hybrid shooter, you likely already own an external monitor. If for nothing else, my eyes strain looking at the back panel LCD. Using a 5" or larger monitor makes it easier on the eyes and allows for MORE video tools; better focus peaking, better zebras, better waveforms, and offers scopes, 1:1 and 2:1 zooming tools (while recording), offer multiple aspect ratio framing, viewing MULTIPLE audio channels simultaneously, and allows you to add external audio and ultimately bypass the camera's preamps (which often can be far less than clean.)

Of ALL the photogs I share the field with, I have only seen TWO (firsthand) use mirrorless cameras for NFL in-game shooting. One as I previously mentioned) used a Sony ( and sinced switched to a Canon system out of frustration) and another used what looked like a battery gripped Fujifilm X-T2. Mirrorless MAY become more mainstream in outdoor sporting events, but that is a more wait-and-see than an eventuality. Simply put, pro DSLR camera auto focus tracking is superior to ANYTHING a mirrorless body has put out at this point. It's just a hard fact. I REALLY LIKE my Nikon Z6. It's GREAT for portraiture, landscape, travel photography and is mobile and light (with it's native lenses.) However, I cannot endorse or promote ANY mirrorless for NFL/fast action sports.

I'm not sure Nikon would make an APS-C Z-mounted camera. Such a large mount opening with a smaller sensor. It kind of defeats the purpose of the Z-mount. But if Nikon makes a DX F-mount mirrorless camera, it would certainly cannibalize it's recent D7500 and perhaps their entry level 3000 and 5000 series DSLR's Now, Nikon making a Z-mounted Medium Format sensor size Hasselblad competitor...THAT would be a camera market earthquake seismic event.

I have a buddy who shoots sidelines at Oakland Raiders games and he switched from his Sony A9 system to Canon. He complained a lot about autofocus tracking especially while panning in autofocus continuous high. This is the weakness of mirrorless cameras and why I would only use my Nikon Z6 for pre and post game shots. In game football action, NOTHING beats a DSLR and optical viewfinder especially on the D500 and D3s up through to the D5 (OH GOD how I love the D500). Then again, these cameras are nothing but tools. Right tool for the right job. There is no magic Goldilocks camera that will rule them all. In regards to hybrid video shooting stabilization, the best thing to do to eliminate lens or IBIS video wobble is to buy a gimbal and turn off IBS/VR. Sure, it makes any mirrorless system more of a clunky beast, but if you want buttery smooth video with a stills camera (mirrorless or DSLR), you need to place it on a gimbal. NO camera manufacturer is going to cannibalize their pro video cam lineup by introducing a cheaper and compact consumer/prosumer stills camera that can eclipse an FS5/7, Ursa Mini Pro 4.6k, EVA1, or Canon's C100-300 Cinema line up. And Nikon is too conservative of a company to leap into that territory of dedicated video cameras. These mirrorless cameras are meant to be nothing but a bridge between standard DSLRs and dedicated video cams.