rarp

3 hours ago, BasiliskFilm said:

Once you have good quality FF glass, then going to crop seems a backward step, especially now that FF full sensor video is available at sensible prices. That is not to say that there are some nice fast-ish primes for Fuji, but it is tough to get the  look of an f1.4 lens on full frame, while I already have several vintage f1.4 or f1.2 lenses for full frame.

You are right, I like very much the look of the Zeiss 85

1 hour ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

Its possible because the the external recorder is doing all the work not the camera itself. The internal recording is a big plus for me. Internal 10 bit at 400mbps is crazy good C300 mk2 territory. That said I find 200mbps perfectly fine for anything I've ever used. Also I've found the Sandisk V30 cards handle 400mbps. I just don't like the extra bulk. 

As far as stills I've never noticed any issue of sharpness. Could be an Xtrans sensor issue if you are using lightroom. People recommend converting the files to DNG or using another program like capture one. I shoot jpegs a lot. 

So, in order to record high quality codecs like prores, the recorder can have access to a higher bitrate than the camera itself can record?

Yes, I know about lightroom and its dislike for xtrans sensors. Until some time ago, I have been using a Fuji X pro1 and switched to using capture one for the raf files. And I remember the mushy details were a little bit tricky to sharpen. But probably things have evolved also in the last few years.

Thanks everybody for your replies. The idea of having image stabilization to my Zeiss 35 and 85 is kind of nice.

On 3/7/2019 at 4:35 PM, MrSMW said:

I agree, the Ninja V (or any quality external monitor, even something like the Feelworld) is a must for filmmaking.

On 3/7/2019 at 8:04 AM, IronFilm said:

But most people might not want to use the Ninja V with their camera, but in your case you're going to do it anyway, which makes the decision easier. 

I have tried once an external recorder and found some features really nice to have, like false color. Not to mention that, in the long run, I think it's also cheaper to use than internal recording. A good quality 500gb ssd can be found for 80 euro. Having 500gb of fast sd cards for internal video recording cost the same or even more than the external recorder itself.

On 3/7/2019 at 3:34 AM, thebrothersthre3 said:

The choice between the Nikon Z6 and XT-3 is a tough one. 

I would say the XT3 is superior in every way except low light performance. Of course the Z6 has the 12 bit prores RAW capability with an external recorder. 

If you want the full frame look (or even medium format) that is another point for the Nikon. IBIS is also another factor, if its something you need. 

I went with Fuji for the color. However the auto focus and high speed options were a big plus (10 bit 4k 60p, HD 120p 10 bit). I also don't like using external recorders. 

Besides the colors, what intrigues me about the Fuji is also the much higher bitrate: 400 vs 100 mbps of the Z6. But for stills, the fuji files have sometimes a kind of mushy appearance in the details, which I don't like that much. I tried to work on some raw files from the fuji and that mushy look is tricky to get rid of.

Talking about bitrate, maybe I miss something, but how can be possible to have some options like the coming z6 raw recording available from a camera with lower bitrate?

Hello community,

I have been reading this forum for some time but never posted anything. I need a new camera and I am interested 50/50% in stills and video and I have a couple of projects unfolding shortly. Main uses would be recording/documenting urban landscapes (churches, monuments, etc) and people working, mostly outside and with natural light. I am also gearing up with some audio equipment in the meanwhile.

After reading and watching reviews I am kind of stuck in the decision process. I came down to 2 candidates: Nikon Z6 and Fuji XT3. The Atomos Ninja V will be added to any of them.

Lenses are not much of a problem, as I currently have some Zeiss ZF and Nikon ais lenses (18, 35, 50, 85, 105, 180) and will use an adapter anyway (the FTZ one or some F to X mount one). I will probably buy one or two lenses for the new system and a wide angle.

What intrigues me about the Z6 is the full frame 422 10 bit output and future raw option and, having used Nikon bodies in the past, their robust construction. But the Fuji seems more equipped video wise (400 mbs max bit rate, eterna profile, etc.). Since most of the video recording will be done on a tripod or a gimbal, I don’t need ibis, which would probably turn more useful for the still images.

Sorry if this post is similar to others, but I am asking personal opinions on the two cameras, especially professionally or from someone who used both of them.