Jump to content
Andrew Reid

Nikon Z6 features 4K N-LOG, 10bit HDMI output and 120fps 1080p

Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

Other than these new Z cameras, in the last few years Nikon has pretty much just sat on their ass and watched the world go by resting on their laurels. No breakthroughs to amount to spit. And that dumbass stuff with their 1" cameras, what a Jackass decision, no D750 replacement, on and on.. Personally I see the Z cameras as a total desperation attempt by them. Sink or swim. And I don't think it is some run away success for them by any means. This Panny S1, S1R, EOS-RS didn't help their cause at all.

The Z cameras do 10 bit external and 12 bit RAW is on it's way.  When another mirrorles camera besides the S1 can do 12 bit Raw comes along then I'll agree that the Z lineup is "desperation attempt by them." (Nikon).  

The EOS - R is a joke for video and the S1 is almost a clone of the Z6.  And don't come back with "if" the Z6 get Raw or no one wants Raw. ProRes Raw is no the data hog of other Raw codecs. 

What would have made the Z6 a breakthrough in your mind ? 4K60FPS pr two card slots? Because we all know the FS7 has two card slots. 

Nikon has the advantage of all the users that have Nikon glass coming over to the Z line up. Nikon owners are not switching to Canon or Panasonic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
EOSHD Pro Color for Sony cameras EOSHD Pro LOG for Sony CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs
1 hour ago, Skip77 said:

The Z cameras do 10 bit external and 12 bit RAW is on it's way.  When another mirrorles camera besides the S1 can do 12 bit Raw comes along then I'll agree that the Z lineup is "desperation attempt by them." (Nikon).  

The EOS - R is a joke for video and the S1 is almost a clone of the Z6.  And don't come back with "if" the Z6 get Raw or no one wants Raw. ProRes Raw is no the data hog of other Raw codecs. 

What would have made the Z6 a breakthrough in your mind ? 4K60FPS pr two card slots? Because we all know the FS7 has two card slots. 

Nikon has the advantage of all the users that have Nikon glass coming over to the Z line up. Nikon owners are not switching to Canon or Panasonic.

I owned both... the Nikon is not a bad camera. But the AF is far behind the Canon, the preamps are inferior... enough so that it is quite noticeable and the image is over-sharpened. And while it's easy to sharpen a soft image, it's near impossible to soften a sharp image without turning it to mush. If the EOS R is a joke because it is cropped in 4k, then so are most cinema cameras. As they are almost all cropped when compared to full frame. You might try using one. I think you might find the joke is on you, because from my experience, there is no camera made today at this level, that cannot be used to create compelling work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DBounce said:

I owned both... the Nikon is not a bad camera. But the AF is far behind the Canon, the preamps are inferior... enough so that it is quite noticeable and the image is over-sharpened. And while it's easy to sharpen a soft image, it's near impossible to soften a sharp image without turning it to mush. If the EOS R is a joke because it is cropped in 4k, then so are most cinema cameras. As they are almost all cropped when compared to full frame. You might try using one. I think you might find the joke is on you, because from my experience, there is no camera made today at this level, that cannot be used to create compelling work.

Of course the Canon EOS R can create compelling content. So can the Z6 and I've defended the Z6 to people have never used it. Calling it a joke is a little harsh.

The Z6 being over sharpened is as simple as turning the sharpness sown and it's solved. Not sure why you brought sharpening up because if you shoot flat the sharpening is at zero. If you shoot standard or auto the sharpness is up 2-3 settings?  So you can back down any additional sharpening without any change in image quality. 

Of course cine cameras crop with higher frame rates but go look up which cine cameras do a full sensor readout and which ones don't. The EOS R crops when Nikon and others don't to the extent that the EOS R does. No IBIS also on the R is another reason to ask why? Why Canon? Canon always leaves off features and specs that keep cameras limited and the EOS R is a perfect example of this.  

I would have loved to get the EOS R and tell me more about why the EOS R is better then the Z6, I'm open to as much info as possible. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Skip77 said:

The Z cameras do 10 bit external and 12 bit RAW is on it's way.  When another mirrorles camera besides the S1 can do 12 bit Raw comes along then I'll agree that the Z lineup is "desperation attempt by them." (Nikon).  

The EOS - R is a joke for video and the S1 is almost a clone of the Z6.  And don't come back with "if" the Z6 get Raw or no one wants Raw. ProRes Raw is no the data hog of other Raw codecs. 

What would have made the Z6 a breakthrough in your mind ? 4K60FPS pr two card slots? Because we all know the FS7 has two card slots. 

Nikon has the advantage of all the users that have Nikon glass coming over to the Z line up. Nikon owners are not switching to Canon or Panasonic.

Still don't get this S1 is a clone of the Z6. The S1 has a totally different codec (HEVC vs x264) and is far better in terms of high-iso performance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Skip77 I wouldn't say the EOS R is better... just different. The Nikon is imo a great camera. I think Nikon put out a camera with about as much spec wise as they could. That said while one can complain about the crop of the R, one could just as easily make a case against the lower pixel count of the Nikon vs the R in stills mode. These are hybrid cameras after-all. There is plenty to like and plenty that could be better. As to sharpness, you cannot completely turn if off. Not from my experience. It's always there to some degree.

IBIS, I fully understand it's usefulness in stills mode, but I hate with a passion how it can randomly ruin video shots with jello. Granted the Nikon has something I wish all cameras with IBIS had... the ability to lock the sensor so that IBIS is fully disabled. When Canon does introduce IBIS, I hope they follow Nikon's example and offer this feature. Likewise, the ability to shield the sensor when switching lenses is a true innovation for mirrorless cameras... Nikon, Sony, Panasonic and Fuji take note. 

If I'm to be frank about what I would love to see in a hybrid... 

1. Pixel level ND

2. 14 + stops of Dynamic range

3. Internal 10 bit 422

4. Electronic stabilization ala GoPro

5. Quad pixel AF

6. Lastly, all cameras in this space should have a clean image at 12,800 ISO. Some do already.

I think this list is going to be real in the near future.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, TheBoogieKnight said:

Still don't get this S1 is a clone of the Z6. The S1 has a totally different codec (HEVC vs x264) and is far better in terms of high-iso performance.

Because the S1 is the next camera that has similar specs, sensor and image quality. The S1 does have better high-iso performance and the Z6 has the full Nikon glass selection and better AF and AF-F tracking in video. And when 12 bit Raw hits the S1 and Z6 I won't have to pay for the firmware update. 

I'm also all for the S1 being a great camera. 

10 minutes ago, DBounce said:

@Skip77 I wouldn't say the EOS R is better... just different. The Nikon is imo a great camera. I think Nikon put out a camera with about as much spec wise as they could. That said while one can complain about the crop of the R, one could just as easily make a case against the lower pixel count of the Nikon vs the R in stills mode. These are hybrid cameras after-all. There is plenty to like and plenty that could be better. As to sharpness, you cannot completely turn if off. Not from my experience. It's always there to some degree.

IBIS, I fully understand it's usefulness in stills mode, but I hate with a passion how it can randomly ruin video shots with jello. Granted the Nikon has something I wish all cameras with IBIS had... the ability to lock the sensor so that IBIS is fully disabled. When Canon does introduce IBIS, I hope they follow Nikon's example and offer this feature. Likewise, the ability to shield the sensor when switching lenses is a true innovation for mirrorless cameras... Nikon, Sony, Panasonic and Fuji take note. 

If I'm to be frank about what I would love to see in a hybrid... 

1. Pixel level ND

2. 14 + stops of Dynamic range

3. Internal 10 bit 422

4. Electronic stabilization ala GoPro

5. Quad pixel AF

6. Lastly, all cameras in this space should have a clean image at 12,800 ISO. Some do already.

I think this list is going to be real in the near future.

 

I like the "wish list".  I think Sony will make an A-S ?? cine version in the $4,000 range with the feature you've mentioned.  Every camera maker should do the same. Give us a $2k and $4K version with pro features at full frame. 

I don't know if you used the Z6 with IBIS selected in video mode but it has zero jello mode going on. Jello mode is present in the A7III and rampant on the A6500 and other models. This was the biggest reason the Z6 blew me away when you go handheld.  

Also - the Z6 has 24.5 MP for stills. The R has 30.3 and that's not even anything you'll notice at all. The R also crops in 1080P mode. 

The next Canon mirrorless should be great.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Skip77 it may not seem like much, but you will notice the drop in resolution from 30MP to 24MP... at least I did. 

I think @DaveAltizer sums up how I feel about the Canon. Yes, I’ll concede no crop would be great, but crop or no, there is just something about the Canon’s image that makes it more filmic, organic... just plainly more appealing. On paper it loses. But the audience does check the dam spec sheet.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Skip77 said:

Also - the Z6 has 24.5 MP for stills. The R has 30.3 and that's not even anything you'll notice at all. The R also crops in 1080P mode. 

 

That's incorrect, EOS R shoots FF in 1080p. For stills, the extra 25% MP increase is definitely appreciated. 30MP is a nice IQ/file size ratio imo.

Quote

I would have loved to get the EOS R and tell me more about why the EOS R is better then the Z6, I'm open to as much info as possible. 

Internal C-Log, 400mbps ALL-I codec, Dual Pixel AF, Vari-ND adapter, video exposure meters, no HDMI lag, vertical battery grip, better native lens line-up...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, DBounce said:

That said while one can complain about the crop of the R, one could just as easily make a case against the lower pixel count of the Nikon vs the R in stills mode. These are hybrid cameras after-all.


I'd argue that 24 megapixels is a sweet spot for resolution for most people, don't need the 30 megapixels of the EOS R

But if you do need extra resolution then Nikon is ahead and winning here as well, with the Nikon Z7!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Django said:

That's incorrect, EOS R shoots FF in 1080p. For stills, the extra 25% MP increase is definitely appreciated. 30MP is a nice IQ/file size ratio imo.

Internal C-Log, 400mbps ALL-I codec, Dual Pixel AF, Vari-ND adapter, video exposure meters, no HDMI lag, vertical battery grip, better native lens line-up...

 

I watch the video comparing the two and he said the EOS R cropped 1.8  in 1080p - at the 09:49 mark.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Skip77 said:

I watch the video comparing the two and he said the EOS R cropped 1.8  in 1080p - at the 09:49 mark.

You misunderstood him, he is talking then about the selectable crop mode in 1080p. A couple seconds earlier at around 9:20 he clearly speaks of the FF 1080p used by famous YouTubers. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Skip77 said:

I watch the video comparing the two and he said the EOS R cropped 1.8  in 1080p - at the 09:49 mark.

Dave mentioned the crop mode being 1.8x...compared to the stills crop (which is 1.6x). The EOS R can shoot 1080 in full frame mode.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see it as a FF Stills / FHD camera with a bonus cropped 4K mode for extra reach on close-ups / money shots. 4K also works good on sticks as B-Cam to a C line cam.

That said others do use it to shoot only in 4K (DBounce) or only 1080p (Mattias Burling). YMMV. There are always other options if those compromises are deal breakers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IronFilm said:

Kinda defeats the purpose of a 4K camera if you're buying it to shoot in 1080 all the time?

I think the thing everyone is missing is that if you are judging this camera on specs alone you will miss the point entirely. We all understand that spec wise the competition may seem to hold the upper hand. But specs be dammed, most people that have used both side by side end up preferring the EOS R... frustrating as that may be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not missing the fact that £2100 is a lot to spend on essentially a hd hybrid in 2019 when all the other cameras offer decent 4k. It's not like 4k hasn't been available for many years on other cameras, Canon seems way behind on this, RS and DR. Tis a bummer cause I've got a lot of Canon lenses but I think I'm going to sell them, and the good old C100 and finally free myself from the constant disappointment of waiting for Canon to get their arse into gear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, AlexTrinder96 said:

Dave mentioned the crop mode being 1.8x...compared to the stills crop (which is 1.6x). The EOS R can shoot 1080 in full frame mode.

My bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, DBounce said:

I think the thing everyone is missing is that if you are judging this camera on specs alone you will miss the point entirely. We all understand that spec wise the competition may seem to hold the upper hand. But specs be dammed, most people that have used both side by side end up preferring the EOS R... frustrating as that may be.

That's not 100% true that most people prefer the EOS R over the Z6. Most people have not shot with both cameras and are biased anyway. There is no "more film like" with the EOS R and the footage proves that without a shadow of a doubt. I use my eyes and my eyes don't say the EOS R is more film like then the Z^. In fact the EOS R has issues with washed out highlights and the Z6 does not. 

I will look into the EOS R more my self because I haven't invested into Nikon yet besides the Z6 and 50mm 1.8.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most people have been hostile in response to Nikon Z6 and it doing 12 bit Raw external. Why? That should be a good thing for everyone. 

I know for a fact the Z6 4K video even at 8 bit is better then the A7III's video and I know for a fact that it compares to the C200 that was used at the same place with the same talent.  That's not saying the Z6 is better or even as good but just what I can tell you based on footage between the two cameras. 

As far as having other cameras that do decent 4K comment. What? and what cameras? The GH5 does very good 4K but at what coast with the speed booster and glass you have to buy. 

The P4K is great but went I went to order one no-one had the P4K in stock.  Sony's 4K sucks, Fuji no and Panasonic S1 is great but is even priced higher then the Z6 by over $1,000. 

The EOS R looks good but the 1.8 crop shouldn't even be happening and no way they get away with that in the next builds. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Skip77 said:

Most people have been hostile in response to Nikon Z6 and it doing 12 bit Raw external. Why? That should be a good thing for everyone. 

I know for a fact the Z6 4K video even at 8 bit is better then the A7III's video and I know for a fact that it compares to the C200 that was used at the same place with the same talent.  That's not saying the Z6 is better or even as good but just what I can tell you based on footage between the two cameras. 

As far as having other cameras that do decent 4K comment. What? and what cameras? The GH5 does very good 4K but at what coast with the speed booster and glass you have to buy. 

The P4K is great but went I went to order one no-one had the P4K in stock.  Sony's 4K sucks, Fuji no and Panasonic S1 is great but is even priced higher then the Z6 by over $1,000. 

The EOS R looks good but the 1.8 crop shouldn't even be happening and no way they get away with that in the next builds. 

 

The Z6 is a great leap forward for sure. People don't appreciate things once they come along there is always something else on the horizon. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...