Jump to content

Nikon Z6 / Z7 to go RAW with Atomos Ninja V - could Panasonic be next?


Andrew Reid
 Share

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, Emanuel said:

REDCODE is compressed RAW for a dozen years, no one has complained in Hollywood included... Do you? :X

Compressed it is OK, almost evrything is compressed these days. :relaxed:

Quality LOSS - aka you cannot recover the original info after de-compression - this is something else (a kind of jpeg!).

And it is up to you to accept an "quality loss RAW", which by itself is a contradiction. :mrgreen:

Myself I accept a "regular" codec with quality loss. This is what I can aquire with my faboulous income (working in IT hardware, photo/video being a hobby).
I will NEVER accept a so-called RAW if you lose quality, call it anything but RAW and I may embrace it gladly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, GiM_6x said:

Compressed it is OK, almost evrything is compressed these days. :relaxed:

Quality LOSS - aka you cannot recover the original info after de-compression - this is something else (a kind of jpeg!).

And it is up to you to accept an "quality loss RAW", which by itself is a contradiction. :mrgreen:

Myself I accept a "regular" codec with quality loss. This is what I can aquire with my faboulous income (working in IT hardware, photo/video being a hobby).
I will NEVER accept a so-called RAW if you lose quality, call it anything but RAW and I may embrace it gladly.

To me personally, it can be called RAW as long as it records Bayer data, I don't mind lossy compression, and the compression is usually visually lossless. Unless you're doing Avengers Infinity War level VFX, you don't need uncompressed/lossless RAW.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, androidlad said:

To me personally, it can be called RAW as long as it records Bayer data, I don't mind lossy compression, and the compression is usually visually lossless. Unless you're doing Avengers Infinity War level VFX, you don't need uncompressed/lossless RAW.

With the "marketing" promotions - what we are dealing with right now - we start to lose words meaning.
If you accept this "kind of RAW" as a loss way to record video, it is up to you.

Will you accept me saying you are a FAT GUY since you have more than 5 lbs?
What ? This is MY WAY to say you are beatifull !
Who am I ? I am the best marketing guy in the galaxy, you have to believe me that you are FAT! :mrgreen:
No one else can contradict me, right ??? !!!

Andrew, I appologize for this OFF-TOPIC... 
Mea culpa!

But we need to respect the words for what they means - if we want to understand each-other!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with @GiM_6x. We should put some effort into using words correctly. Its the reason netflix wont allow upscaled alexa footage to be considered 4k. Prores raw, redcode raw, bmraw, are all fine formats. I dont have an issue with them as formats, but it is marketing bs to call them "RAW." Its not a matter of whats "needed" for a given production, its quite simply a matter of using correct terminology. Its like putting an 8 bit stream into a 10 bit container and calling it 10 bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is big news but i think it's worth mentioning that ProRes RAW currently only opens in FCPX. If you are on Adobe, Resolve or PC it's going to be a no go (AFAIK).

That is pretty limiting compared to other recent Raw codecs like Canon Raw Light which has native support in FCPX, Resolve & Avid.

It's also bit of a shame Nikon couldn't work out to record ProRes Raw internally. They opted for those expensive XQD/CFexpress media cards, why not take advantage of the speed they offer to record high bitrate internally?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Django said:

This is big news but i think it's worth mentioning that ProRes RAW currently only opens in FCPX. If you are on Adobe, Resolve or PC it's going to be a no go (AFAIK).

That is pretty limiting compared to other recent Raw codecs like Canon Raw Light which has native support in FCPX, Resolve & Avid.

It's also bit of a shame Nikon couldn't work out to record ProRes Raw internally. They opted for those expensive XQD/CFexpress media cards, why not take advantage of the speed they offer to record high bitrate internally?

 

Would have been cool, but it can't record 10 bit internally either. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Django said:

This is big news but i think it's worth mentioning that ProRes RAW currently only opens in FCPX. If you are on Adobe, Resolve or PC it's going to be a no go (AFAIK).

 

Ah, not cool... Is there a way to transcode ProRes Raw to a Resolve compatible codec without too much loss ? Just out of curiosity, I know it may be a hassle to dive into this process...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sincerely, people should chill out a bit. We are getting a Full Frame raw 4k camera, with very very very very  good low light, dynamic range, auto focus, IBis, viewfinder etc for 2700 USD. Less if you buy the complete filmmaker kit. There is nothing remotely close to that and people are still complaining. What is small enough for people these days. The Z6 Ninja V combo is smaller than my d7100 Dslr and a Flash. When you see the amount of active cooling something like the Pocket 4k needs for a sensor that is 1/4 of the Z6 people have to be a bit realistic. Another thing to consider is a user of a Ninja Flame, having an external recorder like this brings so much functionality for focusing, previewing and exposure tools that go so much beyond just a recorder.

39 minutes ago, Django said:

This is big news but i think it's worth mentioning that ProRes RAW currently only opens in FCPX. If you are on Adobe, Resolve or PC it's going to be a no go (AFAIK).

That is pretty limiting compared to other recent Raw codecs like Canon Raw Light which has native support in FCPX, Resolve & Avid.

It's also bit of a shame Nikon couldn't work out to record ProRes Raw internally. They opted for those expensive XQD/CFexpress media cards, why not take advantage of the speed they offer to record high bitrate internally?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Geoff_L said:

Ah, not cool... Is there a way to transcode ProRes Raw to a Resolve compatible codec without too much loss ? Just out of curiosity, I know it may be a hassle to dive into this process...

Surely, given you have access to a mac with FCPX. You should then be able to convert to any codec including ProRes4444..

41 minutes ago, Danyyyel said:

Sincerely, people should chill out a bit. We are getting a Full Frame raw 4k camera, with very very very very  good low light, dynamic range, auto focus, IBis, viewfinder etc for 2700 USD. Less if you buy the complete filmmaker kit. There is nothing remotely close to that and people are still complaining. What is small enough for people these days. The Z6 Ninja V combo is smaller than my d7100 Dslr and a Flash. When you see the amount of active cooling something like the Pocket 4k needs for a sensor that is 1/4 of the Z6 people have to be a bit realistic. Another thing to consider is a user of a Ninja Flame, having an external recorder like this brings so much functionality for focusing, previewing and exposure tools that go so much beyond just a recorder.

 

We're all aware of the benefits but also cons of using external recorders.

I'm not complaining, just saying I wish it could have been internal (just like i also wish N-log could be internal).

ML got the 5D3 (a 2012 camera!) to shoot 14-bit 3K Raw internally. The main issue going higher was the 100mb/sec card buffer cap.

Z series should manage with their super fast XQD/CFexpress. But i don't know, maybe ProRes Raw is too much to handle CPU wise.

Or maybe it's a licensing deal with Atomos..?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, KnightsFan said:

I agree with @GiM_6x. We should put some effort into using words correctly. Its the reason netflix wont allow upscaled alexa footage to be considered 4k. Prores raw, redcode raw, bmraw, are all fine formats. I dont have an issue with them as formats, but it is marketing bs to call them "RAW." Its not a matter of whats "needed" for a given production, its quite simply a matter of using correct terminology. Its like putting an 8 bit stream into a 10 bit container and calling it 10 bit.

Not exactly. RAW doesn't necessarily mean uncompressed (that is, can perfectly happen to be minimally processed) but more prone to be taken as a digital negative where information may be subject to be recovered lately. This is what generally characterizes the tool : -)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Emanuel said:

Not exactly. RAW doesn't necessarily mean uncompressed (that is, can perfectly happen to be minimally processed) but more prone to be taken as a digital negative where information may be subject to be recovered lately. This is what generally characterizes the tool : -)

Definitely, but ProRes RAW sucks, you can't even change the white balance in post.

 

This is an awesome development but...

  • Z6/Z7 only 4k30
  • No electronic EF to Z mount adapters
  • RAW output only readable by Ninja V
  • Ninja V media overpriced
  • Ninja V can't do cdng

 

This probably the best hybrid camera package on the market now though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, andrgl said:

Definitely, but ProRes RAW sucks, you can't even change the white balance in post.

 

This is an awesome development but it's not worth it with the Z6 or Ninja V. If this was 4k60 with cdng AND ProRes... I'd buy in a heartbeat.

Well, nothing to object then : ) I find your comment pretty solid, so 100% agreed : -)

I put all my bets for now on the new BRAW to be implemented into the P4K to begin with. Hope others to be subject to be there as further add-on to follow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Emanuel said:

Not exactly. RAW doesn't necessarily mean uncompressed (that is, can perfectly happen to be minimally processed) but more prone to be taken as a digital negative where information may be subject to be recovered lately. This is what generally characterizes the tool : -)

I never said uncompressed, but Raw should be mathematically lossless to be a legitimate Raw format. It should also have a linear gamma, little to no digital processing, and no debayering if originating from a bayer sensor. Any video format can be treated as a "digital negative" and store information that can be recovered later. Most log curves are designed to do just that.

If I make a video format that simply takes the bayer data from a sensor, pretend that every group of 3 pixels is a single RGB pixel, then apply ordinary ProRes compression to the entire thing, that's certainly not RAW at all. I suspect that is very nearly what ProRes RAW does.

9 minutes ago, andrgl said:

Definitely, but ProRes RAW sucks, you can't even change the white balance in post.

You can essentially change the white balance on any video if you transform it into linear gamma before doing so. The only hindrance is that most cameras don't store the original white balance metadata in non-raw formats. As long as ProRes RAW retains all the information from pixels sufficiently, it should be just as flexible as any of the other Raw-lite formats for white balance adjustments. It does seem silly that it is not builtin, though.

Link to comment
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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...