Jump to content

Nikon Z6 + Atomos Ninja Star footage


FHDcrew
 Share

Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, kye said:

When did I state that YT doesn't degrade the image capture?

Were you saying that downsampled 4k to HD uploaded to YouTube in HD will look better than a 1080p sensor shooting 1080p video uploaded to YouTube in HD?

I'd test that out but I don't have any working SD cards for my BM micro. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EOSHD Pro Color 5 for Sony cameras EOSHD Z LOG for Nikon CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs

I was hyperbolizing it a bit but what I said is true to an extent. 4K to 1080p is what you do when you are playing the file locally but uploading to Youtube it's better to leave it as 4K and add a slight NR to it. 

16 hours ago, kye said:

My comments are about resolution, in the context of downsampling, not bitrate.

Yes, but if your comments about downsampling were true, then it wouldn't matter if God himself uploaded a video to YT, it would still be........

But, it's not, and therefore, it isn't.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, The Dancing Babamef said:

I was hyperbolizing it a bit but what I said is true to an extent. 4K to 1080p is what you do when you are playing the file locally but uploading to Youtube it's better to leave it as 4K and add a slight NR to it. 

 

Let's say you are recording in camera, downsampling to HD from 4k in camera, like the original poster did. Even though your file is natively HD I still think rendering it in 4k, which makes YouTube upload it in 4k will give you a better result. The footage itself won't look any sharper, but the extra 40mbps YouTube gives 4k makes a difference. 

I am not saying you disagree, just clarifying my thoughts/experiences with YouTube. 

my 2 cents 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TomTheDP said:

Let's say you are recording in camera, downsampling to HD from 4k in camera, like the original poster did. Even though your file is natively HD I still think rendering it in 4k, which makes YouTube upload it in 4k will give you a better result. The footage itself won't look any sharper, but the extra 40mbps YouTube gives 4k makes a difference. 

I am not saying you disagree, just clarifying my thoughts/experiences with YouTube. 

my 2 cents 

I wholeheartedly agree, and I wish I had done that with my original post.  My original point was that natively, when looking at the RAW files, downsampled 1080p doesn't look much softer than native 4k.  The difference is small enough not to matter unless viewed side-by-side.  The difference is small, and as a result one can use a tiny Atomos Ninja Star with a Nikon Z6 to gain 10 bit log without needing a large bulky external recorder/monitor, thus making the Z6/Star combination very compelling given the price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, FHDcrew said:

I wholeheartedly agree, and I wish I had done that with my original post.  My original point was that natively, when looking at the RAW files, downsampled 1080p doesn't look much softer than native 4k.  The difference is small enough not to matter unless viewed side-by-side.  The difference is small, and as a result one can use a tiny Atomos Ninja Star with a Nikon Z6 to gain 10 bit log without needing a large bulky external recorder/monitor, thus making the Z6/Star combination very compelling given the price.

I agree, it is a great setup. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, TomTheDP said:

Were you saying that downsampled 4k to HD uploaded to YouTube in HD will look better than a 1080p sensor shooting 1080p video uploaded to YouTube in HD?

I'd test that out but I don't have any working SD cards for my BM micro. 

The original claim by @The Dancing Babamef was....

On 10/30/2022 at 5:54 PM, The Dancing Babamef said:

People. When uploading to Youtube, ignore all the downsampling crap. It only applies if you're not compressing the footage again and again. It sounds good on paper but even scaling 1080p to 4K and then watching that "1080p" as a 4K video on youtube gives it a higher visual quality. 

All the pixel binning and noise reduction gets washed away because the compression that youtube uses makes the fine detail into mush anyway.

My reply was simply that YouTube is good enough to show the difference between:

  • Resolution X sensor -> Resolution X timeline -> Resolution X YT upload 
  • Resolution >X sensor -> Resolution X timeline -> Resolution X YT upload 

It doesn't matter if X = 4K or 1080p, YT quality on both of them is enough to see differences.

I think people form the opinion that YT is completely useless and don't think it can do anything because of the way it handles grain (i.e. a bloodbath) and the high quantity of very low quality uploads where the footage has been crunched way before it made it to YT.

I'm yet to understand what makes a YT upload look worse or better, but there is definitely a lot of variation across different channels / videos.

In terms of a 4K sensor -> 1080p timeline -> 4K export-> 4K upload, that can benefit hugely from a little bit of sharpening.  Most of the people that think that 1080p is completely inferior to 4K are seeing the extra YT bitrate from the 4K YT stream, or are simply looking at sharpness, which is easily compensated for in grading.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, The Dancing Babamef said:

I was hyperbolizing it a bit but what I said is true to an extent. 4K to 1080p is what you do when you are playing the file locally but uploading to Youtube it's better to leave it as 4K and add a slight NR to it. 

Unless you have a reason to have part of your signal path in 1080p.

I shoot GH5 using the 1080p 200Mbps ALL-I mode so that I can edit in 1080p smoothly on my MBP laptop without rendering proxies.  Before I settled on that workflow I did comparisons between the 5K h265 open gate Long-GOP mode, the 4K h264 Long-GOP mode, and the 1080p ALL-I mode, using my sharpest lens, stopped down, on a subject directly lit with harsh lighting and lots of fine detail, and then pixel peed my heart out trying to see differences.  They were there, but WOW did you really have to look HARD to find them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, dreamplayhouse said:

Can't find a used Ninja Star anywhere. Would the Ninja 2 also output 10 bit from the Nikon Z6?

Any other cheaper recorders than the Atomos Ninja V that output 10 bit 422 on the Z6??

Ninja 2 should do it.  It's going to be bigger and heavier, but you can get the identical 1080p image.  Just set record settings to 4k on the Z6; then go into HDMI settings, set output to 10 bit and resolution to 1080p.  Then the downsampling is activated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 months later...

I wanted to share this recent project with you guys!  Also I guess this counts as a face reveal lol.  Shot entirely on a Nikon Z6 with the Tamron SP 45mm 1.8!  NLOG graded in Davinci Resolve.   Some footage was shot using the Ninja Star, others the Ninja V.  Most of the footage was shot using the oversampled 1080p mode I spoke about earlier in this thread; the AROLL was definately shot in this mode.  Just wanted to share, because one I want to share some of my work and what I do here, and two I wanted to give a good example of what this camera can do in 2023!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PannySVHS said:

Pro job! Would love some z6 8bit stuff in the good old artsy fartsy gh2 style. It's always easier for me to ask than going out and film and edit some myself:) @FHDcrew

Yeah just filmed some z6 8 bit and it has more flexibility than one would respect. For 8-bit lately I’ve actually done a CST to Arri LogC and then applied the Arri Rec709 LUT. Liking the results, and the camera can be had for like $850 if you look hard enough 😮 

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

  • EOSHD Pro Color 5 for All Sony cameras
    EOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs
    EOSHD Dynamic Range Enhancer for H.264/H.265
×
×
  • Create New...