Nikon Zr is coming

[ArashM]

True, however I know several people personally who have bounced out of the ZR due to the same issue.

My local dealer was mentioning that several ZRs are being traded in for the FX5.

I know a fix is coming, but I'm afraid it will come when it's no longer relevant in the market!

[eatstoomuchjam]

As a person who is waiting for used ZR prices to drop a bit more before picking one up, this all sounds good to me.  😅

[Ilkka Nissila]

5 hours ago, ArashM said:

True, however I know several people personally who have bounced out of the ZR due to the same issue.

My local dealer was mentioning that several ZRs are being traded in for the FX5.

I know a fix is coming, but I'm afraid it will come when it's no longer relevant in the market!

The FX5 is 5599€ here, the ZR is 2449€. I think most customers understand the ZR is not meant to be an FX3 or FX5 at half price.

[mercer]

Honestly, I am a little confused. Why buy the ZR if you want an h.265 codec camera?

The ZR will probably be my next camera purchase but I am buying it for the RedCode Raw/n-raw and 32bit float audio. I wish there were better 4K raw options but that doesn't exist so I'm going to deal with it, I won't buy it and then say... Nikon needs to fix the lack of 4K raw options in the camera that I already knew didn't have good 4K raw options.

If I decide to shoot 4K for "lesser" projects, I'll just use the ProResHQ with n-log or even Nikon Flat for certain things. 
 

I don't mean to be rude, but there are so many cameras on the market that shoot great full frame h.265. Raw video isn't for everybody, nor should it be.

[ArashM]

5 hours ago, mercer said:

Honestly, I am a little confused. Why buy the ZR if you want an h.265 codec camera?

The ZR will probably be my next camera purchase but I am buying it for the RedCode Raw/n-raw and 32bit float audio. I wish there were better 4K raw options but that doesn't exist so I'm going to deal with it, I won't buy it and then say... Nikon needs to fix the lack of 4K raw options in the camera that I already knew didn't have good 4K raw options.

If I decide to shoot 4K for "lesser" projects, I'll just use the ProResHQ with n-log or even Nikon Flat for certain things. 
 

I don't mean to be rude, but there are so many cameras on the market that shoot great full frame h.265. Raw video isn't for everybody, nor should it be.

Hi, you are not being rude at all 🙂 happy to have a convo as we all use our gear differently.

Unfortunately where I failed was assuming the H265 was normal, at the time of purchase it seemed like a perfect camera for most projects where for higher end stuff you could shoot red code and for more lower-end project (talking heads/ social content) you could shoot H265. 

The 2 surprises once we started shooting with it was just how massive the red code is compared to other red cameras (we also have other reds with other DOPs on projects) and how unusable the H265 is 

So camera was sold and we're back to using Lumix's / Sony FX for lower end projects and Pyxis 12/Komodo for higher end projects.

This is just my use case in my little world..... I know we all have different wants and needs 🙂 

[MrSMW]

I’ve come close to pushing the ZR button a few times now and there are really only 3 things that have prevented me doing so…

1. The file sizes of that Red Raw codec. Apparently N raw is the next best option and there are of course some ‘workarounds’, but until there is a compressed version that maxes out at no more than 1000 mbps, it’s just too much and one of the principal draws of this camera is the Red codec.

2. I’m not unhappy with L Mount. In fact the opposite except for one factor and that is the absence IMO of equivalent lenses to Sony’s: 28-70 f2, 50-150 f2 and Tamron’s 35-100 f2.8. It’s ‘almost’ worth switching just for these lenses alone, but that last word, ‘alone’, but alone is not enough and lenses aside, everything else that L Mount, specifically Lumix offers, beats that of Nikon & Sony.

3. I still have hope that from within the L Mount Alliance, over the coming Winter and next Spring, either (or even both) a rangefinderesque camera will appear from either Lumix or Sigma and at least one rival for one of the lenses above, will appear. Unlikely to be a Leica, but next gen FP a possibility and even more likely, an S9ii?

4. Bonus reason, - switching not only costs money, but there is always a settling in period with any new system that frustrates.

So my set up now just works, I have it and I like it and as above, my only real crit is with regard to certain lenses, but the ZR body style just appeals to me and I would like that rear LCD, but ideally as a fully articulated unit which is a bit of a missed opportunity IMO.

[Emanuel]

Same here :- )

[Ilkka Nissila]

11 hours ago, MrSMW said:

I’ve come close to pushing the ZR button a few times now and there are really only 3 things that have prevented me doing so…

1. The file sizes of that Red Raw codec. Apparently N raw is the next best option and there are of course some ‘workarounds’, but until there is a compressed version that maxes out at no more than 1000 mbps, it’s just too much and one of the principal draws of this camera is the Red codec.

2. I’m not unhappy with L Mount. In fact the opposite except for one factor and that is the absence IMO of equivalent lenses to Sony’s: 28-70 f2, 50-150 f2 and Tamron’s 35-100 f2.8. It’s ‘almost’ worth switching just for these lenses alone, but that last word, ‘alone’, but alone is not enough and lenses aside, everything else that L Mount, specifically Lumix offers, beats that of Nikon & Sony.

3. I still have hope that from within the L Mount Alliance, over the coming Winter and next Spring, either (or even both) a rangefinderesque camera will appear from either Lumix or Sigma and at least one rival for one of the lenses above, will appear. Unlikely to be a Leica, but next gen FP a possibility and even more likely, an S9ii?

4. Bonus reason, - switching not only costs money, but there is always a settling in period with any new system that frustrates.

So my set up now just works, I have it and I like it and as above, my only real crit is with regard to certain lenses, but the ZR body style just appeals to me and I would like that rear LCD, but ideally as a fully articulated unit which is a bit of a missed opportunity IMO.

N-RAW Normal at 25 fps should be below 1000 Mbps. If I calculated correctly, N-RAW High Quality (which is similar to R3D NE) has a compression ratio of approximately 1:4 compared to uncompressed raw video (which is not available on the ZR, for obvious reasons). N-RAW Normal is about 1:8. RED's own codecs (not TicoRAW) in the (not Nikon) RED cameras range from 1:2 to 1:22 depending on settings. I suspect Nikon didn't implement the lower quality TicoRAW in the R3D NE codec (although both Normal and High Quality are available in N-RAW) because of the additional quality loss, and as a matter of protecting the quality expectations associated with the RED brand. They could be simply trying to impress.

The ZR body is quite lightweight and slim, and adding more heat sink materials, a fan etc. to enable better quality compressed codecs would have made it larger and heavier, as would adding more hinges and mechanics to make the back LCD screen more flexible in the angles that are offered. I can imagine a bunch of things that could be wanted, such as full size HDMI, SDI, XLR, etc. connectors. THe ZR is probably as small and light as Nikon could make while enabling long recording times and R3D NE recording. 

Rather than focus on the data rates, I am puzzled at the lack of fully featured software support for the raw video formats. Some formats (R3D NE) reportedly offer a good visual match between what you see on the camera LCD with LUT applied but if you want to apply distortion corrections, a separate transcoding utility need to be applied to convert the footage to Prores. With N-RAW you can get lens profiles applied in Davinci Resolve, but the color doesn't apparently look like how it was on the camera display (?). If you use Premiere, N-RAW is shown with RED's Log profile, which then is different from what you see on camera in the view assist mode. People complain that you cannot cut the R3D NE and remove parts and rewrite the edited footage in the R3D NE format, instead it has to be transcoded into something else before the trimmed footage can be stored (if it is stored in R3D NE format the file does not get smaller). With N-RAW you can cut parts out and store it in N-RAW, so why is this different for R3D NE? Or did I get I could have gotten some parts wrong but to me it seems the software support is as much missing as the camera firmware, and the raw video is sort of an experimental feature at this point.

Some comment and seem to think that to get the maximum quality is essential but then complain that the resulting files are too large, even though they are compressed at 25% of original data size, and further compression visibly reduces the image fidelity. I think for video there has to be a realization that you cannot get still-camera like detail and expect small file sizes. A compromise needs to be made. I like using Prores 422 HQ 4K on the Z8 as it allows the distortion profiles to be applied based on lens type and still looks fantastic to my eye, while avoiding the 8K. I can immediately tell the h.265 (which in Nikon's case is always 4:2:0) does not have as rich color on textured, colorful clothes as the 422 codec. Absurd in-camera file sizes, almost as big as 6K RAW? Yes, but it just looks gorgeous and is easy to edit. I delete the original files once I'm done with editing. I can't imagine shooting 8K RAW but with a 6K camera the RAW option is a possibility, once storage costs go down. At the moment the cost of a fast external SSD I got 3 years ago is three times as high as it was in 2023! Hard drives seem less affected and are a possibility for long-term storage, but for editing the SSDs are better.

About your lens preferences, the 50-150/2.0 is 4599€ here, quite pricey! Although a set of f/2.0 primes would also be expensive, and together would be heavier, I still would choose the primes for their smaller size in hand, or use the 70-200/2.8 as a classic choice which is available on all major mounts. But I can see that a portrait and event-oriented photographer might prefer the f/2.0 zooms over primes or the f/2.8. I don't think the f/2.0 zooms will become mainstream though, as the f/2.8 are very high quality, lower priced, and have greater range. 

[MrSMW]

12 hours ago, Ilkka Nissila said:

About your lens preferences, the 50-150/2.0 is 4599€ here, quite pricey! Although a set of f/2.0 primes would also be expensive, and together would be heavier, I still would choose the primes for their smaller size in hand, or use the 70-200/2.8 as a classic choice which is available on all major mounts. But I can see that a portrait and event-oriented photographer might prefer the f/2.0 zooms over primes or the f/2.8. I don't think the f/2.0 zooms will become mainstream though, as the f/2.8 are very high quality, lower priced, and have greater range

In purely lens terms, ie, not considering any camera body or brand, 28-50 is perfect for me indoors so either Sigma’s 28-45 f1.8 or Sony/Canon’s 28-70 f2’s are ‘perfect’ other than size, weight & cost.

There is the compromise but for the way I work, it is a case of:

A. 2 bodies + 2 primes vs 

B. 1 body + 1 fast zoom

Now of we redo the size, weight and financials, we are in the parity ballpark, so it becomes a case of which option do we prefer, - the single larger heavier unit, or bouncing between two smaller & lighter set ups?

I am currently in scenario A but in other seasons have worked with scenario B.

Pros & cons to each!

Outdoors, my ‘perfect’ focal range is 50-100 with a smaller (but essential need) to go as wide as 28 and as long as 150.

A 70-200 doesn’t work for me, even if an f1.0 landed, it would still be a hard nope.

Too long, not wide enough.

The 28-105 is the closest in L Mount right now if I remove the Samyang 35-150 from the equation.

First of all, it’s bit really an f2 other than at the widest end where really it is just an f2 35mm, but a massive and heavy one.

I’d rather have the Sigma 28-105 for outdoor work and crop a bit and for indoor, as things stand, the Sigma 28-45 f1.8.

This is my most likely scenario continuing with L Mount next year which is also my most likely scenario as things stand for reasons already mentioned, namely, I am already invested in the system and happy with it other than some lens niggles.

I am pretty sure if Nikon had got the ZR right for me in just 2 further areas; a fully articulated rear LCD (or even just a tilt) and had a 1/4 size Red codec, it would have been a done deal.

I began my career with Nikon and was was with them for 9-10 years and still have a certain, perhaps nostalgic affinity with the brand.

Fuji was almost another decade and I could easily jump that way for stills, but not video and I have niggles with their lenses for my stills needs as it would be GFX in that regard and there are no rangy fast zooms so it’s a no go for me.

I have zero affinity with Canon though always loved the idea of an R3…but nah, that really would be an entirely new system for me.

I’ve been in and out of Sony various times and could go that direction but there is something slightly lacking I cannot quite put my finger on and the best I can come up with is that word ‘affinity’ again. They have ALL of the lenses and I really like the FX style bodies but still…

And so L Mount…

Leica, for all its criticism and arguably elitism, probably does have a difficult to quantify ultimate quality edge in stills over Lumix, but worth the money? Probably not real world, but does have other merits…

SL3-P over S1Rii purely for stills? Hell yes.

Entire S1/S5/S9 range over anything else in the same price bracket for video? Hell yes.

Leica, Lumix & Sigma for lenses generally, yup they have it.

This is just an early morning coffee ramble really.

Another 8 months will determine following 5 years for me…

[Emanuel]

I think that word “affinity” is actually more important than people sometimes admit : )

On paper we can reduce everything to specs, codecs, lenses and prices, but after a certain point a system also has to make you want to pick it up and use it. Sony can tick practically every box and still somehow not be the answer (I know exactly what you mean there : )

Since you are very much a hybrid shooter, and stills seem to matter at least as much as video, I would probably look at this slightly differently.

 

On the L-mount side, before changing anything, I would certainly try the Lumix S 24-105mm f/4 Macro O.I.S. It is not an exotic lens, but for somebody moving constantly between stills and video it is exactly the sort of lens that can make a system considerably more useful: sensible range, stabilisation, very useful close focusing and one lens that can stay on the camera for most of the day.

 

Sony is tempting for a different reason. Beyond the enormous stills AF lens catalogue, E-mount also gives you an unusually broad selection of genuinely affordable full-frame AF glass (the AF-AFF route, AutoFocus to Affordable Full Frame ; )

And then there is the increasingly interesting cine side.

The compact Samyang V-AF primes are a good example. They are relatively affordable, matched as a family, and the 24mm in particular is interesting because it makes perfectly good sense on full frame while also becoming a very useful lens on something like an FX30 (a cam I am particularly used to : )

Add Samyang's 1.7x anamorphic MF adapter and AF becomes MF. But put something like DJI Focus Pro LiDAR [ 1 | 2] into the equation and you can effectively bring automated focusing back again (the AF-MF-AF route ; )

And you no longer even need to go through that slightly mad route if you simply want AF anamorphic.

Blazar now has the Apex 1.33x S35 AF lenses and the Talon 1.5x full-frame AF line, while Sirui has its 20mm/40mm T1.8 1.33x S35 AF anamorphics plus the new Astra full-frame AF series. So E-mount is beginning to look less like a one-off anamorphic experiment and more like an actual affordable AF-anamorphic ecosystem.

 

The interesting part is that some of this does not necessarily lock you into Sony either.

The Samyang V-AF 24mm has already been shown working with AF on the ZR through the Megadap ETZ21 Pro+, so at least part of that E-mount investment could potentially follow you across.

And Sirui already offers native Z versions of its S35 AF anamorphics. Blazar had actually announced Z-mount for the Apex originally too, although the production lenses have so far remained E/L.

So for me the real attraction of Sony in your case would not simply be "better video AF". It is the combination of the huge hybrid/stills lens ecosystem, lots of affordable AF glass, the possibility of adding something like an FX30 without changing lenses, the Samyang V-AF route, and now a growing choice of genuine AF anamorphics as well.

At the same time, the ZR increasingly looks capable of borrowing some of those advantages without necessarily committing yourself completely to Sony.

Which, unfortunately, probably makes your decision harder rather than easier... ; )

[MrSMW]

5 hours ago, Emanuel said:

On the L-mount side, before changing anything, I would certainly try the Lumix S 24-105mm f/4 Macro O.I.S. It is not an exotic lens, but for somebody moving constantly between stills and video it is exactly the sort of lens that can make a system considerably more useful: sensible range, stabilisation, very useful close focusing and one lens that can stay on the camera for most of the day.

Had it for a year. Sold it.

It wasn’t for me. OK outdoors but too slow indoors/low light and I’m not a fan of lenses that extend when zoomed out unless it’s a very small movement such as with the Sigma 28-70 but would much prefer internal zoom and that is a very high priority for me.

I have the 70-200 f4 (the lens I traded the above for and it’s a ‘better’ lens but obviously a completely different focal range) but it’s currently not working. 
Dropped my camera bag and it hasn’t worked since and suspect it’s the OIS… 

Back to the ‘affinity’ though, us working pros have a different criteria to the enthusiast in that we don’t shoot on a whim, but because we earn a living from doing so.

We literally can’t afford to have less interest on any given day and a lack of enthusiasm for any tool probably means we should at least be considering another option!

Then there is familiarity and boredom.

Familiarity is of course a good thing and there is always a learning curve with any new tool that can be a bit of a PITA.

I’m always tinkering with a tweak here and a tweak there such as yesterday, disabling the red video button when shooting stills because I’m sick of catching it when flipping to portrait orientation and thereby not only wasting time and a possible split second opportunity, but it’s even more annoying when it’s a bit of crappy upright video!

I have also finally found a baked in LUT look that I trialled this weekend which gets me SOOC something very close to the final image with virtually zero grading required, - combo of many factors including; the stellar image the S1Rii puts out over any other LUMIX camera since the S1H, lens choices, blending 2 different LUTS in camera; one specific conversion and one other at a certain percentage, with exposure and WB choices all pre-saved on the custom mode dial. That’s massive for me for workflow and can only come from familiarity with the tools in real world working scenarios, ie, whenever I test this stuff at home, it pretty much never works due to all kinds of reasons but mainly it’s tricky to replicate my working scenarios as anything other than work scenarios!

Familiarity means the tools get out of the way allowing you to focus on more important stuff that is purely down to YOU, ie, subject, composition, DOF yada yada yada. 

And then there is boredom which is a lot more subjective and can often be combined with GAS.

GAS is probably the wrong term as my interpretation of it is more stuff generally so ‘desire’ might be more appropriate as in which do I desire the most, an S1Rii or an SL3-P?

No contest but when we take desire out of the equation, it’s a bit like that, f*ck/marry/avoid scenario, the SL3-P is the first, the S1Rii is the second and the ZR is the third, for there simple reasoning for me, that the latter has too many flaws for my requirements and I know I’d resent her compromises quite quickly.

Any Nikon; ZR, Z6/8/9, the Megadap E Mount lenses are for me biggest draw, but  only ‘equal’ to me the L Mount equation I am already in ie, would only ever be a sideways move at this time and sideways is really only viable of you have cash to burn. 

For me, it’s never been about a search for some kind of holy grail setup because it doesn’t exist.

It is however getting very close and I just need the love child of a ZR with Lumix internals and Sony glass…

[ArashM]

23 hours ago, Ilkka Nissila said:

The ZR body is quite lightweight and slim, and adding more heat sink materials, a fan etc. to enable better quality compressed codecs would have made it larger and heavier, as would adding more hinges and mechanics to make the back LCD screen more flexible in the angles that are offered. I can imagine a bunch of things that could be wanted, such as full size HDMI, SDI, XLR, etc. connectors. THe ZR is probably as small and light as Nikon could make while enabling long recording times and R3D NE recording. 

I'm curious, why does it have to be the smallest possible, it's a new product, who was asking for this to be the measurement it is now? even a full Cm on each side would have still resulted in a small body, but if it offered full size HDMI and proper heatsink would make the product far more compelling to a lot more people.

I think we also have to remember, there seems to be 2 types of users here, people who shoot and edit their own work and can have a voice in each step and people who shoot and hand off footage, I'm in the second camp and have to always make sure everything is as foolproof as possible, because if anything goes wrong after us, somehow it's our fault.....

( Ya I've had major clients on 6 digit campaign shoot complain about how flat and dull the video was only for me to see they just outputted log without any colour grade or even applying a technical 709 lut, and it's somehow our fault!!!!! 🤦‍♂️ )

[ArashM]

11 hours ago, MrSMW said:

 

Now of we redo the size, weight and financials, we are in the parity ballpark, so it becomes a case of which option do we prefer, - the single larger heavier unit, or bouncing between two smaller & lighter set ups?

I am currently in scenario A but in other seasons have worked with scenario B.

Not to mention that you always have to carry settings over, and somehow no matter how well you sync the time, the captures don't always fall in perfect sequence!