Danyyyel

Under full moon test

Brandon Lee review seems really nice, it looks like it quite good. As a user of the Zhiyun crane 2, I am not very satisfied by its stabilization and sincerely those heavy gimbal are very hard to use because you get fatigue very fast.

Yes, nothing more distracting after bad audio than watching a film or documentary where the focus is on the background or foreground of the actor or interviewee.

Yes, in theory, I myself just experienced that even using a Ninja Flame, the peaking at this distance start to get unreliable, everything start to peak while with those ultra fast lens the DOF is still quite thin. Its only when you get back home and watch it on a 27 inch monitor that you find that the focus was a little behind the subject. You would need a focus puller with a 20+ inch screen to see this.

The thing is that for photo I can understand shooting at these type of apertures like 1.4 because even if you get 1 out of every 2-5 photos in focus it is ok. There is no continuity in photography, you can do 10 out of focus image, if you get one it is ok, more so in our digital world where you can take hundreds if not thousand of photos during an event. While in video you need continuity, you would need at 5 to 10 second for every scene , and unless you are shooting static subject it is near impossible to keep your subject in focus during those take, more so when using FF. For example I do interviews at least at F4 with FF at about chest level and it is still problematic. The person just has to move some cm in front and the focus is gone, so he just as most people move little bit in front or back as he is talking and gets out of focus. If it is only for some fraction of second it is ok, but if half your interview it is the case then it is a big problem. The second thing is what I would translate as subject attachment to his surrounding. Just after the large sensor revolution with the 5d ten years ago there was that craze to use very shallow death of field that your subject is like floating in an abstract universe that was completely blurry. That's why sometime I think that cine 35 mm was perhaps the rel best medium, because it gave you enough shallow DOF for subject separation and nice bokeh, but not that crazy that it becomes artificial.

Someone testing the z6 and seems some test of the zlog. I wouldn't call it a good advertisement for the zlog given the subject. I would really have liked to see what human beings etc and his first samples where completely overexposed etc, I don't know if he used zlog in there.

Yep does not take a lot to fool a little bit an automatic system. I think for video it is really an overkill.

Yes, that's what I think is their strategy. Memory price have been very volatile and prices historically high, with CFexpress you might not need a big buffer anymore. Nice z7 video

Low light comparison between the z6 and z7.

I think that whatever Nikon decided to do it would have been heavily criticized. If ever they had done a bigger body everybody would have said that either they could not match Sony tech or that the idea about MILC was small size and portability, which was true at least until now. Since Nikon and Canon launch of their new mount with much wider size (more for Nikon), that give the possibility of faster lens, we are hearing that MILC can get you better and faster lens regardless of size. Some part of Nikon PR mess was that they showed up only days/weeks before the Canon EOSR and eventual Pana S1. For example, they got ten times the negativity because of the 1 card slot than the Canon R. While they are giving a much better and robust XQD/CFexpress compared to Canon SD card. For me when you look at the price and size of the Canon 28-70 F2, I am glad they stuck with the 2.8 aperture. Another thing people don't discuss is the 24 vs 28mm starting zoom range. I like the 24-70 because of its flexibility and loosing the 24 is a big compromise. With the higher ISO we can shoot now, for me the f 2.8 is the best compromise, anything lower would warrant a prime lens. In fact this f 2.8 looks at least shorter than todays 24-70 and with the size/weigh gain, you could even carry another camera prime combo easily. That's the promise of the mount. The F4 kit lens (S is considered super for Nikon) being higher resolution than the top of the line older F-mount lens. The z7 already broke the record from the D850 with the 35mm f1.8 lens and by a margin in terms of resolution. That is why Nikon has been defending their 1.8 zoom as real professional primes and not just typical affordable primes for those that could not afford 1.4 primes. These things are more usable at 1.8 than some of the 1.4 primes at 1.8 and even beyond that. They say that their 1.8 lens are more reminiscent of 1.4 primes in capturing the light and I guess it is about the overall sensor plane and not just the center, with less curvature/distortion and I guess vignetting.

Yep, it would be good, they said they would focus much more on video now and its a priority for them. I hope they do implement some more functionality through firmware update, like a higher 50 mbit 1080p bitrate, 4.2.2 would be prefect (a dream would be 10 bit at this resolution), just for broadcast. The second thing would be some 10-15 second burst 4k 60p would be great , to compete against the new Panasonc or an intermediary size codec like DJI 2.7k or a 3k mode at 60 fps or even burst 120 fps. A squarer mode for anamorphic lens would also be great. The photo was on a Facebook z6/z7 group, the mockup of the 24-70 and 58mm knoc, have been doing the shows around the world.

I understand your point your point about manual focusing, my guess is that those lens are not necessarily meant for manual focus for movie use. I know it is a sacrilege for some but with those new autofocus, manual focusing might really become a niche thing like in photography.

I don't understand that supposed edge in native lens. From everything I have seen the adapted lens worked as good as they did on native F mount cameras. Have people not seen the video from Ricci Talk and BH, one was the 105mm F1.4 and the other 70-200 2.8. The 70-200 2.8 was tracking in very low light in the BH video. I dare to say that after the lens rental review of the build quality of the z7, that the z6 might be more weather proof with the FTZ adapter than Sony cameras. I personally don't know, but can someone tell me how many Sony, Pana or Fuji have in terms of video centric lens (silent, no breathing etc) The second thing is that Nikon said they were dedicated to video now and the development of the S line of lens was from the ground up done with video in mind. We can already see it with the fast focusing , silent and zero breathing lens they have released. If you think that the treatment they gave to their 24-70 f4 kit lens in terms of video, you can be sure that they were not joking when they said that. Another thing, they already published lens roadmap, by next year we will get nearly the trifecta of Nikon 2.8 zoom and two new f1.8 prime lens plus the f.95 prime. Again I just saw a mock up of the F 2.8 Nikon zoom and it had a third ring. I guess we will have smooth step-less aperture control with this lens as the Canon, if I am not mistaken. So tell me how many Sony, Pana or Fuji are have thee type of video centric features to their lens line.

What can you expect from youtube. So was filmed between ISO 3200 and 12 800, I guess we will see soon how it behaves.

Some z6 video

Just some advise as a Nikon shooter. Contrary to Sony, I start up with very good colours, so the need of another picture profile is not a priority for me unless I want more dynamic range or it really brings some big benefit. Until now we have Flat profile which is in some way quite capable because even if it not as flat as log profile it has still quite some more info at least in the shadows (You get quite some DR from it). Now with the launch of the z6-z7, we are getting the Nikon N-log +10 bit which I have zero knowledge how good it is. Fortunately I already have an external recorder, so will be able to test it afterward when I get a z6. Now again, as a Nikon video user, what the marketing material of the z-log is not very enticing (I think for a video newbee even less). The first thing is that the most important thing I wanted to see was human beings and skin tone, more so in harsh natural lights and not indoor lights, at least with sunlight I can guess how it is as the sun is a known factor. Again skin tone is vital for most who are not going to trade skin tone for DR. Secondly what would make people move is a proper test like the one done with different camera but at least in this case between Flat and Zlog, even N-log would be good. Without this , how to convince Nikon users. The last thing again, with example footage, is the robustest and gradability with Zlog. Then explaining the importance of having standard LOG profile that mimic for example Sony or Canon log, because then, you can use all those luts that have been developed already for those log profile. I am sure that not even 1% of Nikon would be video shooters, understand how practical it would be until all those luts are develop for N-log. Some sample files (with humans beings) showing how it grades (banding 8bit or even how it works in 10 bit external), use of some known Canon and Sony lut etc would make it much more appealing to Nikon users. At least for me, that's what I feel as a Nikon shooter who might be interested in a Flat internal log type profile. I think a LOG profile is an overkill to use on object or scenery that are in the shadows. The DR is not challenging at all and would need grading while a normal profile would already nail the shot.

It is true that sometimes I cannot understand the kind of gear some people have compared to their photography and videography they do. perhaps because I live in a second world country and cannot phantom how people can by for example as a Nikon user a z7 when you are not a pro. One thing I would advise some, take your money and buy lesser gear and use the rest to take some courses etc. No gear is going to make your photo or video better, we have reach the level that most of us are the limiting factor, but some know how will make a drastic difference.

I see the Fuji quite close to the Nikon, but that's not the point of this test. I kind of question his first test now, where the Canon look way softer than the others. In this test it is the Fuji which looks much softer than the rest. I just don't understand anymore. From his two test one thing I can conclude is that ISO discrepancies. Clearly the XT3 for example is darker by at least half a stop to the Nikon. In high Iso it would mean that Nikon 1600 should be tested with Fuji 2500 ISO.

I don't know exact skin tone colour of the man and the lighting, i would say the fuji must be the closest followed by the Nikon and then the Canon and Sony. Unless the light is golden hour in this case, if I was the guy I would immediately go to hospital to check if I any liver or bladder problem.

So auto focus test from Max, for me z7 is best in this test. That's so great that Nikon who was dead last is at least for me, the best now. Again for the test, many strange thing, because it is the Sony and Canon who are the greenish skintone, he did use auto white balance this time. Another thing of note is it is the Fuji which looks super soft, much softer than the Canon.

It seems yes, in the video below he has a sample video starting at ISO 1600 to 12 800 that you can download from a link below the video. I think it is over sharpened a bit, he himself says you should decrease sharpness because at default it is too high.

Many valid point, but he is not doing this test for them because anyway those photographers will buy the z7 anyway because of its photographic qualities and the video in full auto will be plenty enough for them. Where is test is valid, is for hybrid shooters or video shooters who wants to know if the first full frame camera with 4k log and 10 bit is good or not. Because just before that you would have to buy a Canon C700 for more than 30k to get at least 10 bit FF.

Whaaaaat, do you think that 90% of people buying a 3000+ usd camera use it at default setting. If it was a point and shoot or one of those cheap 500 usd camera, I would agree, but apart from being some rich guy just for bragging rights, most would configure their camera to some level.

That's why I always take people like Max test with a pinch of salt. Imean if ever you have worked with a Nikon camera you know that this is not the kind of skin tone you would get. The second thing, I am not saying that the z7 can have more detail, but you have NR settings in the z7. Did he use it, or is it set up from standard to be high, I guess we will never know. The problem is that he has never worked with a Nikon camera and his first test was already revealing that because he could have easily decrease the sharpening in camera setting before concluding that it was oversharpenned. If you don't know a camera at least ask some people for help or spend a bit more time testing it, rather than being the first and getting clicks.