MrSMW

Hmmm, seen a couple of reports now that DR at base ISO is quite a bit lower than the previous gen sensor Zf/Z6II. This is a bit disappointing because until fairly recently, I had only one interest in the Z6III and that is it would essentially take the capability of the Zf but host it in a Z6 style body. Catches up by around 640/800 ISO or thereabouts I believe which is at least something. Any video capability was secondary to me and for my stills needs, it's gone backwards... Yes, I wanted better/faster AF, one of my criticisms of the Z6II is that it's slooooooow compared with the Zf, but the handling of the Zf is terrible next to the Z6 style body. And when a battery grip is involved, that gap increases still further. As an out and out 'sports' camera, sure, things have improved, but image quality, of which DR is a HUGE component for me, has gone backwards. Which is partly why I went to Sony and an A7RV for my stills needs. But having said that, my first job with the Sony did not go so well and after some modifications, I'm interested to see how this second job has gone. Downloading it right now and it will be make or break for this camera. If it's the latter, then I'm not sure what I will do because if the Sony is not what I needed it to be and if the Z6III possibly is not the answer I hoped it would be, so maybe the Z8 or Z9 are possibilities... We just seem to keep making a step forward and then having to also take a step back! For my needs anyway.

Priority 3, actually going out and shooting instead of staying home agonizing over which camera to buy…and then “I’m gonna hold off” for the next generation despite the latest and greatest just being launched because some random YouTuber who also couldn’t get out of their bedroom, said something about a camera they did not understand. The amount of spreadsheet procrastination some folks have… Of course, this does not happen with anyone here 😂

And in most cases, most of the time, that’s a fact. Unless you absolutely must have 120fps in 8k full frame, then yup, ‘everything else’.

I just like one camera, one lens, no bag, no choices or indecision. I love a fixed lens P&S for this very purpose but they have limitations such as “is that Mt Fuji in the background or an anthill?”

That’s me, but actually it’s considered. For video, because my cameras do not have an OLPF (except the S1H which is being replaced) I find that a 1/8th mist is quite subtle and takes off that digital edge whilst helping reduce or eliminate any moiré. For stills, the 1/8th Bloom Golds just reduce the overall contrast a little and again take off that digital edge and make the resulting files that little bit more ‘filmic’ SOOC. For me, it’s about doing more in camera in order that I have the best/a better and consistent starting point when it comes to editing. Could you spot it? Probably in lower light shots when there are visible light sources such as lamps or strings of lights etc, because there is some inevitable (and wanted) diffusion going on. But only nerds like us would spot it and my clients would simply ‘like the images’ but not be able to technically break down as to why.

It’s easily done when packing for such things.

Nah, you take whatever you want as we all do. Me, P&S at most…but it depends on the trip I guess. I’d like to go to Japan and as I am fairly sure Lumix won’t be inviting me to any camera launches, I’ll have to go at my own expense and won’t get a free camera. For such a trip, I would take something with an interchangeable lens and my perfect combo for that would be an OM-1 with the 12-40mm f2.8 so real world FF equivalent of 24-80. That’s my ideal ‘proper’ travel camera set up.

His family.

Interesting… First thing I noticed when switching from Nikon to Sony was the increase in noise. Really ugly noise too! And the opposite of you in that I do not de-noise video! These Sony files though… Even the medium raw which are supposed to be better than full uncompressed 61mp raw are supposed to be better, but I thought them horrendous. Actually shocked at how bad they are. Talking stills here. Unless I am missing something but I can see it from 1600 and it just gets worse and the max I shoot is 12800. Hmmm….

Freewell VND 1/8th mist at all times for video. Bloom Gold 1/8th stills.

I know. I like to sail hard against the wind.

Absofuckinglutely. I see what others get out of the S5II and it’s always a case of ‘must work harder’ (an ongoing lifetime project) and never a case of ‘I need a better camera’. A smaller one. A lighter one. One with better (actual) IBIS, or AF that is reliable, all valid reasons to be looking elsewhere, but if it’s simply a case of your work looks a bit cack next to A.N. Others output, well that’s on us.

Not as far as I am aware. I use DXO PureRaw on raw stills files. Video software is available such as Neat but I have never used it myself and haven’t experienced any issues with video noise. Possibly because in lower light of after dark, I light everything…

Or DXO or Topaz. I run everything through DXO these days. 1000 files is about an hour while I walk the dogs. Then when I am back, I import the DNG files into LR with my import preset and hand edit from there on in, but noise is a potential issue that has already been solved.

For now, I’d agree. But these things always get leapfrogged and when the next gen Lumix and Sony appear… But today, if I was going out shopping for my needs from scratch and had the necessary bag, I’d go with an all Z6III lineup for sure. If I was invested as I am in 75% L Mount, I’d be very interested to see what they do next as ideally, I’d like to be 100% within a single system. What stops me currently, cost aside? Lenses. For my needs, Canon has it, Sony has it, Nikon has it, Fuji has it…basically everyone except L Mount. What is missing for me are 2 things: Thing 1, the actual deal-breaker; no long fast zoom under 1kg. That happens any time, I’m in for good. Thing 2, a ‘current’ camera from Lumix that is fantastic for stills. I hate the shutter feel and sound on the S5II and for me it’s a deal breaker for stills use, hence why I am currently with Sony. When a replacement for either the S1R or S1H appears, we’re covered, but Thing 1 still applies. So for me, L Mount is one lens and one body away from being perfect. The body will happen within 6 months, I am pretty sure. The lens though is a massive issue for me and one I have wrestled with for the last 3 seasons.

Yep, but then most other brands also have this? My Sony does and my Nikon’s do. But that is how I work with an outdoor setting, an indoor setting and a low light setting. 3 is a magic number.

Kinda…but not really. Nikon has: Zf, Z6III, Z8, Z9 L Mount has: the super expensive Leica SL3, the old and lacking in so many ways, FP pairing from Sigma and Lumix has the S5II/X. Plus the soon to be replaced S1 line with the S1R long since out of production and the others, what 5+ years old now? Now if we’re talking end of this year or next, then yes, with what will probably be a new S1 line (or single camera at least), I think the balance might be addressed. But until then… And don’t get me wrong, I am an L Mount user (3 of my 4 working cameras), but the S5II/X is really the only current ‘pro’ camera that could arguably be recommended. New Z6III over an S5II? Maybe. Not really looked at it other than for stills and for that, easily a Nikon win for me. And I haven’t included the Lumix S9 as it’s a toy camera only a complete muppet of a pro would use…which is why I have one on preorder and should be my main workhorse by the end of this month 😉 Horses for courses and all that and I don’t know your needs, but blank slate, I’d go Nikon for my needs right now. But as I don’t have a blank slate and have to write my own checks, a 75% Lumix, 25% Sony mix it is. Unless the Sony fails to deliver this weekend and then that 25% will revert back to Nikon…

Neither have I, so should test that really… But then I hate changing settings because inevitably I forget to change them back! WB is often one such thing… 🤪

I need to watch it again. I watched it on the laptop with the missus but I think it deserves another viewing on the 52” 4k TV screen. Maybe this Winter as I have too much on this time of year…

You could just imagine Lindybeige, in a pub, on his own, having a good old chat with himself. About anything.

"Lindybeige!!" 👍

That was the sum of it for me and many others. And for my work, I need reliability above all else because even an average result is infinitely better than no result at all.

None taken, none given, - this is all just chat/opinion!

Hilarious. The horse & cart is not that far behind the motor car. OK, the S5 is not quite as bad as some make out but the single biggest issue between these two and tests is as follows. The S5 and the S1/S1H/S1R, are finicky bastards when it comes to video as in there is a combination of settings and tweaks that need to be made to achieve the optimal AF within their capabilities. Then there are circumstances to add into the mix. And then lens choices as in real native as in Lumix, or L Mount native such as Sigma. Then differences between zooms and primes. Flip to the S5ii and 90% of these issues cease to exist. Of course, same as with any camera, AF can be optimised and optimised for certain specific scenarios, but the S5ii is way ahead of the S5 regardless of what some random YouTuber has to say. And that is not to denigrate this particular YouTuber as I have no idea who he is and nor have I watched the video, - just speaking from experience. I have not tweaked a single setting since moving to S5ii's from S5.

What got me thinking about this was my move from Nikon to Fuji to Lumix to Nikon to Sony for stills. Nikon film for 5+ years, then digital for around another 5. Night and day difference between the film and digital in that the film was soooooo much nicer. Fuji was a step up at the expense of AF and the bonus of a massive size and weight advantage. Lumix full frame files definitely had an edge over Fuji APSC. Fujis SOOC Jpegs crush Lumix’s but Lumix’s raw files are better. Almost 10 years with Fuji and then 3 years with Lumix. Nikon Zf has the same sensor as the S5ii but maybe with some minor differences as the files are almost identical and placebo effect (?) I found the Nikon files to have an edge. Less than 6 months back with Nikon and the switch to Sony is not as drastic as it might sound as I made the decision to leave Lumix for stills based around lenses. I invested in E Mount lenses with the knowledge I could use either Sony cameras natively, or with Nikon adapted. What swung it for me then was the extra stuff the A7RV has over the Nikons which is principally: 61mp allows for a ton of cropping and a ton of cropping allows for less lenses and lens swapping with just a single camera. Compact size & weight. Lenses are native so have an edge in AF and in camera lens corrections. But what I am struggling with slightly is colour science… 24mp Nikon files are nicer and easier to work with than Sony files. I can’t quite put my finger (yet) exactly what it is, but there is a significant difference. Having said that, I have not been able to process the files in my normal manner because who knew that no image software on planet Earth does not denoise 26mp Sony medium raw files. Unless you do each one manually and with an average 1000 images per shoot, not an option. But even with the 10-15% I shot at 61mp uncompressed raw, there’s a difference I need to overcome in the processing as I do not yet love the result as I did the Nikon… Also, still not quite managed to get the result I would like out of my Lumix files for video and I don’t think that is a colour science issue per se, but more me. Working on that one…