Brief comparison of Nikon Z6 and EOSHD Z-Log L

[tomsemiterrific]

 

[Mark Romero 2]

Thanks for the test. Looking good so far. Looking forward to any more DR tests you or anyone else can provide.

Curse you @Andrew Reid as I might have to buy a Z6 now... Thank goodness the preamps are so bad on the Z6 that I have held off buying it. Plus I can't really think of a good B camera to the Z6 (besides another Z6).

[tomsemiterrific]

20 minutes ago, Mark Romero 2 said:

Thanks for the test. Looking good so far. Looking forward to any more DR tests you or anyone else can provide.

Curse you @Andrew Reid as I might have to buy a Z6 now... Thank goodness the preamps are so bad on the Z6 that I have held off buying it. Plus I can't really think of a good B camera to the Z6 (besides another Z6).

The three flavors of Reid's Z-log has decidedly more dynamic range than Nikon's internal flat profile...a lot more. And they're easy to grade, with lovely LUTS. When you can't shoot N-Log and need the dynamic range I think this is the way to go. I really love the Z6--fun to shoot with great stabilization, lovely image, kick-butt dynamic range.

[Mark Romero 2]

9 hours ago, tomsemiterrific said:

The three flavors of Reid's Z-log has decidedly more dynamic range than Nikon's internal flat profile...a lot more. And they're easy to grade, with lovely LUTS. When you can't shoot N-Log and need the dynamic range I think this is the way to go. I really love the Z6--fun to shoot with great stabilization, lovely image, kick-butt dynamic range.

Yeah, it is very tempting. I saw about ten different videos on youtube claiming to be shooting in Z-Log and they all looked pretty good  (although a few were in languages I didn't speak so I don't want to swear they were shooting Z-Log).

Wonder what would be a good gimbal for a Z6 and the 18-35 AF-S G and the FTZ adapter?

[Mark Romero 2]

@tomsemiterrific If you have time, I hope you could do a little dynamic range test of the Z6 and Z Log for me.

Can you just shoot a brief couple of clips (20 seconds each is long enough) from inside a house looking outside  a window on a sunny day?

Expose one clip for the sky (I understand the interior of the house will be dark)

Expose one clip for the interior of the house (the outside will blow out).

Expose one clip in the middle.

You could also just do one clip and adjust the exposure during the clip so that in one part you are preserving the highlights, in another you are preserving the shadows, and the other is just kind of in the middle.

I shoot mostly architecture and for me the struggle is trying to balance a bright view out the windows without making the interior to dark. Here is a sample of what I try to do and the challenges I face:

https://youtu.be/iBXa6-svjPA?t=80

Starting at the 1:20 mark, you can see that the outside was really blownout because I had to have a bright enough exposure for the interior.

Anyway, thanks in advance if you could do ANY sort of DR testing.

[tomsemiterrific]

5 hours ago, Mark Romero 2 said:

@tomsemiterrific

https://youtu.be/iBXa6-svjPA?t=80

Starting at the 1:20 mark, you can see that the outside was really blownout because I had to have a bright enough exposure for the interior.

Anyway, thanks in advance if you could do ANY sort of DR testing.

EOSHD Z-Log will do MUCH better than the video I saw. Here's a 3 minutes video I just did with the cinema version of Z-log. But z-log version L is much flatter and has much more dynamic range.

 

Reid states the Z-log has LOTS of dynamic range in the lower range.  He says just protect the highlights and you can lift up the lows and they look great.

The place you might find interesting is at 1:58--2:00--but the L-Log is much better, and I could have lifted the lows a LOT more and still have it look good. It was flat out dark there under the falls. At 1:54 the falls and the wall were in complete shadow---and all lifted up. I kept my highlights below 85 IRE. At 1:27 the stone wall was very dark. I lifted the gamma light cure and I think it looks find. Reid isn't BSing that there's lots of dynamic range in the lows you can pull out. And you'll notice none of the highlight are blow at all.

Also, check at 10 seconds in, all the lows were lifted and they look clean and, IMO, very good.

As long as you're on my youtube site you might check out a video called Twilight Fishing. The Nikon has butt kicking dynamic range.

I'll tell you what I'll do. I have a LOT of clips from that shoot at Clark Gardens that show the dynamic range better than the clips I used. I'll try to put some of them together before tomorrow. Okay?

[tomsemiterrific]

Here are some exposure grading. 1 is as shot in-camera, 2. exposure pulled down, 3. low lifted to reveal lower dynamic range. 

[tomsemiterrific]

Mark, I looked closely at your video. I think EOSHD Z-Log L would give you a better result at getting a nice interior image without blowing out the highs. 

These profiles and the instruction are inexpensive. I'll try to do some shots tomorrow, but it's supposed to be cloudy. Not sure how effective it will be.

[Mark Romero 2]

On 3/28/2019 at 11:21 PM, tomsemiterrific said:

Mark, I looked closely at your video. I think EOSHD Z-Log L would give you a better result at getting a nice interior image without blowing out the highs. 

These profiles and the instruction are inexpensive. I'll try to do some shots tomorrow, but it's supposed to be cloudy. Not sure how effective it will be.

Thanks in advance.

Two more questions / requests for you.

1) You mentioned you were pretty happy with the Z6 compared to the a7 III. Can you kind of list the reasons why you like the Z6 better than the a7 III?

2) Do you know of a good manual focus lens around 20mm to adapt to the Z6? Something with minimal distortion preferably? (I know that might be hard to find in a wide angle lens).

[thebrothersthre3]

10 hours ago, Mark Romero 2 said:

Thanks in advance.

Two more questions / requests for you.

1) You mentioned you were pretty happy with the Z6 compared to the a7 III. Can you kind of list the reasons why you like the Z6 better than the a7 III?

2) Do you know of a good manual focus lens around 20mm to adapt to the Z6? Something with minimal distortion preferably? (I know that might be hard to find in a wide angle lens).

I've had good results with the Tokina 16mm 

[Mark Romero 2]

7 hours ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

I've had good results with the Tokina 16mm 

I haven't heard of a Tokina 16mm... do you mean the older 17mm f/3.5???

[tomsemiterrific]

On 3/30/2019 at 10:46 AM, Mark Romero 2 said:

Thanks in advance.

Two more questions / requests for you.

1) You mentioned you were pretty happy with the Z6 compared to the a7 III. Can you kind of list the reasons why you like the Z6 better than the a7 III?

2) Do you know of a good manual focus lens around 20mm to adapt to the Z6? Something with minimal distortion preferably? (I know that might be hard to find in a wide angle lens).

Menus are simpler, color is BETTER---MUCH better, pic profile presets are great, great looks out of the camera from many pic profiles, better stabilization, great native lenses, buttons are placed better, MUCH better EVF and LCD, better feel--better construction, no over heating issues in normal use. The Nikon equals the remarkable dynamic range and low light performance of the Sony. Hands down, the Nikon is a much more lovely and satisfying shooting experience. You don't have to spend forever tweaking those cursed endless list of image tweaks in the pic profiles---you've got great looks you can easily customize to your needs and/or tastes, and then GO SHOOT.

But the real thing is the IQ. It's far better than the Z7III, and skin tones are a quantum leap better. Without that nothing else would matter.

I have a review of the Nikon Z6---it's critical insofar as I'm asking Nikon to make some firmware changes to give video shooters a better shooting experience, but even without those changes the Nikon is superior. Besides my reviews, a more complete and fair look at the camera is given by Sareesh Sudhakaran. Here is his latest review:

He also has just published a guide for the Z6, and has 6 EXCELLENT cinematic picture profiles you can download for free in place them into the camera's selection of profiles.

that's about all I've got. If you get it I think you'll fall in love with shooting it.

In fact, I have two---one I just purchased about a month ago and have used very little. If you want to purchase it I'll give you a good price. I'm having to also sell my X-H1---we just discovered a bad leak UNDER our house that must be repaired--which means creating a hole in MY closet near where the leak is located and digging until the leaking pipe is reached, silvery soldering it and closing it up. Total cost: $2000.00---and I'm not sure that includes the repair of the hole they have to put in our foundation. SUCKS.

Whoever buys it I'm going to have to sell it. It's really new, since all I've done it test it in studio on the tripod---I do have Sudehakaran's picture profiles loaded into it, and I think my settings for video are better than his. Anyway, I hope you enjoy his presentation. 

[thebrothersthre3]

2 hours ago, tomsemiterrific said:

Menus are simpler, color is BETTER---MUCH better, pic profile presets are great, great looks out of the camera from many pic profiles, better stabilization, great native lenses, buttons are placed better, MUCH better EVF and LCD, better feel--better construction, no over heating issues in normal use. The Nikon equals the remarkable dynamic range and low light performance of the Sony. Hands down, the Nikon is a much more lovely and satisfying shooting experience. You don't have to spend forever tweaking those cursed endless list of image tweaks in the pic profiles---you've got great looks you can easily customize to your needs and/or tastes, and then GO SHOOT.

But the real thing is the IQ. It's far better than the Z7III, and skin tones are a quantum leap better. Without that nothing else would matter.

I have a review of the Nikon Z6---it's critical insofar as I'm asking Nikon to make some firmware changes to give video shooters a better shooting experience, but even without those changes the Nikon is superior. Besides my reviews, a more complete and fair look at the camera is given by Sareesh Sudhakaran. Here is his latest review:

He also has just published a guide for the Z6, and has 6 EXCELLENT cinematic picture profiles you can download for free in place them into the camera's selection of profiles.

that's about all I've got. If you get it I think you'll fall in love with shooting it.

In fact, I have two---one I just purchased about a month ago and have used very little. If you want to purchase it I'll give you a good price. I'm having to also sell my X-H1---we just discovered a bad leak UNDER our house that must be repaired--which means creating a hole in MY closet near where the leak is located and digging until the leaking pipe is reached, silvery soldering it and closing it up. Total cost: $2000.00---and I'm not sure that includes the repair of the hole they have to put in our foundation. SUCKS.

Whoever buys it I'm going to have to sell it. It's really new, since all I've done it test it in studio on the tripod---I do have Sudehakaran's picture profiles loaded into it, and I think my settings for video are better than his. Anyway, I hope you enjoy his presentation. 

Its definitely a very tempting camera. That reviewer you posted was a bit harsh on it though. 

[Mark Romero 2]

11 minutes ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

Its definitely a very tempting camera. That reviewer you posted was a bit harsh on it though. 

While I agree it was a bit harsh, I found it pretty helpful. Maybe I will wait until a new firmware update... or go for the X-T3. Still can't decide.

[tomsemiterrific]

59 minutes ago, Mark Romero 2 said:

While I agree it was a bit harsh, I found it pretty helpful. Maybe I will wait until a new firmware update... or go for the X-T3. Still can't decide.

Did you hear the end where he says he would choose it over the A7III?

By the way, I tested the Canon FD 20mm 2.8 again, and it's very good, with very little end distortion. It would probably be perfect for a gimbal.

If you were familiar with Sareesh's presentations and reviews you'd know he is very, very blunt. Note how much he praised the color and image, and said the IBIS is better than the Sony? You're not going to get a perfect review from this guy. He routinely shoots on Alexas and top end movie cams.

[thebrothersthre3]

I want to see his opinion on the XT3. 

[DanielW]

Excited to dig into this profile.  I have been using VH S-Log with great success but am always interested in trying out new profiles.  Just purchased Z-Log this morning and will shoot with it later, but I will ask a question up front because it is something that had been bugging me with VH S-Log.

Why do these profiles clip shadows and highlights early in the histogram?  Separately, they also require 235 or lower setting on zebra for them to show up at all.  Without much knowledge, it would lead be to believe that, at the highlights end, these profiles throw away some of the largest buckets of data.  Neither Flaat nor Nikon profiles clip the histogram like this.  Being this is the second high quality "Log" curve to do so, I have to imagine there is some benefit to it.

Finally, how does the author of this profile get special access that the rest of us don't get through Nikon's desktop profile editor to remove the sharpness or did they just use that tool?  No shame either way, if it is good, it is good.  I just think the marketing of that seems a little misleading, especially when it is compared to Nikon Standard rather than Nikon Flat with sharpness turned all the way down.

[Andrew Reid]

Nice test. I'm glad the dynamic range benefits come across, and the other main priority was getting the Nikon colour science into LOG format. I don't like the colour in N-LOG over HDMI, looks whacked. In-camera it is SUPERB and comes through in Z-LOG.

The Z6 has come in for a lot of stick in reviews and not hard to see why but it's very capable. Nikon made a few critical mistakes which shafted it on the market so nobody is buying it  No dual card slots on a pro camera. Cheap looking, but expensive F1.8 primes. Consumer leaning design rather than all-out aimed at pros and high-end Sony users.

Speaking of which, Sony users tend to be quite satisfied at the moment and most have Canon lenses, not Nikon. So Z6 is a hard sell to quite a big proportion of the market. Canon users can't bring their lenses. Sony users haven't got a big reason to move sideways. Nikon users probably only just bought D850 and not ready to upgrade. So hard to see a market for Z6.

When you get down to it though, the nuts and bolts of the Z6 make for a wonderful camera and shooting experience especially for video. Great ergonomics and feel, no crop factor in any mode, really good for full frame 4K, very good full frame 120fps as well and will be getting ProRes RAW over HDMI when nothing else is. I also find it has very good 5 axis IBIS, more steady than Sony's version, amazing colour science, again better than my A7 III and very good AF for video with Nikon / native glass.

Come to think of it, it's a tough choice between the Z6 and S1 for the most capable FF mirrorless prize.

Of course S1 has better codec... Well it will do come July... but there's a smaller gap between 8bit and 10bit than people realise when 8bit is done well (see Canon 1D C... and Z6 / D850).

To get a big leap you really need RAW not 10bit.

It will be fascinating to see how S1 with Filmmakers Update and Z6 with ProRes RAW compare, although I still HATE external recorders.

The S1 also has a more "pro" body, dual card slots, springy high quality shutter like X-H1, higher 180fps for slow-mo and an even bigger EVF although the one on the Z6 is very good indeed.

What would you guys choose if only one?

[BasiliskFilm]

Nikon video AF looks fine, but currently Sony seems to take it to another level, with magical levels of stickiness with object tracking. Considering a camera that is capable of wildlife and action video/photography, this could be a deciding factor.

[webrunner5]

Yeah I don't think Canon is the company to "hitch your wagon" on anymore. Nikon is doing better on the video side. Sony to me is the long term bet. They will match whatever Panasonic comes out with down the road. They have a Huge advantage making other company's Sensors. They know ahead of time what they are up to. More so than some Mole in a competing company.

They have had, and still do have the video industry sewed up. They have had in place tons of support people and engineers to handle it. They will probably in the long run be #1 in the Hybrid segment like them or not. They have the will and the money to pull it off. Canon seems to kind of just slowly get out of the market, maybe wisely so I don't know? Down the road there is not going to be much of a market at all.