Does anyone know if it's a hardware limitation of the sensor that prevents electronic shutter speeds faster than 1/8,000 sec.? Other manufacturers have had higher ES shutter speeds on some pretty old sensors.
Maximum electronic shutter speed is dictated by sensor read speed. That’s why stacked sensor cameras have such higher maximums.
highdesertmesa wrote:
Does anyone know if it's a hardware limitation of the sensor that prevents electronic shutter speeds faster than 1/8,000 sec.? Other manufacturers have had higher ES shutter speeds on some pretty old sensors.
RoamingScott wrote:
Maximum electronic shutter speed is dictated by sensor read speed. That’s why stacked sensor cameras have such higher maximums.
The GFX cameras have very high shutter speeds with ES (16K), and that sensor scan speed is super slow. Maybe it's just Nikon's self-imposed limitation as they don't want to deal with people wondering why their 1/16,000th sec. exposure took so long to complete?
highdesertmesa wrote:
The GFX cameras have very high shutter speeds with ES, and that sensor scan speed is super slow. Maybe it's just Nikon's self-imposed limitation as they don't want to deal with people wondering why their 1/60th sec. exposure took so long to complete?
You can have as fast of a shutter speed as you want, but there is a tipping point where you'll get rolling shutter when shooting well faster than the sensor can read data.
Nikon likely optimized for that where Fuji didn't. Just look at any forum for complaints about the GFX rolling shutter in ES mode.
Shoot a baseball in motion with the Z9 and the GFX 100S at the same high speed shutter speed. The Fuji picture will actually be of a football. Magic!
RoamingScott wrote:
You can have as fast of a shutter speed as you want, but there is a tipping point where you'll get rolling shutter when shooting well faster than the sensor can read data.
Nikon likely optimized for that where Fuji didn't. Just look at any forum for complaints about the GFX rolling shutter in ES mode.
Shoot a baseball in motion with the Z9 and the GFX 100S at the same high speed shutter speed. The Fuji picture will actually be of a football. Magic!
Hah. Well, the Zf scan speed is not anywhere near as slow as the GFX. Nikon lets us use ES at 1/8000 sec. and under where rolling shutter will be just as bad.
It would be nice to have 1/16K sec. for static subject + wide apertures + bright light despite the limitations of ES.
You can shoot at up to 1/32000s with the Z8 and Z9. Premium features for premium prices.
I don't see how one would come to a situation where one would need to use such fast speeds though. Daylight isn't that bright. f/0.95 in full-on sunlight?
ilkka_nissila wrote:
You can shoot at up to 1/32000s with the Z8 and Z9. Premium features for premium prices.
I don't see how one would come to a situation where one would need to use such fast speeds though. Daylight isn't that bright. f/0.95 in full-on sunlight?
Even f/2 in bright sunlight can need over 1,8000 sec. if the subjects are light colored. Daylight is that bright if you want to use wide apertures. The premium for Z8/9 is you can shoot with ES and never worry about rolling shutter. But to limit ES in general to 1,8000 sec. is simply arbitrary. I think it has more to do with Nikon's idea of pro vs amateur segmentation. For example, labeling ES as "Silent Mode" instead of what it is, which is a shutter mode that should be right there next to MS and EFCS in the shutter type menu tells us they think photographers with cameras at the Zf level are still just beginners and/or need some extra coddling.
ilkka_nissila wrote:
You can shoot at up to 1/32000s with the Z8 and Z9. Premium features for premium prices.
I don't see how one would come to a situation where one would need to use such fast speeds though. Daylight isn't that bright. f/0.95 in full-on sunlight?
X-t5 does 1/180,000th with EC, even shooting at F1 never needed to go that high.
ilkka_nissila wrote:
You can shoot at up to 1/32000s with the Z8 and Z9. Premium features for premium prices.
I don't see how one would come to a situation where one would need to use such fast speeds though. Daylight isn't that bright. f/0.95 in full-on sunlight?
Know how I know you've never shot the CV 40/1.2 wide open on a Texas summer day?
JustShootMe wrote:
X-t5 does 1/180,000th with EC, even shooting at F1 never needed to go that high.
We don't need much to accommodate wide aperture shooting in bright daylight. Usually 1/16K sec. is enough. Sensors with a base ISO of 64 help a lot, too.
But to illustrate, if you shoot a person wearing white on a sunny day, even f/2 at ISO 100 will need a shutter speed higher than 1/8,000 sec.
Ok, I just found a solution for shooting at wider apertures in bright light with the 1/8,000 shutter speed limit: setting Auto ISO's lowest ISO to "Lo1" (Low 1.0) or manually setting ISO to the same value. Note that when Auto ISO uses an ISO below 100, it won't show in the ISO display overlay, it will just flash ISO 100. On playback it will show ISO 100 but in red.
This is probably a better solution to just have the camera underexpose the shot with an ISO value below base ISO than to deal with rolling shutter if there had been an option for ES speeds over 1/8,000 sec. on this sensor.
Have to give kudos to Nikon here for allowing Auto ISO to use a value below base ISO. It's an added bonus that Auto ISO only goes below ISO 100 after the highest shutter speed value required to get the correct exposure has been exceeded. Very smart.
Auto ISO was always limited to the true base ISO on the Canon, Fujifilm, and Leica cameras I've used.
Hmm. The sunny 16 rule is equivalent to f/2, 1/6400s at ISO 100. If a white shirt is blinking it is probably a result of application of a JPG conversion with specific curve that increases contrast. Are you sure the raw data is clipped?
highdesertmesa wrote:
We don't need much to accommodate wide aperture shooting in bright daylight. Usually 1/16K sec. is enough. Sensors with a base ISO of 64 help a lot, too.
But to illustrate, if you shoot a person wearing white on a sunny day, even f/2 at ISO 100 will need a shutter speed higher than 1/8,000 sec.
ilkka_nissila wrote:
Hmm. The sunny 16 rule is equivalent to f/2, 1/6400s at ISO 100. If a white shirt is blinking it is probably a result of application of a JPG conversion with specific curve that increases contrast. Are you sure the raw data is clipped?
Doesn't Sunny 16 assume an 18% gray scene?
Edit to add: I'm also at ~5,500' altitude and desert environment. Everything is a light shade of tan here
Ok, so compared to what I was used to with the Canon R5 and R6, the eye-AF on the Zf with the 40 f/2 is terrible, even stopped down to f/2.8 and on the people-specific setting. I'm just going to call it eyebrow-AF. At headshot distance, 50% of the shots hit focus on the eyebrow, 30% hit focus the eyelashes, 15% get the outer edge of the eyeball, and maybe 5% get the actual iris in focus. Makes no difference with AF-C or AF-S. The Canon R5 was nearly infallible for iris eye focus even at f/1.2.
Pretty sure I will return the 40 f/2 and put the money toward a Voigtlander Z lens and dedicate this camera to manual focus. AF on this camera feels like the Df all over again. What good is fast eye-AF if it can't focus on the iris of the eye?
Do I just need a better lens than the 40 f/2? Is it possible to get a 90-95% iris hit rate with a Nikon Z camera like I did with the R5?
highdesertmesa wrote:
Ok, so compared to what I was used to with the Canon R5 and R6, the eye-AF on the Zf with the 40 f/2 is terrible, even stopped down to f/2.8 and on the people-specific setting. I'm just going to call it eyebrow-AF. 50% of the shots hit focus on the eyebrow, 30% hit focus the eyelashes, 15% get the outer edge of the eyeball, and maybe 5% get the actual iris in focus. Makes no difference with AF-C or AF-S. The Canon R5 was nearly infallible for iris eye focus even at f/1.2.
Pretty sure I will return the 40 f/2 and put the money toward a Voigtlander Z lens and dedicate this camera to manual focus. AF on this camera feels like the Df all over again. What good is fast eye-AF if it can't focus on the iris of the eye?
Do I just need a better lens than the 40 f/2? Is it possible to get a 90-95% iris hit rate with a Nikon Z camera like I did with the R5?...Show more →
So now the question is, will the Eye AF focus aid actually green light when the eyebrows are in focus
I personally stopped caring about if the iris was pin sharp...at normal viewing distances and crops, no one will realistically tell and it's just not a detail worth caring about THAT much. If the eyebrow is in focus and the iris isn't, I'm too close and shooting too open in the first place.
ilkka_nissila wrote:
Given the actual performance of the Zf, the Z6 III if it is based on the following
* same performance as the Zf, including autofocus features and new customizations, burst performance, sensor etc.
* Z6 family stuff: tilting screen, not fully articulating, MC-DC2/WR-R10 connector for remote flash and remote camera triggering, modern controls from the Z6 family
* improvements to custom function allocation
* video modes similar to Zf
* CFexpress type B / XQD 1st slot, SD UHS-II 2nd slot
* lower price by 300-400€ to account for the absence of the old-style brass dials, etc.
Such a Z6 III would do very well in the marketplace, I believe.
There is no chroma subsampling involved in RAW recording. I don't see how you'd get 4:2:2 RAW video; there is no such format.
The issue with the RAW video and Prores 422 HQ is that they require the storing of very large amounts of data quickly and continuously. This is incompatible with the practical limitations of small cameras. The camera would probably run too hot. The nice thing about what Nikon is offering is that they made the Z9 large enough to not overheat (period) and the smaller Z8 smaller but still large enough that it won't overheat in practice if you use the coolest-running memory cards. But as you go smaller and smaller with the camera size, overheating becomes a real issue. ...Show more →
Oh sorry, I got the fumbled up. 10-bit ProRES 422 or ProRES Raw. The Z8 runs into the issue you stated with RAW video and heat. I have no doubts that the Z6 III with CFExpress and Expeed7 will perform fine, but the issue remains as you stated the heat.
RoamingScott wrote:
So now the question is, will the Eye AF focus aid actually green light when the eyebrows are in focus
I personally stopped caring about if the iris was pin sharp...at normal viewing distances and crops, no one will realistically tell and it's just not a detail worth caring about THAT much. If the eyebrow is in focus and the iris isn't, I'm too close and shooting too open in the first place.
Hitting the eyelashes can sometimes pass for focus but definitely not the eyebrow, at least not at headshot distance at f/2.8 or wider.
Editing this post: Seems in AF-C the focus issues might be user error, and I will need to retest. I had AF-C set for release priority over focus priority. I had seen focus priority when I was buzzing through the menus originally and didn't think about there being separate priority setting for AF-S and AF-C.
I see. Open sunlight is brighter at high altitudes because there is less atmospheric attenuation. I don't think Sunny 16 depends strongly on subject reflectance, think of it like an incident meter reading where the reflectance simply places everything in their correct place on the histogram. But it is probably intended for New York latitudes and sea level, and may need adjustment depending location.
Z8 and Z9 offer both ISO 64 and fast shutter speeds so those can be the solution. I'm not much of a bright sunlight photographer; I avoid those hours if I can, and I live at latitude 60.2 degrees or so.
highdesertmesa wrote:
Doesn't Sunny 16 assume an 18% gray scene?
Edit to add: I'm also at ~5,500' altitude and desert environment. Everything is a light shade of tan here
Hey all, different Zf question (and maybe Nikon in general)...I'm new to Nikon. Can I change a setting (specifically on Zf so that the apertures are in full stops, not thirds? Or does Nikon not do that?
Circling back to the Z eye-AF at headshot distance. Changing to focus priority for AF-C made zero difference. This specific camera/lens combination (Zf + 40 f/2) consistently misses focus on the eye itself much less the iris even at f/5.6. The only way to get correct focus on the eye at selfie and headshot distance is to switch to single shot with the pinpoint-sized AF box and manually move it over the eye. Night and day difference in eye sharpness that way.
For my purposes, eye-AF with the Zf + 40 f/2 is useless at close distances. It's only good for subject recognition at distances for which the chosen depth of field will overcome the focus inaccuracy. I have no experience with any other AF Z lenses, but given that the 40 f/2 is very sharp when focused correctly at these distances at f/2, I see no reason why the 40 f/2 would be the cause of the issue. This is simply Nikon's eye-AF box being too large to focus on the eye within the eye socket at closer distances.
