The bigger issue is that you aren't able to record redundantly to an external device like an Atomos Ninja, so there is zero redundant recording. Not to both slots (obviously) and not to an external recorder. So, once again, Nikon failed to provide what MANY have asked for since the Z9 came out. I know that no consumer camera is recording RAW to both slots, but at least H.265 4:2:2 would have been nice. Your entire hope is that CFExpress card doesn't fail or you lose everything.
Yes, that is true. And I was very vocal in the past about the importance of backup for stills. So I know the topic.
But... I spend lots of time on YouTube/Instagram and know many content creators. Frankly, most of them won't care about this very low risk. They don't create content that is rare and unique enough that a card failure would have a significant impact on their revenue.
I am aware that my personal experience isn't statistically significant. But I had 3 SDs cards failing on me over the years and zero CFExpress. Although by now I have shot way more images/video on CFExpress due to the much higher frame rate of those bodies and a strong shift of my shooting towards action and video work (less so very recently).
So yes, a failure is of course possible. And that will happen and result is some of the videos shot with the ZR being lost. But frankly, so what? If it is a problem for your applications then the Zr isn't a solution for you more than the Z8/Z9 and I understand the hope that Nikon addresses this at some point. I am sure they are aware.
But I don't think that this limitation will impact the market success of the Zr.
Yes, that is true. And I was very vocal in the past about the importance of backup for stills. So I know the topic.
But... I spend lots of time on YouTube/Instagram and know many content creators. Frankly, most of them won't care about this very low risk. They don't create content that is rare and unique enough that a card failure would have a significant impact on their revenue.
I am aware that my personal experience isn't statistically significant. But I had 3 SDs cards failing on me over the years and zero CFExpress. Although by now I have shot way more images/video on CFExpress due to the much higher frame rate of those bodies and a strong shift of my shooting towards action and video work.
So yes, a failure is of course possible. And that will happen and result is some of the videos shot with the ZR being lost. But frankly, so what? If it is a problem for your applications then the Zr isn't a solution for you more than the Z8/Z9 and I understand the hope that Nikon addresses this at some point. I am sure they are aware.
But I don't think that this limitation will impact the market success of the Zr.
JadedWriter wrote:
Yeah I kinda think this camera started out as an FX Z30 to be honest and then they got some of the Red people to tinker around with it and supply some codecs. They'll get this out, use the feedback from this and then two years later a better camera will be out. I think this is mostly fine for what it is. If you're doing production house stuff you're probably in a different budget category any way. This is basically priced to hit independent shooters and maybe even some college students. Get them in and get them to grow out a system. Honestly this could be worse since I thought the camera was going to be hot garbage before I started watching videos for it.
Largely agree, I'd just like to point out (slightly off-topic?) that "independent shooter" and "shooting production house stuff" are not a clear-cut distinction, nor are they mutually exclusive. I'm both, for instance. Can't speak about the world at large, but in Bulgaria at least, production houses tend to keep a skeleton crew and rely on freelancers (especially for DP's; the small in-house staff is mostly logistics and a post-production guy, often only one).
What I earn from freelancing, I tend to re-invest in models and actors for personal projects, then glass, and only then cameras. Which is to say, I try to use the cheapest bodies I can get away with -- I'd rather put most funds towards lenses and personal fancies.
But yes, getting people to build lens kits for your system is what creates long-term customers. As a Canon RF shooter, I have no bias when I say the Nikon mount is better for the budget-minded. That 1.8S line has no Canon equivalent in terms of (almost) top-tier optics at the affordable end. (Canon's 1.4 VCM line is close and slightly better, but 50% more expensive. The entry-level RF glass is garbage).
What industry standard feature are you referencing? The only boneheaded thing in this camera is basically the micro HDMI port. RoamingScott wrote:
"I don't use industry-standard feature X that is missing, so this camera is perfect", the thread
JadedWriter wrote:
What industry standard feature are you referencing? The only boneheaded thing in this camera is basically the micro HDMI port.
Port placement that makes sense
Memory placement that makes sense
Full size HDMI
Attachment points that don't require a 3rd party rig
and everything else already beaten to death in here
A lot of people running an FX3 use a cage with it actually so the use of a cage isn't that much of a negative, it's basically an obligatory in that space, port placement of the screen is also a bit dumb, I'll agree on that. If they can make an attachment that you can mount that you can run your mics into then that turns into a non starter as well. Like as I said, the biggest WTF on this camera that you can't address with an attachment is the micro HDMI port. I also hate the memory card placement. I feel like they were too caught up in making this "small" instead of making it make sense, but it doesn't feel like an impossible camera to use. I could easily use this thing at work for interviews and gimbal shots. So yeah, while I agree, I'm not going to be a drama queen over this. RoamingScott wrote:
Port placement that makes sense
Memory placement that makes sense
Full size HDMI
Attachment points that don't require a 3rd party rig
and everything else already beaten to death in here
The only compact and contemporary cameras that competes with this on value are the ZVE1 and Panny S9.
The S9 is boring as hell, although it does have some cool things about it and is really cheap- but MAN the L-mount is frustrating.
The ZVE1 is a Sony, so that's a non-starter for me, but they do very well with the "serious" VLOG crowd.
I think this ZR is a killer value and is probably going to sell very well for Nikon. I have and mostly enjoy the ZF, but the ergos on the ZF are pretty bad. This thing is way stripped down (as far as physical UI), but the massive display will go a long way to correct that. This would probably be an awesome travel camera, if you don't mind a slower shooting style.
I am not sure to understand the criticism of ports placement causing cables to collide with the screen when it is extended. At least not for the HDMI port.
The main, if not the only, reason to use the mini HDMI port would be to connect an external screen, is it not? So either you use the HDMI port and then you don't need to extend the screen, or the opposite. I don't see why you would want to use the screen extended while using the HDMI port. What am I missing?
So that would leave the audio jack, right? As mentioned, I feel that most people will end up using the new electronic hot shoe instead of the audio jack. And btw I hope that Nikon did a better job with that connector than Sony. It is plain awful on the Sony bodies.
My personal conclusion is that Nikon didn't intend this camera to be used with the screen extended when cables are connected to ports. Even if you can of course try to do it. Besides, mini HDMI was selected for packaging reasons but also because connecting a screen to the camera is not mission critical, you are not recording any data.
Should we not try to understand how the camera is intended to be used instead of projecting on it the way other similar cameras are used and declare the incompatibility of such usages as a fundamental issue of the Zr?
JadedWriter wrote:
A lot of people running an FX3 use a cage with it actually so the use of a cage isn't that much of a negative, it's basically an obligatory in that space, port placement of the screen is also a bit dumb, I'll agree on that. If they can make an attachment that you can mount that you can run your mics into then that turns into a non starter as well. Like as I said, the biggest WTF on this camera that you can't address with an attachment is the micro HDMI port. I also hate the memory card placement. I feel like they were too caught up in making this "small" instead of making it make sense, but it doesn't feel like an impossible camera to use. I could easily use this thing at work for interviews and gimbal shots. So yeah, while I agree, I'm not going to be a drama queen over this.
I use a cage with my FX3. It adds a few more connection/contact points and a layer of protection for the body. Most people rig out their video-centric cameras to some extent so that’s not a major detractor for the ZR. Nice to have but not a dealbreaker.
And the HDMI port, maybe also debatable, given the built-in screen.
But yeah all of the above combined (and the price), make it clear that this camera is more on the “-sumer” side of “prosumer”. Still a very interesting camera that shows potential for other higher-tier models in the lineup. I’m tempted to give it a run once it hits the used market.
A bit tangential to the ZR, but it baffles me that manufacturers don’t bring in a few professional videographers that use competitors’ products as consultants. I can’t image the cost of doing so would add much more than a rounding error to the overall development cost…
With a little help, a camera manufacturer could easily create the “perfect” video body, right ports with the right placement, right media type and access, right body design, etc, etc, etc. — spec’d with sensor and features that allow it to hit the intended price point. Any manufacturer that did this would be way ahead of their competition. Even Nikon, after acquiring RED, cuts corners in some head-scratching ways. Cutting corners isn’t the issue so much — they need to hit a certain price point after all — but some design decisions just leave you baffled. It would be extremely interesting to hear Nikon design team’s logic and reasoning for the ZR!
Instead, every manufacturer has a long list of seemingly dumb or easily-solved issues in every camera they produce, even on relatively high-end models. You don’t get close to perfection until you get into truly professional big-budget models that the majority of consumers will never even consider, and even then those often have some design features that seem out of place.
The Fuji Eterna 55 is one of those higher-end models that is certainly designed for pro use — Fuji being no stranger to the pro broadcast market — yet has a wacky sensor choice that seems totally out of place for a cam in its category, yet seems to be the primary USP…
Kind of wish it had the "Extended Oversampling" feature in z8, z9, z6ii, etc for oversampled 4k 60p. Gerald Undone's test of the hevc (h.265) also shows how mushy it can look.
Some points that I was not aware of:
- The Zr is the first Nikon camera with software focus breathing compensation
- there are new cinematic user modes in which the camera selects the settings to achieve some types of results (slow motion,...). Sounds great for content creators who are not (yet) video experts
- there are new RED video picture controls that enable to apply a red look in camera for those not shooting raw, this sounds great for users upgrading from their phones who want to upload some footage immediately to social media
- the on/off switch button is located on the left and is illuminated when the camera is on
- the middle button right of the sceen can either access the i menu (short press) or the main menu (long press)
- -10 ev focus acquisition (same as Z6III and better than any other camera)
- several tests confirm that shooting 6K RED Raw for 2 hours doesn't generate any over heating at ambient temperature. Heat dissipation is said to be at Z9 level although the body is much smaller
- camera is fully weather sealed thanks to the lack of fan, the new electronic hotshoe is protected by a newly designed rubberized cover protecting the whole hot shoe
- Sony FE mount lenses were already tested and no issue through the Megadap adapter
ahinesdesign wrote:
A bit tangential to the ZR, but it baffles me that manufacturers don’t bring in a few professional videographers that use competitors’ products as consultants. I can’t image the cost of doing so would add much more than a rounding error to the overall development cost…
Without spending too much time on this topic, it baffles me that you assume they didn’t do this. They seeded the Z6III to a bunch of video centric guys/gals who shoot Sony, getting a LOT of feedback in the process, and did the same with the Zr. The result is a camera with clear compromises that convey a subjective design intention. The fact that their intentions don’t line up with your expectations isn’t evidence of a lack of planning. Different priorities. You have a few reviewers who, like you, have noted they feel the design is a strange mashup, and then you’ve got at least one reviewer who “gets it” where Nikon is coming from, the subjective design lines up pretty well with their use case, and can’t hide their genuine enthusiasm. This is clearly a camera that is underspec’d but that can, with a little work, punch up. It’s small, light, easy to use if capturing footage as a soloist is your main goal - great screen, audio and customization possibilities (new hotshoe). If you told me about this camera 3 months ago I would have groaned and rolled my eyes… but now that it exists and I can be shown the whys and hows of a workflow with it, I absolutely get it. IMO it’s clear they’re making a splash into the “content creator” and “photographer turned reluctant videographer” and “wedding videographer” markets, and one or two clever people will shoot shorts and features on it, working with its quirks, in the same way the FX3 was used for The Creator, making use of its weaknesses as strengths. The thing is tiny and cheap but gives you access to R3D and allows integration with that world. All of the “problems” IMO I will predict will prove to be relative non issues after people work with the camera and get acquainted with how it was intended to be used, similar to the Z6III. Again, watch the reviews - feature filmmakers scoff at it; content creators are somewhat giddy about it. It’s a perspective thing. I have a hunch, and I could absolutely be wrong, but my expectation and hope is that a bunch of people will be eating crow about the thermal problems they keep speculating on. And I also assume if and when this camera does well, we will get something closer to what you’ve described, that is: an overspec’d camera that punches down.
hsiunghsiung wrote:
Kind of wish it had the "Extended Oversampling" feature in z8, z9, z6ii, etc for oversampled 4k 60p. Gerald Undone's test of the hevc (h.265) also shows how mushy it can look.
However, one can shoot 6K RAW (either N-RAW or R3D NE) at up to 60 fps and then downsample from that to 4K and not lose as much detail, but then one needs a lot of storage and some processing time on the computer. I get it, it would be nice to get 4K oversampled in camera at 60 fps also and not have to go through RAW. Probably this was left out in order to avoid the bad press resulting if the testers could get the camera to overheat in some mode.
jlafferty wrote:
Without spending touch time on this topic, it baffles me that you assume they didn’t do this. They seeded the Z6III to a bunch of video centric guys/gals who shoot Sony, getting a LOT of feedback in the process, and did the same with the Zr. The result is a camera with clear compromises that convey a subjective design intention. The fact that their intentions don’t line up with your expectations isn’t evidence of a lack of planning. Different priorities. You have a few reviewers who, like you, have noted they feel the design is a strange mashup, and then you’ve got at least one reviewer who “gets it” where Nikon is coming from, the subjective design lines up pretty well with their use case, and can’t hide their genuine enthusiasm. This is clearly a camera that is underspec’d but that can, with a little work, punch up. It’s small, light, easy to use if capturing footage as a soloist is your main goal - great screen, audio and customization possibilities (new hotshoe). If you told me about this camera 3 months ago I would have groaned and rolled my eyes… but now that it exists and I can be shown the whys and hows of a workflow with it, I absolutely get it. IMO it’s clear they’re making a splash into the “content creator” and “photographer turned reluctant videographer” and “wedding videographer” markets, and one or two clever people will shoot shorts and features on it, working with its quirks, in the same way the FX3 was used for The Creator, making use of its weaknesses as strengths. The thing is tiny and cheap but gives you access to R3D and allows integration with that world. All of the “problems” IMO I will predict will prove to be relative non issues after people work with the camera and get acquainted with how it was intended to be used, similar to the Z6III. Again, watch the reviews - feature filmmakers scoff at it; content creators are somewhat giddy about it. It’s a perspective thing. I have a hunch, and I could absolutely be wrong, but my expectation and hope is that a bunch of people will be eating crow about the thermal problems they keep speculating on. And I also assume if and when this camera does well, we will get something closer to what you’ve described, that is: an overspec’d camera that punches down....Show more →
Agreed 100%!
There is a lot of value to be had from using the Zr the way Nikon intends it. And that value will be perceptible for categories of users going beyond vloggers.
bernardl wrote:
I am not sure to understand the criticism of ports placement causing cables to collide with the screen when it is extended. At least not for the HDMI port.
The main, if not the only, reason to use the mini HDMI port would be to connect an external screen, is it not? So either you use the HDMI port and then you don't need to extend the screen, or the opposite. I don't see why you would want to use the screen extended while using the HDMI port. What am I missing?
So that would leave the audio jack, right? As mentioned, I feel that most people will end up using the new electronic hot shoe instead of the audio jack. And btw I hope that Nikon did a better job with that connector than Sony. It is plain awful on the Sony bodies. ...Show more →
Users don't come from voids, they have existing equipment and it should be compatible with a new camera that they buy. Since the only way to get external audio into the video file with Nikon cameras has been through the analog mic input connector and so people have those microphones and audio recorders that can do just that, but then this camera doesn't allow the screen to be tilted up (a very common position to be able to record video from a natural height for full-body images) when an external microphone is used with the audio input connector. That there may be microphones for the digital hot shoe interface doesn't solve the issue that people already have equipment that they want to use and purchasing Nikon's digital microphone may not solve their use cases and it's extra equipment to buy that they wouldn't need to buy if using another camera. The digital microphone interface is probably a different one than what Canon and Sony use (which are different from each other), so audio device manufacturers would need to make custom products to fit and function with the Nikon hot shoe. This will take time and limit the options available to users. The ZR supports bluetooth-based timecode recording and this, when combined with a timecode generator and a compatible audio recorded can result in a working system without the use of any camera-specific audio device, you need the timecode generator, an adapter, and compatible audio recorder which can then use TRS or XLR microphones, and then you can just sync the audio with the video more easily, but it's still extra work, and if you want the audio to be directly input into the video file you still need to use the analog audio input connector and not be able to tilt the screen. Any way this is put, it's an inconvenience that would affect many people, and probably an unnecessary one. I don't care about the micro HDMI as the built-in screen is large and the camera can record high-quality video in camera, so an external display and/or recorder is not needed at least not by me. However, again, a lot of people who are potential buyers of this product may already own external displays and recorders that they might want to keep using, and even view the footage on multiple displays from different angles at the same time.
If Nikon launched a product which would fit the hot shoe and accept analog microphone cables and convert the signal into 32 bit float digital signal without having to go through the analog connector that would be great and it would alleviate the problem. It would then increase the height of the camera (there should be a cold shoe on top at the very least) and that might be awkward for some but at least it would allow the screen to be tilted freely.
Making a relatively inexpensive product (ZR) that requires the purchase of additional products (that replace ones that the user may already own and is happy with) could end up just as expensive as a slightly more expensive product that doesn't have these design flaws (such as the Z8). However, I think for in-camera audio recording the 32-bit float option should be very practical, but the limitations imposed due to the camera being so small may make this feature not directly usable for some. Of course, if one wants to accept the screen as a fixed angle screen like those in older stills cameras (though one would have to try hard to find a video camera with a screen that is fixed and can't be tilted) then the analog audio interface can be used as it is. I am fairly tall and don't like the idea of having to kneel down to be able to shoot at the height I would want to shoot.
Should we not try to understand how the camera is intended to be used instead of projecting on it the way other similar cameras are used and declare the incompatibility of such usages as a fundamental issue of the Zr?
Sure, one can always bend over and try to understand a product like camera manufacturers' sales reps do, but then products would never get good if people are willing to do that.
The more I learn about this camera, the more I want it.
I really hope the shutter angle comes to other expeed7 models in an update.
This will be an absolute banger of a run and gun/travel/hybrid event camera. If you don't think so, go ahead and spend twice as much for similar specs, or I guess go shoot Sony or Panasonic.
ISO1600 wrote:
I really hope the shutter angle comes to other expeed7 models in an update.
The Z6III, Z8 and Z9 already have shutter angle as an option. It seems to be, for now, a feature limited to higher-end models as well as the video-first ZR.
