ronno wrote:
Interesting that the client specified the codec / file format for a project. They are usually just talking end results.
Care to share what kind of project this is?
Best,
R
it's something in-house for them, thus the XAVC codec. talking head interviews and b-roll, the usual stuffs.
This is all kind of a bummer, as I wanted to get this camera on day 1 just to use that huge screen and good IBIS, now gonna have to wait for a decent h.265.
Also here is the video someone referred to, with more soft Zr h.265 footage...
ronno wrote:
This is all kind of a bummer, as I wanted to get this camera on day 1 just to use that huge screen and good IBIS, now gonna have to wait for a decent h.265.
Also here is the video someone referred to, with more soft Zr h.265 footage...
Out of curiosity, any relatively compact cameras you would recommend that you tried with good h.265 footage out of the box?
RustyRus wrote:
Its clear you are way to in love with Nikon to see anything objective-
Multiple people are telling you why H.265 is important....Not worth discussing anymore.
Again, I am not saying it’s not. My earlier wording was not accurate enough. I understand that in some situations and for some videographers it’s good enough and that some situations prevent from shooting raw despite the superior flexibility due to storage impacts.
As I said I think that Nikon will improve their H.265 (if not done yet in production units) and probably add a more compressed version of Red Raw also.
Personally flexibility and image quality are my priorities. I’ll shoot Red raw most of the time, do my editing and keep converted H.265 for archival to avoid additional long term storage costs (knowing that Backblaze includes a one year back up of deleted files). That will essentially limit the additional storage costs to what I need during capture.
My view is that the standards for video are evolving and that the impact on storage needs/workflow have to be seen as an avoidable consequence but I do fully understand the impact on the economics (more or less important depending on workflow evolution) and that not everyone has factored this evolution in yet, or see it as positive.
One solution may be to add raw usage/storage as paid options for clients. As more videographers do this cameras providing this capability may become a competitive differentiator instead of a burden, even for those who prefer to keep using H.265 as the baseline. But both options must be usable for this to work.
tzhang4284 wrote:
Out of curiosity, any relatively compact cameras you would recommend that you tried with good h.265 footage out of the box?
I find most of the Sonys relatively compact.
A1, A7r5, A74 etc etc all have great (IMO) h.265 (lots of detail, now noise) with high D.R. - especially with SLOG3.
Sony's IBIS is not as good, however.
I would not call the Canon / Nikon bodies small (though Z6 and Z7 are pretty small)
I’ve watched a few of the softness tests on the big screen in 4k. Once thing that I notice across them is that they have that “plastic” look that the Sony mirrorless cameras get flak for due to the default high NR setting. With the larger cameras you can adjust how much NR gets applied, and you get a more organic, grainy image at high ISOs.
These were shots in broad daylight, so I don’t think this is particularly what’s going on, but there is a very distinct sheen like a plastic on skin tones. I suspect there’s also some sort of line skipping or pixel binning happening when they shoot the H265 in 4K as if doesn’t look like a downscale of the sensor.
Possibly a pre-production firmware issue. We'll know for sure in a few weeks.
Cheers,
Bernard
Yes, it indicates they have either wicked the NR right up or they are pixel binning. I don't know why they would be doing either as the Z6iii doesn't. It oversamples 4k H.265 right up to 60FPS and the footage is very sharp.
These matters are nearly always design choices made at time of release and it would be good to understand these better.
ronno wrote:
The people using the camera seem to think it's an over-aggressive NR issue - should be easy to fix.
I am wondering what settings are available in camera to control this, if any, and what value they used.
None of the initial reviews of the camera had mentioned this soft H.265 footage. Possibly because they all were focusing on Red raw, possibly for other reasons.
bernardl wrote:
I am wondering what settings are available in camera to control this, if any, and what value they used.
None of the initial reviews of the camera had mentioned this soft H.265 footage. Possibly because they all were focusing on Red raw, possibly for other reasons.
Cheers,
Bernard
This is why I titled this thread The review that I was waiting for…No one else was shooting H265…just drooling over red raw ;-).
There was one initial review that did - he said the h265 was soft but then later on said it was decent.
This thing will be out in the public by next week so we will all know for sure.
And I have no doubt that there will be firmware coming pronto.
ronno wrote:
This is why I titled this thread The review that I was waiting for…No one else was shooting H265…just drooling over red raw ;-).
There was one initial review that did - he said the h265 was soft but then later on said it was decent.
This thing will be out in the public by next week so we will all know for sure.
And I have no doubt that there will be firmware coming pronto.
Got it, but when a reviewer doesn’t mention something as basic as H.265 we don’t know whether it’s because they tested it and found nothing particular/interesting to say about it or because they didn’t test it.
Most tests of new cameras never speak about jpg image quality.
EB-1 wrote:
I prefer tests and reviews of the product gainst a fixed standard, not against another random product.
EBH
If you are serious about shooting video/cine on a mirrorless body, the Panny bodies kind of are a fixed standard.
I've long had a love for small (hybrid) box cameras with simple UI.
That started with the Canon EOS M and M2, later the Sigma FP, and now I'm drooling over this ZR.
ZR fixes essentially every issue I had with the FP (in theory), except now it appears you're left with two paths for video codec/format currently- "soft" H265 (which is probably better than most FF options cheaper than it?), or super high bitrate raw.
I am still a total noob when it comes to working with big video projects, I really need to start learning the workflow and improve my personal file archival system- but until i do either of those things, I have zero business thinking about getting an ZR when my ZF does just fine.
Regardless, I'll still be watching the ZR with a lot of interest!
