Well, for birds on water and a lot of other small wildlife on the ground, the best perspective is often as close to the ground level as possible, and in that case, use of a viewfinder would be difficult without a prism attachment or a tilting viewfinder. The large OLED is likely the best and most convenient way of composing the shots in such situations. You can put the camera on a bean bag, low level tripod, a fluid head or gimbal attached to a floating hide, or something like that.
Cliff L. wrote:
I'll bet holding one of these cameras at arm's length with an 800mm lens attached while trying to frame a shot would be a lot of fun!
ilkka_nissila wrote:
Well, for birds on water and a lot of other small wildlife on the ground, the best perspective is often as close to the ground level as possible, and in that case, use of a viewfinder would be difficult without a prism attachment or a tilting viewfinder. The large OLED is likely the best and most convenient way of composing the shots in such situations. You can put the camera on a bean bag, low level tripod, a fluid head or gimbal attached to a floating hide, or something like that.
Yes, one can usually conjure up some extremely niche use case to justify any compromised product design.
was thinking more along the lines of the way I normally use my gear every single day.
You commented on 800 mm lenses which are typically used for bird photography, seemingly doubting that one would use such lenses with the screen. Ground level is not niche where it comes to wildlife/bird photography, it's the equivalent of photography of people at the subject's eye level. There are many reasons why low level camera vantage point is preferable. Autofocus, background cleanup, immersion into the subject's world etc.
Apart from the discussed topic of use with long lenses, shooting using the screen is by far the most common way of taking photos today. You may not like it but the popularity of this approach cannot really be debated, it's a fact.
Cliff L. wrote:
Yes, one can usually conjure up some extremely niche use case to justify any compromised product design.
was thinking more along the lines of the way I normally use my gear every single day.
I use the screen tilted on my Z8 and a7rIV with my Sony 200-600mm + TC 1.4 (840m) for wildlife photos. Sometimes it's for getting down low, sometimes it's for tripod positions that make the evf hard to use, sometimes it's for video where I find the screen easier to use for panning.
Would I buy a camera with no EVF for dedicated telephoto lens use, no. But give me a ZR with a Z8 sensor, and it's almost guaranteed I would be adding one to my kit, for when I want a smaller camera, and for video use. I gave the ZR some serious thought, but I don't do enough dedicated video work to justify a video only camera. I usually go for photos first, and then take some video if time allows. With a camera like the Z8 I can switch between photos and videos without changing cameras too, which is nice.
I’m interested to see what Nikon releases. While I rely on a viewfinder and tripod for landscape work, recently I’m spending many days doing fun evening walks on Disney properties where I get a lot of joy out of making small architectural or abstract compositions, and for that (especially in crowded situations) I’m using the rear screen rather than viewfinder more and more on my Z8. For this use (and other evening walkarounds on other travel) that big beautiful screen on the lightweight ZR is calling my name, but hard for me to justify the cost for my use case (I would never touch the video features). For most of these I’m holding the camera high over my head, and yearning for a bigger image to see as I compose.
NIKON Z 8TAMRON 28-75mm F/2.8 Di III VXD G2 A063Z lens28mmf/8.01/30s2200 ISO0.0 EV
NIKON Z 8TAMRON 28-75mm F/2.8 Di III VXD G2 A063Z lens34mmf/10.01/250s64 ISO-1.0 EV
NIKON Z 8TAMRON 28-75mm F/2.8 Di III VXD G2 A063Z lens37mmf/4.01/15s1600 ISO0.0 EV
NIKON Z 8NIKKOR Z 28mm f/2.8 lens28mmf/2.81/10s1250 ISO+0.3 EV
NIKON Z 8NIKKOR Z 28mm f/2.8 lens28mmf/2.81/20s1800 ISO0.0 EV
ilkka_nissila wrote:
Apart from the discussed topic of use with long lenses, shooting using the screen is by far the most common way of taking photos today. You may not like it but the popularity of this approach cannot really be debated, it's a fact.
If a photographer struggles to frame telephoto shots with no viewfinder, is it simply lack of skill? I'm doing my best to understand what you're saying.
Rainbow Chaser wrote:
If a photographer struggles to frame telephoto shots with no viewfinder, is it simply lack of skill? I'm doing my best to understand what you're saying.
He's just saying it's the most common way of taking photos today because that's the way people are taking photos with their phones. It's not weird or uncommon to just rely on the screen.
Rainbow Chaser wrote:
If a photographer struggles to frame telephoto shots with no viewfinder, is it simply lack of skill? I'm doing my best to understand what you're saying.
Unless you are a robot, nobody can handhold an 800mm with accurate framing for hours continuously.
A lot of people are missing out on a tripod. But handhled or on a tripod no EVF means shooting with sun from behind is terrible a hood or flag is needed to black the sun. These flimsy little cameras are probably for close shooting with wide to short tele lenses.
ilkka_nissila wrote:
You commented on 800 mm lenses which are typically used for bird photography, seemingly doubting that one would use such lenses with the screen. Ground level is not niche where it comes to wildlife/bird photography, it's the equivalent of photography of people at the subject's eye level. There are many reasons why low level camera vantage point is preferable. Autofocus, background cleanup, immersion into the subject's world etc.
Apart from the discussed topic of use with long lenses, shooting using the screen is by far the most common way of taking photos today. You may not like it but the popularity of this approach cannot really be debated, it's a fact.
At high school sports events- Any kid shooting is 100% Back of the screen- They are constantly flipping from video to photos and I have seen some great results from these kids!
Not only that, but a lot of hybrid shooters don't use the monitor OR evf...they use a big ass external monitor that's better than either other option for chest level monopod shooting.
After a little bit of hands on time with the ZR, I've changed my mind and think this is likely a terrible idea if Nikon just adapts the ZR.
1) the camera is way bigger than I expected. Add the small rig grip and it's closer to the size of the Z8 than it is a Z6iii. Overall it's thinner than the older Z6/Z7 cameras, but only because of the grip on those cameras. The body of the ZR is thicker and much taller (minus the EVF). This camera is substantial and substantially bigger than something like an A7CR. In the hand, it feels much bigger than even an A7RV.
2) the screen is great...and not. First of all it needs to be able to tilt vertically from the on the body position like the Z8/Z9. Even for the ZR it needs to be able to do this. I get why Nikon put a swivel screen on this, but it is really awkward for non-eye-level horizontal shooting. Because you're supporting so much of the weight of the camera with your lens holding hand, the screen is banging into your wrist. Its also only opens to 90% so you can't ever get the screen on the same plane as the sensor. That drives me nuts.
3) The screen also takes up so much real estate that if you have touch functions turned on you will be doing all sorts of things unintentionally because it's almost impossible not to touch it.
4) Did I mention it's just big!? I expected something more like the Sigma FP.
nhmorgan wrote:
After a little bit of hands on time with the ZR, I've changed my mind and think this is likely a terrible idea if Nikon just adapts the ZR.
1) the camera is way bigger than I expected. Add the small rig grip and it's closer to the size of the Z8 than it is a Z6iii. Overall it's thinner than the older Z6/Z7 cameras, but only because of the grip on those cameras. The body of the ZR is thicker and much taller (minus the EVF). This camera is substantial and substantially bigger than something like an A7CR. In the hand, it feels much bigger than even an A7RV.
2) the screen is great...and not. First of all it needs to be able to tilt vertically from the on the body position like the Z8/Z9. Even for the ZR it needs to be able to do this. I get why Nikon put a swivel screen on this, but it is really awkward for non-eye-level horizontal shooting. Because you're supporting so much of the weight of the camera with your lens holding hand, the screen is banging into your wrist. Its also only opens to 90% so you can't ever get the screen on the same plane as the sensor. That drives me nuts.
3) The screen also takes up so much real estate that if you have touch functions turned on you will be doing all sorts of things unintentionally because it's almost impossible not to touch it.
4) Did I mention it's just big!? I expected something more like the Sigma FP....Show more →
It does look bigger than I thought, but still within a size range my hand is comfortable with (I usually walk around with A7RV and have also been doing so with the Z8 the last few weeks). How is the screen quality? And how do you feel about the grip?
I feel like people trying to use the ZR as a stills camera first is a classic example of the type of hardheadedness we see a lot of around here.
It has no grip. Why is that? Because it's not made to be used primarly as a handheld stills camera, it's meant to be used as a video camera on a gimble, or with a cage like this:
Nearly every piece of footage I've seen has the shooter using something like this as a bare minimum:
The ZR wasn't built to be a compact stills option while running naked...it was designed to be slim so that it could be augmented via these cages to customize the functionality for video shooters.
This is akin to complaints about how a McLaren handes traffic on the 405.
RoamingScott wrote:
I feel like people trying to use the ZR as a stills camera first is a classic example of the type of hardheadedness we see a lot of around here.
It has no grip. Why is that? Because it's not made to be used primarly as a handheld stills camera, it's meant to be used as a video camera on a gimble, or with a cage like this:
The ZR wasn't built to be a compact stills option while running naked...it was designed to be slim so that it could be augmented via these cages to customize the functionality for video shooters.
This is akin to complaints about how a McLaren handes traffic on the 405....Show more →
Knew all this going in. It is still a larger camera than many of the review suggest. The Sigma FP for example was a well featured video camera that became popular with many for it ability to shoot raw, cool well, and do so in a compact form factor. It was also a great little camera for stills if you accepted its limitations. It was the BF before the BF. Its downfall (which I suspect is also the downfall of the BF was that the screen wasn't really usable in bright light. It also couldn't articulate (although you could get it modded). I, in particular, enjoy my hardheadedness. It's not so much hardheadedness, though, as a willingness to try new things. That's benefitted more than it's hurt. However, you're also missing the point of this whole thread, which is the rumor that Nikon might make something resembling this as a stills camera. In that context, the size and form factor is a valid observation, IF, Nikon is planning to adapt the existing ZR approach.
RoamingScott wrote:
I feel like people trying to use the ZR as a stills camera first is a classic example of the type of hardheadedness we see a lot of around here.
It has no grip. Why is that? Because it's not made to be used primarly as a handheld stills camera, it's meant to be used as a video camera on a gimble, or with a cage like this:
The ZR wasn't built to be a compact stills option while running naked...it was designed to be slim so that it could be augmented via these cages to customize the functionality for video shooters.
This is akin to complaints about how a McLaren handes traffic on the 405....Show more →
You couldn't be more wrong, in the hand it's very comfortable and it does have a grip as seen in the photos comparing it to other Z bodies. Look at the side view, it could be argued that the grip is far more sculptured than a Z8. Also has a built in thumb grip. I had every intention of getting a Z6III but after trying one with a 24-120 it was unbalanced, front heavy, buttons on the back partly obscured by my hand and my fingers felt cramped on the front with hardly any room between body and lens. I have small hands. The 24-120 balances so much better, if you just go by pictures online you'd never believe it. Cage free here too. I kept swapping between them in the store and couldn't get my head around how it balanced better with a largish zoom attached.
Too many people just shout get a Z6III for stills, usually people who've never used a ZR. When you've spent a few minutes with the ZR screen you can understand why it's also tempting still shooters. I also found myself using an evf far less in recent years but it was always a struggle with a small screen.
I also see rumours of a stills focussed ZR type body coming which would appeal to a lot of people if they use the same screen and don't dumb it down.
I thought i posted in here yesterday, but guess not.
I think a "ZR-style" camera that the crowd who doesn't like the ZR..... would have to be so different it wouldn't be ZR style anymore.
If we add an EVF without making the awesome LCD smaller, the camera will either be HUGE or not a box layout like the ZR....
I think the most likely thing is they do is a full frame Z30. Similar controls and layout, but it won't really please many of the people who currently are hating on the ZR.
The Cinema crowd loves the ZR, because it's a killer value. It's even more a killer value in Japan (~$1600). Where do they position a stills-only camera in relation to this and the Z5?
I hope they bring a hotshoe EVF accessory, making the ZR more flexible. This would broaden the appeal.
I also am in the camp of people that don't like the feel (or look) of ANY of the Z cameras outside the ZF(c) and ZR. I just think all the others are ugly and feel incredibly crowded with buttons in-hand.
The ZR feels good, and after having it <24 hours I'm already pretty comfortable with the controls.
