Nikon ZR can indeed be a capable stills camera!

Initially I was a bit skeptical about the Nikon ZR also being a capable stills camera. But after watching this Asian reviewer, speaking in Cantonese with English sub-titles, I am quite blown away by the ZR's stills capability using its built-in RED image recipe support.

The reviewer tested the ZR stills and video creating capabilities in full, including how to get certain shots in stills and in video. All using RED's creative LUTs, which is actually very appealing to me. This is by far the best balanced video I've seen of what the Nikon ZR is capable of and what it is meant for. So all the other reviewers who said this is not a good stills camera is incorrect!

In the video, there is a portion which includes flash photography. Since the ZR is limited to 1/60sec or slower sync speed, I wanted to see how effective it is for portrait photography and it seemed that it works with the Godox wireless setup pretty well.

All in all, I was wrong to think that this is only a video centric camera. The reviewer showed us that the ZR can become an effective stills camera.

You don't have to customize the buttons for most operations. It is all touch screen based. There is also a comparison between the ZR 4" screen and the traditional Z 3" screen. What a difference in image IQ.

This below really helped me a lot to visualize what I can do with this camera. I will be getting this camera to complement my Z8 for both stills, but mainly for video production.

[Ching Sir Unbox] First Look & Hands-on Review: Nikon ZR Camera | Z CINEMA [English Subtitles] - YouTube

You do know it's basically just a Z6III that can record 32-bit float and Redcode, just in a different shape, right?

He's shooting JPEG's with RED's picture controls put on em. You can download those and do it on just about any Expeed7 Nikon.

Thanks.

Nice review. Presenting user's experience without using much technical jargons.

For me, a big advantage of the Z6 III is the separate viewfinder can be of considerable benefit some of the time, particularly when photographing moving subjects.

The ZR has only a (larger) monitor.

This should suit video work better as for video work pre planning can often be important for moving video lasting a minute or more.

Horses for courses?

--
Leonard Shepherd
In lots of ways good photography is similar to learning to play a piano - it takes practice to develop skill in either activity.

Leonard Shepherd said:

For me, a big advantage of the Z6 III is the separate viewfinder can be of considerable benefit some of the time, particularly when photographing moving subjects.

The ZR has only a (larger) monitor.

This should suit video work better as for video work pre planning can often be important for moving video lasting a minute or more.

Horses for courses?

Click to expand...

The larger monitor is certainly appealing to me, so I don't have to bring out my field monitor, which I do attach to with my Z8. I never use my Z8's VF when I'm doing video.

Other than that, I plan to make the ZR as my field video camera. Currently my Olympus E-M1X is my field camera, but it's limited to only 8bit 4.2.0, so makes grading somewhat limited compared to my Z8.

However, as a portable range finder like camera, the ZR looks very appealing. Bolting on a Viltrox 28mm f/4.5 CHIP lens would make it even more exciting as a last minute stills cam alongside my Nikkor 40mm.

The trend among younger pro photographers has been a higher percentage who shoot without using the view finder. Having direct eye contact with the subject can be great for portraits. Having a large LCD is great for outdoor work on a tripod or when helmets, goggles and other outer wear can make it difficult to bring a camera to the eye.

Like the Hasselblad experience in the film days; it was typical to not shoot with the camera against the eye.

The issue for older photographers like myself is that worsening near vision, even with glasses has made small rear LCD shooting difficult, as the viewfinder always seems clearer and better to judge composition, subject expression etc. Many like myself do not need glasses for EVF but do need glasses to see the typical camera LCD. Taking glasses on and off while shooting is not convenient. So for me, these days, pro shooting is mostly an EVF, camera against the eye, experience.

This is not an issue with recent larger phones with big displays.

So I think one of the ZR's potential is to give still photographers with diminishing near vision an option to evaluate their images well off the LCD and to start shooting without the eye to the camera, keeping glasses on and having a camera that is like phone but with a real camera. This is also facilitated by a smaller lighter body. I am looking forward to handling a ZR.

vockman said:

The trend among younger pro photographers has been a higher percentage who shoot without using the view finder. Having direct eye contact with the subject can be great for portraits. Having a large LCD is great for outdoor work on a tripod or when helmets, goggles and other outer wear can make it difficult to bring a camera to the eye.

Like the Hasselblad experience in the film days; it was typical to not shoot with the camera against the eye.

The issue for older photographers like myself is that worsening near vision, even with glasses has made small rear LCD shooting difficult, as the viewfinder always seems clearer and better to judge composition, subject expression etc. Many like myself do not need glasses for EVF but do need glasses to see the typical camera LCD. Taking glasses on and off while shooting is not convenient. So for me, these days, pro shooting is mostly an EVF, camera against the eye, experience.

This is not an issue with recent larger phones with big displays.

So I think one of the ZR's potential is to give still photographers with diminishing near vision an option to evaluate their images well off the LCD and to start shooting without the eye to the camera, keeping glasses on and having a camera that is like phone but with a real camera. This is also facilitated by a smaller lighter body. I am looking forward to handling a ZR.

Click to expand...

I'm with you 100% on this, although I shoot video. I've ordered the ZR and have my fingers crossed the larger, brighter VF will obviate the need for an EVF which I've always used for the very reasons you state.

I’m looking forward to Thom’s more detailed comments in his review For what I shoot now, travel, family and family events, a reasonably competent stills camera in this format might just be the trick to get into FF from m/43

I totally understand the near vision comments

vockman said:

The trend among younger pro photographers has been a higher percentage who shoot without using the view finder. Having direct eye contact with the subject can be great for portraits. Having a large LCD is great for outdoor work on a tripod or when helmets, goggles and other outer wear can make it difficult to bring a camera to the eye.

Like the Hasselblad experience in the film days; it was typical to not shoot with the camera against the eye.

The issue for older photographers like myself is that worsening near vision, even with glasses has made small rear LCD shooting difficult, as the viewfinder always seems clearer and better to judge composition, subject expression etc. Many like myself do not need glasses for EVF but do need glasses to see the typical camera LCD. Taking glasses on and off while shooting is not convenient. So for me, these days, pro shooting is mostly an EVF, camera against the eye, experience.

This is not an issue with recent larger phones with big displays.

So I think one of the ZR's potential is to give still photographers with diminishing near vision an option to evaluate their images well off the LCD and to start shooting without the eye to the camera, keeping glasses on and having a camera that is like phone but with a real camera. This is also facilitated by a smaller lighter body. I am looking forward to handling a ZR.

Click to expand...

I'm one of the old with need of assistance for near vision, and in the past swore I would never buy a camera without a viewfinder. But due to a series of circumstances I now find myself with one of my cameras not having a viewfinder. And I also have had to do a bunch of apologizing to folks. I am finding that using the screen is not nearly the problem I thought, and in some instances it is clearly a better option than the viewfinder. On the vision, I wear trifocals and holding the camera 8-12 inches in front of my eyes at eye level it just takes a tiny bit of eye movement to either view the screen through the bifocal which is sharp and clear to seeing over the top edge of the screen to view the scene in real vision though the clear glass upper segment of my trifocals. It is really kinda neat. Also just last week was photographing some fast rc aircraft that it was really hard to find in the viewfinder and keep them there, but using the screen where I could also see the whole area over the screen made it easier to keep the subject in the photo. Maybe these young pups coming from their phones are not so crazy after all.

I also seem to notice that almost all brands have recently came out with ILC cameras without viewfinders. They must think they will sell also. Guess we will see.

I don't understand or did not know the camera will be limited to 1/60th of a second with flash? Is that correct?

My Z6iii is different in that respect.

Or am I misunderstanding your comment?

broodrooster said:

I don't understand or did not know the camera will be limited to 1/60th of a second with flash? Is that correct?

My Z6iii is different in that respect.

Or am I misunderstanding your comment?

Click to expand...

The Zr does not have a mechanical shutter like the Z6iii so that is going to limit it with flash photography and could potentially have issues with banding in some scenarios with artificial light. The sensor readout speed is lower than the sensor used in the Z8 and Z9 which only have an electronic shutter too, but a higher sync speed because the electronic shutter is closer to the speed of a mechanical shutter. The partially stacked sensor in the Z6iii/Zr is much faster than traditional sensors in many other cameras but not fast enough to eliminate all problems.

broodrooster said:

I don't understand or did not know the camera will be limited to 1/60th of a second with flash? Is that correct?

Click to expand...

That's correct. There's no mechanical shutter, so this limit is imposed by the rolling shutter.

BudgetTraveller said:

Initially I was a bit skeptical about the Nikon ZR also being a capable stills camera. But after watching this Asian reviewer, speaking in Cantonese with English sub-titles, I am quite blown away by the ZR's stills capability using its built-in RED image recipe support.

Click to expand...

What stills-capability regressions did you anticipate the ZR would have that would make it less capable as a stills camera?

Horshack said:

BudgetTraveller said:

Initially I was a bit skeptical about the Nikon ZR also being a capable stills camera. But after watching this Asian reviewer, speaking in Cantonese with English sub-titles, I am quite blown away by the ZR's stills capability using its built-in RED image recipe support.

Click to expand...

What stills-capability regressions did you anticipate the ZR would have that would make it less capable as a stills camera?

Click to expand...

It is the same regressions some photographers have that we prefer to use dedicated cameras with the stills ergonomics that we come to expect and the ZR is lacking. Also, the 1/60th flash sync is another limiting stills factor.

BudgetTraveller said:

Horshack said:

BudgetTraveller said:

Initially I was a bit skeptical about the Nikon ZR also being a capable stills camera. But after watching this Asian reviewer, speaking in Cantonese with English sub-titles, I am quite blown away by the ZR's stills capability using its built-in RED image recipe support.

Click to expand...

What stills-capability regressions did you anticipate the ZR would have that would make it less capable as a stills camera?

Click to expand...

It is the same regressions some photographers have that we prefer to use dedicated cameras with the stills ergonomics that we come to expect and the ZR is lacking. Also, the 1/60th flash sync is another limiting stills factor.

Click to expand...

What aspects in the OP video refuted those regression concerns? Just seeing someone actually handling the camera?

Horshack said:

BudgetTraveller said:

Horshack said:

BudgetTraveller said:

Initially I was a bit skeptical about the Nikon ZR also being a capable stills camera. But after watching this Asian reviewer, speaking in Cantonese with English sub-titles, I am quite blown away by the ZR's stills capability using its built-in RED image recipe support.

Click to expand...

What stills-capability regressions did you anticipate the ZR would have that would make it less capable as a stills camera?

Click to expand...

It is the same regressions some photographers have that we prefer to use dedicated cameras with the stills ergonomics that we come to expect and the ZR is lacking. Also, the 1/60th flash sync is another limiting stills factor.

Click to expand...

What aspects in the OP video refuted those regression concerns? Just seeing someone actually handling the camera?

Click to expand...

The demonstration of the stills touch screen function refute those regression concerns. The Asian reviewer actually spent more time demonstrating the usage of the camera through the touch screen to get certain images, rather than focusing on DR specs and on making a great film with the ZR. It's similar in a way in how I would shoot with my Panasonic Lumix ZS-100 and with my iPhone and the Asian reviewer's actual handling of the ZR resonates fully with me and my iPhone and my ZS-100.

I shoot differently with my Z8 and my E-M1X, since those 2 cameras have the F1/F2 buttons, a dedicated ISO and exposure compensation and drive buttons.

Horshack said:

BudgetTraveller said:

Initially I was a bit skeptical about the Nikon ZR also being a capable stills camera. But after watching this Asian reviewer, speaking in Cantonese with English sub-titles, I am quite blown away by the ZR's stills capability using its built-in RED image recipe support.

Click to expand...

What stills-capability regressions did you anticipate the ZR would have that would make it less capable as a stills camera?

Click to expand...

I think it was just a lack of information on some of the stills capabilities we got with the Z6iii. Focus modes, Interval shooting, Nikon Image Cloud and Recipes, etc. Does it have all the shooting modes the Z6iii have?

BudgetTraveller said:

The demonstration of the stills touch screen function refute those regression concerns. The Asian reviewer actually spent more time demonstrating the usage of the camera through the touch screen to get certain images, rather than focusing on DR specs and on making a great film with the ZR. It's similar in a way in how I would shoot with my Panasonic Lumix ZS-100 and with my iPhone and the Asian reviewer's actual handling of the ZR resonates fully with me and my iPhone and my ZS-100.

Click to expand...

Indeed, the review was produced targeting camera users in Hong Kong. Many, if not the vast majority are phone camera users, at least those I know and have come across.

From the Cantonese narratives, I got the impression that ZR was hailed as a compact and modern camera with clever Red technologies for image colour rendering, which could also take professional videos. Something could have been missed in the English subtitles.

WPMChan said:

BudgetTraveller said:

The demonstration of the stills touch screen function refute those regression concerns. The Asian reviewer actually spent more time demonstrating the usage of the camera through the touch screen to get certain images, rather than focusing on DR specs and on making a great film with the ZR. It's similar in a way in how I would shoot with my Panasonic Lumix ZS-100 and with my iPhone and the Asian reviewer's actual handling of the ZR resonates fully with me and my iPhone and my ZS-100.

Click to expand...

Indeed, the review was produced targeting camera users in Hong Kong. Many, if not the vast majority are phone camera users, at least those I know and have come across.

From the Cantonese narratives, I got the impression that ZR was hailed as a compact and modern camera with clever Red technologies for image colour rendering, which could also take professional videos. Something could have been missed in the English subtitles.

Click to expand...

I think the ZR may do well in Asia, at it seems to be a natural market for it. Indeed, it was marketed as stills first and video second and while it may have been missed in the English subtitles, it was clear that it can do better than your phone, while capturing great stills with RED tech and can also take professional videos at the same time. A different approach for sure.

A number of North American ZR reviewers place video first and stills as an afterthought. Interesting as to the direction the Asian and North American market are going with the ZR!

BudgetTraveller said:

I think the ZR may do well in Asia, at it seems to be a natural market for it. Indeed, it was marketed as stills first and video second and while it may have been missed in the English subtitles, it was clear that it can do better than your phone, while capturing great stills with RED tech and can also take professional videos at the same time. A different approach for sure.

A number of North American ZR reviewers place video first and stills as an afterthought. Interesting as to the direction the Asian and North American market are going with the ZR!

Click to expand...

Interesting to note that in the first few minutes of chatting, it was all about the number of followers on various channels by these three characters.

The primary objective of those Youtube reviews are not so much bout the subject under review, but rather the number of viewers clicking on the review. What they focused on would be what they expect what their target audiences would be interested in.