Nikon Z6 sample gallery

Get Rekt, - You got 3 likes for a post that made fun of your own original post haha.

Said certain camera review site does a great job of shooting real world people in real world lighting/situations. Then get periodically raked over the coals for not being 'professional' enough and/or not using models, studio lighting, etc.

I agree that real people in real situations is better and more indicative of what a camera system can do.

SteveAnderson, you know, Canon 50D now in China (I live now here) cost 150 USD in mint, 99% condition, 40D is cost - 100 USD... And in the hand of good photographer results will be near same as from any other modern APS-C cameras. I can say same about Nikon D300...

kobakokh, Yes, 200$can. I was saying that the 50D is actually better than the modern Nikons for skin quality. Not just equal.

Chasing DR and noise is creating that fake make-up, plastic look to skin.

@Son of Waldo, a rather personal attack in response to a fairly innocuous comment. Your issues aside, this is a place to exchange ideas; you have any?
I would stake my mortgage that you, or any commenters here, or any dpr staff, would not be able to distinguish photos from the many cameras in the market, on the evidence of these 'sample galleries'. What do you think about that idea?

@jackspra, you know very well that if the article didn't specify the camera that produced these pics, you wouldn't have clue. You'd be scrabbling around in the dark, "do I like them, are they any good?" These sample galleries on dpr are basically worthless in terms of information.

PostModernBloke:

Of course downloading raws gives one camera data.

But generally, yes because these look yellowish, one can guess they come from a Nikon lens--no, not necessarily a Nikon camera. Albeit, right, extraction can alter that yellow look or the cyan look from Canon's better lenses, or the blue from Fuji's lenses. But one can make an educated guess.

PostModern:

"With all due respect, one can guess anything, but know nothing."

That just be saying you don't know much of camera lenses and colour.

@PMB

perhaps you can back up your rather outlandish (or fairly innocuous?) claim that "any photos in the dpr 'sample galleries' could have been made with any modern camera".

Let's start with the Out of Camera JPEGS with the provided Z6 samples. Show me examples with visible noise patterns and I will follow with what you are now referring to as "many cameras in the market".

That's what I think about your 'idea'.

HowaboutRaw,

"That just be saying you don't know much of camera lenses and colour."
This thread has nothing to do with lenses, it's a 'sample gallery' of the Z6.

PostModernBloke:

Two new Nikon Z lenses were used here. A zoom and the 50mm f/1.8.

Pretty sure the 85mm f/1.8 got used with an adapter here too.

So yes, this gallery is most certainly also a sample gallery of new Nikon Z lenses. I don't remember if the Z 50mm f/1.8 was/is in the Z7 gallery; that lens shipped after the new 24-70mm Z zoom.

In fact, given that this Z6 sensor is widely understood to be the sensor from the Sony A7III, the lenses are a big reason people are looking at this gallery.

(Right, this Nikon may use a different processor than the Sony, and definitely uses different processing algorithms. Most digital camera processors are made by Fujitsu, though ironically Nikon does do some processor engineering.)

SOW, "Show me examples with visible noise patterns" - we are photographers. The 'sample galleries' add nothing to our profession, but they do seem to gratify the nerds and pixel-peepers on these threads.

Are you saying that you can distinguish between the 'sample images' from the Z7, Z6, and the eosR in these galleries??

PMB, I am saying that the Z6 examples are CLEARLY and OBVIOUSLY cleaner than the D750 files that I have been dealing with for YEARS and that camera is hardly known as noisy, even by today's standards.

Have a look at some of the lower light Z7 files for yourself.

Post:

"Are you saying that you can distinguish between the 'sample images' from the Z7, Z6, and the eosR in these galleries??"

Couple things, you know that each camera has a completely different pixel count? So of course one can tell, assuming there was no compression engaged.
Then, I'm not simply looking at jpgs posted by DPR, I'm looking at extracted raws.

Generally yes, with raws, one can see a consistent difference between a good Canon lens and a good Nikon lens--it's not very difficult, and no it doesn't have to be the same scene shot under the same conditions. Note that's lens NOT camera body. Did you look at the Z7 versus Canon R samples?

Now, the Orlando Florida bird images that Imaging Resource shot with a Z6 are a bit hard to guess as a Nikon lens because there's plenty of low lying mist.

@postmode. I don’t think you know what others think very well.

Your describing the over-processed look of cellphone cameras. Excluding the hyperbole, I somewhat agree with you, which is why I sometimes shoot film. Fuji may be on to something when they decided to include film simulations.

One of the beauties of mirrorless is that you an mount pretty much any glass you want.

@KrisAK same question. ccd sensors + legacy lenses, perhaps?

I agree with and will point out sharp ED and Aspherical glass with high resolution and low character. it's not a film sensor, it's digital. Some people think that is the standard. I agree with the sensor tech approach that is happening too.

I'm honestly failing to understand the issue here. Don't like it? Cool, shoot film.

Why? Casual shots around Seattle can show exposure mistakes by the photographer, which can interfere with the quality test of gear.

Depends on the DPR photographer. Getting Dan is a blessing to both manufacturer and readers. Wrestling set was great, this is very good.

Less keen on his post-production choices than his photographer's eye though. Out of camera jpegs looked much better to me in several cases than the corrected RAWs.

That is the problem. Cameras have only 3 channels, and they are the wrong ones.

@Endgame Trigger
>There is no such thing as a "Colour Science"<
It's not that simple. Technically speaking a light spectrum has to be transferred for every pixel into a set of rgb-values. This is done by color filters with a transfer function that results in absorption of light depending on the wave length. These transfer functions could be slightly different for different sensors. That could result in images of different cameras which are substantially different in color. It means that you can't transfer the colors of one image to the other by global color corrections. With that said I totally agree with your statements of color science as being totally overrated. As Tony Northrup investigated recently (see my link above) people judge completely inconsistent and are biased towards their brands. In a blind test it turned out to be Canon on the last place according to the judgement of the 1.500 participants in the test.

Yep, I have the proud owner of a d750, please give me the brand and model of that separate camera.

I was just curious as a pro photographer/filmmaker who has been looking at most photo and video site and forum, I am curious to know that mysterious 1000 dollar camera that can beat a z6.

Why stop there? These images on the web could have been taken with a $150 D80.

> What is that 4K video camera under $1000?

Sony A6300 will solve your 4K video issues (has done mine, as a Canon still shooter). Kit lens is stabilised. Sony E 50mm f1.8 is $200 and stabilised and every good. An A6300 can be had for as little as €500.

Built-in microphone is good enough to use in production in a pinch. No IBIS or fan noise.

@MyReality care to tell me why you are in this place talking about a full frame camera and not some other place talking about latest compact camera. Let me guess, ah you like large sensor camera for the control of DOF and the esthetics it gives you. What about the low light and DR those large sensor camera gives you. Guess what it is the same for video. Thats why in the video world we talk about the Canon 5d starting the large sensor camera revolution 10 years ago. Because it was the first affordable large sensor camera that gave the possibility to everyone to mimic the 35mm film format used in Movies, thats why your Sony FD whatever crap is dead.

I started with a w t f with the first photo, he just had to make sure to shoot vertical to avoid that wall that was beyond the DR and completely over exposed. But some other photos where good.

AKH - the definition of professional is simply that the photographer gets paid to take the pictures, nothing more, nothing less, and I'm pretty sure that is the case here.
Sure there are top end pros like the Nikon Ambassadors, and clearly the Dpreview staff are not at that level, but that is also not the definition of professional. Joe Mcnally for instance is a living legend (in my opinion).