Nikon Z7 gallery updated with full-production samples

Has nothing to do with exposing correctly and has been discussed 100x on here. To properly expose a sunset for example, other areas are too dark and need to be brightened is why this is useful.

😂

.............................................

PhozoKozmos' activity is using a Canon camera

Those are not fake shadows; in the film world we call it “crushing the blacks.” It’s.a way of eliminating distracting elements, and of course hiding noise.

The big problem nowadays is not lens distortion. High Res High DR sensors are so good that they capture spacetime distortion. More mass distorts more. That's why manufacturers gave up on lenses without distortions: They get so big that they introduce gravitational distortion - which can't be easily corrected in PP.
It actually is way easier to construct smaller lenses with more optical distortion and correct that in PP.
Bigger and heavier lenses also attract more photons (at random places!) which causes more noise in image.

well.. for the Z7, there was a full pro music video being made, a few days ago, here on DPR :)

photos look alright to me, i'd love one but i'm not gonna buy one.....just don't need it

And when you bought into full frame and look over to the new Fuji X-T3 you might even get Bayer's remorse...

Meant to say"does NOT show obvious traces of thermal/self-noise" but I guess everyone got that. Yes, it was a FinF reference at the end. :-)

Your NEX-5 looks better than that at 11,000+ ISO? Wow. I suppose you can prove that with, you know, photographs?

I find it hard to believe a Nex 5 would be better than any recent FF camera let alone the Z cameras. But keep on drinking on whatever you are drinking it gives some members a chuckle or a reason to do neck exercises.

Guys, why are you feeding the troll?

Because... you are a troll?

I just love any kind of animals. I feed stray dogs, I feed stray cats. And even some stray mice once in a while. Why shouldn't I feed stray trolls?

entoman, I was asking LessMirrored19 actually. Sorry, did not mention name.

Subject, composition, light and color will trump resolution, high ISO and fast AF vast majority of the time, but when you need them - you do need them.

exactly, *you* don't need them, but others do, so these kind of snarky comments "you are not a good photographer if you want new gear packed with features" started to really make me sick.

Of course the photographer will take and make a picture. Do you think that any of those "winner images" would have lost if they were shot with the Z7 mk3 camera? No they would have been even better (regarding the potential of larger prints, etc). Why constantly commenting on top of the line new cameras if you have no interest in them?

multisystem - Agreed. Obviously a newer camera will be more capable and have better image quality, but one of the most important factors in getting good photographs is familiarisation with equipment. A camera that is familiar will be intuitive to use and makes it easier to produce great shots. That's why the best photos are usually those taken with older cameras.

@Fly 18 Oh I do, I am more of a painter than a photographer, this is my website:
www.justinjones.info

And yours?

Some seriously strange and unnecessary bickering here. Lighten up guys, we're only talking about cameras, not an impending world war!

@Fly 18 It is not a direct link, it's an internet address to a website you can type into your browser, and I'm sure you already have. You evidently have nothing to show.

entoman - I think the older cameras are also likely in more experienced hands. Not just experience with the gear but experience in photography.

You may wanna wait for the next firmwear the xt3 has lock up issues

My whole *house* is mirrorless. I'm that ugly.

peterwr, ladies and gentlemen!

Thank you, I'll be here all week! B-)

Love the "Brick" reference. Some of the sharpest, coolest images I ever took were with a C3.

well... as a non-nikon user, i agree with Aaron. The cameras, as they stay now, offer little over a D850. Some pluses and some minuses as well. I would say that from a professional's point of view the D850 wins by a big margin.

They offer a huge weight and size reduction over the D850 for one thing.

He wants the Hipster 1970 controls the Fuji has. They just look so cool. The obsolete cropped sensor is the icing on the to cool for school cake.

If the "X-T3 has been the only thing that has caught" your "eye so far this year" why do you spend your precious time coming to this topic?

Just to tell the "the Z series does nothing for" you and that you find the top model too expensive? It seems quite a funny justification… 😄

I agree with you, as a Nikon user: the price level of the Z7 is just way too high compared to the Z6, which has exactly the same hardware, except for the sensor resolution.
In Europe the Z7 is 60% more expensive than the Z6 and is as expensive as the D850: this price level is just plain wrong.

@Badi:
<< I would say that from a professional's point of view the D850 wins by a big margin. >>

Depends what kind of professional you are. Having actually used one, I'd have one like a shot (cash permitting), for one reason alone: it's *quiet*. Even out of silent mode, the mechanical shutter is easily as quiet as, if not quieter than, a film Leica. For some of the performance and documentary photography I do, that's worth the price of admission in itself. The D850's a lovely camera - I wanted one til I heard about the Zs - but when you hit the button it sounds like the crack of doom by comparison.

Not to mention the lightness, the EVF, the ergonomics, the lenses...

z6 is $2k. Few hundreds more then the xt3 with the the smaller aps-c sensor. Fuji can put as much noise reduction as they want, but it nothing compared to a modern ff sensor (both made by sony anyways). My friend xt2 in nightclub has so much NR it is kind of waxy/rubberly looking.

The Z7 definitely has something over the D850. One of the main reasons why I went canon way back when was Nikon's extremely bad live view interface. I don't do much video, but I do use LV shooting 30-40 percent of the time.

The Z bodies have that going for them in spades compared to the D850. On top of that you have the weight reduction and IBIS, and the future lenses look promising. Sure selling your D850 for it might be silly, but if you do a lot of travel, or weddings (that silent shutter comes in handy), then it is something to consider.

@webber15 "Looking at these, & compare to the Canon R, I'd say that the Canon images of the portraits look better, a little something for me thats not quite there.

Of course ibis could be the cause of that."

The Canon portraits were shot in perfect lighting along a much better locale. Even an iphone could've taken nice pics in that setting.
Nikon, OTOH, likes to be cheap and doesn't fly out the reviewers to nice locales like the Hawaiian Islands

I find 'Canikon' very sexist, too. ;-)

... also calling "Z7" a camera that Nikon insisted it is "Z 7"

I'm extremely taken aback that dpr would use the term "camera" to describe a smartphone.

..or something like that.

Petty comments know no limits on DPR

If you don't pixel-peep they all look the same.
But if you pixel-peep, they all look the same as well.

Be informed the D850 isn’t a mirrorless camera. But it and the Z7 do use the same sensor. The Sony has horrible color. The Nikon Z7 is way better more realistic.

>"The Sony has horrible color. The Nikon Z7 is way better more realistic."

Statements such as this (of which there are plenty on such boards) would never survive a blind test, as anybody trained enough in this industry will easily confirm you. This applies to Fuji, Leica, Nikon, Canon and what's not.
As a matter of fact, brand loyalty today is seldom based on factual, measurable features, but rather on sentimental, instinctive or (at best) practical motives (unless you're a paid endorser).
You, of course, will disagree.

It's not that one camera has better color than another. I think it's more that when you've worked with a camera brand for a while you can look at a photo and instantly know in your head how to correct any color problems.
For instance, I have used Nikons since the D200 so I know exactly how to get great skin tones even in horrible mixed light.
If you handed me a 5DIV and asked me to shoot an event, I would wet my pants and cry like a baby because I have no idea even where to start color correcting.

These are amateur pics that could have been taken with a smart phone or $200 Coolpix, and look it. I wish an outfit like DPReview actually had real photographers on its staff.

I know when I see Sony images I don’t like them as much as the Nikons. You can feel the opposite and that is ok in a free world isn’t it. I am not a Canon or Fuji guy either but I do feel they have the best color of all.

GrammarFairy - Yes all recent FF cameras produce great colour and differences between them are easily adjusted.

To say that colour is better on one than another would be misleading, because if you shoot on say a Nikon, you get used to ts colours and if you switch to anything else it will look slightly strange for a while.

Each brand does have slightly different colours - Sony, particularly on earlier models had a greenish cast. Nikon tends if anything towards a slightly yellowish look. Canon looks the most "natural" to me but that's mostly because I've used them for years and got used to the look.

Also some brands tend to slightly over-expose or slightly under-expose, and correcting this in post leads to changes in colour balance as sensors respond differently to variations in exposure of various colours.

DPR do me a favor and shoot images from at least five different camera brands, post them without any exif data or description and lets see if people can really tell which image came from which camera.

@Ebrahim Saadawi Looking at your profile pic I can understand why you love Canon skin tone, pink

Pooki - If you are shooting JPEGs you should be able to set up your Nikon so that all images are biased towards (or away from) any colour you choose. Likewise you can set your preferred levels of saturation brightness, contrast and sharpness via the camera menu, and these will then be applied automatically to every image you shoot.

Similarly if you shoot RAW you should be able to apply and save a similar set of adjustments that can be applied to an entire batch of your Nikon images to make them match Canon colour pretty closely.

It's quite tricky to get the colours right initially, but once done, you can automatically apply it to all your photographs. This is easy to accomplish with Lightroom, and should be possible with any editing software that allows batch processing or copy and paste formatting.

Hope that helps :)

R lenses? What are you talking about???

You can't afford a $500 lens, but you can afford a $3400 body?

Sure, but at the end of the day, you need to be able to afford all the pieces if you want to have the puzzle. Don't buy a sports car if you can't afford the insurance and premium fuel. You want a 46mp, FX sensors? Prepare to spend some money on glass. Otherwise stick to APS-C or low resolution sensors.

One day they are going to bamboozle us by uploading iPhone fotos as the A9II sample gallery

No smartphone can do the 18000 ISO image of the lady sitting on a couch, and have it be recognizable as a lady sitting on a couch.

It's a pretty impressive accomplishment in low light capability-1/500 sec in tavern lighting!

@Mr Bolton faster shutter speed means less blur photographing people falling off bar stools. :)

I thought it was only me that noticed...

Monet makes the world go round!