8K Camera SHOOTOUT! Nikon Z8 vs Sony A1 vs Canon R5 C! 

We did show the prices near the start. The Canon R5 C is also capable of 8K/60P Raw video. It's odd the Sony doesn't offer 8K/60P recording as the sensor is fast enough.

​@@thatjordandrake Thanks for the answer. Maybe the processor in Sony does not allow that, or they do not have big enough housing for heat dissipation. When I got to contact you I can ask something else :) I have a z6, when I want slow-mo, I have two options: 1-) Film 4k30 and slow down with DR Studio Optical flow speedramp. 2-) Film FHD60p or 120p and have native slowmo. I have a feeling that the first option gives me better results. Am I thinking dumb to compare these options, is there an obvious drawback for the first option?

@@AykutArgun Sony invented a new flagship camera philosophy. The overheating flagship, I mean nikon and Canon have always made sure their flagship camera to be bullet proof, I mean you are supposed to be able to take any eos1 or Nikon D3 and go shoot from death valley to the poles. They decided they would stick with a small camera that absolutely need a grip if you want to do any sport/bird/action photography because of the lens size, and compromise on the reliability just for it to be small!!!

@@danielvilliers612 What we see with Sony is they build consumer tech toys for the average Joe that is already impressed easily with spec sheets. Even the weather sealing quality in the A1 still can't match anything from Canon or Nikon.

Nailed it. At some point you need to disappoint that heat. @@danielvilliers612

The Z9 would be Simba. 😃

I'm still thinking the Z8 at 4000usd is a bargain. Is like the best camera on the market now, for a lot less money than others.

& now they own RED

* cherry on the cake ;)

Agree on that lol. I've just tried 4.1k nraw and found that is not stressful to edit on my core i7 macbook pro.

@@rogeryoung3587 Yes English is my second third language. LOL

@@NOAHAUYEUNGI did the reallife test yesterday night. I rendered a job I did during the weekend and played it on my 4k 70 inch screen, I could count every pores and hair, so it is sharp enough for me even if it 4.1k.

@@danielvilliers612 I think 4K will always be enough but shooting 8K gives a lot of flexibility to the 4K end-product for work where reshoots cost a lot more than computers...

Yes. It's not much of a downside at that. Trying to check focus from a flipped out little screen from several feet away is not going to work in any case so it's really ease of framing at most.

@@borisgalos6967 Yeah I use a Z9 and honestly it's pretty much my only complaint with the camera. Not that I'll be vlogging with the Z9 (unless I lift a lot of weights first) but it is a bit of a pain to not have it. I was really surprised they didn't put a flippy screen on the Z8 - it would have been a really solid improvement.

Yeah, I can’t recall any times I’ve seen people using 4-6k cameras to selfie record in 8k. Doesn’t mean people don’t need and do this! But, seems like an edge case.

Well, if you are shooting on a gimbal, it might be good to have a flip out screen, too. I use the flip-out screen on my Panasonic S5 when on my Weebill S gimbal.

You can use any external monitor on top of the camera by mounting the display on the hot shoe. Also any bigger smartphone display can be used for that task which is the cheapest solution.

nikon z 50mm 1.8 is almost 600$, so 3 times the canon equivalent.

@@jcg4350 And you get the optical performance of a Zeiss Otus lens. Even FUJI medium format GFX users are astounded by it's image quality wide open at f/1.8 on high resolution sensors. If you want a cheap Nikon lens you can use the Z 40 mm f/2.

@@jcg4350 well whats the surprise? its a better lens, its an S line lens , has better coatings etc

No focus breathing. Matches Otus line.@@jcg4350

Also, Nikon bodies are comparatively much cheaper with more functionality.@@jcg4350

…or broke 😃

Agreed. 8K is stunning…

but they're all expensive. why bother

Yeah especially when manufacturers often don't even list the real resolution... I feel like the camera industry has chosen a few weird genre specific metrics as the main metrics. Makes it sometimes difficult to get a good comparison to other fields and products, especially if you're new to the field.

wonder how freaking long Ill have to wait to get my hands on a z7iii....

The Zf is turning into the Z6ii I always wanted so if it's any indication the Z6iii should have at least what the Zf has or better. Im keeping my Z6ii for astro and I am holding out for a Z50ii for travel as my Z8 is a little too big.@@ThatNorma

I suspect overheating will be an issue with the Z6iii. But I am curious to see what it’s like, as I currently own the Z9, Z8 and Z6ii.

Overheating is more of an issue at 4K-120 and 8K. The Sony cameras are too small for heat dissipation so that's an issue. I think 4K 12bit might cause overheating in a warm environment but overall I would be surprised if we see 8K on the Z6iii. @@andrewmason8691

True right at 10:21. Ha ha.

@@sputnickers they were very forgiving of A1’s deficiencies. It doesn’t even have animal detect in video and is behind Z8 for video af.

​@@livejames9374 I've seen elsewhere that the Z8 has far superior af in low light. But the Sony A1 excels with dynamic range (very important for me). Cined gives Sony and Nikon similar numbers 11.9 to 11.6 stops of DR, but Mathieu Gasquet shows A1s perhaps 2 stop superiority in the highlights. Nikon is also 2 stops behind the Sony in Cined's latitude test. So I'm still scratching my head here. The Canon suffers and is a dead last wrt to dynamic range. Sad that this video doesn't address DR which is easily one of my most important factors.

@@sputnickers A1 certainly had the best stacked sensor for DR. I love the high flash sync speed too, so the ough unrelated to video.

That’s a really good point. Hopefully they’ll address this comment on the podcast. X-H2 is a beast!

There's also the s5 with all of those features plus fullframe and better ibis. Its just that this video is for maniacs who want 8k

​@zaymax_7 you know H2 is 8k?

@@zaymax_7 S5's IBIS is only better for walk motion suppression, for handheld tripod-like performance the X-H2 is better. Different priorities.

In all Codecs?

I went over and looked at Cined and it appears the Z9 has only 6 stops of latitude vs 8 for the A1. What am I missing. And in Mathieu Gasquet's review he found similar differences, where the A1 outperformed the Z8 by what looks like about 2 stops in the highlights. LMK.

@@sputnickers You are talking about the Dynamic range test at the top, and this is due to Nikon very conservative Nlog. This is the conclusion for the latitude test. "That gives a solid 8 stops of latitude performance, with some wiggle room towards 9 stops!"

@@danielvilliers612 Ah. Thank you for the citation and response. So we are talking a 3 stop difference between N-Raw and N-log!!! That is breathtaking. But yes one is 12 bit and the other is 10-bit. Still I wonder what is happening in the review by Mathieu Gasquet which shows the A1 clearly better in the highlights. Maybe that is a codec thing too? But wow the difference in his video is substantial. And I feel like s-log and n-log are similar.

Wow brilliant comment. Who would have guess putting a screen on top of the camera hot shoe would solve this? I guess Panasonic and Canon got this wrong all along!

@@vlcheish It's actually most flexible solution and the cheapest one if you can do it with a bigger smartphone rather than using a small display from the back of the camera facing forward which doesn't work at greater distance. Professionals are doing it the whole time with a camera rig for video.

Thanks for this. Considering the Z8 and will use it for some vlogging

After all that merry-go-around, do you actually notice any difference between that footage and a FHD footage when played on the phone or computer?

How many people are making films here for Netflix?

why record 8k? I still can't figure that out.. I shoot in FHD when it comes to higher frame rates (60/120) and 4k ( 24/30).. But no matter what I record in, I render it in FHD.. finna still tryna figure out playing 4k footage on my phone or computer, now 8k?

@@joshmcdzz6925 8k is just so you can stabilize, recompose and add motion to the footage. Ex record still on a tripod and add a pan motion or zoom in or out in post.

@@joshmcdzz6925 ​for watching on 8K TV

Z9 is the best solution. Everything in one "box". You won't have to us any cage, any external battery any dangling wire with Nikon Z9, plus no overheating with a rugged body.

Unfortunately, Panasonic recently stated that they are focusing on 6K and not developing 8K in the next few years. The Z8 is very nice, but huge next to the S5ii.

@tvid777 It is and the price is huge compared to the S5 ii also. I'm good with what I have for the next year or 3...lol

​@@tvid777 actually, 6K Open Gate is almost 8K, apart from, of course, the left/rightmost areas. (At least vertically it does deliver roughly the same as 8K.) On the Lumix S5 II, it has tremendous pixel-level detail levels and even the 200 Mbps H.265 video (the only one format available on the base S5 II) is the cleanest of all comparisons. (I've compared the compression artefacts to all.)

6K OG is IMHO a sweet spot: an affordable camera can be produced with these common (and, for manufacturers, surely cheap) 24 Mpixel sensors, while still delivering astonishingly good video. Not everybody can afford 3000 USD+ cameras.

Yes as an owner of a D850, it’s new succesor the Z8 is amazing for video.

1080p images are soft unless you're watching on a phone.

@@dsoprano13 And yet most TV channels are still broadcast in 720p. So clearly most people don’t care that much.

@@christill Honestly, I don't watch TV unless it's a big sport event like the Superbowl. Everything I watch is streamed and most streaming content made in the last 5 years is in 4k. I only pay for TV as a necessary evil to get Internet.

@@dsoprano13 Yeah I generally don’t watch much TV either. (I’m with Virgin Media in the UK for TV and internet). For sports (I like American sports and other similar things) it’s just convenient to have a series link or whatever. For news shows and soap operas we watch, it’s just more convenient than streaming to have everything recorded in one place. I know I sound a lot older than I am saying that, but I honestly think having separate streaming services is a huge step backwards in terms of convenience and usability. Having one TV guide so you know what’s on rather than hunting around. It’s just better. And it’s more reliable. It continues to work when your internet is occasionally down. I do use streaming. I watch more RU-vid than TV. And I watch certain sports on Discovery+. Especially winter sports. But cable is still great and very much underrated in my opinion. Of course it depends on the person. For those who only watch TV series and movies and no live sports, news or current affairs documentaries, then yeah. You can do 100% streaming. But for me, it doesn’t work anywhere near as well.

I'm also an R5 C user and once you understand when to use the different AF features they work perfectly. I know this is just a review of the 8k, but the wonder of the R5 C is that its 4K from the 8K is amazing, it has a cinecamera OS from its higher end models, and its photography quality is also outstanding. Not to mention that Canon lenses are beautiful and the RF are smaller and more light weight than the EF. Oh, and the R5 C video is certified for Netflix and the others aren't.

The r5C AF is not as smart s others but it's the smoother and more cinematic AF available. You just have to learn to use it. R5 AF is way smarter tho.

This was an 8K shootout… isn’t the X-H2 only 6.2K?

@@utooboobnoobX-H2 does 8K 4:2:2 up to 30p

@@utooboobnoobX-H2S is 6.2k max with Open Gate

Buy a full frame already, never look back.

@@lewcehjitl3282 I've both full frame and APSC , X-H2 is as good as any full frame top camera in the market , it's got everything, just lags behind Canon and Sony in autofocus , that's the only draw back ( better than Nikon and Lumix autofocus though )

I 100% agree. It’s why I don’t bother shooting 8k. But if there was 6k…

exposure time is tied to frame rate so pick the 1 with the highest. you'll end up with a bunch of blurry photos at 24 fps. i think some Panasonics have the ability to take stills from video while recording but the workflow isn't really feasible if you just want to hit the record and hope for the best. you've got 30fps @ 50mp with compressed raw on the A1, 20fps raw @ 45mp with z8/z9, and 30fps @ 24mp raw with the r3 as the best options for highest frame rates at the highest detail

@@seanbirtwistle649 "exposure time is tied to frame rate so pick the 1 with the highest" - noone forces anyone to use a 180-degree shutter angle. For example, on my S5 II, in 6K Open Gate mode at 30p, to be able to safely (w/o blur) extract still frames, I generally shoot with at least 1/200s when there's movement in the picture. Sport events 1/500s and up. Excellent-quality still frames can be grabbed from these videos - not THAT much worse than still images taken with the same camera.

@@mostlyfinnishlifeeventsand5112 if it works for your workflow then I can't argue you're doing it wrong, but video and stills are still seperate disciplines looking for different outcomes. You might have the time to spend 12hrs going through an hour of footage for a shot that works, but most will want peak action in as many sequences as possible at the best quality they can get. I can't see an efficient way to get both video and stills at the same time with the 1 camera

It would at least won the price tag competition... and better Ibis than Canon ;-)

Absolutely. I think it also would've done well with its screen and excellent viewfinder.@@JeanManuelVignau

The Sony A1 has a 8k 4:2:0 h.265 mode and that IS SUPPORTED by Nvidia. That's another option!

@@siyangqiu1 Yeah 4:2:0 is fine, if the cameras can output it 😄 Such a bizarre thing to not support 4:2:2 on at least the highest end cards. Not sure if their workstation cards do though 🤔

I believe the new Intel ARC GPUs support 4:2:2 footage, so thats also an option on PC. Plus, their drivers have apparently improved massively since launch.

@@definedphotography Yeah I'd really like to try one out. Could be a good option on Linux too, as their driver support there can't possibly be worse than Nvidia 😅 Not sure what the state of the decoders are on current AMD cards actually, which also makes more sense on Linux as well. It's great to have a third player in the GPU space - hopefully it'll spur Nvidia and AMD to improve as well.

@@robert_may AMD, like Nvidia, does not support 4:2:2 for some reason. Intel CPU starting from 11th gen with iGPU actually support 4:2:0, 4:2:2, and 4:4:4. You probably have to go into BIOS to make sure the iGPU isn't being disabled when you have a dGPU, but you don't have to buy an ARC GPU!

The Cinema EOS operating system is one of the best parts of the 5C, there are absolutely no problems with it, it’s proper video tools for doing video, I really can’t understand why anyone would see that as an issue.

Its 8K is of considerably lower quality (effective, pixel-level resolution & compression artefacts) than that of these cameras. I personally wouldn't bother.

@@mostlyfinnishlifeeventsand5112 is this coming from actual practical experience using the camera or a “full frame is better” auto-reply? Not here to pick a fight, just tired of auto replies :)

@@fadiheterjag It's not an APS-C vs. FF debate. Clearly, as the even-smaller GH7 certainly shows it, this is not because the Fuji's sensor size. For some reason, the X-H2's 8K mode does NOT deliver better overall detail than the 6K mode. And the footage is the least clean; that is, it has considerably more compression artefacts at 600 Mbps than even the lowly S5 II at 200 Mbps. At least based on the DPR video test results - I haven't shot with the X-H2 myself. I've even started a thread in the DPR forums, comparing these results.

@@mostlyfinnishlifeeventsand5112 that type of analysis in itself would have been a valuable addition to this video, I think

Almost any big screen flat TV offers a RU-vid app and they have 4K since many years.

@@jorgepinogarciadelasbayonas You're assuming everyone has a 4K TV. I don't! Only 44% of TV-owning households here in the USA have a 4K TV. The real advantage of filming in 8K is for reframing while delivering in 4K, just as it was for 4K delivering a 1080p final product. There's only so much detail the human eye can resolve.

@@danieldougan269 Your logic is fundamentally faulty. You're technically right but misusing that statistic. That only 44% of households have 4K is not because 4K only has 44% of the market popularity, but because many just keep their old TV for a long time. Among currently sold TVs the popularity for 4K is more likely 98% with the last 2% being 8K. THOSE are the statistics you should look at when comparing new tech to each other. Why should the camera brands not aim for current market standard? "My main TV is a 1080p set from 2010, and it still looks more than fine." This is one of those 'you think it's good until you try something better' things. Take a look at good 4K video on a 4K display, if you can't see the difference then something is wrong. Once you get used to it you'll never go back to 1080p. Most people think that bad cheap earphones are just fine, but that's because they don't know how higher quality ones sound, thus it's kinda irrelevant to use as an argument. 4K is the de-facto sweet spot because it's right at the limit where our eyes can no longer perceive the individual pixels when viewing from from a distance where the TV or monitor covers a comfortable field of view (in my case 48" from 2m away). So 4K is not just a standard because it's "the next thing" but because it actually is about as detailed as our eyes can perceive relatively. In the end, your argument is just completely irrelevant. The idea that brands should only aim to satisfy the lowest common demands has never made any sense in any industry ever.

@@fotografalexandernikolis Of course everything you say is true. I have two 4K cameras, and obviously, all the stores are selling 4K and 8K TVs except in the smallest sizes. I also have two 4K monitors and have seen my share of 4K videos on 4K displays. I've shot plenty of it myself. Using a 4K monitor up close for multitasking like I do is a wildly different use case from sitting 10 feet away from a 4K display. 8K is another matter entirely. The size of screen you need in order to see any difference between 8K and 4K is enormous. Can I see the difference between 4K and 1080p video? Yes. Is it huge? No. When it comes to the difference between 4K and 1080p as a final product, you still need a pretty good-sized TV to see a difference. For me, the best reason to upgrade to 4K over 1080p is HDR content. One of these days, my 40" Sony 1080p TV will kick the bucket, or I'll find an amazing deal on an OLED set, and that's when I'll upgrade. It's the color, not the additional resolution, that will compel me. It always makes me laugh when stores like Best Buy promote 4K TVs for watching sports when there are almost no 4K sports broadcasts. It's still in 1080i in almost every case. Digital Trends did an excellent video on why live broadcasts including sports broadcasts have been slow to adopt 4K or even 1080p. As for filming in 8K, you can do a lot of the reframing and still deliver in 4K if you only shoot in 6K open gate. It's probably quite a bit easier on your computer as well, although I would not push my gaming laptop (which is my only normal computer) past 4K for editing. 8K is just incredible overkill. There are limits to what the human eye can perceive. Remember, there is a cost to all of these extra pixels. You need more storage, more computing power, new cameras, and new screens. The benefits are marginal at best.

I just recently started exploring video on the A1, captured a lizard fight in 4k 120p and was instantly hooked.

Yup, APS-C... too bad this roundup is FF only. And accordingly VERY expensive, unlike the Fuji.

@@mostlyfinnishlifeeventsand5112 would’ve loved to see how the Fuji compares to cameras that are double the price. Hopefully they will do something like this would the Fuji in the future.

It's naft to exclude a camera based on sensor size. WRT to video super35 has more applicable depth of field anyway, and Flog2 offers great dynamic range.

@@Paul_Rohde totally agree.

It's such a stupid comparison, because he uses a vertical grip on the A1. Without it I doubt it's battery life would be competitive. The A1 with the grip would be fairer to compare to a Z9.

Probably just because they wanted the top 3.

Probably they are all Full frame

Wait until a Fuji GFX have a fast sensor and 8k video, with the processing power of a XH2S.

@@amermeleitor Stacking a medium format sensor would be cool. I just wish fujifilm would hire a software department to utilise the stacked sensor for reasonable AF. They've been left behind on that since the X-T3.

You have a much more professional approach than this video for the average consumer. :)

They had to figure out a way for Sony to win. Also didn’t mention how a1 also doesn’t have a fully articulating screen but mentioned it 3x for z8. Similar to their Z8 vs a7r5 and a74 vs r6ii videos. I’m starting to become suspicious.

@@livejames9374yeah, Nikon really should have cleaned up. The articulating screen is a non-issue, and Nikon’s IBIS is class-leading… factor in the price and it would have been a clear leader. Not to mention the S lenses, the mount that can adapt literally any lens from any brand, and the dual USB-C for power + accessory.

Yeah, this kind of reviews aren't really made for professional clients. If you hear all tthat stuff about selfies that attracts only the average consumer.

​@@jorgepinogarciadelasbayonasc'est l'inverse, tous les grands vidéastes se foutent du mode selfie

I agree. The budget is the first place we typically start at.

You can, the internals are still as weather sealed as the R5.

no, the npfz100 battery is just really good

@@summonedfist It's the only camera here with the grip. It should be in 2nd place.

The grip was not used for the battery test, single a single Z battery.

@@silvere36 the man literally said he borrowed the setup for a video prop and didn’t have a way to remove the cage. You can google CIPA ratings (which are usually underestimated counts anyway)

Thx for sharing, you named quiet a view points I want to mention too.

I cannot believe they left out IBIS either, as that would have been a major win for the Z8. I was surprised they harped on the screen so hard but didn’t mention how good the stabilization is - something that matters way more than vlogging in 8k. Also could have mentioned dual USB-C on the Nikon for power AND accessory.

I’d imagine it’s because they haven’t done a full review of it. Hopefully, once they do a full review they give us more insight as to how it stacks up against the full frame options.

I'd also be REALLY interested in that as the Fuji is far more affordable than any of these pro cameras...

While you clearly don't need a $4,000 laptop if you are in Apple's ecosystem(Mac Studio is half the price) building a PC for this purpose isn’t as cheap as you think and you cannot do it under $1,000 to match this. This is discussed all the time in the Davinci forums. Also not to mention misc bugs that pop up depending on the video card. AMD has tons of issues over the last few years.

This comment raises a lot of questions, like distance from the screen and scaling algorithms, but human vision caps out at around 5k in a 16:9 aspect ratio in the best situations, and in many others drifts down to round 2k depending on the viewing distance. 4k tends to be the optimal resolution for the majority of people at almost all viewing distances. The differences you were likely seeing are far more likely due to the scaling algorithms altering things in a way they created the equivalent of a sharpening effect on the video more than real detail, and would likely be achieved in editing if one either used simple up-scaling/super-scaling algorithm while retaining a 4k timeline or potentially with a sharpen effect applied to the video. Anyhow, I'm not saying this is bad or good, but just pointing out that these perceived differences aren't necessarily because the source content started as 8k.

@@billyoung9538 while that may be true, if you watch the same video in RU-vid 4K setting, then 8K setting, on a large 4K display (in my case an LG 48" 4K OLED from about 3ft away and also a 65" 4K OLED from a further distance), there is a substantial quality/detail difference that appears to be more than just sharpening. It appears that RU-vid is just compressing the 4K setting more, but it's a significant difference. So my question is, would the quality be the same by simply upscaling a 4K video to 8K during export? Would RU-vid then recognize it as 8K noticeably increasing quality and detail for the viewer? Or would native 8K still have better quality than 4K upscaled once RU-vid compresses both videos? (both viewed on 4K displays in 8K RU-vid setting)

@@bladerealm124 A lot of RU-vidrs would simply render their old 1080p footage at 4k because it retained a higher quality when viewed at 1080p due to the bit rate differences. So it wouldn't surprise me if the same didn't hold true for an 8k upload of scaled up 4k content, but it is a good question someone should test.

Not really. Thare are many complaints about abysmal battery life. Read the B&H reviews.

In video mode the r5 c is the only true camera of the bunch. Nobody here understand the power of that cinema Os. And most cameras are rigged so..

@@jorgepinogarciadelasbayonas this is a cinema camera and bought her. fantastic image and functions, I had already owned the A1 and the Z9 but sold them again. The battery life is absolutely OK compared with other Cinema cameras, I have also the BMPCC 6K Pro. The best thing is always to make own reviews and not read them ;)

What are the faults? I've seen elsewhere that the Z8 has far superior AF in low light. But the Sony A1 excels with dynamic range (very important for me). Cined gives Sony and Nikon similar numbers 11.9 to 11.6 stops of DR, but Mathieu Gasquet shows A1s perhaps 2 stop superiority in the highlights. Nikon is also 2 stops behind the Sony in Cined's latitude test. So I'm still scratching my head here. The Canon suffers and is a dead last wrt to dynamic range. Sad that this video doesn't address DR which is easily one of my most important factors.