NOTE: KEH Coupon is now TNC24 for buying or TNC24-SELL for selling. The a7S III does shoot HD/240 slow-mo, so that ties it with the Nikon in that category (Sony really hid that option). The Panasonic Lumix S5 II and Sony a7 IV were excluded from the test because they heavily crop 4k/60 footage. The 1.5X crop makes them an APS-C camera in that mode, reducing low-light performance and dynamic range by more than a full stop. They also have worse rolling shutter. Thus, they would have performed poorly anyway.
I actually came down to the comments to complain about the omission of the Lumix S5 II, but having read your explanation, yeah, that now makes sense why it was left out.
Maybe I missed something but seems like you don't tested the raw video in the Z6III. That would helped A LOT with the noise and DR. I think Josh Satin proved that point
So rulled out the s5iix for rolling shutter and 4k60p crop but completely ignored the plethora of awesome thing it brings to the table like open gate which not 1 of the cameras included have and its a game changer.
There are a number of things I notice in this video which tells me there is a lack on understanding of the Z6 III, particularly on the video side. I own a Z8 and the FX30, I also had the A7R V, I have used them extensively and made videos about my findings of them, the good and things I would like done differently, as well as how they differ in use. The video auto focus on the Z6 III seemed to be using AF-C (Auto Focus-Continuous) mode and not AFF (Auto Focus Full-time) which is for video use, in Sony cameras it is Continuous AF for video. The Z6 III has better low light detection performance than both R6 II and A7S III, it seems odd that it would be pulsing in AFF with Human subject detection activated, in addition the Z 24-70 f2.8 lens noise is low and not detectable with the on camera (used with Z6/Z6 II) mic. The noise in the video seems to have been enhanced. For the HLG video, it seems as though there wasn't a correct application of noise reduction. On the NLog/ProRes RAW footage, it seems like ISO 800 was used, the Z6 III has the ability to record at Lo2.0 (ISO 200) in manual mode, which would be a better setting to use in this bright outdoor environment. Nikon recommends Davinci Resolve as their application to properly edit their NRAW files, that is the product I use and I believe Resolve would do a better job managing the noise from the NRAW files, if used correctly. Most aren't aware that Sony and Canon has noise reduction applied to to their video image (which is not user controllable), before any other noise reduction feature in the camera's menu. There are other tests on YT which show the Z6 III retains better image color/quality when pushed, prior to noise reduction being applied in post. The take away here is that the Z6 III was not being used to the best of it's capabilities, hence the poor video showing here. You can watch Gerald Undone's video on the video DR performance of the Z6 III, using the IMATEST analysis, Cine D has not done their test on the Z6 III yet. The Z6 III has been used in video production, producing better results than shown here.
@alphaandomega2709 what world are you living in? How long has Sony been making mirrorless cameras? Canon was making the M series for years before the RF mount came about. Nikon has caught both of them in a short time and has passed them in certain areas.
After watching this video I feel there is a lot he isn’t telling us about what his settings with the Z 6III was because it seems he simply was just setting it up to fail. I have used the Z 6III at extreme lowlights situations at a paid client event and the camera AF performed exceptionally well with no hunting or focus breathing issues. He never mentioned what ISO he filmed in any of those scenes or what his AF settings was (was it AFC or AFF or even human or auto or 3D or Wide?)
@@JeromeMorada And the problem is he never really mentioned what is ISO or even AF settings. Was he on AFC or AFF? His videos are becoming too agenda driven and it’s beginning to tell.
@@AsuquoTravelsProductions If you guys feel that reviewers are biased, feel free to make your own videos and show them up, simple. Personally, I don’t really consider input from reviewers, doesn’t matter the brand, as they are mostly always biased one direction or the other, depending what they get in pocket. Not saying this is the case here though, you can form your own opinions. My choice of body and lenses generally comes down to my wants vs needs vs cash-splash. There are many great camera eco-systems out there at this point in time, base your selection on what works best for your use-case.
@@bsc001 Not everyone needs to make a video but every needs to call out misinformation when they see one. He has been known to be very biased towards Nikon for reasons best known to him. There are many other videos from real video/photo professionals who are using the camera and showing real world experiences and examples at their various client jobs and not people sitting in their homes/studios trying to find faults or issues that don't exist in a camera.
This guy has been misleading the audience from the start, deliberately hiding all the settings and parameters. Pay attention to the details in the background at the 9:00 mark-on the Z6 III, you can clearly see the background, while on the A7S III and R6 II, the background is blurred. It's obvious they set the Z6 III to a small aperture. Then at 10:30, the R6 II is missing from the test. What’s the secret about the R6 II that they can't reveal?
I’m skeptical of your testing methodology. For example in the dynamic range test…….. They aren’t even exposed the same. The Nikon was noticeably darker starting off. Look at the candle flame, look at how you’re visible in the other two. Many other examples in this video were just odd like the sharpness comparison of 6k 60 to 4k 60. You know the 6k 60 footage is raw so of course it’ll have more noise, there’s no noise reduction/sharpening. The low light autofocus sequence probably can’t be replicated by anyone…. I tried and have darker skin. I could go on for quite a bit. At this point, I don’t know if it’s honest rookie mistakes/lack of knowledge or if you’re being disingenuous to your audience on purpose because you have an agenda.
😂😂😂😂 Man he’s not fooling us all. I made this comment about his rolling shutter test. “4k 60 rolling shutter on canon is 1/67 (slight crop). Nikon is 1/107, Sony is 1/114 (no crops for either). So I don’t know how you screwed that up.” The crazy AF test had the Nikon lens sounding like an old adapted DSLR lens. Never heard sounds like that from the 24-70S lens.
The settings are the same in the low light test; the cameras expose different because ISO is fake. Noise reduction is applied in Davinci for N-raw and final cut for Prores. The low light autofocus problem happened repeatedly. I verified the settings with Nikon. I used the 24-70 f2.8S. that is how the camera performed.
@@TonyAndChelsea 6k 60 is not ProRes. And no, noise reduction isn’t automatically applied to nraw. And I don’t believe you lol my Z6iii focuses in darkness.
@@livejames9374 I mentioned that in a comment above a few minutes ago about the AF among other things. I thought it was just a mode choice because that jumpy in and out focus should be easy to correct.
Yeah seems like whoever did the exposure and post processing for the video dynamic range test needs to go back and learn very basic camera and color workflow stuff. This isn't uncommon for people who are primarily photographers since video workflows are completely different and have tons of annoying pitfalls even experienced editors often screw up unfortunately.
don't you think you should of mentioned that the Nikon z6iii RAW n-log has 0 noise reduction while both the Sony and the Canon have noise reduction baked into the file? kind of an important point. the raw DR of the nikon S/N of 2 is 9.89 stops. but once you compensate with similar Noise reduction it jumps up to 12.5 stops. the sony has 13 true, but it's such a marginal difference. and it's better than the 11.2 the canon has. I mean it's common sense that RAW has no noise reduction .. you can't blame nikon for this one or the rep
High ISO NR is set to Norm; it definitely has noise reduction on camera. Raw files were processed according to Nikon's instructions, which includes noise reduction. Also I show on screen when I add extra NR in post.
@@TonyAndChelseathat’s not how it works Tony. If you add a tiny amount (the image didn’t even change) to each camera the other two cameras still have more noise reduction. Also you don’t understand the high iso NR setting.
In fact, in some respects, Canons are better than any Sony or Nikon cameras, when you spend time with them in the wilderness: the R5's and R6's can be used as space heaters, you can fry eggs on them, stuff them into your sleeping bags to keep you warm at night. Check it out, they were designed to be very efficient heating devices!
@@jonesphotography5257Yes I love how people let others think for them and send their brains to unpaid vacation. The Z6III buyer ISN’T considering a 4k usd A7S3. Obviously it’s a Canon vs Nikon.
if looking for lightweight with best lcd panel and evf along with the best possible image quality and useful crop in medium and small size, get A7R5. More importantly, sony e mount has the largest lens collection with third party affordable lenses to choose from... But if you are looking for best overall camera for everything with the best value, get z8. 5RII may be the newest but not much difference enough than z8 at much higher price esp with more expensive lenses and no third party lenses.
Rv doesn’t compare to those cameras weak video performance it’s not really a hybrid like those other 2 cameras it’s more of a high end slow action camera
@@TonyAndChelseait would make more sense to compare the R5 mark ii with the Sony A1, A7RV, Nikon Z8 and Z9. The canon R5 mark ii technically competes with all of those cameras so it should be a 4 vs 1 comparison otherwise it’s going to beat the Z8 and A7RV (except in megapixels for the A7RV).
I am on the fence about getting the Z6iii. I want a cheaper alternative to my Z9 that I can set up as a secondary to shoot wildlife (stills) especially after the new Z9 update unlocked the ability for it to shoot automatically as soon as it detects the motion of a particular subject within the frame. Once I have my Z9 set up just as I want for shooting video, I can solely focus on the Z6 III for stills thereby TECHNICALLY being twice as productive in the same amount of time 😅. I often have to shoot during blue hour thanks to which I am skeptical about purchasing the Z6 III given how horrendously it is shown to perform in low light even against middling competition such as the Canon R6 ii. Any help is appreciated.
It is not surprising that the Sony a7S III outperforms the Nikon Z6 III vs Canon R6 II Review cameras in terms of dynamic range. The Sony a7S III is designed for video shooting.
The R6 II definitely held its own for dynamic range and did pretty good in low-light! I think I'd rather have the 24 megapixel sensor with downsampled video... Canon just needs to smooth out the AF pulls.
@@TonyAndChelsea In video shooting, 24 MP is not at all necessary, 12 MP is more than enough. And the dynamic range of the Canon R6 II is hardly better than that of the Sony a7S III. After all, the pixel density of the Canon R6 II is higher than that of the Sony a7S III. You just want to kill two birds with one stone by choosing the Canon R6 II to shoot photos and videos.
@@ВалентинАракчеев-б7д I shot as a pro for over a decade with the 1DIII which is 10 MP. It was fine. However, I think 24 MP is the sweet spot right now and I would not sacrifice and go to 12 MP for minimal video improvements (and also pay a LOT more money for the A7SIII).
@@TonyAndChelseaTony canon has done that with the RF-Z and video centric lenses. If you purchase the 24-105 f/2.8 you’ll notice a lot better performance in your camera reviews. You’d also notice the difference if you had the new 35mm f/1.4 canon lens. It’s important to let us know which lenses you used because some of canons lenses do have focus breathing issues and if that was a determining factor and you’re using the wrong lens, it could skew your results and someone who’s looking at purchasing the R6 mark ii vs the other cameras could be making the wrong decision based on your review! I understand this was a marketing campaign for KEH (now my comments probably going to be deleted and other people won’t be able to read this b/c that’s what happens when I’m honest about what I see is happening in these RU-vid videos), but if you’re non-bias, and looking to help people understand what’s the right decision, you should really allow them to understand the full scope of your work and let them know there are options in lenses out there that eliminate this issue. The other thing is most videographers shoot manual lenses and auto focus wouldn’t be a problem. Just sayin!
I honestly don’t get the importance of the comparison of ridiculously underexposed/overexposed images. It seems kind of cool, but frankly, they all look terrible. I understand that Sony has built-in noise correction. Is it as good as AI post-processing software? The inclusion of a more expensive camera seems like part of a stealth marketing push for KEF, which undercuts the sincerity that I value from this channel. At some point there will be hardware with code that lets you photograph the sun and the interior of a cave while exposing everything perfectly. That will have the glorious perfection of HDI images, which always look a bit phony but also cool. Until then. Maybe shoot the bride coming down the aisle at an aperture where the sharpest focus doesn’t flit between her pupil and eyelash when the flower girl throws her doll head in front of the lens. But, don’t get me wrong. I like the way this channel challenges me to think about issues I don’t have.
The outdoor dynamic range test we did is realistic... we often film outdoors, and we don't want our faces in the sun because it would make us squint, so we put our faces in the shade. People often film inside homes with windows in the background (for example, for real estate) or inside cars.
I'm just Going through comments. Not sure if this review is reliable or trustworthy. Or just mistake or deliberate attempt to make someone look better. Or comment section is biased towards either of the brand.
I think it's unsurprising the A7S III still comes out on top because it's also the only camera that isn't making the "hybrid" stills/video compromise; the Nikon and Canon bodies have the resolution to pull double duty, and it comes at a price. Ultimately, I think I'd take the Nikon despite it's notably lower dynamic range because it fits my needs better as a hybrid shooter (plus all the Z and F mount glass I have...).
I thought a lot about this prior to choosing the a7S III, but it's definitely a hybrid camera. Many wedding, portrait, and commercial photographers use it for stills. But yeah, if you have Z glass already, the Z6 III is the best video camera in the Nikon lineup (assuming you need the flippy screen).
Love my Z6III…no DR issues at all. There will be firmware updates, it’s been out a month. I do agree on the video recording…that’s irritating and I hope a future firmware update changes that! 📚😎
Unbiased review you call it comparing a camera that is 1k more expensive to the other two. Sony still have a camera within the price range but you omitted that. A7iii is closer in price to the Z8 and R5 and should be compared with those .
The Panasonic Lumix S5 II and Sony a7 IV were excluded from the test because they heavily crop 4k/60 footage. The 1.5X crop makes them an APS-C camera in that mode, reducing low-light performance and dynamic range by more than a full stop. They also have worse rolling shutter. Thus, they would have performed poorly anyway. The Sony a7S III is 3.5 years old now and readily available used for cheaper than the Nikon Z6 III is available. It's a totally valid option to buy a used, higher-end body, and in this case it makes sense.
Man, you’re really upset about this. Why would you compare the cost of a camera over their capabilities? That literally doesn’t make sense. And if the Sony A7S III costs as much as the R5 and Z8, it really wouldn’t do well at all against those 2 cameras video capabilities and quality. The A7RV doesn’t even come close (because its crops in certain modes) the A1 is the only one in Sonys lineup that comes close to the Z8 and R5! In some ways it beats both cameras and in other ways it’s far behind which is surprising for a flagship. It is what it is. No emotions
@@TigaWould I like the test as it was done, but realistically, this is only one possible set of cameras that could be tested like this, and with many slight variations in parameters. I would say that such variability makes for "job security". 🙂
@@vidthreenorth4007I think they should do a shoot out at the end of the year in a longer video (hopefully Tony reads this). Sony A1, a9 iii, A7RV, A7IV (or if the V is out) vs. canon R1, R3, R5 (both mark I and mark ii), R6 mark ii vs Nikon Z9, Z8, Z6 Mark III and concluded the overall best value of a camera out of all the cameras based on the following criteria: 1. Sports/action 2. Wildlife/birds 3. Portraits 4. Stills/product photography 5. Ease of use (but this time Tony leave out the apps. No one uses those things and that clearly gave Sony a leg up to win when it shouldn’t have). What most people are going to find is Sony has too many niche cameras and only the A1 is a well rounded camera with the A7IV coming in second. Nikon still has some work to do on their lower lineup and Canon despite getting all the criticism for the R1 still has the most well rounded lineup for cameras that can do the most. I might sound bias here, but overall, I think there’s so much that these other 2 companies need to learn that canon is doing right. Because people think Canon doesn’t listen to their base, and that’s false. They listen to only the people purchasing the cameras.
I know this video took a lot of time to make. Good job overall. Just want to point out a couple things. A lot of these comparisons were with video settings where some of the cameras had noise reduction built in and another did not. You also compared read out speed with one camera having a crop and others not. 4k 60 rolling shutter on canon is 1/67 (slight crop). Nikon is 1/107, Sony is 1/114 (no crops for either). So I don’t know how you screwed that up. Also Sony has touch features, and 1080/240
The Canon R6 II is really the winner here because it doesn't sacrifice still photos the way the A7SIII does... and the A7SIII is much more expensive. Plus I'm impressed the Canon has the best rolling shutter compared to a partially stacked cam and a cam with crippled resolution like the A7SIII. EDIT: Thanks for taking the time to make this.
If you want to have photo capabilities at the same time, Sony offers a7m4. a7r, a7m, a7s, Sony has a good division of labor and there are many choices.
Yes the A7 IV would be the logical competitor, the SIII isn't really comparable as it is a video camera in disguise (although we could argue that the FX3 and FX30 also look like photo or hybrid cameras)
@@mr.blurred606 yes but then take a cinema camera like a Red or am Arri and then it is game over. The A7SIII is so compromised as a photo camera that it isn't a direct competitor... And never is an Arri. But yes Z6III and R6II are as close as you can find in terms of competition.
The Sony's "crippled resolution" is what makes it a low-light beast. For ANY sensor size, lower resolution means larger, more sensitive photoreceptors. The DJI Osmo Pocket 3 has only 9MP, which is enough for 4K, but about half of what other 1" sensor cameras have. It's low-light video competes with even full-frame cameras. And if you don't need to crop, 12MP is enough for pretty much any online application. You only need high res for humungeous prints, if you get your composition right in camera.
Nikon has a 24.5 megapixel senzor, Canon's is 24.2 while Sony's senzor is 12 megapixel. This is why Sony smokes the competition. The a7s was made specially for video. It actually uses the whole senzor. That's why you can film at 80.000 iso without a problem and have better dynamic range than the others. You don't crop on a a7s so your croping comparison is useless.
Did you really test a 4K Dollar , 12MPx, slow, video-only camera against two real hybrid cameras? ...and what crazy rolling-shutter test was that? Show the bent lines! ...more lines at flickering means faster! :D
The camera is the same price because you can buy it used. Fewer lines is faster because it's recording the number of times the light flashes while the sensor reads out.
@@TonyAndChelsea here in canada the a7siii sells for 4000-4300cad second hand…i bought my z8 for 3800cad used, even if in general, people sell it for 4200-4600cad…I think that they are near in terms of price and in the fact that These two cameras are the two best video mirrorless cameras of the two brands
@@TonyAndChelsea first the Sony is a 12Mpx lowlight Video camera ..."because you can buy it used :D :D :D" ...you will get the Z6III at christmas for 2000$ ...used ;-)
@@TonyAndChelsea Please show us some bending lines, a vent or something in the same 6K 60 (no crop!) mode and try the 4K 120 mode on the Z6III as well! ;-)
Wow, the fact that since the launch you haven't made any positive video regarding Z6iii yet but made 2 videos showing its weakness with the most possible biasedness you could have given. Its clear that you hate Nikon for whatever unknown reason but don't know why other youtubers don't face the same problem as you and Jared do...
Literally everyone has reproduced the dynamic range problems. We went out of our way to highlight the strengths, like 6k and wildlife, and to work with Nikon to improve areas where it was weak. And a reminder that Nikon won both our camera and lens of the year awards and my main camera is the Nikon Z9. Our reviews are positive or negative based on how a camera performs, not our feelings.
I think for it to be a fair comparison the cameras should be on the same price range. Canon r6mk2 and Sony a7s3 are totally on different price ranges. Sony a7IV, canon r6mk2, and Nikon z6iii sounds like a more balanced comparison
a7s, a7m, and a7r are products of the same level, although their prices are different. The Z6iii is mainly for video functions, so it is reasonable to compare it with the a7s3. Tony did not use a real movie camera FX3 to compare. If price is the only factor that determines comparison, rather than the market positioning of the product, Leica will not be able to compare with any 135 camera, because even though Leica's products in the same class are weaker than other brands, prica is the most expensive.
@@瀧君-v3hthe a7siii (or fx3 as it is the same camer with different body) should be compared with the z8 in terms of video cameras… Z6iii is on the same category as the r6mkii and a7iv as 2000-2500usd hybrid camera
Thank you for making this comparison! I love the dynamic range of the A7S III. It’s a joy to use. Interesting to see that it still does the best in that area.
I was actually trying to decide between all three of these cameras and ended up going with... Lumix S5 IIX :) Insane deal on the body, the 20-60, and the 50mm f/1.8 for only $2,200 new. I would have gotten a used a7S III, but the problem for me is the lack of 6K, and hence the noticably lower resolution when punching in. Also, and I might be wrong about this, but it looks like adapted Canon EF glass works better on the S5 IIX than it does on the a7S III. Sure, the Panasonic body has drawbacks (many of them, honestly), and the lens system still isn't as developed as that of the other three models, but for MY needs, it is probably the best I can do.
Thank you for testing out the wildlife tracking + video on the Z6III. I'm more looking to pick up a Z8, but knowing the Z6III surpassed the Canon R6II in this area is really useful information. Also, thank you, THANK YOU for saying, "you really do need to count on cropping in post when it comes to wildlife" and, "when filming wildlife, you need all the reach you can get". There are SO MANY folks out there shouting, "just get closer to your subject!" which I don't disagree, getting closer does improve your captures, but it frequently isn't possible when out shooting in the wild. If a camera can give a wildlife photographer better tracking, more pixels on subject, and freedom of composition, they will take it! No question!
My A7SIII is definitely awesome for wedding photography. It’s krayzie how often I’m booked for a video gig but I end up also becoming the photographer for the same gig because the photographer had to drop out. My A7SIII always delivers.
I think it is reasonable to compare it with the Sony a7siii. I don’t know what it is like elsewhere, but because the first sentence of Nikon Hong Kong’s website introducing the Z6III is...the Z6III has extraordinary film capabilities...it is obviously positioned as a video camera. The introduction of the A7m4 on the Sony website is... with its breakthrough performance in still images and video recording... it is obviously a true hybrid camera. So it is reasonable to compare Nikon Z6iii with Sony a7siii.
@@77dris z8 dynamic range is 0.5 stop less than r5 in mechanical shutter despite canon’s baked in noise reduction artificially raising its dynamic range. In electronic shutter Z8 beats R5 in dynamic range by almost 1 stop and that’s still with canon baking in noise reduction. Let that sink in. I have both r5 and z8, the Z8 has better autofocus overall and I think difference is quite apparent. R5ii should exceed the Z8 since it’s 3 year old tech and now almost $1000 more. Will be awesome to see if canons dynamic range claim is true although it seems like they are leaning on more noise reduction tech than they have in past. Similar to how their lenses aren’t even projecting full coverage of the full sensor anymore. I plan to get a pair of R5ii because they seems like a worthy replacements for my R5s.
@@77dris We will see. if the R5 II has a new faster sensor the dynamic range could suffer as well. ...but yes the R5 II will be a beast but also cost a lot more than the great Z8. ...hope future sensors will use it's speed and resolution to generate (different exposure of photo-diods) more dynamic again!
With Panasonic GH6/7 and the Arri Lut you get Arri Alexa Filmlook on a $2.400 Camera (body plus Lut). Most Hollywood movies are made with Arri Alexa, because of the look it produces. 9 of the last 11 cinematography Oscars are made with Arri Alexa. Any questions. And the camera is not in the competition.
No Lumix S5iiX!!? Lumix basically pioneered the video focused hybrid camera category! They are even doing a rad sale currently- about $600 off when you bundle both camera and lens.
The Panasonic Lumix S5 II and Sony a7 IV were excluded from the test because they heavily crop 4k/60 footage. The 1.5X crop makes them an APS-C camera in that mode, reducing low-light performance and dynamic range by more than a full stop. They also have worse rolling shutter. Thus, they would have performed poorly anyway.
@@TonyAndChelseaa7iv is 2500usd as the z6iii this is the fair comparaison. A7siii is 3500usd, you should compare it with the z8 (3700usd) for a fair comparaison
It's true that Sony has more lenses but you didn't mention that the z mount can adapt the E mount which means Nikon can use any of the Sony E mount lenses. That means you have access to not only the z mount merge but also everything Sony has. You can even adapt the Canon EF lenses. Also, a lot of Canon and Sony lenses have focus breathing whereas most of Nikon z lenses do not. That's probably why the Sony was pulsing in that one video. When you buy a camera you are buying into the whole system. This includes the lenses. Yes Sony has more lenses but how many of them are junk? They made a lot of lenses that just aren't that good. Canon and Nikon both had bad lenses with their previous mount. Now that they have changed their mind again they have the opportunity to start over and only produce good lenses. They can leave the junk lenses to the third party companies.
The Canon R6 II supports Tascam CA-XLR2D microphone mixer wich means you can use any microphone of your choice, and not just one but two at the same time...
I'm a wedding videographer using the Sony. I have to say, I personally don't want / care about 6k sensors or extra cropping. I don''t want to have to buy way more expensive cards, and fill all my drives faster, or run my batteries down faster, to have extra crop that I will usually not need to use. This is not a beneficial trade-off for me. With the right lenses and skills, I can get the shot right without needing to crop in post. If they add 6k resolutions, I will not use them. Having sharper 4k footage that is super sampled might be beneficial, but the amount of sharpness that we get from the camera as it currently is, is more than adequate. I think it's very smart of you to point out that wildlife shooters don't live in this world, and often need to rely on that crop. But I think more professionals using these cameras will feel the way I do though, and I appreciate that Sony seems to realize this, despite what the marketing pushes.
As a VIDEO canera the a7S III still kicks butt. It's strong low-light and dynamic range performance comes at the expense of resolution. Its 12MP sensor has half the resolution of its cousin, the a7 III, and it can't do the 8K video, at all. If you don't need 8K video, and you have another camera for stills, it's hard to beat. Especially when you consider lens selection, where Sony kicks everyone to the curb.
Wow…nikon held up well even tho the colorworkflow was off and this vid seemed to have a strong bias towards canon/sony…+ Sony is a 12mp dedicated video cam, the other 2 are true hybrids…12mp simply isnt enough to do proper photography (ive tried many times, but was always quite disappointed tbh)…the dynamic range on the z63 could be an issue tho…
If it were decided based on price, I’m afraid there would never be a comparison review between Leica and other cameras. I think this comparison is reasonable because Nikon positions the Z6III as a video camera rather than a hybrid camera. I can’t see any description of taking pictures on Nikon HK’s website, only the video function. The A7m4 is a hybrid camera, so it is unreasonable to compare different types of cameras. Sony A7siii welcomes the challenge of Nikon's Z6III, which is specially designed for video.
Well for photos I’ll say this. Just got back from Cancun and the resort photographer was using a Sony A7Siii with the 28-70 kit lens. In my mind I was thinking what the heck. What professional is going to use this setup? Even made a few comments to my gf about it. We got the pictures and they were less than 2Mb and jpegs. The company wouldn’t give the raws. We purchased a couple of the photo and when I got home decided to print them at 13x19 inches on fine art with my canon pixma printer. Long story short I have one of them hanging on my wall right now. Image looks great. I never would have thought that. Put a tool in the hands of someone that knows how to use it and well you know.
Yeah I used to think 12 megapixels was stupid for stills, but I have a close friend who is a pro video/photo shooter and uses the a7S III for both stills and video constantly, and every client is satisfied. If it weren't for his experience, I wouldn't have considered the a7S III to be a proper hybrid stills/video camera for this comparison.
Nice work Tony! Although more settings displayed in the comparison for transparency would be lovely, I also appreciate that YOU DON'T HAVE TO. I'm shocked by the comment section that only a fraction are appreciating your work. I totally agree with you, as a A7SIII user, I very much miss the higher resolution. I really think Sony should make A7SIII/FX3 24MP and A6700/FX30 12MP, so they match in color, dynamic range, noise level and only differ in perspective. Plus 24MP is way better for stills. The latest firmware for A7SIII is v3.02 and we still don't see bird eye AF in video like the A7IV, I'm utterly disappointed in the way SONY treat their existing customers. And firmware v5.0 for FX3 still hasn't pre-roll. Really Sony? Your cinema line cannot even match R6 Mark II which has 3-5s pre-roll in video. I'm currently waiting on A7SIV or A7V, but if no show by Xmas, I'm switching to R5 Mark II. So sad about the E mount lenses as they've been great.
Excellent video. Very easy to understand the differences. I love my Z6III for its HD240p capability but hope Nikon can make some improvements to the video quality via firmware updates (if possible).
The Panasonic Lumix S5 II and Sony a7 IV were excluded from the test because they heavily crop 4k/60 footage. The 1.5X crop makes them an APS-C camera in that mode, reducing low-light performance and dynamic range by more than a full stop. They also have worse rolling shutter. Thus, they would have performed poorly anyway.
Idk, I've been taking a little detour down micro four thirds land and if you want the pinnacle of camcorder technology, it's now in the form of the GH7. That with the wide variety of lenses available and killer stabilization takes the title of "video camera" for me. These are hybrid cameras. Better than these are cinema cameras and better than those are movie cameras.
Wow great eye opening video! I have to admit I am a R6 II user and mostly shoot stills, but occasionally short sequences of video. For me, with a limited budget it has been a good compromise that weighs out the weaknesses. We can use the electronic shutter in stills mode, without having to think too much of rolling shutter effects(usable 40fps). The noise is not that colorful, so higher levels of noise are acceptable. And it provides out of the box user-friendly default settings
Thanks for doing this review, you're always so thorough! I wonder if you've tried the new Megadap Pro adapter from Sony E to Z. I tried it on my Samyang 35-150, a couple sony lenses and even stacked a Sigma MC-11 and adapted some EF glass. All seems to work good to me. I think alot of people would be interested in testing adapted lenses, IMO this adapter makes Nikon a nearly universal recipient - save their own D series lenses since the native nikon adapter doesn't have an autofocus motor built in, go figure...
Nice video, I would have loved if you included the LUMIX S5ii. It seems like it could hold its own against the top brands. Edit: I read the pinned comment.
I sold my Nikon Z9 and went to the Z6III. Elitists will chime in and say that I am crazy, but if you know how to use your cameras, you absolutely do not need a flagship body too get amazing results. I just do not buy in to all of the snobbery in photography these days. learn your craft and have fun with it. A camera is only as good as the person behind it. i have never used the modern Sony or canon bodies, but their video capabilities are said to be amazing.
Thanks for making this video. A lot of RU-vid tests I've seen are done in relatively ideal situations. When shooting weddings or any hectic situation you know that there will be that shot you HAVE to make without being able to adjust all your settings properly because it is happening right now without notice or that shot is happening in a spot where lighting is not great, but you still need to capture it and hope that your camera is good enough make a useable shot of someone in the shade with very bright background.
Yeah, I totally agree. The tools you buy need to work under the worst possible conditions you will encounter over the lifespan of that tool, and that's why we push the limits.
Tremendous amount of work here, bravo ! About stills, I'd love to see a very specific test. Have a group of runners come towards the camera, pick one face with the equivalent of Sony’s spot tracking and count the sharp shots. R6ii, Z6iii, A7iv, S5ii to be compared.
Is the z6iii really that Bad? I just cant imagine it beeing so far off considering Nikon is normally known for being a little slow but with super quality
Yes, as evident from all the evidences which everyone can see in Tony's tests easily: Yes, the Z6 III is really that bad. Because of that, Nikon shouldn't have spoiled the Z6 line with that too-new semi stacked sensor. They should have opened a new, experimental, maybe temporary camera line, for a niche which doesn't care about dynamic range, nor image / video quality, at least not so much in high-DR or high-shadow-lifting environments.
No, it’s not that bad. The canon and Sony bake in corrections to their images in camera, the Nikon does not. Anyone who knows how to use these camera properly will get stunning footage out of any of them
It is worth mentioning that when transferring files (from 7SM3 with CreatorsApp), the iPhone cannot transfer 10-bit video clips above 100mbps (iPhone 14 Pro). I can do it without any problems on a 5-year-old Android phone (XZ3)
So you basically compared the Z6III and the R6II to a camera that is tuned to video from factory. It´s like comparing a Ferrari and a Mclaren to an old truck and being amazed that the old truck wins because of off-road and cargo compartment.
Very good video. I would like to see a comparison video like this one for still photography, including the R6 II and the Z6 III. I don't know if it would make sense to include it on the Z6 III review video or as a separate video, but I really apreciate videos like this, although I understand that it may take 3 times the effort of a single review video. Anyway, thank you for all your videos and all these years of information, entertainment and useful tutorials.
Excellent review! It is important to note that Canon and Nikon are not video cameras, but hybrids. And they do take Sony by storm in terms of still photography. And still cheaper, although with the exception of low light situations, the Canon is equal to or better than the Sony in almost every category.
Setting the Z6III to H265, NRAW or ProRes disables the High ISO NR setting. It seems to me you didnt realize that NR is not applied to the Nikon whereas it is for Canon and Sony?
Well, guess it is true on the Nikon Z6iii Dynamic Range issue. I do push the boundaries from time to time, and looks like it does show it's weakenesses here pretty clearly. Thanks for the info and great work =)
Thank you! Yeah we frequently recover shadows too, since we film in natural light and on-the-go, so it's a deal-breaker for me. I didn't realize how good the Sony was.
@@TonyAndChelsea Yeah man, i was really thinking of getting this.....until you did 2 videos on the Nikon z6iii on its DR and also the autofocus (in video).....Now i may consider the Z8 instead. I do a lot of Real Estate, Interior Design photoshoots and Pushing the Dynamic Range sometimes is needed especially shooting handheld for nightshoots or some dark environment where tripod is not possible or faster work due to limited time for that moment.
@@WednesdayRaven Did you notice that once Tony tweeked the focus settings in video the Z6iii was similar both Sony and Canon? Go back and look at strange colors in Tonys outdoors DR test once he color graded the Sony and Canon, those colors the greens and blues look strange on the sony. The Blues look strange on the Canon.
Great video, but video stabilizatiion test is sadly missing. Please include it! Stabilization in video is is the reason why I got Lumix S5II and sold Fuji X-H2s. Tried Canon R6 when deciding between it and S5II and R6 was way worse, it wasnt smooth with slight hand movememts and when walking it was warping whole image.
the canon and especially the sony apply high level noise reduction on video. not the nikon raw. you can turn it off in canon but its on by default, and sony doesn't provide options. i use the r6ii, but would say this wasn't very fair to nikon. sony noise reduction is horrible when the camera moves. though im not sure how to be fair to nikon when sony bakes in noise reduction.
High ISO NR is set to Norm. Raw files were processed according to Nikon's instructions, which includes noise reduction. Also I show on screen when I add extra NR in post.
@@TonyAndChelsea you aren’t getting it. Adding noise reduction in grading across the board will not level out the total amount of noise reduction for each camera. Also you dont understand the high iso noise reduction settings either.
@@TonyAndChelsea you're really not getting it. Sony bakes in noise reduction on video. You can't adjust it. canon also does to a lesser extent. Move the camera and see the horrible noise reduction effect.
@@truthseeker6804 Video is not their forte, not everyone is aware of the fact that some manufacturers have built in noise reduction applied prior to any user accessible setting. It's been mentioned multiple times, I left another comment for them to check Cine D's testing on the video portion of hybrid (and cinema) cameras.
As a pro photographer who uses a Nikon DSLR and am increasingly doing more video these days, I really wanted Nikon to win this, but for me, while the dynamic range isn't great, the biggest issue is the lack of recording to the 2nd card slot. Thank you for highlighting this issue. I really hope Nikon figure out how to implement that via firmware updates because otherwise I'm probably going to have to switch systems. To me Canon is the best option for hybrid use. When you factor in stills use too, I still think they take the cake overall. If I was only shooting video, I'd probably go with Sony.
Thanks for your thoughts. I definitely think the Z6 III could implement writing video to two card slots with a firmware update; I recall that Canon added it to the R6 with a firmware update.
I'm sure they'll add that in an update. They added more impressive things via updates. And yes the 2nd card would be easily capable. You going from doing video on DSLR to a z63 would be a massive upgrade. Period Canon video is not as good as the z63. Nikon has better hybrid shooting features
To me, the Sony is the huge winner, with Canon being a "usable" second. The Nikon just doesn't pass. I don't care how it performs otherwise, the autofocus performance looks awful. And the best thing is: The Sony is from 2020. Unbelievable. Sony can release that camera today with a bit improved autofocus and it would wipe the floor with anything. The only downside is the resolution...
Yeah, I agree, the a7S III was really ahead of its time, and it's crazy Canon & Nikon haven't caught up. We tried to switch to the R6 II when it was new, but it overheated a few times during real-world video productions, and the AF pulsing was a little unnatural.
14:45 Look closely at the Canon footage, you see something called "interlacing". Basically the Canon is probably line skipping + interpolating between those lines, which is why it looks less detailed too.
Very interesting! I get the point about the cameras chosen for this test, similar price points with video capability. However, the sony is hardly a hybrid camera, but more likely a pure video camera. For someone like me, looking for a photo camera with decent video capability, this video is not all that meaningful, but interesting nevertheless!
A7S3 is a hybrid camera. It has a mechanical shutter and EVF. Many people think that 11 million pixels is enough for taking pictures and putting it on IG.
Hi Tony, what Nikon lens are you using for the low light test where it hunts like crazy? Is it a system fault? Cause it sure makes a lot of noise being a Z lens. It can also be seen in the dynamic range test, the abrupt push and pull.
Because it has bigger photo diode and is not stacked (fast) ... Tony's rolling shutter test was nonsense :D ...more lines at flickering means slower - no idea why he doesn't show us the bent lines.
The results are a little weird, imo. First of all, it's incorrect to compare used prices for one body with new prices for another. If you don't want to buy used, you still have to pay 3500 € for the a3sIII, which is insane for a 12MP camera these days. Also, absolutely no still picture comparison between these HYBRID cams. No third party lenses for the RF mount is also not a negative for everybody. Canon L glass is among the best money can buy anyway, and I don't need 5 variants of more or less the same lens, when the one I have works like a charm. Plus, I find it weird to spend a lot of money on a body only to ask for the cheapest lenses to go with it. The R6mII is the clear winner here, imo, when it comes to price to performance ratio and versatility of the body.
Tony why you never compared canon and Sony's wildlife video capabilities footage? Are you afraid or is it a tactical way of not showing the weakness of other systems?
And you can buy a ZVE1 with better autofocus and more features and same image quality for $2000. Never had mine overheat but I’m not doing pro shoots just RU-vid.
imagine developing a new camera for multiple years and EVEN adding internal RAW support (Nikon), just to lose to a 4 year old camera... to be fair tho, the a7s iii is a beast of a camera in itself.
Owning A7Siii and happy with it. Use HD 240fps mainly. If I need to sharpen or denoise, I run the video through Topaz. Works for me. Just don't see me investing in whole new Nikon system. A Canon, just does not inspire me. Sticking with A7Siii.
7:25 it is important to mention the lens and settings you used. Just to know if it’s an issue with certain lenses or universal. The focusing on Nikon made a lot of noise, so I wasn’t sure if it was the 24-70/2.8 or a cheaper lens with noisy motor.
