White balance on the run

[scorsesefan]

I would say "maybe" if you had native lenses - but without native lenses, it's a "maybe not".

If NR ends up being too much and DR is slacking and RAW doesn't work for you then probably not being picky (because you might end up with more unlikes than likes for it).

I’m just getting hung up on the low DR numbers. Probably because I do a lot of run n gun in uncontrolled situations. It would be nice if Nikon could add a DR boost option like LUMIX. I’d trade DR for RS. I wish the fx3II was on the radar… Are you going to pick up a ZR, Norbro?

 

[NorBro]

You would of course know best, but I'm thinking how much DR could you need?

I know in NYC if you're shooting an interview outside in the shade by a building or under scaffolding the background of the city/street can be really overexposed, but aren't you indoors most of the time?

I feel like even 12 stops would cover you pretty well in most situations and that you'd be more interested in a strong format that could be bent in post after all of the mixed lighting and white balance issues you may face while rapidly running-and-gunning.

No, I won't get one...would have been another very unnecessary purchase on my end.

You get older and you truly start questioning your purchases...not even about the money but the reasoning and principle and why you haven't learned your lesson yet.

You only get to use YOLO so many times, ha.

 

[scorsesefan]

You would of course know best, but I'm thinking how much DR could you need?

I know in NYC if you're shooting an interview outside in the shade by a building or under scaffolding the background of the city/street can be really overexposed, but aren't you indoors most of the time?

I feel like even 12 stops would cover you pretty well in most situations and that you'd be more interested in a strong format that could be bent in post after all of the mixed lighting and white balance issues you may face while rapidly running-and-gunning.

No, I won't get one...would have been another very unnecessary purchase on my end.

You get older and you truly start questioning your purchases...not even about the money but the reasoning and principle and why you haven't learned your lesson yet.

You only get to use YOLO so many times, ha.

Yeah, good points. The only thing is I’m working on a project upstate with plenty of light and space, so the extra DR would help. Something to think about anyway.

 

[Bassman2003]

From what I have seen and read, it seems this camera's real value is only if you shoot Red RAW all of the time. The images are a cut above using Red RAW which makes the next higher end model show promise.

 

[NorBro]

Bassman is stuck on this 'next model' idea, lol...there's always a next until you're involuntarily delisted

 

[Peter C.]

I'm not a fan of mixing camera brands, time matching them, non native lenses don't perform the best, maintaining two types of batteries, and the controls are different. It adds up to a lot of headaches to save some money. Not worth it to me, ease of use and avoiding errors while shooting is most important to me. For solo work the one thing you can't buy is time and mental energy.

As far as DR I've never found it helps much because manufactures over inflate the numbers. I don't find an extra stop of DR is going to do a lot. if you're truly in a difficult situation I find using mechanical means to lower the DR more effective. This might be changing position, location, adding a light, or scrim. When you can't that might mean the sky will be overexposed or you'll have to underexpose the subject. If the subject is static I'd use a mask in post to brighten an under exposed face.

Some of the worst decision I've made with gear is when it was based on saving money. Sometimes saving money isn't wrong, maybe your buying a specialize piece of gear that will not be used much or doesn't impact the overall production quality. End of the day you have to decide what you want to put up with.

 

[Bassman2003]

Bassman is stuck on this 'next model' idea, lol...there's always a next until you're involuntarily delisted

This current model does not have a mechanical shutter along with a mediocre readout speed. So the next model might have proper still tools, a better sensor and more software optimization.

Seeing the Red RAW footage along with the optimism of it being paired with a better sensor is about the only thing that would give reason for folks to actually switch brands. This one body is not enough.

 

[scorsesefan]

This current model does not have a mechanical shutter along with a mediocre readout speed. So the next model might have proper still tools, a better sensor and more software optimization.

Seeing the Red RAW footage along with the optimism of it being paired with a better sensor is about the only thing that would give reason for folks to actually switch brands. This one body is not enough.

The readout speed is pretty good, like 9.15 or something

 

[scorsesefan]

I'm not a fan of mixing camera brands, time matching them, non native lenses don't perform the best, maintaining two types of batteries, and the controls are different. It adds up to a lot of headaches to save some money. Not worth it to me, ease of use and avoiding errors while shooting is most important to me. For solo work the one thing you can't buy is time and mental energy.

As far as DR I've never found it helps much because manufactures over inflate the numbers. I don't find an extra stop of DR is going to do a lot. if you're truly in a difficult situation I find using mechanical means to lower the DR more effective. This might be changing position, location, adding a light, or scrim. When you can't that might mean the sky will be overexposed or you'll have to underexpose the subject. If the subject is static I'd use a mask in post to brighten an under exposed face.

Some of the worst decision I've made with gear is when it was based on saving money. Sometimes saving money isn't wrong, maybe your buying a specialize piece of gear that will not be used much or doesn't impact the overall production quality. End of the day you have to decide what you want to put up with.

Your point is well taken re: mismatched cameras. Pulling my hair out last night trying to get my feet wet in Nikon world. I’m so used to Cine EI it’s second nature… Just sold my Komodo so I thought it would be cool to get back the Red look at an even lower price point but there’s always sacrifices…

 

[Bassman2003]

The readout speed is pretty good, like 9.15 or something

Sorry, I should have specified for still use.

 

[cyvideo]

So I wound up playing with my ZR. My first impressions are that there’s a lot of NR going on in the h265 (more than my fx3 as I recall) and the low light performance at 6400 is ok but pretty noisy. The AF with my Sony lenses is decent with the megadap but not native lens good. My main concern with this camera is the average DR which has me on the fence about returning it. But for $2200 am I being nit picky?

I understand your indecision. Noise levels aside. Noise is something we have battled in post for years. It can generally be handled in post one way or another, unless it's outrageous. What we are always fighting for in post these days, as we move away from the limited 6-7 stop 709 world, is Dynamic Range.

If your material is going to be optimized for HDR 2020 delivery, you are up against it right away with cameras that top out at a DR of 10-11 stops. No amount of 'post recovery' gets you past the fact that you just didn't capture the range of your scenes in the first place.

I have to point out the Sony A7iv, when scenes push it is absolutely like a wet blanket over my FX6 in high DR scenes. All over it!

For me, DR is the most important thing. Ask yourself, why has the ARRI Alexa 35 shot to the top of being one of the most desirable cameras for serious filmmakers. Above all, it is because of the DR that the camera offers. It offers a clean 16 stops, with the tips of the 17th and 18th stop visible in the noise floor. You only have to look at the latest The Most Popular Cinema Cameras of Fall 2025 list for confirmation that DR is probably one of the main attributes that is driving this cameras' popularity.

I've seen much thinner, lighter codecs outperform much higher bit rate codecs when those thinner, lighter files have come from a camera with good DR and low NR.

So I guess your decision comes down to what your priorities are. Picky at $2200? I don't think so, as there are other strong options out there at prices that are not much higher. Sorry, 10 stops do not excite me in an HDR world where we need to capture the max we can in extreme lighting scenarios. Capture the most DR you can without NR and if the capture isn't too noisy your post process is so much simpler and the results are in most cases are usually very strong and decent looking.

Chris Young

https://ymcinema.com/2025/10/27/fall-2025-most-popular-cinema-cameras/

 

[NorBro]

I think color and skin tones would go right above DR as most important.

Many films grade the dynamic range out of existence. 10, 11 stops in the master, so much info gone and irrelevant, especially for the majority of screens where the videos will exist.

But color is what people notice first. Saturation, contrast, beautiful skin tones that stay put while everything else around them may be bent and broken as creative grades for creative visions come to life.

Because ~13 stops compared to ~15 stops in so much 1% production that has advanced lighting would not be a definitive deal-breaker if other cameras had some life to their motion pictures.

 

[scorsesefan]

I understand your indecision. Noise levels aside. Noise is something we have battled in post for years. It can generally be handled in post one way or another, unless it's outrageous. What we are always fighting for in post these days, as we move away from the limited 6-7 stop 709 world, is Dynamic Range.

If your material is going to be optimized for HDR 2020 delivery, you are up against it right away with cameras that top out at a DR of 10-11 stops. No amount of 'post recovery' gets you past the fact that you just didn't capture the range of your scenes in the first place.

I have to point out the Sony A7iv, when scenes push it is absolutely like a wet blanket over my FX6 in high DR scenes. All over it!

For me, DR is the most important thing. Ask yourself, why has the ARRI Alexa 35 shot to the top of being one of the most desirable cameras for serious filmmakers. Above all, it is because of the DR that the camera offers. It offers a clean 16 stops, with the tips of the 17th and 18th stop visible in the noise floor. You only have to look at the latest The Most Popular Cinema Cameras of Fall 2025 list for confirmation that DR is probably one of the main attributes that is driving this cameras' popularity.

I've seen much thinner, lighter codecs outperform much higher bit rate codecs when those thinner, lighter files have come from a camera with good DR and low NR.

So I guess your decision comes down to what your priorities are. Picky at $2200? I don't think so, as there are other strong options out there at prices that are not much higher. Sorry, 10 stops do not excite me in an HDR world where we need to capture the max we can in extreme lighting scenarios. Capture the most DR you can without NR and if the capture isn't too noisy your post process is so much simpler and the results are in most cases are usually very strong and decent looking.

Chris Young

https://ymcinema.com/2025/10/27/fall-2025-most-popular-cinema-cameras/

Good points. In real world test the ZR seems to perform better than on paper:

 

[Bassman2003]

Great conversation and I am privileged to be able to discuss these matters with fellow geeks. I think all three are important and interdependent. I am with Chris though. DR is what has been lacking in the camera world since the move to digital so that is a big yardstick for me. While the stop number count is a way to quantify DR, to me, it translates to having freedom in making the best image one can. Things just degrade less when using a camera with more DR. It allows you to keep quality skin tones and color where these two things would go away quickly with a low DR camera.

Color probably is the first thing "normal" folks would spot more than DR. But let's face it, if we patterned our careers/work after what normal people noticed we would be in a different sort of place. We know its there and we are making the product.

Overall though, the trend of fast memory cards being utilized by big codecs making better images in these small cameras is great. Color, skin tones, detail and DR will be represented so much better without all of the compression. 40ish minutes of RAW recording for ~$150 is not a bad deal.

On the footage above, I am confused that a LUT was used for the RAW footage. I thought using Red RAW would eliminate the need for a LUT to be implemented outside stylistic choice. I just skimmed though the video though. Maybe he says why.

 

[scorsesefan]

Great conversation and I am privileged to be able to discuss these matters with fellow geeks. I think all three are important and interdependent. I am with Chris though. DR is what has been lacking in the camera world since the move to digital so that is a big yardstick for me. While the stop number count is a way to quantify DR, to me, it translates to having freedom in making the best image one can. Things just degrade less when using a camera with more DR. It allows you to keep quality skin tones and color where these two things would go away quickly with a low DR camera.

Color probably is the first thing "normal" folks would spot more than DR. But let's face it, if we patterned our careers/work after what normal people noticed we would be in a different sort of place. We know its there and we are making the product.

Overall though, the trend of fast memory cards being utilized by big codecs making better images in these small cameras is great. Color, skin tones, detail and DR will be represented so much better without all of the compression. 40ish minutes of RAW recording for ~$150 is not a bad deal.

On the footage above, I am confused that a LUT was used for the RAW footage. I thought using Red RAW would eliminate the need for a LUT to be implemented outside stylistic choice. I just skimmed though the video though. Maybe he says why.

Yeah, I'm just trying to sort through the hype with this camera and do some of my own tests to see if it's workable for me. The DR numbers do bother me, but I'm not sure in real world use it would be a big issue. I need a b-cam to my fx6 now so I'm debating whether to keep this or go with the reliable but more expensive choice of an fx3. Money is sort of is an issue, as my girlfriend who I live with is out of work at the moment... I wasn't too clear on the LUT issue either.

 

[NorBro]

The thing with DR is that they say (I can't really speak on it because I don't have experience with it but just from reading) that most film stocks are between 12-14 stops, so it's we've kind of been there for a bit with some of these cameras and also look how much the 1% did with them, that DR.

So it's like how much do we, most of us, really need for our non-1% work?

To me, it's the quality of the codec/format that will get you through the grading, not the DR (of course it helps).

And you can add/stack LUTs to RAW footage, most people (YouTube) always did way before Resolve and the grading community became what it is today.

 

[scorsesefan]

I'm also weighing other factors like form factor and usability. My eyes aren't too great anymore, so the 4" screen is really helpful and the 32 bit audio would be great for run and gun stuff.

 

[Bassman2003]

Yeah, I'm just trying to sort through the hype with this camera and do some of my own tests to see if it's workable for me. The DR numbers do bother me, but I'm not sure in real world use it would be a big issue. I need a b-cam to my fx6 now so I'm debating whether to keep this or go with the reliable but more expensive choice of an fx3. Money is sort of is an issue, as my girlfriend who I live with is out of work at the moment... I wasn't too clear on the LUT issue either.

Always a tough choice. The Nikon footage next to an FX3 looked pretty close color-wise in this video. Some more work and it could look very close -

Or possibly a good used FX3? I have always been a proponent of matching brands as it just looks better and it much easier in post.

 

[Peter C.]

I always wanted a A7s3/FX3 but the prices never came down might have gone up. Sony inadvertently made it too well, good in low light, fast read out 4k 60 without a significant crop, no over heating, etc. Can you believe it they made a pro camera that was dependable and could be used on paying jobs. Because no other manufacture wanted to build a competing camera and only now we are starting to have alternatives, it sells so well Sony was content to not update it.

 

[scorsesefan]

I always wanted a A7s3/FX3 but the prices never came down might have gone up. Sony in inadvertently made it too well, good in low light, fast read out 4k 60 without a significant crop, no over heating, etc. Can you believe it they made a pro camera that was dependable and could be used on paying jobs. Because no other manufacture wanted to build a competing camera and only no have alternatives, it sells so well Sony was content to not update it.

The fx3 is due for an update. I'm hearing 2026/27 though...