Nikon has advantage of being #2

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
7,972
502
Don't you AE-lock and recompose anyway?

When shooting in burst?! No.

Sure, there's a time for locking AE, but leaning on the shutter at max fps is not the time to do it. You either shoot M* or you don't. If you don't, you need to run the AE calculations every frame or (for instance) a panning shot over a varying lightness background (sports, wildlife, etc.) will be a hot mess exposure-wise.

*And I don't own a 1-series camera but I believe some of them still do the metering/AE lift in the background in M mode (if you love auto ISO, EC, etc.)

I'm not saying the Z6/Z7's max fps is useless, I'm saying it's conditional based on settings. Right now we know one of those conditions to be AE working with each frame. We might also find in the manual that you only get it with JPG or compressed RAW. I would rather just be told 6-7 fps in all use cases than have my framerate have to be something that I game/tune to get what I want, but (in fairness) others might like that level of tribal lore and tinkering.

(Folks: Am I completely high for thinking conditional FPS / 'we say X fps but it's really way less than X in practice' is dumb? I'll get off my horse if so.)

- A
 

Kit.

EOS 6D MK II
Apr 25, 2011
1,349
741
When shooting in burst?! No.

Sure, there's a time for locking AE, but leaning on the shutter at max fps is not the time to do it. You either shoot M* or you don't. If you don't, you need to run the AE calculations every frame or (for instance) a panning shot over a varying lightness background (sports, wildlife, etc.) will be a hot mess exposure-wise.
I think it's quite a rare situation when your subject - or the details in the background you want to keep - is unpredictably illuminated during burst shots.

(Folks: Am I completely high for thinking conditional FPS / 'we say X fps but it's really way less than X in practice' is dumb? I'll get off my horse if so.)
I am personally not a sports photographer, but I think than when you are shooting an artificially illuminated soccer field, you can as well shoot JPEGs in M, if that gives you +50% increase in FPS.
 

Mikehit

EOS 5D MK IV
Jul 28, 2015
3,225
415
I think it's quite a rare situation when your subject - or the details in the background you want to keep - is unpredictably illuminated during burst shots.
The problem is the metering. When panning a bird in flight, or a runner they can have a background of deep shadow one moment and bright background literally the next.
When shooting a wedding do you really want to be recalculating exposure depending on how much of the bride's white dress is in the frame?
 
  • Like
Reactions: ahsanford

Kit.

EOS 6D MK II
Apr 25, 2011
1,349
741
The problem is the metering. When panning a bird in flight, or a runner they can have a background of deep shadow one moment and bright background literally the next.
When shooting a wedding do you really want to be recalculating exposure depending on how much of the bride's white dress is in the frame?
That's what I'm trying to say. When panning in a burst over a variable-lightness background with continuing AE metering, it's harder to negotiate with the camera exposure AI what exposure you think is proper, than if you prenegotiate the exposure on a more predictable scene and then AE-lock the result.

And in the case of most sports, it is not even needed, because the lighting is already setup for you (and everyone else) to be predictable.
 

fullstop

EOS 6D MK II
Apr 23, 2018
1,088
153
Folks: Am I completely high for thinking conditional FPS / 'we say X fps but it's really way less than X in practice' is dumb? I'll get off my horse if so.
- A
hmmm ... i also dislike advertising containing phrases like
* flight to Berlin "starting from only 29 €" ... and when i jump at it and want to book it, i am asked 239 €
* or a camera with "up to 330 shots on a single battery charge", but every time i use it i have to swap batteries after only 220 to 310 shots? ;-)

BUT! ... on the other hand, if a camera can honestly shoot at 9 fps under certain conditions which are ok for many/most use cases but only 5.5 fps under all conditions and all use cases ... should the maker not be allowed to say "shoots (up to) 9fps" and an asterisk footnote to explain the "up to"?

the cat is grey, not black or white - as so often in life. :)
 
Last edited:

fullstop

EOS 6D MK II
Apr 23, 2018
1,088
153
another situation where i would not like to lose AE during bursts is in concerts ... when stage lighting goes from dim moody blue to 10.000 watts glaring orange while i shoot short bursts of the singer (or the entire band) to have a number of images to chose the best from afterwards? granted, 5.5 fps may also suffice for that, but yet ... again not a dealbreaker to me, but definitely something to be aware of.

on that note: do z6/7 have anti-flicker feature?
 

jrista

EOL
Dec 3, 2011
5,341
23
jonrista.com
As #2 Nikon can afford to be bold with their new products. Look at the Z7, it competes with the D850. They are not afraid to have the Z7 steal business from the D850. Plus the Z7 will steal business from Canon.

Canon on the other hand protects their products from each. They provide clear points of difference between each body. I wonder what they will do with the new ML? Will it compete (and exceed) the 5D M4 or 5DSR? Or will they cripple the camera is some critical way.

I think has made some great products but currently they are too conservative. They seem afraid that a new product will eat an existing products lunch. Well if theIr ML products are too cripple to product the 5D M4, 5DSR or 1Dx M2, they will fail. And to some extend Nikon will steal business from Canon.

So what is this. A plea to Canon, do your best. If the Z7 can shot 45.7MP at 9 FPS, then the next generation of 1DX or D6 should be able to shoot 30 MP at 12 FPS. Go for it.
This is just more market diversification. And I don't think it is any different than Canon, if they really are working on their own FF mirrorless. It's a new competitive market. Some people just plain and simply do not want a DSLR, and FF mirrorless has been dominated by Sony for a while. Canon, Nikon and even Panasonic it seems are now entering the FF mirrorless market. Even if it does "compete" with the D850, it will still bring in new business for Nikon, because there are many die-hard Nikon fans who want mirrorless FF, and would LOVE to have it from Nikon. It should be a growth opportunity for them more than anything.

There are some things I will only do with a DSLR. There are other things I really only care to do with mirrorless. Lot of times a DSLR is just way too bulky. Lot of times an EVF is so much more useful than an optical viewfinder (and it's odd for me to say that, as there was a time I wouldn't touch an EVF with a 10 foot pole...but they finally came of age, I guess. ;)). I would even offer that people could easily buy and own both Nikon D-series and Z-series cameras at the same time, as they are not necessarily mutually exclusive products. Same thing goes for Canon DSLRs and Mirrorless, or Sony DSLRs and Mirrorless.