A Z9 Oops?

[Mary Doo]

My Gitzo fluid head is 0.6 kg so it's very light weight, and surprisingly capable. Since I sold my 500 PF I am not using the Gitzo head at the moment, but it is possible that in the future I will have a 100-400 which should work well with it. I find that even the lightweight fluid head reduces vibrations compared to other types of heads. However, the payload max for the head is 4 kg so it is not a good choice for my 300/2.8.

I did look up your Gitzo GHF2W and noted it was lightweight. I am glad that you find it useful for wildlife photography. However, to me, vibration reduction from a ballhead is not important because both the camera and the lenses I use have excellent stabilization capabilities. In fact, if I need to use a tripod, the advice is to turn off vibration reduction (or image stabilization). That said, contrary to "reducing vibration", I like to use a monopod these days and thus the camera is hardly stable. But it's OK when high shutter speed combines with image stabilization from the camera and lens. :)

[ilkka_nissila]

I sometimes have to wait for a long time for the event to happen, for example, birds could be floating in the water for 30 min and then one of the adults takes off. I can't keep a long lens pointed at the subject for a long period of time without getting frustrated. With the tripod, the lens is pointed towards the subject which seems likely to take off and I don't quite need to work so hard while nothing is happening. When the bird does take off, I find that the fluid head reduces the jerkiness of my panning and leads to a more controlled sequence. There is some learning curve to this, and I'm by no means an expert, but I was happiest doing this with the fluid head. I've also done it hand-held and with gimbal head. The gimbal head was hard to balance with the 500 PF (the lens is just too light compared to a large body) while the fluid head could be balanced using the adjustable counterbalance mechanism. Also the gimbal heads which I have are difficult to turn very slowly to follow a swimming bird; there is some rest friction. They work better for fast movement but the fluid head makes it easy to follow a subject which moves very slowly (initially). But I can see that if the photographer can react quickly and find the subject while already taking off then the hand-held approach could work well. I just find the results of hand-held panning have shake on two axis whereas with my panned shots on fluid heads have just one axis of blur (that is due to my movement not quite matching the speed of the bird, which is a question of getting enough practice); the vertical blur is absent which is not what I can achieve with hand-held panning. But anyway, I know there are many different ways to do this and one should use what works best for one's subject and skills. I found the tripod and fluid head to lead to calmful observation instead of nervously trying to keep the subject steady while not much is happening. ;-)

[Ed_Ingold]

With respect to video RAW compression, Sony and others expediently transmit uncompressed RAW footage via HDMI to a product (e.g., Atomos Shogun) which then compresses the video for recording using a licensed product like ProRes RAW (from Black Magic). However, Nikon has maintained a corporate avoidance of third-party solutions for most of their history, which is the main reason they're now #3.

[mike_halliwell]

Nikon has maintained a corporate avoidance of third-party

3rd party anything, not just software solutions....!

[ilkka_nissila]

Nikon supports the use Atomos and Blackmagic recorders for raw video recording in the Z6 and Z7 series (via paid firmware modification in the service, or when purchased as filmmaker's kit). They are happy to work with third parties in some instances.

 

Nikon also recently started collaborating with Nissen and Profoto to make the third-party flashes more compatible with Nikon cameras.

 

They also work with third parties on software development, sensor development etc.

[Mary Doo]

I found the tripod and fluid head to lead to calmful observation instead of nervously trying to keep the subject steady while not much is happening. ;-)

Makes sense in the scenario you mentioned. The fluid head is obviously a bonus though I think sometimes it can also be a drag (pun?) when one needs to move fast. Well, nothing is perfect, that's why we keep searching for better solutions as we keep buying and experimenting. ;)

Edited June 2, 2022 by Mary Doo

[Ed_Ingold]

Once a fluid head is properly balanced, you don't have to lock and. unlock it for each use. That saves a lot of time. The tilt has a 180 deg range, so you don't have to reverse it when you go past center. A true fluid head ($1k+) has zero slip-stick action. Cheaper heads use spring tension and TFE and/or grease.

[glen_h]

(snip)

 

Red's patent seems to cover a method where R and B are transformed by replacing them with R-G and B-G, respectively.

(snip)

 

Sounds like what NTSC video did since 1954.

 

But patents are strange, and it is often what you get through the patent

office more than what it actually does.

 

My first thought was Kodak's loss to Polaroid.

 

It seems to be seven patents, so they might win some and lose some,

or maybe lose none.