Sony Z280 test footage Part 1

[Doug Jensen]

I've uploaded some Z280 test footage that I shot over the Labor day weekend when I was in Maine teaching workshops. It's all S-LOG3 in this test (but with some custom paint settings) and has been graded in Resolve.

Sony PXW-Z280 test footage Part 1 on Vimeo

[David Knaggs]

As always, very impressive, Doug.

I love how you got that shallow depth of field in the shot about 27 seconds in, despite the 1/2 inch chip size!

[Paul Cronin]

Doug, every time I see footage you have shot it inspires me to get out and shoot.

[Doug Jensen]

Thanks, Paul. Your comments mean a great deal to me.

[Doug Jensen]

I was crunching numbers this morning and realized I crossed a threshold last week with my Z280. I got my camera in September 2018 and as near as I can determine, as of last week I have sold enough stock footage that was shot with the Z280 to cover the entire cost of the camera. Not bad. And those shots will continue to sell over and over again for years. The rest is pure gravy. I love this camera.

[Bob Safay]

Doug, great footage! And congratulations on your threshold with Shutterstock. I continue to upload clips and having fun doing so. Bob

[Doug Jensen]

Bob, are you getting any sales yet? What camera are you using?

[Bob Safay]

Doug, no sales yet. Most of what I have posted is old clips from Alaska, Africa, and other travels. I only have about 6-8 clips in 4K. I am heading up to Virginia where I will shot 4K with the intent of posting them on Shutterstock. I am using the new Canon XF705 and finally getting used to the settings and color profiles. I may be coming down to Merritt Island in early December if the birds are there.

[Doug Jensen]

Bob, I'm sure the sales will come eventually. But don't pin all your hopes on wildlife because that is not in very much demand bt stock footage buyers.

Not too many birds in my area yet, but they are increasing day by day. We're headed to Key West for a week but I'm not sure if I'll shoot anything or not. I'll bring the Z280 just in case. Better to have it and not use it than the other way around.

[Bob Safay]

Doug, hope you had a good trip to the Keys. I understand about submitting clips on wildlife, there must be 1000 clips on elephants out there. The colors in VA and WV were at their peek. I already started submitting clips in 4K showing water wheels, waterfalls and general colorful shots of the Blue Ridge. I checked this morning and several have already been approved. It has given me an entirely different mindset when I'm out filming. Plus, I'm having fun. Thanks for putting this course together. Bob

[Doug Jensen]

Bob, you echo my thoughts exactly. I'd be out shooting for the fun of it even if I had never even heard of stock footage, but once you know there is a chance to make some money from what you are doing, it kind of changes your focus. It makes me more concerned about doing a good job and getting good coverage. It doesn't turn the shooting into work or take the fun out of it, but somehow it makes me more focused on doing a better job. I like trying to get some shots that I think someone will like and actually pay for. How will they use them? How could certain shots be cut together? Have I gotten wide, medium, tight? Is there a beginning, middle, and end to shots with action? Is there room for graphics? Stuff like that. It's kind of like having a client you want to please -- yet not having to answer to anyone. I know shooting for stock has made me a better shooter because I'm out shooting more than ever.

[Tom Van den Berghe]

still looking for this Z280. I'm not in a rush to buy one because by the covid19 I had almost no orders from customers past year. (filming is a secondary occupation)

On the other hand there is the new sony FX6 full frame. Very different to the Z280 but I'm asking myself this:

a FX6 with a slow FE 24-240mm F3.5-6.3 against the 17x zoom from the Z280. How will they compare in lower light situations? (like inside a church)

the Z280 ramps to F2.8 zoomed in and the 24-240mm to F6.3...
In the past I had the 18-200mm F3.5-6.3 aps-c and the zoom range was ok for me. Would rather have a bit more range.

I have already full frame lenses like a 35mm F1.8 samyang prime, a 80-200mm F2.8 nikkor manual lens and an 28-70mm kit lens.

the FX6 has no viewfinder and no stabilisation.

[Doug Jensen]

As someone who is fortunate enough to own both an FX6 and a Z280, I can tell you that the FX6 is the best low-light camcorder I've ever used. It blows the Z280 and every other camera out of the water on low-light and noise-free images. Previously the Z280 was the best or second best low-light camera I had used, so it is no slouch, but the FX6 blows everything out of the water. I've got some examples in my FX6 master class that continue to amaze me, even though I shot them.

So if low-light is the main thing you care about then the decision between the two ought to be clear. But that would ignore all the other pros and cons the two cameras offer. They are each suited for totally different styles of shooting and they aren't really even in the same family. It would be like going into a car dealership and not being able to decide between a 4x4 or a sports car. They both might be very nice, but suited for totally different kinds of driving. If I was in your shoes, I would focus on what features I needed, my style of shooting, what I was going to shoot with the camera, my budget for lenses, etc. before I got down the list to low-light sensitivity.

[Leslie Wand]

very well put doug...

i often toyed with the idea of, (originally), moving from camcorder to dslr - a prospect that was soon put to rest from nearly every practical point of view for MY needs. then from my ex1 to one of the f series bodies. however, though cost wasn't a major consideration, it did become quite a factor when i had to take into consideration the variety of lenses i'd need just to continue with my existing clients; from tracking running horses in huge paddocks thru to talking heads, the zoom on the ex1 just about managed the former (though a 17x > would have been better), and i though couldn't complain about the heads, a little wider (with less distortion) wouldn't have gone amiss on some wide shots i was often required to shoot.

so, (without having to worry about lowlight in the first place), the simple cost of lenses was the deciding factor - i did research using adaptors to use 'proper' 2/3" broadcast zoom lenses, but the cost was not only prohibitive, but there seemed to be a great deal of misinformation and heresy as to whether any combination actually worked properly in practice.

so, as doug wrote, best start off with knowing what your needs are, then finding a camera that matches them without blowing your budget ;-)

[Tom Van den Berghe]

thx Doug and Leslie for the answers!

Here a part of the review of the Z280 from Alister Chapman:

When you factor in the Z280’s f1.9 lens, compared to an FS7 with the Sony F4 zoom or many other zooms that are typically around F4 the Z280 with it’s f1.9 lens does better in low light and offers similar DoF when both are wide open. Of course you can change the lens on an FS7 and use a faster lens, but then you won’t have anywhere near the zoom range of the Z280.

Low light isn't the most important for me but I do often film inside churches where I have to zoom a lot.
And my panasonic DVX200 is limited in this part.

So F6.3 vs F2.8 on the Z280. How they compare?
And is the viewfinder on the Z280 good enough for someone who's wearing glasses?

Where I live the Z280 is not more for sale and at this moment I can't find a second hand one.
The FX6 off course is new and currently out of stock where I live.