Nobody should even underexpose or overexpose their pictures by 3 stops or more. You can easily see the preview with the EVF or LCD screen.

Hey buddy. After all the crazy fail tests that KZbinrs have been doing, I’ve been talking about the non issue gripes about the DR of the Z6iii, and your video at least to my eyes, WHEN EXPOSED PROPERLY!!! Looks better on the Z6iii. Haha. I’d love share your channel and this video with my audience. Come get my email from my about section, hit me up, and let’s maybe talk about it in a short video 🤙

I'm not sure I agree with your assessment... The II has better control of tinting, less noise, and more detail in the darker parts of the image.

A buddy of mine has the z6III and he returned it because the dynamic range and AF were a step back from the R6 II that he already had.

I believe that Tony's test was done using a photo of a photo (originally shot with a Canon camera over 10 years ago... and we know how 'good' Canon's dynamic range was! - the worse in the business I dare say back then).

Thanks for this video, it clears up the air a bit... (much needed these days). As you know I normally underexpose 8 or 9 stops... No wonder my images are a bit weird... (Good job!)

Tony does it for the clikbait Fuzz about nothing

Nice test finally i can buy z6lll

I'm actually seeing generally the Z6III has less chroma noise, mainly reds. The Z6III has bolder, more saturated color rendering. The Z6II does have better retention of the mid tones and shadows, but they tend to be splotchy when recovered. So basically it seems the Z6III loses maybe 1 stop at worst, but gains even more accurate color rendering.

You need to tell us a lot more about your methodology before one can say whether these tests represent anything at all. First, you haven't disclosed the exposure settings - or how you controlled the illumination. Only if the exposure for each ISO setting was the same for both, and at the ISO standard for that setting are we comparing like for like. Also, when you use a tool like ACR, there's a lot of difference under the hood between different cameras. To really know of differences in the raw file you'd need to do a direct analysis of the raw data, or use a neutral converter like dcraw (or successors). (Also, re your header, there is no such camera as a 'Z62' or 'Z63'. From what we know of Nikon's naming conventions those would be DX cameras, if they existed.)

thanks for both sets of images - it seems that in the second set you fixed the WB and the exposure to match on both cameras - the first set of images in fact differ in WB, EV and the noise reduction is set in camera - from Photons to Photos the difference in the photographic Dynamic Range is between 100 and 636 ISO with the Z6III worse of about 0.8 EV - if there is any difference you would see it in that area - maybe would be helpful is you provide a few images with the same technique you shot the second set.

Excellent !!!!!!

To me the biggest difference between the newest and older Z6 at very high iso is the lack of colour shift.

WHY ONLY 720P ?

Thanks for this. The differences are marginal and won't be apparent in most real world situations at lower ISOs. I plan to get the Z6III so all these vids are a great help.

I don't get it. Is the measurement from photons to photos accurate or not? I'm not talking what do we see in the photos. My S23 is much slower than S24. But that's true in paper. In real life you won't tell the difference. But the measurements are accurate. So are the measurements for Z6 III accurate or not. That's the question. And numbers never lie even though they don't tell the whole truth. They tell their own truth. So what's gonna be?

I want to mention something as someone who shoots a lot of fashion and gives a perspective most people here won't have. The Magenta in the extreme underexposure comes from IR pollution. You will see this in much less extreme situations with a lot of special, often awful expensive garments and this is a hell to edit out. This is even more pronounced by a couple of flash brands/tubes, something no one is really testing. It is also a huge problem with a lot of Softboxes, they can even empower this behavior. Means with the right garment, you can see an awful magenta shift at iso100 without underexposure, just from the combination of the camera sensor, softbox, flashtube and black garment. If the sensor has now a better IR Cut filter, this can lead to a bit more noise in super weird underexposure tests, but for fashion photographers this can mean hours of less editing in normal shoot conditions.

@vahagraphy @TonyAndChelsea @froknowsphoto @mattgranger @RicciTalks

Is the Z6II "clipping" the blacks because its lower noise let's it reach 0 in the shadows while the higher noise in the Z6III prevents it from ever getting down to 0?

Is there an option of noise reduction in z63 raw file???

I downloaded raw. Check ISO's 6400 and 3200. You have been used different exposure mode ("spot" on z62 and "matrix" on z63), so you have different SS (on z6iii lower), so this is not relevant comparision.

Honestly that’s a strange result, the z6-3 should definitely have more noise. BTW, the sensor is also a bit sharper which tend to confuse people about the level of detail retained at high iso. The z6-2 should retain a bit more detail even when it’s softer- that’s also a result of the slightly higher dinamic range. Moreover, the Z6-2 has a magenta cast. I don’t have the z6-3 but people seem to find a green cast to it instead.

Are these raw or jpegs?

The Z6III background noise looks better to my eyes. I'm more concerned with the color shift. Background colors are definitely different. Maybe it was settings or color profile, IDK.

Really useful ❤

It could be that on the Z6III due to the Expeed 7 processor some kind of AI AntI Noising and sharpening is happening, nevertheless a very impresseing result for a stacked sensor, maybe a lot better then with the A9III.

Exceptional ISO perfomance!. Thanks.

Nice video. Do you have an A7III or something to compare it🤔 would be interesting to see the outcome

Your findings bear out what I discovered when playing with the Z6iii at my local camera store recently. I was shooting at 5000, 10,000 and higher, and the files definitely looked cleaner than the Z6ii at the same ISOs. 👍👍

Why you jumped 20000 from 6400. what about 12800.

I left a comment on your dynamic range video explaining I had been running my own tests and they mirrored your DR results. I also said you should do an ISO video as I found the Z6iii was handling the higher iso's much better than the Z6ii. My results were the same as yours, thank you for confirming things. I shoot sports (mainly football and tennis) and I have found the z6iii is spitting out really great higher ISO images. My real world results were tested last week at the Wimbledon tennis championships and I was very happy with the files. Keep up the good work.

Z6 II vs Z6 III = better noise!

I'm almost thinking, given the body of evidence that concluded the Z6 III is slightly worse, that maybe you accidentally switched up the labels, and it's actually the Z6 II on the left. Assuming you shot RAW and treated the files in the same way.

Thanks for the test, is it possible to get the images from the DR test also.

The new Z6III native ISO ranges to 64,000, so that is "the highest ISO with a number." The Z6II range does indeed stop at ISO 51,000, which is a major reason I upgraded to the III. Thank you for this video. It provides more results for people considering the abilities of these two cameras.

Not sure if there is a problem with KZbin? But it is hard to tell any difference in 720P? Based on this video looks like the Z6III is actually better than the Z6II. I was waiting for the Z6III but think I will just buy the Z8 instead. Thanks for sharing 👍🏼🙏🏼

It would be nice if the video was in 4K, we would see the result better.

Interesting results, on your test it certainly seems that the Z6III manages higher ISO's a tad better than the mk II. I'm inclined to think that the dynamic range tests carried out by other KZbinrs perhaps reveals more about the Z6 III sensor's " invariant" capability compared to the Z6 II. That is to say that compared directly and assuming exposure is correct to start with that the Z6III improves upon the Z6II in purely higher ISO capability. That would make sense given it us utilizing a more powerful expeed 7 processor. Where the Z6II beats it is in situations where you have to recover a poor exposure in post be it due to under or overexposure. It seems that the Z6II just has a tad more headroom in post processing. I own both the Z6III and Z6II. Even if the Z6III performed less favourably than the Z6II in terms of ISO and dynamic range I'd still take it over the Z6II purely for the improved AF, better EVF and faster fps not to mention the faster sensor readout. These aspects are more use to me in real world image taking than being able to obtain more dynamic range. I very rarely shoot above ISO 6400 anyway. Its also extremely rare I would ever have to recover any image 5 stops or more, heck if you cant get exposure right with WYSIWYG in the EVF then perhaps photography isnt for you 😋

Great video! The pressure for attention pushes for cherry-picking and exaggeration. As Public Enemy said "Don't believe the hype!"

Very Interesting tests thanks Kelly! QQ is it possible to save footage directly to an external SSD?

Got mine few days ago and pretty happy with it, Tony Northup lately been publishing Clickbait videos. This is an amazing camera for the price.

Pretty amazing. In low light situations, that would allow you to use higher shutter speeds to hand-hold the camera and still capture usable shots.

Thanks a lot!!

Thank you very much for your practical and comprehensible test. Tomorrow my Z6 III will arrive and i am so happy!

Tony just wanted to get some clicks/integrations to feed the algorithm. He chose a composition with an overexposed subject and a barely exposed subject and pushed that because he knew that the resulting exposure required to not blow out the overexposed subject (1/80th at ISO 100) would tank SNR on the shadows given the limited number of photons that could be captured. There are so many other examples of real-world photos, including unevenly exposed subjects such as in wedding photos he described in this video, that clean up very nicely on the Z6iii. His example was the most outlier of outliers. I started watching his videos back in 2011, specifically his star trails videos. I admire his passion, but he, like many other big name photogs, sold out to the algorithm and sponsorships. He might say he makes all his money off book sales and that he just has our wallets in mind when he makes such videos, but, sad to say, I've not bought it for a long time. His methods are based on science, but he's performing the most obsurred test that can be devised. It may have given the nod to the Z5, but consider that the QE (Quantum Efficiency) of the Z5 is much lower than the Z6iii given the latter is a BSI sensor, and you realize he's really pushed the limits of any sensor. (Sorry if I repeated a bit but it's late) In short, while other sensors may "win" under those conditions, how many photographers will find themselves taking photos in those conditions, with those exposure settings, and then pushing their files that much. What I know is the Z6iii and other Nikon cameras produce amazing images but compared to the Z6/ii Z7/ii Z5, the Z6iii's AF is in a league of its own and that is a difference I know I will see in all my images.

Tony has left the chat, lol. Great test! I'm a working photographer and pay my bills with my camera. I felt like his test was nonsense and you showed exactly why. Kudos!

This is a total fail. This is not how you test DR or noise. You could have saved all that time and looked at Bill Claff results who actually knows what he's talking about.

Shooting at iso 100 doesn’t tell the full story. How about shooting at 6400 iso and comparing move 1 or 2 stops… that is a much more real life example

Best.

The Photons to Photos site that Toneh points to in his "test" actually shows that the Z6III matches the dynamic range of the z8 & z9 up to ISO 400, between 400 and 650ish the Z8 and Z9 have slightly more dynamic range, but by ISO 800 and onward they all match up again. But I don't hear anyone complaining about the dynamic range in the z8 or z9. Sure, the z6II, z7 and Zf seem to have consistently slightly higher dynamic range but, again, by ISO 800 the z6II, z6III, z7, z8, z9, zf ALL have roughly the same DR. The Sony a7III lags behind all of them between ISO 630 and 1200ish before catching up. And as you and many other folks on KZbin are now demonstrating the real world differences in DR if you are not shooting magazine pictures are negligible.