We have all been ready for this: Nikon ZR vs Sony FX3, a battle so essential that Nikon went out and acquired one other digital camera firm to be able to win it.
Sure, the Nikon ZR is the primary digital camera not solely made with Crimson DNA, but additionally to bear the Crimson title on a Nikon physique. The Massive N pulled out all of the stops to dethrone the mighty Sony FX3, which can be beneath heavy fireplace from the Canon EOS C50.
So, how does this cutting-edge Nikon (which is basically primarily based on the Nikon Z6 III) stack up in opposition to the FX3 from 2021 (which is basically the Sony A7S III from 2015 cosplaying as a cinema digital camera)?
The percentages are in opposition to Sony, whose 10-year-old 4K sensor is squaring off in opposition to Nikon’s 12-month-old 6K partially stacked sensor, full with 32-bit audio, the most recent autofocus tech, and Crimson codecs and colour science.
Place your bets and let’s examine how the Nikon ZR vs Sony FX3 battle goes down…
Nikon ZR vs Sony FX3: At a look
| Row 0 – Cell 0 |
Nikon ZR |
Sony FX3 |
|
Launched |
September 2025 |
February 2021 |
|
Sensor |
24.5MP full body, partially stacked |
12.1MP full body |
|
Lens mount |
Nikon Z |
Sony E |
|
Autofocus |
Hybrid part detection |
Quick Hybrid AF |
|
Acknowledged topics |
Video: Human, canines, cats, birds, vehicles, bikes, bicycles, trains, airplanes • Photograph: Human, canines, cats, birds, vehicles, bikes, bicycles, trains, airplanes |
Video: Human • Photograph: Human, animal |
|
In-body picture stabilization |
7.5 stops |
5.5 stops |
|
ISO vary |
Twin base ISO (800 / 6400) • Video ISO100 to 51,200 (exp to 204,800) • Photograph ISO100 to 51,200 (exp to 204,800) |
Video ISO80-102,400 (exp to 409,600) • Photograph ISO80-102,400 (exp to 40-409,600) |
|
Max video decision |
6K 60p, 4K 120p, FullHD 240p |
4K 120p, FullHD 240p |
|
Viewfinder |
None |
None |
|
Rear display |
4-inch articulating, 3.07 million dots |
3-inch articulating, 1.44 million dots |
|
Reminiscence |
1x CFexpress B, 1x microSD |
2x CFexpress Kind A / SD UHS-II |
|
Connectivity |
WiFi, Bluetooth, mini HDMI, timecode (wi-fi), microphone, headphone, USB-C, RC terminal |
WiFi, Bluetooth, 2x XLRs (on deal with), HDMI, timecode, microphone, headphone, USB-C |
|
Battery |
EN‑EL15c |
NP-FZ100 |
|
Dimensions |
134 x 80.5 x 49 mm |
129.7 x 77.8 x 84.5mm |
|
Weight |
630g physique solely (with battery) |
715g physique (with battery) • 1,015g with deal with |
Nikon ZR vs Sony FX3: Value
• Canon EOS C50: $2,199 / £2,199 / AU$3,499
• Sony FX3: $4,098 / £3,799 / AU$6,499
Sony has had the run of the yard for the previous 4 years, and thus the FX3 nonetheless carries a heavy asking value. However with each Nikon and Canon undercutting it considerably, that four-year-old tech would not provide significantly good worth.
Nikon’s digital camera is getting on half the worth however provides so many extra options and features, however the baseline bump in horsepower and efficiency you get from issues like newer sensor and autofocus tech.
Until there is a crazy-good promotion working, the FX3 is an extremely arduous promote subsequent to the ZR.
🏆 Winner: Nikon ZR
Nikon ZR vs Sony FX3: Design & dealing with
• Nikon ZR: 134 x 80.5 x 49 mm, 630g, 4-inch display,
• Sony FX3: 129.7 x 77.8 x 84.5mm, 715g / 1,015g with deal with, 3-inch display, IBIS
Nikon has made its digital camera comparable in top and width to the FX3, however remarkably it is solely 58% the depth. It is an amazingly skinny design that makes the ZR rather more at house within the fingers, although this does include a number of bodily compromises – a few of which depart the ZR feeling much less of a cinema digital camera than the Z6 III on which it is primarily based.
For instance, it is restricted to a micro HDMI as a substitute of the full-size port on the Z6 III and FX3. The svelte physique additionally signifies that as a substitute of the reminiscence card slots being located on the aspect (as commonplace for a professional physique) they’re relegated to the battery compartment on the underside (as is frequent on fanatic cameras).
The latter is puzzling for a variety of causes. Firstly, the selection of underpowered microSD may be very unusual for a cine digital camera – doubtless a compromise as a result of lack of actual property, which additionally brings efficiency compromises resembling no redundant recording. Secondly, eradicating the microSD means additionally having to take away the battery to be able to entry it.
If that is not aggravating sufficient, you may in all probability need to take away all the digital camera out of your tripod when you could change the primary CFexpress card; you may’t truly open the battery compartment on many tripods, as the top obstructs the door hinge (which is why professional our bodies normally put card slots on the aspect). As well as, the smaller chassis means there’s solely a single mount level.
The FX3 would not undergo these entry points, and options twin CFexpress A / SD card hybrid slots for larger paired efficiency and redundant seize. Its thicker body additionally means there are 5 mounting factors. All of those are fairly main factors in Sony’s favor – however the FX3 would not get every thing proper when it comes to its design.
For instance, the FX3 has a joystick nevertheless it’s bizarrely positioned on prime of the digital camera! And whereas its 3-inch display is completely nice, at simply 1.44 million dots it is hardly the very best decision show on the planet. Against this, the ZR retains its joystick on the again (the place it belongs!) and maybe its crowning achievement is the massive 4-inch, 3.07 million-dot display – over a 3rd bigger and over twice the decision of the Sony.
In contrast to Sony (and Canon), although, Nikon didn’t launch the ZR with a modular deal with, which not solely helps with ergonomics and dealing with, but additionally homes XLR ports – a notable omission for a digital camera on this class.
In all, there are execs and cons on either side. Actually, although, whereas I love the ZR’s measurement, the operability compromises – inferior storage media, the shortcoming to entry it with out de-rigging the physique, lack of deal with and XLRs – imply that this spherical goes to Sony.
🏆 Winner: Sony FX3
Nikon ZR vs Sony FX3: Photograph specs
• Nikon ZR: 24.5MP, 20fps RAW / 120fps JPEG
• Sony FX3: 12.1MP, 10fps
Fairly clear-cut win for Nikon right here, because the ZR (which, once more, is constructed on the identical structure because the good Z6 III hybrid digital camera) outclasses the FX3 (which is constructed on the video-oriented A7S III).
Photograph functionality is hardly the promoting level right here, as taking a YouTube thumbnail or a nonetheless for the ‘gram might be the extent to which most customers are going to make use of these cameras for images.
Sony’s 12.1MP sensor has traditionally been a go-to for astro and low-light photographers, the place the decrease decision and bigger pixel measurement rely in its favor. Outdoors that use case, nonetheless, Nikon’s partially stacked sensor is much better for burst pace and general picture high quality.
The ZR additionally packs the most recent topic detection algorithms together with a rock-solid 7.5 stops of stabilization, in comparison with Sony’s notoriously ho-hum IBIS (which is 5 stops on paper, however actually would not really feel like that in efficiency).
🏆 Winner: Nikon ZR
Nikon ZR vs Sony FX3: Video specs
• Nikon ZR: 20.6MP, 6K 60p, 4K 120p, FullHD 240p, inside RAW, 32-bit float
• Sony FX3: 10.3MP, 4K 120p, FullHD 240p, XLR functionality
Nikon’s digital camera has means an excessive amount of firepower for the Sony to maintain up. The upper decision means it’s able to as much as 6K 60p inside RAW – and that is with the signature Redcode RAW (R3D NE), together with different 12-bit RAW codecs like N-Log and ProRes. You even have necessities like shutter angle management and waveform monitoring.
In the meantime the poor outdated Sony cannot even report RAW internally, and issues like shutter angles and waveforms have been conspicuous by their absence even 4 years in the past. It does no less than nonetheless produce very clear footage, because of the decrease decision and beneficiant ISO80-102,400 sensitivity, however with the twin base ISO functionality on the Nikon this is not the benefit it as soon as was.
Crucially, although, the Nikon ZR is lacking an XLR deal with – with out which it can not settle for skilled XLR enter, which is unquestionably a giant strike in opposition to it within the audio stakes (although until Nikon is totally mad, an XLR deal with completely needs to be on the best way). Nonetheless, an enormous boon for audio is the truth that the Nikon ZR is the one digital camera with built-in 32-bit float.
What’s 32-bit float, and why is it essential? Consider it like RAW recordsdata however to your audio – it allows you to improve and even rescue sound in publish, even in the event you’ve fully tousled your ranges on the level of seize. Whereas a variety of Panasonic cameras have 32-bit functionality, resembling the favored Lumix S5IIX, all of them require a further adapter.
Whereas the shortage of XLR enter is a black eye for the ZR, frequent sense tells you that it is on the best way – and every thing else, significantly headline options like Redcode and 32-bit float, greater than makes up for it.
🏆 Winner: Nikon ZR
Nikon ZR vs Sony FX3: Lens choice
• Nikon ZR: Z mount
• Sony FX3: E mount
Right here is the only greatest benefit the FX3 has over the ZR: the sheer landslide of native E-mount lenses in comparison with the relative trickle of Z glass.
It is no shock; not solely is the E mount 15 years outdated, with some 330 lenses in the marketplace, Sony has cranked out over 80 lenses by itself. By comparability, the Z mount is barely 7 years outdated and Nikon has simply managed to crack 40 home-grown lenses.
Extra importantly, whereas Sony totally opened its mount to 3rd events very early on, Nikon remains to be very restrictive about who can produce Z-mount glass – no less than, Z-mount glass with know-how resembling digital contacts and autofocus, although there are a selection of manual-focus dumb lenses in the marketplace.
Nikon is conscious of this, having introduced that Nikkor Cinema lenses are in growth, and it has licensed Leica to supply its new Leitz Hektor cine lenses for Z-mount – however that also signifies that the one native cinema lenses for the ZR price $7,400 a pop.
The upshot is that whereas each single lens producer can (and most do) make optics for Sony, there’s a a lot smaller collection of third-party glass for Nikon Z. And in contrast to Canon, Nikon hasn’t spent the previous few years producing cinema lenses (as a result of it did not have any cinema cameras, till shopping for Crimson and launching the ZR), so it would not have any first-party cine lenses but.
You may, in fact, adapt all the most well-liked PL and EF cinema optics to the Z mount – which is what many individuals will do. However there is no getting spherical the truth that the ecosystem of native lenses is drastically smaller for ZR customers.
🏆 Winner: Sony FX3
Nikon ZR vs Sony FX3: Verdict
This battle was truly far nearer than I anticipated. Whereas the ZR wipes the ground with the FX3 when it comes to tech and specs, it is let down by ergonomics and design selections.
The shortage of XLR inputs, the questionable alternative of media with an absence of redundant recording, and the shortcoming to swap reminiscence playing cards with out eradicating the digital camera from a tripod are fairly huge sore factors. And there is no skirting the truth that Nikon would not have any Z-mount cinema lenses – with uber-pricey Leica lenses being the one native choices proper now.
Nonetheless, the headline options – specifically the power to seize inside 6K 60p RAW video in Redcode, 32-bit float audio, together with 7.5 stops of IBIS – compensate for these hangups. The Nikon ZR is a top-to-bottom higher technological proposition than the FX3, and anybody selecting between the 2 cameras right this moment could be properly suggested to leap on the Z Cinema bandwagon.
🏆 Winner: Nikon ZR