DBounce

Except that as @TEDD pointed out after having played with the E2, it has features currently advertised as working that don't actually work. Those are what we call defects. Look, it's only a couple of Gs if you like to be on the bleeding edge it's an option. For me it's more about the enjoyment of getting the shot. I don't like when frustrations with hardware gets in the way of that enjoyment. @androidlad benefits are only benefits when the camera performs reliably. From all accounts on both the Facebook group and the last review from a well know reviewer, this camera is somewhat less than reliable. It's one to watch though. They are surely learning a lot from this release. Their next camera might be amazing.

I'll say it's worth no more than the Fuji X-T3. The X-T3 has a larger sensor, is a competent stills camera... is weather sealed, in a smaller package... and it works out of the box. Seems the Z-Cam only has one party trick... 120p @ 4k. If all you shoot is video with music than fine... that's your ticket. But if you can get by with 4k 60p or you shoot narrative work, there are better options. if you are not sure it's for tinkerers and beta testers, watch his review again... or go to the Z-Cam Facebook group. From reading the postings on there, I am certain my prior statement stands up. I'm not saying it cannot, or will not be good. But it seems like a product that is still in development.

Yes, but the GH5S is a reliable platform, with a 3 year warranty from a company that has a well established reputation. The Z-Cam is a quirky camera for tinkerers and beta testers. I think most here would have little worries about depending on a GH camera for an important project. Inversely, I would wager few here would prefer to have the Z-Cam be their only camera for any important work. Even the reviewer said he would not buy one. Oh, and what was with the WB? Everything was yellow. Surly he understood WB, he's reviewed enough cameras. So I'll give him the benefit of the doubt, that he understands how to WB a camera. So what gives?

I believe it best to capture the footage as close to the final output as possible. Granted I’ve done some pretty heavy handed stuff. But usually this is so I can understand the limitations of the footage. When I find looks that work I’ll save them as presets for my edits. That way I can have consistency as I switch from angle to angle in my multi-cam shoots. In order to make certain this works you need to have the cameras setup so that they are easy to match in post. I control lighting and manually set everything. I just about have everything to where I want it now. But honestly it’s been a long time getting here. Grading is an important part of the project to me. But with thoughtful planning it does not need to be painful.

I must be out of the loop on this one. There’s no company I hate... though I dislike the feature omissions that are frequently performed by many companies. I’m guessing maybe Panasonic. I think the GH5/S can do this... though they are not full frame.

If you look at the video from 7.25 (posted below) you can see that he is experiencing the exact same issue with hunting. Also the tracking is pretty piss poor. Now keep in mind I have been shooting Canon and also shoot Sony. So I am accustomed to some pretty dam good AF. But if this is "usable" by your standards, then good luck with that. But for my use, I would never trust this camera to perform well in regards to AF with N-Log enabled.... YMMV. If you mean the Canon EOS R it cannot output 10 bit C-Log whilst recording internally. IIRC, neither can the Nikon.

@Django yes, I’m aware that Sony had many first, but I’m also aware that Canon gives not a fck what Sony does... but if Nikon does something they standup and pay attention.

The Sony is a great camera. It really comes down to personal taste. The important thing to me is that the gear does not get in the way of your creative vision. I'm on the same page with you on the crop... and I don't know who Canon thinks they are fooling... we all know they are full of shit when they say they cannot output 4k without a crop. And if that is the case, isn't Nikon making Canon look dumb right about now? There can be little doubt that the day is fast approaching when Canon will have to start anteing up with features.

Yeah, it really is infuriating the way they selectively withhold features, and then give idiotic reasons why they couldn’t add it. Hopefully the new offerings from Nikon, Sony and Fuji will force Canon to unshackle their mirrorless offerings.

The Nikon is great... better than the Canon in many ways; but in the end... for me, the Canon fits my artistic style better. So I parted ways with the Nikon. It was a tough choice, but it seemed like having both would complicate matters. Sometimes having too many options can work against you. @thebrothersthre3 the Fuji is a fantastic camera. I thoroughly enjoyed mine... up until they died. Had I not had bad luck with my examples, I would no doubt still have them. They were tons of fun to shoot with.

Over the past few weeks I have spent a lot of time with the Canon EOS R. I have also spent a lot of time with Nikons new Z6. On paper the Nikon Z6 would appear to have the EOS R beat dead to rights. And in all fairness to the Nikon, the 4k output from the Z6 is more detailed, sharper and cleaner at higher ISO than what the Canon can manage. So case closed then... an easy win for the Nikon, Canon fanboys go home! Well, not so fast... the problem is that for all of these specs, when viewed side by side... the exact same scene shot on the Canon EOS R just seems more organic. More filmic... in all honesty, it feels more cinematic. Most here know that I have long praised the Nikon for its strengths... and rightly so. It's one hell of a camera. But when looking at the same scene, shot on both the Nikon and Canon, I can tell you, there is something magical about the Canon footage. I caught myself constantly trying to make the Nikon footage more like the EOS R. I thought softening a sharp image would be a simple matter of adding in a diffusion filter. But in practice nothing I did could duplicate the effortless organic vibe of the Canon. It's not the sharpest, but it is clear and in focus; softer by default, and frankly in a world filled with over-sharpened footage I find it refreshing. The color out of the EOS R look great. You need do very little if anything to the files. But if you shoot in C-Log, there is ample data to play with. Better yet if you output to the Ninja V in 10 bit. While it might not make sense... and you would be right to argue that the Nikon is superior... none of that changes the fact that the Canon produces a nicer image. Even when it gets noisy the noise looks more like film grain than noise. Between the two, both are fairly easy to use, granted, there is a learning curve if switching from one brand to the other. But nothing that bad. I find the Canon's menus to be better, but that might be just because I am use to Canon. I will say that the Canon's controls are arranged to be easier to use from in front of the camera. The flippy screen is also a big plus. The crop did bother me at first, but I don't favor wide shots so it was not a deal breaker, and for those times that call for more FOV, I can easily adapt one of my wide angle lenses. In the end you have a choice to make... Go with the spec sheet, and get a superior camera; or pick the one that delivers more cinematic footage. For me the choice was difficult until I stepped back and looked at the output from both cameras. Once I did that the choice was clear. Canon wins again. I'm not sure how they managed it. But perhaps that's part of the magic.

@mercer first thanks for the compliment, it’s always nice to hear positive feedback. As for marks... you can set your marks very easily by simply moving the camera to whatever position you want and holding an empty pose button. Repeat for subsequent positions. Poses can be sequenced to form complex movements. I also have the focus module and laser targeting system, but I wanted to test it out with AF first. I’ll be doing some test with the Canon EOR R later. Both are great, but there are so many great cameras out right now. I feel to really separate ones work from the crowd and finally achieve that cinematic goal, we filmmakers need to turn some serious attention to lighting, movement and most importantly... story. I hear you on your second point... it’s often hard to find others that want to film. This kind of setup can really help to free us to shoot whenever the sprit takes us. As for my goal, I have a couple of interest: narrative works are really my main artistic goal. Capturing family memories is important also, but more often than not my camera of choice for that subject matter tends to be my smartphone. Youtube for me is more about sharing ideas and knowledge that I may have gained. If my channel grows that’s great, but it’s not a huge focus of mine. Interesting you still prefer my Canon work... I won’t lie @mercer when you said that about the GH5S it probably played a role in my decision to ditch Panasonic. Too many people seemed to be of the same opinion. I like the Nikon it’s a great camera. But that Canon EOS R is just so easy to shoot with. It’s a study in functionality.

Really never found the quality of the rear display to be a problem on the X-T3. Compared to the 1DXMk2 the biggest usability difference I noticed was that the Fuji articulated when in portrait mode... something that is pretty handy if you ever shoot stills in this orientation.

One correction, the MK lenses do indeed have electronics. They transmit lens data to Fuji bodies. And they are great lenses for the money. Still, this idea that Nikon is really not embracing video is way off. On the contrary, I commend Nikon for their new approach to both video and firmware updates. They are on the right path.

The pros maybe quicker, simpler and much cheaper production... but it will also look like a cheaper production. So other than cost, there is no upside. Back in the day I loved AE. I could create some pretty crazy effects with that software. After awhile I focused on using it in subtle ways. Effect that were "there", but never noticed as effects. So naturally I've tried stimulating movement with cropping. It tends to look "off". Even a simple zoom or pan is easily spotted as fake. It doesn't matter if you ease in/out... or add motion blur. The problem is you cannot fake parallax and you cannot fake lens compression. This might have more success with a lightfield camera... but you could buy the motion controller and hire a crew for the price of one of those.

It's a great tool. Granted on the pricier side... maybe not so much when compared to other systems with the same functionality. Of course there are other options out there. For time lapse you can actually get into a slider that pans and slides pretty affordably. So there's no reason not to give it a try.

So our Edelkrone Motion kit with the new HeadPlus unit arrived. I figured it would be a great chance to have a quick play with it to see how the Nikon Z6 handles on it. I like this smaller form factor for this setup. It keeps it pretty light. I used the 24-70mm F4 on this shoot. The whole systems was very easy to setup and use. I plan to use this setup regualarly. So I will be in a good position to gauge reliability. Anywhoddles... here is the video. Feel free to comment:

First, the NIKON Z6 AND SONY A73 DO NOT SHARE THE SAME SENSOR. Nikon has their own engineering department and designed the sensors in the Z series to their own specs. They outsourced the manufacturing to Sony. As for Nikon only handing over the keys to their HDMI protocol... well that's selling Nikon short imo. Let's not forget that the entire new Z-mount lens series is specifically designed to work well for video. The lenses all operate near silent... and all have minimal focus breathing. Even the just announced 14-30mm F4 is designed with a flat front, so that it can be fitted with ND filters for video use. Nikon is building a video friendly system... not just a single video friendly body. I believe this is hugely important for many of us here in this community. As for the 1DXMK3, I know it will be amazing for stills, and the video will look great out of it. But it's hard for me to imagine Canon not pulling a Canon again... I hope I'm wrong.

I have to agree, it’s not perfect, but it’s a pretty good camera to work with. Are there limitations? Yes, that crop sucks. It makes all your glass tighter and slower. The build could be better. While the body itself feels quite solid the plastic bits feel cheap. But it has some killer features also. In the end what ruins this camera is Canon gimping it... as they always do. I think we have to reward companies that push the envelope. Nikon is doing that now. For years they neglected video... for years they neglected firmware updates... and so, for years I neglected Nikon. That has seemingly changed in a massive way. This entry into mirrorless presented an opportunity for Canon to turn over a new leaf. But clearly they are not ready to make that leap just yet. But don’t worry, with companies like Nikon and Fuji putting out cutting edge features Canon will have little choice but to evolve just to stay relevant.

Wow, your experience with this camera sounds awful. I can't say I've had so many issues. My main gripes are the crop, poor DR and... that's sort of it. If this was the only game in town... but it isn't.

It's nothing they can't add. I asked them about this at NAB, and they told me they would add it if they felt it was needed to even the playing field.

Don't mistake a hybrid for a dedicated cinema camera. The C200 is my main workhorse. I loooovvvveee the full sized XLRs, unlimited record time, handling, powerful rawlite codec. It's a wonderful thing to use. The 1DXMK2 is a tremendous stills camera. Trust me when I tell you the EOS R is no 1DXMK2... not even close. It's a weird kit... yes, but I suspect Nikon is going to deliver the hybrid we have all been waiting for, while Canon is going to continue to be "Canon". The Z6 represent a cheap way for me to test the Nikon waters. Honestly, so far I like what I see. Although my girl agrees with you. Oh, about that "beefy" codec... after bending the footage from both around in post, from what I can see, it is no more bendable than the Nikon codec... but it's about 3x the size... so there's that. I'm not saying it's bad, but it really takes awhile to transfer the footage compared to the Nikon, partly because the files are larger, and partly because the XQD is faster.

But not a Full Frame "Pocket". I know I'm not the only one thinking like this. The Z6 has really disrupted the market for hybrid shooters with this news. I think everyone has been put on notice. I fully expect Fuji not to be left behind.

I've given some thought to the cine glass situation. It's perhaps less of a problem with these mirrorless bodies, as adapter are readily available for both R and Z mounts. They are both great cameras, but if you are in it for the longer haul I feel Nikon will be a better choice. I really do love how quick it is to setup and get a shot with the Canon. I think the Nikon is a steeper learning curve. If the Canon shot full frame it would be a real winner. The low-light AF on the Canon is the best I have ever used. It nails focus in near complete darkness. Which is a good thing, because given the 4k crop, F4 becomes like F7 on the 24-105mm, it's pretty extreme. Both amazing cameras at any rate.

So you would use it with an external monitor attached in the rain? Interesting choice. I almost never carry the external monitor. I'm not sure if you are aware of this, but the Z6 can actually capture video internally. And it looks pretty dam good.