Danyyyel

R5II is still mainly a photography camera with its 45MP, ergonomics and eye-AF control EVF. It has great video specs but no fan, line skipped 4K60p.. I'd imagine the C50 would have limited stills, maybe e-shutter only, no EVF, cine OS.. not to cannibalise R5ii.

Open Gate alone is a major game changer. 6K RAW / 32MP stills make it a serious upgrade for hybrid duties. 
Now stuff like triple-base ISO / DGO sensor & NDs would make it epic but I still doubt that'll happen.
That said if you're happy with FX3 or locked into Sony, see this as more pressure on them to up the ante on FX3 II.

Why should it be a issue if you shoot raw? If its raw, the data is there. 

Just keep in mind to get "cool" cfexpress cards. Z8 has no serious overheating issue, unless you put a card that consumes a lot of power. There is huge gap in efficiency between some of these cards that nobody talks about (one of the reasons a reviewer says I got 1 hour and another says only 20 minutes). Angelbird CFe v4 1TB is rated 3.75w, but v2 that is slower is rated 2.4w. v4 sustained write speed is 2100MB/s (insane in such a small package) and v2 is 1300MB/s, meaning you get 60% higher speed for 56% more power consumption, which I don't think a good tradeoff, considering 1300MB/s is already fast enough, and I dont think you take too much 8k60p shots at highest bitrate. 

They also fixed their horrible n-log view assist. Nikon is really killing lately with their value for money, firmware, and camera offerings.

Yep, seems that it is not a Canon or Nikon, apart from the Viltrox, I don't think Canon or Nikon would showcase their camera with a third party lens, and not a full autofocus Canikon lens. 

Clearly, it's the DJI camera that they've been on the cusp of releasing for about 3 years now.

The Z6 III likely has a similar optical low-pass filter as the other models of the Z6 series which is reported as one axis only, so if there are high spatial frequencies on the other axis, these can cause moire or other forms of aliasing. Stopping down the lens to smaller apertures (such as f/11, f/16 etc. or using other means to soften the lens, such as a front filter) should eliminate the aliasing (including moire) if it does occur. The cause of this phenomenon is that the adjacent color filter array pixels can get different light (including different color of light), causing an interference pattern to form. Attenuating the high spatial frequencies optically should resolve the issue (and is the normal way to solve the issue). A thicker (two layers) optical low-pass filter on the sensor has the issue that the blurring is always there even though for some subjects (that are random enough not to cause problems) you might prefer the higher sharpness of the weaker, one-axis OLPF that the camera probably has at the moment. 
 
In video, moire can (in some cameras) be caused by line-skipping, e.g., when going for a high frame rate mode, this is common with some cameras to achieve 4K120, but on the Z6III 4K120 is achieved by cropping to DX so there is no line-skipping and there should not be any additional aliasing or moire happening due to the use of that mode. 

How can it be luck?
That's approx 100,000 frames of photography and approx 15,000 5-15 second clips of video (plus another 60 hours of static capture).
For the photo side, that has been with; Sony A7RV, Nikon Zf, Lumix S1H and Lumix S1RII.
Video, Lumix S5II, S1H, S9 shooting Vlog with LUT baked in. (Except S1H which has OLPF but no facility to bake in LUT).
It's just my experience, - what can I say? You have experienced something else, but that doesn't make my experience invalid.
What are these cameras of yours that are moire prone?

I mean the aim is not to use those 4-5 last stops and put them back at the base exposure, but it tells you that a 3 stop underexposure is still good, meaning your noise floor would still be much better than a camera that would be stuck at 2. Somebody else who likes to do technical test on Nikon cameras has an interesting test between the two, because he was intrigued how could the z6iii that was so criticized for the DR, while the S1ii got so much praise while using the same sensor. For me without the DR boost, the S1ii is still reaching 9 vs about 7 stops of latitude in the case of the Z6iii. The only difference for me is the 9 vs 12 ms for the sensor readout. And I hope Nikon give us, at least the S1ii DR. I already se a z9 which has 14ms sensor readout, so 12 ms is good for me.
 
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4812023 link to the comparison

Maybe the Sony 18-110mm cine zoom with an E to Z Mount adapter?
  
They do.
  
At least two big factors:
1) there are a tonne of Sony E Mount users, now they can very easily transition over to RED
2) Nikon will bring better AF to RED than Canon ever would have 
 

https://www.nikonusa.com/content/red-luts
 
Excited to try these. RED color (or maybe RED-ish color) for Nikon is a win in my book. The fact that these work on my 6 year old OG Z6 is awesome. That camera truly has aged like fine wine. 

IF I was you, I would wait a little bit until a CineD lab test. As shown with the Z9 test, between synthetic benchmark and real life latitude test, the result can be very different. Same for the Sony Burano which with the Z9 scored poorly in the imatest test, were for Nikon about the highest Sony based sensor camera with 8 to 9 stop (Even better than the Sony Venice 2), and The Burano, which with its 10 stops latitude, is the first camera to equal the original Arri Alev sensor. 

Too true. Arri targets the feature film and commercial industry. Those industries have absolutely no incentive to use BM or anything cheaper. The rental cost of an Arri is one of the smallest line items in their budgets. Why would they experiment with something that saves a few bucks on the rental when they have years of experience, trust, rigging etc all geared around their usuals cameras of choice? You technically could shoot a movie with a BM camera or an FX30 or a bunch of other cameras, but why would you unless you need something small for a specific shot? It's like saying your such and such street car can go the same speed on a drag strip as an F1 car so they're going to dominate the F1 industry here pretty soon. Um, no. Why would they? 

This was true with RED and yet it barely made any penetration into the industry.
It almost makes you think that the image coming out of the camera isn't the thing that determines the fate of the brand.....

Well I own precisely zero fast lenses as in primes such as 1.4 or 1.8’s and moved exclusively to zooms recently.
I prefer primes, but the reality for my work, is I tried juggling them for far too long but the simple reality was a typical zoom covers at least 3 prime focal lengths with simple rotations. 
OK, other than a few exotics such as Canon’s RF 28-70 f2 monster, faster than f2.8 zooms do not exist and I am over using any lens above 1kg and most of my zooms are ball park 500g or under.
AI could certainly adjust DOF to be even shallower, but you know what? I am also over ultra shallow DOF and f2.8 is just fine thanks!
 

With this logic, which I'm not arguing against, AI would kill the smartphone market first. Why should I upgrade my $1000 phone when I can update my camera app for $1.9 per month? 

IF I was you, I would wait a little bit until a CineD lab test. As shown with the Z9 test, between synthetic benchmark and real life latitude test, the result can be very different. Same for the Sony Burano which with the Z9 scored poorly in the imatest test, were for Nikon about the highest Sony based sensor camera with 8 to 9 stop (Even better than the Sony Venice 2), and The Burano, which with its 10 stops latitude, is the first camera to equal the original Arri Alev sensor. 

Nikon a bit naively, have a very conservative (Contrasty) Nlog which make it look very bad compared to others on DR test. On CineD on its Nraw test, it scored very low in the Sythetic DR imatest results.  But It shines in the truer real life latitude test. In their the Z9 is better than every Sony camera by at least half if not 1 stop better DR. +4 stop above and - 5 stop lower. In fact their are big surprise in this test, from Canon baked in NR RAW, that makes it look good, but once you have real life latitude it falls apart... except for their C70 with the DGO sensor. The biggest surprise for me is the Venice 2, at least a stop bellow the Z9!!!

This is the normal bitrate, they  have a higher bitrate one, it at least give you the capability to shoot raw at what used to be normal h264/265 bitrate. 

Yep, and this is why I said to go and watch latitude test on CineD. Before the CineD lab test I did not understand why people were saying Canon was faking its DR by using NR on its RAW files, now I know. Imatest is a synthetic test, you just have to apply a little NR on your footage and it might think the shadows are super clean. Look at Gerald's test of the Z8 h265 test, the thing is he got like an extraordinary number that he found out was due to extra NR on the z8 h265 footage and at the start of the file, that the imatest was fooled. 
Now look at the lab test at CineD. You will see above that the Xyla/Imatest result aren't that good compared to most other cameras, but watch the latitude test below. While most Sony sensors even the Venice 2 are at best 8 stops of latitude the Z9 is a solid eight and room for nine!!! https://www.cined.com/nikon-z-9-n-raw-lab-test-fw-3-00-rolling-shutter-dynamic-range-and-latitude/
Same for the Sony Burano, Which is even better as it reaches 10 stops of DR, the first camera to reach the Alexa Alev classic DR.  https://www.cined.com/sony-burano-8k-lab-test-rolling-shutter-dynamic-range-and-exposure-latitude/
You can see clearly when you analyze the different camera test, that the latitude test is much more real life DR of a sensor than the synthetic Xyla/imatest measurement. 
 

And this is why one shouldn't get hung up on imatest
The whole point of RAW for me is that the RAW sensor data is exposed in the final image, including grain texture and shadow noise.
Also this seemingly standard method in tests of exposing CMOS sensors for highlights, then ramping up the blacks - think about the impact that has on colour in the mids and tonality in the shadows. Yes you are showing what kind of dynamic range is possible but in creative terms it is a step back.
And when you start applying NR to the shadows in some misguided uncreative attempt to squeeze out that last 0.5 stops of dynamic range, you may as well shoot H.265
It would be interesting to take the uncompressed Cinema DNG cameras... Blackmagic Pocket 4K original firmware, Sigma Fp-L, 5D Mark III Magic Lantern, Digital Bolex and compare the image aesthetically to N-RAW and ProRes RAW, in terms of how close one or the other looks to film.
And film remains the gold standard for atmosphere, warts and all.
I always look at images and not so much the numbers especially when we are talking less than 1 stop differences between cameras.
Unless it is a case of Alexa 35 which is far ahead of everything else.

Yep, and this is why I said to go and watch latitude test on CineD. Before the CineD lab test I did not understand why people were saying Canon was faking its DR by using NR on its RAW files, now I know. Imatest is a synthetic test, you just have to apply a little NR on your footage and it might think the shadows are super clean. Look at Gerald's test of the Z8 h265 test, the thing is he got like an extraordinary number that he found out was due to extra NR on the z8 h265 footage and at the start of the file, that the imatest was fooled. 
Now look at the lab test at CineD. You will see above that the Xyla/Imatest result aren't that good compared to most other cameras, but watch the latitude test below. While most Sony sensors even the Venice 2 are at best 8 stops of latitude the Z9 is a solid eight and room for nine!!! https://www.cined.com/nikon-z-9-n-raw-lab-test-fw-3-00-rolling-shutter-dynamic-range-and-latitude/
Same for the Sony Burano, Which is even better as it reaches 10 stops of DR, the first camera to reach the Alexa Alev classic DR.  https://www.cined.com/sony-burano-8k-lab-test-rolling-shutter-dynamic-range-and-exposure-latitude/
You can see clearly when you analyze the different camera test, that the latitude test is much more real life DR of a sensor than the synthetic Xyla/imatest measurement. 
 

Just wait and see how much it cost to use an ambulance in the US, you get 4 Z6iii for one trip. LOL