tweak

Sorry, I did not mean to sound mean. But this is not how internet works, I am free to voice my opinion. I see a BS post and I call it out. OP pretentiously talks about "galilean action" and "horizontal artifacts", yet the images are highly uninspiring home shots with some of the ugliest flares I've seen. Then he proceeds to post lenses that look butchered. It seems he just took a hacksaw to some schneider cinelux lenses, then butchered some other lenses and randomly paired elements until he got a useable image. Using pseudo scientific terms to describe this process does not make it anything different. Just pure lens hacking. Pointless exercise, because no self-respecting DP will use something like this to shoot anything remotely important. Sure, if you want to learn by destroying lenses – go ahead. They don't make them anymore though.

But what really worries me is that I see at least 4 different kids in these shots. I don't know how old OP is, and I don't want to assume their gender, but this is not normal. 

No offense, but this is pointless. I mean, maybe if you have too much time on quarantine it's an interesting hobby, but it looks like you simply ruined schneider cinelux lenses. Any cheap sankor lens can do much better than this, with nice waterfall background. Get yourself a good cinelux and it will be a proper lens with good image, that won oscar.  I don't know what's a point in these, they look hacked together, not suitable even for lowest budget indie productions. I don't think any DP would put that on their camera. Maybe you should look at Rapido Technologies, they make good products like cases for anamorphics with engravings. etc. They still don't look very good, just a dull black pipe, but anything would look better than this. I think this would scare away any model or client when they see it in front of the camera. Maybe that explains why you only photograph kids and have no serious work to show with these.

A few more for the road. Damn does the F3 grade well.

There is a user made one and it’s constantly updated, though not on the main site, but it’s been recommended a ton, even from Kinson himself: https://reduxfilm.co/z-cam-handbook/#Frequently_Asked_Questions

Prores raw has the same problem though, you cannot use it in davinci resolve.

Wow.

Z-cam definitely needs a FAQ or knowledge base on its website, because the Facebook group can be very overwhelming. 

I just take it as a joke, he seems like a decent guy who is funny sometimes. I don't watch all his videos (or even watch through all of the ones I do), but I do find his humour funny because he's just trying to be a regular guy and not some inflated egotistical giant like most reviewers and influenzas are. For the record I've never watched an episode to get factual information. I think he fills a good niche that no one really has previous and his sense of humour at times appeals to me (making a joke out of people and things that take stuff really serious is the best, I hope he's making money).

For the record my favourite camera YouTube channel is - Analog Resurgence. That guy is doing it for all the right reasons and it shows.

The school lesson for today kids, is:
1. Jack by all means MUST apologise in a lengthy monologue at the end, brush the ice from his hair and making clear that in no way is he morally right to come after his wife with an axe.
2. The "problematic and triggering" child abuse must be balanced by an extra 30 minute scene inserted into the middle of the director's cut, where Danny has counselling.
3. Rather than Shelly brushing all this off as a bad day at the office for Jack, she should immediately leave the hotel at the beginning of the movie and bring Danny with her.
I think the film would be improved immeasurably for contemporary audiences with just 3 simple changes.

Stills from some past F3 projects, all with Leica R's and the 5" Video Assist. Such a remarkable camera: lovely to use, easy to grade, solid in low light, lots of dynamic range...for the money I paid, it's earned its keep 50 times over.
 
 

* Camera Conspiracies has entered the chat 

The Z-Cam folks definitely seem receptive. In many ways they're a model for what more companies should be doing. You can't compare them to anyone else in the camera game when it comes to listening to their user base, they're unmatched. I don't know that they'll be able to continue that as they get larger, but I certainly hope so! 
The users though are definitely fervent, and it's not always endearing. It seems your best bet, before criticizing anything, is to heap praise first or risk getting their fan base riled up. 
I watched Gerald's original review and I thought it was fair, and pointed out serious issues. I really didn't expect it to get the reaction it got. 

This is not my experience and I've met Kinson at IBC in person! Very nice guys, open to feedback and they constantly fix and improve firmware.
I believe you are confusing defensive fanboy users on Facebook with Z-CAM themselves!
It is good enough that Kinson actually takes the time to engage directly with users on Facebook.
Do you see the Canon CEO doing that?

More defensive community than Red?

Solution:
Abolish Facebook.

The state of the industry is shocking. The shilling is flagrant and constant. Sony is really bad at it with all the cretins they enlist on YouTube. It's become so bad that the best, and most unbiased, reviews come from a meme channel started as a joke about finding the perfect camera. He actually gives in-depth tests and comparisons.
Just look at the 1dx and the rolling shutter issue and how that was ignored. And some companies like Fuji get a pass on poor autofocus and ibis. Just does not look good and people should be made aware of it. 

With the decline of retail stores, the tech industry has found a replacement for shop salespeople.
YouTubers and reviewers.
In fact these are far more effective with much greater reach and they don't even need to be paid actual hard cash.
With the general public currently hypnotised by the lifestyle aspects of these channels (i.e. Philip Bloom style glossy videos), it's an easy sell.
For this all to work so well, the public have to be in their current online addicted narcissist state. I really like Stewart Lee's take on this, it is the absolute truth and bloody funny.
I was reading a few takes by the usual camera press on the Olympus situation recently.
To determine how high the level of control is over the press, even a dying company continues to hold reviewers in a rapture.
This Imaging Resource piece for instance, where they compare the transfer of Olympus imaging to vulture capitalists JIP to Sony buying Minolta!!
Don't forget these are top editors with links to almost every PR person in the camera industry.
https://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2020/06/25/can-olympus-thrive-after-the-sale-madavors-photo-editors-talk-it-through
It isn't up to me to tell you whether it is outright lying or just complete denial / delusion!
But it is one of the two.
"Wes Pitts (Outdoor Photographer and Digital Photo editorial director): It could be a good thing in the long run. Olympus has struggled for a while now. Though it's not a totally analogous circumstance, this "carve-out" reminds me of the sale of Konica Minolta's image assets to Sony. That move eventually led to Sony completely disrupting the traditional DSLR market and emerging as the leader in mirrorless"
William Brawley (Imaging Resource senior editor): Good thinking, Wes! I sure hope this new "Olympus Imaging company" does indeed follow a similar Konica Minolta-Sony path.
It has also become clear that there is an orchestrated cartel of YouTubers, probably with agencies and managers pulling the strings.
The occasional comment, the occasional share, it is not organic but completely pre-determined by a promotional strategy.
A quid pro quo situation.
'You do this for me and I'll do this for you, and it boosts both channels'
I think it is sickening the amount of shilling types out there and the way buyers are being manipulated.

I think your argument is based around the idea that lenses are an investment, but they're not, they're a consumable.
I understand why you might think that, because it's a myth that seems to be on endless repeat in photography circles.
To understand why I don't believe that lenses are an investment, have a look at the Camera-Wiki Lens Mounts page, or the Wikipedia Flange focal distance page, and see how many of the mounts are still in-use on a current model camera.  There are things like PL, and EF (although its days are numbered), but the vast vast majority of them are essentially dead.  Even if you take very good care of them (the best way by never using them!) they will still age and the rubber and lubricants will dry out, with plastics becoming brittle, and coatings changing over time (yellowing, for example).  A second hand market does exist for some of the exotic lenses of yester-year, but unless you're talking about the pinnacle of the range, then they're worth very little.
MFT is a dead mount in the same way that EF is a dead mount - it is supported by current flagship cameras with specs that remain desirable, but is likely to decline in the future.
I would hesitate to call PL mount a dead mount, but anything else probably has the writing on the wall, it's just a matter of time.
I invested in MFT glass considering it a purchase that I would use for a period of time, get value out of, and then at some point it would be worth nothing to me and likely to other people as well.  Just like the shiny new camera bodies that everyone loves to salivate over.  I have some of the most desirable MFT lenses around, but the total cost was still in the same league as buying a single camera body.
In terms of the GH5 having been left behind, do a count of how many current model cameras can match the 4K60, or the 400Mbps All-I 4K 10-bit internal, or the 5K 10-bit open gate h.265.  Odds are whatever it is you're using can't do that.  There are some cameras that can, but odds are that I can't get them into a museum or historical monument without security asking me if I'm a professional, which wouldn't matter because my arm would probably fall off having to carry it around all day.
All technology goes down in value over time.  Relying on the resale value of any piece of equipment to justify its ROI is a recipe for losing your money.
I don't understand why people think of equipment in terms of resale value - it's purpose is to be used, not traded.

Another one they need to make really is an EVF with in built recorder, something which is much more viable now with the tiny SSDs.
Having it in an EVF format would add so much value to a lot of cameras, particularly fixed screen ones like the fp and Pocket4K/6K.
In an ideal world, RED would license R3D directly to camera manufacturers to stop the hoop jumping and I'd presumed their link up with Canon over the KOMODO was going to do just that with the R5 but as far as I understand that isn't the case.
 

I wonder if it will have the same impact with the youtube shills as the zv1 i.e. 1000 videos drop at once from the likes of Phillip Bloom, that tech channel which exclusively reviews apple products, the fashion blogger that sony paid et cetera et cetera.  

Global Shutter cameras have always been a compromise, sometimes really serious compromises. 
This is why it is  no surprise that there is only currently just one professional grade cinema in widespread usage: the Sony PMW-F55 (plus the very niche Phantom). 

And you clearly do *not* need a global shutter to be widely successful, ARRI doesn't. 

Thus I don't want small startups with a promising future like Z Cam, to waste their precious limited resources on developing a camera which will be a flop such as their global shutter Z Cam E2-GS

As for the RED Komodo, we all know RED has a very very long history of... should I say "lying"? Let's just say, "over promising"  / being "hyperbolic" / "generously optimistic".

Let's wait until we see Komodo available in stock at retail stores to buy, and has reviews from non-biased / non-censored reviewers. 

hahaha. Just doin it for the love! (I'm the dude with the glasses btw). I didn't really set out to make this thing I just shot and it happened.

Lenses on E2 +MBXL:
nFD taking lenses - 85mm f1.8, 135mm f2.8, 200mm f4
Anamorphic: ISCO s8.
Rapido FVD8A variable diopter.
(There's also a couple of shots of the yellow rail and kicker which were taken with el-nikkor 50mmf4 and Kowa8).

Lenses on GH5 + MBXL (housing shots mostly):
nFD 24mm f2
Sony 1.33x anamorphic

Drone and Action Cam:
Hero 7
Mavic

True. Even Phantom Cameras have a Rolling Shutter, with a Global Shutter switch. The dynamic range loss, low light issues and the image degradation must be pretty substantial. 

True that.

Your other work on the BMPCC looks really good as well. I've been shooting super 8 a bit and I have to agree, it's very easy to grade. I'm trying to get my 16mm setup dialled in so I can shoot something more proper, your work is good inspiration for me, there's something there that just makes you want to do it.

I've been shooting the E2 with anamorphics for over a year now, it's an amazing package for the price. I mostly shoot in 48fps Zlog2 Pro Res for the best of both worlds. A lot of what I do is sports.

Here's the latest thing I did with mostly 2x anamorphics, the waterhousing stuff is 1.33x GH5. Just scrub through and you can find some shots. Very happy with the camera.