KnightsFan

I'm understanding what you're saying, it's just that the Z6 seems to behave differently than other cameras that I have used. I'm leaning toward the idea that there is something else going on correction wise that is affecting noise levels. It's nothing that cannot be worked around, but it is an additional consideration when planing a shoot. I might have to dig into the settings to see if there is anything enabled that could be the culprit. 

Most people do not even have theirs P4K yet, and you are selling it for 500-1000$ already?!
Get a grip guys!
At the moment there are cameras offered at higher than retail price on ebay. This camera is a huge success already, and it well a lot more before the end of its cycle.

I don't know about holding back, but it's all about priorities, I think. Z Cam is a bleeding edge company. They make 360 cameras and are actively working on integrating AI into their cameras. Z Cam has a smaller community, and many owners at this point expect bugs and workarounds--it's the price of using bleeding edge.
Blackmagic is focused on bringing cinematic imagery at a low cost: they care more about color science and integration into pro workflows than they care about high frame rates and next gen tech. Their target audience is more likely to have learned on film than Panasonic or Z Cam. The P4k is also significantly cheaper than the other cameras, the fact that it even competes spec-wise is impressive.
Panasonic is orders of magnitude larger than either company, and needs to compete with the other giants (Canon, Sony, Nikon), both today and tomorrow. Their products need to have near 100% reliability, and be easy for consumers to use. A single bug could kneecap initial reactions to a product, permanently damaging their reputation. Why spend the R&D money on 4k 120 if Sony isn't, and when that money could go towards QA?
Of those three companies, it seems to me that Z Cam has the most incentive to innovate with technology. It wouldn't surprise me one bit if Z Cam ends up with the best specs.

as androidlad says, with h.265 and framerates of 30fps or below, you can get 400Mbps with both long gop or all i

I don't know about holding back, but it's all about priorities, I think. Z Cam is a bleeding edge company. They make 360 cameras and are actively working on integrating AI into their cameras. Z Cam has a smaller community, and many owners at this point expect bugs and workarounds--it's the price of using bleeding edge.
Blackmagic is focused on bringing cinematic imagery at a low cost: they care more about color science and integration into pro workflows than they care about high frame rates and next gen tech. Their target audience is more likely to have learned on film than Panasonic or Z Cam. The P4k is also significantly cheaper than the other cameras, the fact that it even competes spec-wise is impressive.
Panasonic is orders of magnitude larger than either company, and needs to compete with the other giants (Canon, Sony, Nikon), both today and tomorrow. Their products need to have near 100% reliability, and be easy for consumers to use. A single bug could kneecap initial reactions to a product, permanently damaging their reputation. Why spend the R&D money on 4k 120 if Sony isn't, and when that money could go towards QA?
Of those three companies, it seems to me that Z Cam has the most incentive to innovate with technology. It wouldn't surprise me one bit if Z Cam ends up with the best specs.

I dont think thats a fair assessment of blackmagic. Prores is, for whatever reason, an industry standard. Blackmagic includes it because thats what standard workflows require. If blackmagic were responsible for making prores standard, then you could say they were just trying to market an inferior product.
Moreover, as much as i believe that more efficient encoding is better, it is significantly easier on a processor to edit lightly compressed material. Editing 4k h265 smoothly requires hardware that many people simply dont have yet, such as the computer lab at a university i recently used. Prores was simply easier for me to work with.
But for the most part, you are right. Processors seem to be a limiting factor for cameras at this point. Even "bad" codecs like low bitrate h264 can look good, if rendered with settings which are simply unattainable for real time encoding with current cameras. Its great to see sony making bigger and better sensors, but with better processors and encoders, last generation sensors could have better output.

I shot with an xt3 and an nx1 on a recent project, and while the xt3's footage was visibly better in 4k 24 when i pixel peeped, i really can't say it really made a difference for my project. Of course having that quality in higher frame rates and a faster readout are real benefits, but even the nx1 peaked for diminishing returns in terms of color, compression, and dynamic range. At this point the biggest upgrades i want are for workflow: timecode, ergonomics, false color, and such.

No converter ever seems to have the options I'm looking for. I first started using ffmpeg to create proxies. After shooting I run a little python script that scans input folders and creates tiny 500 kb/s H.264 proxies with metadata burn in. I tried other converters but I had so many issues with not being able to preserve folder structure, not being able to control framerate, not being able to burn in the metadata I want, etc. I've also had issues with reading metadata--sometimes VLC's media information seems off, but if I use ffprobe I can get a lot of details about a media file.
I also use ffmpeg now to create H.265 files since Resolve's encoders are not very good. I can get SIGNIFICANTLY fewer artifacts if I export to DNxHR, and then use ffmpeg to convert to H.265 than if I export from Resolve as H.265.
And recently I did a job that asked for a specific codec for video and audio, the combination of which wasn't available to export straight out. So I exported video once, then audio, then used fmpeg to losslessly mux the two streams. And another little project that required me to convert video to GIF. It's become a real swiss army knife for me.
Yes, Resolve has a batch converter. Put all your files on a timeline, and then go to the deliver page. You'll want to select "Individual Clips" instead of "Single Clip." Then in the File tab you can choose to use the source filename.

Incorrect! 

No problem! Good luck!

No converter ever seems to have the options I'm looking for. I first started using ffmpeg to create proxies. After shooting I run a little python script that scans input folders and creates tiny 500 kb/s H.264 proxies with metadata burn in. I tried other converters but I had so many issues with not being able to preserve folder structure, not being able to control framerate, not being able to burn in the metadata I want, etc. I've also had issues with reading metadata--sometimes VLC's media information seems off, but if I use ffprobe I can get a lot of details about a media file.
I also use ffmpeg now to create H.265 files since Resolve's encoders are not very good. I can get SIGNIFICANTLY fewer artifacts if I export to DNxHR, and then use ffmpeg to convert to H.265 than if I export from Resolve as H.265.
And recently I did a job that asked for a specific codec for video and audio, the combination of which wasn't available to export straight out. So I exported video once, then audio, then used fmpeg to losslessly mux the two streams. And another little project that required me to convert video to GIF. It's become a real swiss army knife for me.
Yes, Resolve has a batch converter. Put all your files on a timeline, and then go to the deliver page. You'll want to select "Individual Clips" instead of "Single Clip." Then in the File tab you can choose to use the source filename.

So the current situation is that:
1. You have H.264 footage, but it is not linking properly in Premiere
2. You can convert H.264 to ProRes with Adobe Media Encoder, but it bakes a black bar at the bottom
3. You can convert H.264 to ProRes with Compressor, but there is a color shift
4. IF you could convert to a properly scaled ProRes file, you can get it to work properly in Premiere.
Are all of those correct and am I missing anything major? If not, one option is to use ffmpeg for conversion. It's is my go-to program for any encoding or muxing tasks, and I've never had any issues with it encoding poorly or shifting colors. Is this an option?

Have you looked at the file in other programs? Can you confirm whether it's exclusively a Premiere problem, or is the problem with the files themselves?

Because downsampling decreases noise, thus giving more dr in the shadows (at the expense of resolution of course).

Hi Andrew, this rumor and details should be presented in perspective.
I means, the NX1's sensor was able of 4k 240fps, IN LAB SETUP, and in year 2014 or even before.
By LAB SETUP, it means you cannot have it in a "camera size", even thinking to a large format camera.
BUT,  NX1 itself was able only 30fps. What was missing? A very powerful processor.
This is valid today for any pro-consumer camera, how many are able to do it, aka 4k 240fps?
Can you hold it on your nose or on your shoulders?
This new 8k sensor (7680x4320) with 71.93fps, does not have an 4k (3840x2160) output yet in the leaked specs but it could be 4 times quicker, so 4k @ 280 fps, well 16% quicker than the one in NX1.
I can't have a smooth playback on 4k on a "normal" laptop (i7, 16GB RAM, 250GB SSD, nVidia discreet graphics) just few years old, I have to have the playback direct from NX1 on HDMI :-( . . .
8k, let me. . . hope. . . maybe in 10 years will it be in a "convenient" package not pulled in a trailer.

In the context of the original post I was responding to you can't make up the difference between and Alexa's  DR and colour capture buy subsampling an 8k 'consumer grade' sensor. 

You don't really need a 16bit screen to reap the benefits though.

I will never understand, do you shoot or are you just some kind of geek. Because I will never understand people that says thing like that. I mean, can someone at real viewing distance even see more than 2k. The perfect example is the Alexa 2.8k sensor, I don't see anyone complaining about lack of resolution. It is just the geek that might find it sexy to be able to count every pores in an actress face when stopping the image.

It is a sony sensor.
@DBounce thats correct, two models, one for 30p and one for 60p.

It is a sony sensor.
@DBounce thats correct, two models, one for 30p and one for 60p.

I'm disappointed that the very vocal global shutter religious fanatics online have mislead Z Cam to waste their R&D resources on such a poor return for them.
No
 
Yes
No. 

You could even ask the question:

Is a global shutter camera really even necessary for 99% of professional filmmaking/videography? 

Answer: No.

The GS variant will probably have even fewer takers. It has a 1" sensor, lower frame rates, and less dynamic range. Basically, the RS version will be better in every way except that one feature, so I doubt it will influence sales of the RS version much.

Exactly. How useful is it? And if MFT gives the performance we need, then do we need to go extreme with FF sensors?

Look at the stills world, APS-C sensors already give all the photographic performance that 99% of us need (More people realizing that is what Fujifilm is betting on. With MF for the 1%, and the rich doctors/dentists/lawyers/hipsters)

The GS variant will probably have even fewer takers. It has a 1" sensor, lower frame rates, and less dynamic range. Basically, the RS version will be better in every way except that one feature, so I doubt it will influence sales of the RS version much.

Over on PV Forums then @eatstoomuchjam reports that with a little hacking he can already record ProRes HQ 4K on his Z Cam E2. 

Just needs a flag to be enabled in the existing firmware. So ProRes is already 100% ready to go on the E2, but Z Cam is waiting before enabling it....   probably just the final rubber stamping approval from Apple.