KnightsFan

Amazong. So is this the first hybrid camera to natively offer RAW video? I would never have guessed that Nikon would be first.

Interesting.  I didn't realise that they were keeping Fusion as a standalone product, although that might not be the long-term direction.
I know that in terms of integrating or modifying software significantly, certain bits are a lot easier to get working than other bits.  Maybe the roadmap is to gradually add in the bits that Resolve hasn't enabled yet, or maybe not, who knows
Yeah.  I found it interesting the BM guy searched the forum to see how many times it was mentioned, so maybe they do try and respond to users.  I kind of got the impression that they do, but also they have a strong strategy - integrating an NLE, Fairlight, and now Fusion into Resolve wouldn't have been them responding to forum users!
It was also interesting the BM guy said that it wasn't necessary, and someone countered by pointing out that 8K support also wasn't necessary..  touché!
Agreed.  I noticed a huge difference in crashing between 12.5 and 14, so I think someone really pushed for it to get more reliable.  It went from crashing about every 20 minutes to maybe every 8 hours of use for me, so that's significant.
One thing I can kind of sense is that a lot of the niggling bugs have been around for many versions, so I think they might be harder to get to issues more to do with mashing things together instead of just isolated in one module or whatever.  Things like the "I get no audio" bug which seems to be fixed by anything from muting and unmuting in each panel to changing system output device or messing around with the database, and has been with us since v12.5 and probably before that even.
I agree it's big and blocky.  I alternate between using it on a 13" laptop and using the same laptop with a UHD display.  It's better on the larger display, but it's definitely not as customisable as would be ideal.  
I think this is due to the heritage of it being around for a long time, like most other long-lived software packages look old and inflexible.  In a sense this is something that also runs through the film industry too, so much of the processes, techniques, terminology, etc is rooted in out-of-date technologies or previous limitations that are no longer present.  This is really a symptom of what happens when you take a challenge (make a film) break it up into the steps (shoot, develop, edit, test-screen, picture lock, sound, colour timing, distribute) and then when the technology changes you update each part individually but not the way that it was broken up in the first place.  The things that the film-industry talks about as being revolutionary seem completely ridiculous when viewed from an outside perspective, like the director working with the colourist to create a LUT that was used on-set to preview the look as it's shot, or being able to abandon the idea of the picture-lock by being open to making changes to the edit if the audio mixing discovers any improvements that could be made.
These are obvious no-brainer things if you haven't gotten used to those limitations over time.
In terms of Fairlight I think that's the case too.  Having a mixing desk approach made sense when audio equipment was all analogue, but it's always seemed restrictive to me.  Here's a screenshot of the free modular software-only tracker that I was writing music with about 20-years ago.

Every blue box was an audio generator and every orange one was an effect.  Every arrow had a volume control and every module had an unlimited number of inputs.  Every module could be opened up and adjusted with sliders for each parameter.  Every slider could be automated.  Anyone could develop new modules and share as .DLL files.  
As computers got more powerful you could have more modules.  We got to the point where it became difficult to work with because you couldn't adjust the size of the boxes on the screen and so you'd have stacks of boxes on top of each other.  I used to write tracks like the above where there was a separate effects chain for every instrument, except things like compressors where you want them to drive the whole mix.  My friend used to connect every module to every other module just to see what they sounded like, and he'd get these amazing textures and tones.  He was a big fan of Sonic Youth and apart from writing electronic music with me he also used to play guitar and integrate samples from that, and later on we get into glitch and heavy sampling.  
I think I would have gone insane if I'd been trying to write music limited to the architecture of a mixing desk, or couldn't just right-click and bring up a new module..  what do you mean every reverb instance costs $1000?????

Brusfri is another NR software which is highly affordable that I'd recommend. 
 
It is. And besides, you'd assume everyone should have a DAW and NLE already anyway

Reaper for instance is so cheap everyone should have it!

Thats a fair assessment for whether it is worth the money to you. In fact, i passed on the e2 because i will be using an xt3 on my next project. But thats a similar argument to saying the a7r3 isnt worth more than the a73 because you only need 42 megapixels for specialty purposes.
And as @androidlad points out, there are other benefits. If you want prores on an xt3 you are looking at another $500 for an external recorder anyway. I completely see your point though, and agree that if you dont need the extra features, or if you want those beautiful 26mp photos, the xt3 is a better camera for you.
The truth is, everything is now a product in development. Most major software companies ate switching to rolling updates and away from major versioning. Tesla rolls out software updates for their cars. Ten years ago it would be unthinkable to have to update your car! Its just how the world works now. The good news is Z cam listens to their buyers and is willing to shape their product to fit evolving needs.

No more than you would need for most other cameras. It uses cheap batteries, and you can use an iphone as a wired or wireless monitor. Most other cameras need like a teradek to do that. A side handle is pretty cheap and you can even use it left handed.
Most people considering an e2 would get an external monitor and cage for any camera they got which would puy them at the exact same accessories.
Name a cheaper camera--with or without accessories--with an interchangeable lens and 4k 120 at 10 bit. Name one that also has wireless monitoring for cheaper. You could spend $1k on accessories and still it will be cheapest in its class. The gh5s cost more brand new than this does with a side handle and cheap monitor.
Maybe none of those features speak to your needs. Thats fair if it is not the best value for you. But the price overall seems good for what you get.

"Z CAM E2 is formally ProRes licensed!" -Kinson
Next firmware update will unlock it automatically; in the meantime they posted a method to unlock ProRes manually. Unlike the internal H.265, which is 10 bit 4:2:0, internal ProRes on the E2 has 4:2:2 subsampling.

I wonder how the low light would stack up with a speed booster and some aggressive noise reduction? I mean if you are tearing it down anyway, it would be worth looking into switching to MFT or E mount.

Cinamatic is intention. If you intend it and it has a purpose it can be cinematic. If your gimbal isnt calabrated right and you get jittery footage it's not cinamatic but if it was controlled and intentional like in Saving Private Ryan it certainly could.

Totally agree. I'd rather see the E2 as a polished product before they announce a GS version. But hey, maybe the industrial market will snatch them up?
True.
But... last weekend I went back to some of my REALLY old projects. (The .wmv files no longer play audio in VLC, so I wanted to re-export in a modern codec. Success, btw) They were shot on an old photo camera. 640 x 480, 15 fps. But it was a CCD with intraframe mjpeg in 422! The motion was day and night compared to modern cameras. Really makes me want a GS camera.

It is EXTREMELY RARE to even have a global sensor cinema 4K camera, in fact what notable ones exist....  only the Sony F55 (VERY expensive!) and the flawed BMPC4K

So if someone brings out a low low priced Global Shutter 4K cinema camera then I'm perfectly ok if it is a compromise or there, such as a S16 sensor (merely the same as my BMPCC has). 

Although honestly I wish the rabid global shutter internet deskjockey fanboys had never managed to convince Z Cam in the first instance that a global shutter camera is a worthwhile project, as I'd have rather Z Cam had directed their limited R&D elsewhere. 
 
Arguably you can use the Z Cam straight out of the box (not counting media or lens, which most cameras don't come with), assuming you have a smartphone (as nearly everyone does). 
 

I expect fewer sales for their GS camera than they're expecting. 

Because there are not "many" people who want a Global Shutter camera above all else as their holy grail, there are only very few, but these few are very vocal online and fool people into thinking it is more important than it really is. 
 
 
Well you'd still be needing plenty of lights if a person got the Digital Bolex instead. 
 

The GH5 is a lot more expensive even used, compared to the E2C. The E2C is like if Panasonic had put 4k 10 bit into their G85.
Same thing that already happens when you get a phone call during a shoot... you ignore it and don't ruin the take.
Haha, I kid--it's a valid point. But to be fair, people already use their iphones to shoot serious videos. It's easier to pop the monitor off and make a call on it than to get it out of one of those fancy rig/cage things with the lens on front and everything lol.

The E2C is certainly an interesting new camera. My guess is it's the same sensor as the E1, but with a better processor, and updated I/O to fit with the E2 family. If so, there was minimal R&D involved, just putting together pieces Z Cam was already familiar with. I'm not really interested in buying one, but it seems like a brilliant option for live streamers. POE can really cut cable clutter.
For $800 you can get a brand new camera that shoots 10 bit internally. Amazing how far we've come.
On a more speculative note, a future that I've imagined is using a tiny PC as a recorder. Run ethernet from the camera to the PC, affix an audio interface to the top, and record multi-track audio in sync with the video using your favorite software. No timecode or synchronization needed, just one record button for everything. You can use codec you want, any hard drive you want. Review footage and edit metadata with a full blown OS.
 
It might be, but the E2C is significantly cheaper for a brand new camera, even compared to a used GH4 and a new Ninja V, plus the E2C is a significantly smaller setup. If  you already have an apple phone, your monitor needs are already covered. With the E2C, you get H.265, and I assume it will eventually have ProRes internally. It seems there are advantages to both.

Yup, sounds like simple compression artifacts to me. Downscaling might make it subjectively more pleasant to look at, but won't recover any details that have been mushed. The only real solution would be to use a higher bitrate or better codec to begin with. Raw of course solves every problem, but is usually overkill. High bitrate intraframe codecs are ideal for fast pans, but even using a higher bitrate interframe codec would improve the image.
However, a better acquisition format doesn't fully solve the problem. If you distribute on a streaming service, then it will be compressed into mush, whether you shot in Raw or not. The delivery format is often the limiting factor these days.

Downscaling is essentially adding a blur to your image. It might help reduce compression artifacts--if that is indeed what you are seeing, that was just my first guess without having seen the image itself. You might get better mileage out of a directional blur rather than downscaling.

Good advice for anyone who uses middle grey as an exposure method but using middle grey as and exposure method may not be good advice.....

Well yeah, but at least for me it means "Dont stick to the native iso's and try some stuff out if needed." 

There are definitely prores videos out there. It's officially in the camera now. They said it can't do prores raw output.

...and Nikon goes from "buy Nikon lenses--you can adapt them to any camera!" to "buy Nikon cameras--you can use any lenses!"

The a7 is old. This is a 2019 camera we are talking about. I assume it will have 4k and high frame rate of some sort, etc, much different from a years-old camera having dropped in price to $800

...and Nikon goes from "buy Nikon lenses--you can adapt them to any camera!" to "buy Nikon cameras--you can use any lenses!"

Nikon has registered several new models with the wireless agencies worldwide, with rumours that a high-end mirrorless Z9 is due to be released this year, along with a more affordable Z5 aimed at the lower-end of the full frame market around $1200. The first affordable Nikon APS-C DSLR to shoot non-cropped Super 35mm 4K is expected to be the Nikon D5700.
Read the full article

It might be a year or two, but in the meantime we can use proxies, the way we did when 4k just started. I dont think computing power will be a big deal in the long term. It seems to me that 8k is happening much smoother and cheaper than 4k did.
Thats not to say that 8k is super important, but i think the tech is shaping up nicely.

It might be a year or two, but in the meantime we can use proxies, the way we did when 4k just started. I dont think computing power will be a big deal in the long term. It seems to me that 8k is happening much smoother and cheaper than 4k did.
Thats not to say that 8k is super important, but i think the tech is shaping up nicely.

Similar price, both will be used by vloggers, hobbyists, students, and professionals for a variety of purposes, and both will end up in those "$1000 camera vs Arri Alexa" videos. Both have some features i like, and lack some that i find essential.
Considering the price, i find a comparison between this and the p4k more apt than say a comparison between this and an a7s3, or between the p4k and an ursa mini. In both of those cases, one option is simply out of my budget.
If you want to tell people which cameras can be compared, youve got a lot of internet to police.