Z Cam's Super 35mm 6K camera for under $3K: the "Z Cam S6"

[DBounce 1,270]

I'd be up for a S35 or Full frame Global shutter variant... If priced well. That would make these cameras into a micro Sony F55.

[androidlad 481]

18 minutes ago, DBounce said:

I'd be up for a S35 or Full frame Global shutter variant... If priced well. That would make these cameras into a micro Sony F55.

Sony Semicon ain't gonna allow that to happen.

[KnightsFan 480]

3 hours ago, IronFilm said:

We're talking about the FF cameras.

The Nikon Z6 with a Ninja V is definitely a lot cheaper than the Z Cams from the pricing indications they've given us. 

Ah ok. I was thinking the S6 with the preorder discount for some reason. $2500 for the S6 vs $2700 for the Z6+ninja, though it seems the Z6 is $200 off so it is roughly the same, give or take. Certainly cheaper than either of z cam's full frame cameras.

[thebrothersthre3 877]

7 hours ago, KnightsFan said:

Ah ok. I was thinking the S6 with the preorder discount for some reason. $2500 for the S6 vs $2700 for the Z6+ninja, though it seems the Z6 is $200 off so it is roughly the same, give or take. Certainly cheaper than either of z cam's full frame cameras.

I am seeing the Z6 go for $1500 used now, making it a total of $2200, which is nuts for what you get. 

[Geoff CB 967]

I have yet to see any great footage from these cameras...

[zerocool22 313]

1 hour ago, Geoff CB said:

I have yet to see any great footage from these cameras...

Yeah true that, get these cameras to some talented people and sell 100X times more cameras(if they are awesome that is)

[kye 2,144]

2 hours ago, zerocool22 said:

Yeah true that, get these cameras to some talented people and sell 100X times more cameras(if they are awesome that is)

Even if they aren't - the ability to get good results in seriously difficult situations is what separates the amateurs from the pros.  Even if they just commissioned a few short films by hiring a respected DoP, a good editor, and a great colourist, it might make all the difference.

With how cameras are tested nowadays it's really hard to tell what is the weakness of the camera, what is the weakness of the professional YT, and what is "I only had this camera for 17 minutes and only had 12 minutes to edit and grade because I wanted to upload before I got on the flight to the next fully-paid camera launch trip".

[thebrothersthre3 877]

7 minutes ago, kye said:

Even if they aren't - the ability to get good results in seriously difficult situations is what separates the amateurs from the pros.  Even if they just commissioned a few short films by hiring a respected DoP, a good editor, and a great colourist, it might make all the difference.

With how cameras are tested nowadays it's really hard to tell what is the weakness of the camera, what is the weakness of the professional YT, and what is "I only had this camera for 17 minutes and only had 12 minutes to edit and grade because I wanted to upload before I got on the flight to the next fully-paid camera launch trip".

On the other hand if you can get good results from a camera with a quick test that probably means it is a pretty good camera.

I know some people have looking at specs but it seems like any camera these days you can get good results with if you know what you are doing.

[DBounce 1,270]

2 hours ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

On the other hand if you can get good results from a camera with a quick test that probably means it is a pretty good camera.

I know some people have looking at specs but it seems like any camera these days you can get good results with if you know what you are doing.

Then that would seem to suggest these are not very good cameras.... wouldn't it? I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that these are quick test with a non-production ready unit. I do hope these cameras are amazing. For now though it's more something I will just keep an eye on and see how it develops.

[thebrothersthre3 877]

27 minutes ago, DBounce said:

Then that would seem to suggest these are not very good cameras.... wouldn't it? I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that these are quick test with a non-production ready unit. I do hope these cameras are amazing. For now though it's more something I will just keep an eye on and see how it develops.

That is true. I guess its just the difference from a camera that gives you a nice image easily vs something you have to work a bit more to get it. Maybe Canon vs Sony. Sometimes it might come down to something as simple as one camera having better auto white balance than another, at least when it comes to these quick tests you see online. 

That said there is no reason you can't get a good image out of the Zcam or really any other camera. 

[AlexTrinder96 167]

 

[maxmizer 43]

Perhaps we want to say: that the samples seen so far are not so "exceptional"
there is still a long way to go

[tweak 398]

Give a youtuber an Arri and see how they do... you'd probably think it's a bad camera afterwards as well  .

[zerocool22 313]

47 minutes ago, tweak said:

Give a youtuber an Arri and see how they do... you'd probably think it's a bad camera afterwards as well  .

thats true, but dont give it to a youtuber, give it to some cinematographers who got some decent films under their belt. 

[DBounce 1,270]

1 hour ago, tweak said:

Give a youtuber an Arri and see how they do... you'd probably think it's a bad camera afterwards as well  .

So is the Arri a "bad camera" now?