BLOG

The Z Cam is an exciting new cinema camera, but technical info and resources can be hard to find so we’ve put together this simple (and growing) set of resources to help new users.

There’s a forum for Z-Cam users.  It’s not especially active, but hopefully it will grow over time:  https://zcamuser.com/

As of December 3, 2019, the most recent firmware for the E2 is version 0.93.  You can find it here:  https://www.z-cam.com/e2/updates/

The most recent manual is oddly misnamed (with a lower number than the previous version).  You can find it here:  https://www.z-cam.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Z-CAM-E2-User-Manual-draft-v0.6-FW0.89-.pdf

When using the Z-Cam app you want the BETA version.  It’s stable and gives you more control options over the camera.  If you plan to connect your phone via USB-C be aware that it doesn’t work with all Android phones.

There are 5 image profiles:

• Rec.709
• Z-Log2
• Z-Log2Cine, one more stop in high light than Z-Log2. (E2-F6 only)
• Flat, same dymanic range as Z-Log2 but with color correction.
• HLG

When using WDR, the image profile is fixed to Z-Log2

Dynamic Range Chart:

This dynamic range chart was created by Z Cam, and frankly I have no idea what they’re trying to communicate here.  It’s unlike any dynamic range chart I’ve seen.  The one possible take-away is that the amount of data collected is reduced from the lower end of the range as the ISO increases, but this is pretty unclear:

 

False Color Chart:

Recording rates and Codecs:

ProRes 422HQ 4:2:2 10-Bit:

4096 x 2160p up to 30 fps

3840 x 2160p up to 30 fps

3696 x 2772 up to 30 fps

1920 x 1080 up to 100 fps

ProRes 422 4:2:2 10-Bit:

4096 x 2160p up to 48 fps

3840 x 2160p up to 60 fps

3696 x 2772 up to 48 fps

1920 x 1080 up to 120 fps

ProRes 422LT 4:2:2 10-Bit:

4096 x 2160p up to 60 fps

3840 x 2160p up to 60 fps

3696 x 2772 up to 60 fps

1920 x 1080 up to 120 fps

ProRes 422 Proxy 4:2:2:

4096 x 2160p up to 60 fps

3840 x 2160 up to 60 fps

3696 x 2772 up to 60 fps

1920 x 1080 up to 120 fps

H.265 10-Bit:

4096 x 2160p up to 23.98/24/25/29.97/50/59.94/120/150 fps (230 Mb/s)

3840 x 2160p up to 24/25/29.97/50/59.94/120/160 fps (230 Mb/s)

2696 x 2772p at 23.98/24/29.97/50/59.94 fps (230 Mb/s)

1920 x 1080p up to 23.98/24/25/29.97/50/59.94/240 fps (200 Mb/s)

H.264 8-Bit:

4096 x 2160p up to 23.98/24/25/29.97/50/59.94/120 fps (230 Mb/s)

3840 x 2160p up to 23.98/24/25/29.97/50/59.94/120 fps (230 Mb/s)

3696 x 2772p at 23.98/24/25/29.97/50/59.94 fps (230 Mb/s)

1920 x 1080p up to 23.98/24/25/29.97/50/59.94/240 fps (200 Mb/s)

 

Info on ZRAW is a bit difficult to find.  What we know for sure is that it’s 4:4:4 and 12bit.

 

Viltrox vs. Metabones Speed Boosters

There are a couple of speedbooster options for the Z Cam E2, and I had the opportunity to test both the Viltrox and Metabones.  I use Nikon lenses, which have the advantage of being excellent, inexpensive glass, and the disadvantage of being virtually impossible for adapters to autofocus.  So how do these two speedboosters compare and which should you buy?

Both adapters are .71x magnification. Metabones has a newer, Ultra model that is .64x. The Viltrox weighs in at $85—just one-fifth the price of the $480 Metabones.  That’s a huge advantage.  The low-low price raised questions about image quality, and I was surprised—nay, shocked—to discover that the Viltrox was just as sharp and slightly more contrasty with the Rec709 color profile.  And it’s slightly wider (even though they both claim to be .71 amplification). It actually looked better than the pricier Metabones.  Of course, if you plan to shoot ZLOG or flat, you may not want this extra boost of contrast.  You can judge the results yourself below.

Viltrox Speed Booster at f/4

 

Metabones Speed Booster at f/4

The scene is pretty dull and flat (sorry, winter garden box).  Both images were shot in 709 on the Nikon 28mm f/2.8 at f/4 for “reasonable” sharpness across the image.  The additional contrast in the Viltrox makes it initially appear sharper, but that when adjusted in post the images become virtually identical.  You need to add a little contrast and saturation to both images (and the adjustment automatically sharpens up the image as well), so neither is tweak-free.  If image quality alone was the deciding factor, the Viltrox comes out ahead in my opinion.  But unfortunately, the Viltrox had two issues that ultimately made me go with the Metabones.

My Viltrox (and yours may work better) was a little loose where it attached to the Z Cam.  There was about 1/8^th of an inch of wiggle, which is difficult to justify.  It didn’t cause a light leak, but if you were pulling focus you could run into issues when reversing direction.  The pull would jerk at the beginning.  The Metabones fit snuggly, but (sigh) there were was an oh-so-slight slight wiggle on the other end, between the adapter and the lens.  That wiggle was more of an irritation than a functional problem.   If the wiggle was the only difference between the two adapters I probably would have kept the Viltrox.  I don’t pull focus often, and you can “prep” that first pull and eliminate the initial lurch.  But the Viltrox doesn’t accept Nikon’s 20mm f/2.8 lens, either.  The lens won’t attach (it’s made differently).  With the booster, 20mm is roughly a 28mm equivalent (full frame), and that’s my preferred angle of view.  The Metabones does accept this lens, and this was an important selling point for me.  The Viltrox website lists which lenses it supports, so the lack of support for the 20mm shouldn’t have been a surprise.  If it supports your preferred lenses, be they Nikon, Canon, or other, I would definitely try their adapter first to see if it meets your needs.

One unexpected aspect of both boosters is that they don’t boost speed… at least not in comparison to a full-frame camera (perhaps MFTs are darker?).  The image below was shot with the Metabones Speed Booster and the Nikon 20mm f/2.8 on the Z Cam and on the Sony a7iii with Viltrox “dumb” adapter and the same lens.  I used the narrowest aperture so that the adapters would be set exactly the same; images shot with the widest aperture are similar.

 

And images shot using a light meter to set the camera settings are slightly under-exposed on the Z Cam as well (though not quite as much as this image).  I’m still working through they “why” this is.

 

The Z Cam (top) and the Sony a7iii exposure set according to light meter

 

Smallrig Cage Mini Review:

The Smallrig cage is one of the cheapest options for the e2, starting at $90, but it comes with a few quirks.  I love that it hugs the E2 so closely that it barely increases its size.  For those traveling light, it’s a boon.  There are two NATO rails built into either side, keeping the unit small, but they also the source of the quirks.  With the cage attached, it’s almost impossible to open the CFAST slot without a key or thin object.  The cage technically leaves room for the slot, but not enough room to get your finger in there. And tightening NATO rail attachments is a fiddly process because there’s not enough room between the camera and the cage.  But these shortcomings are well worth the reduced size in my opinion, and I’d recommend the cage.

ProRes:

Looking for more info on ProRes?  Read the white paper from Apple.