I have had lots of video camera's chasing that holy grail of picture quality thinking it would bring work flooding in my last was the pmw320 but no it didn't, on this journey I remember the z7 standing out the picture from this was lovely but no tape is dead you need tapeless so ex1 ex3 to 320 and then of course 50mbs raises its head oh iam running out of money what iam I going to do? Well I sold them and now have a used Z5 with the recording unit and the ninja 2 is there a need for anything more, whats people thoughts on the Z5 coz to me it ticks all the boxes

are we been sucked in by the hype? nobody wants blueray discs dvds are fine so 4k well!!

What are you filming? you mention cameras and work not flooding in. But what type of work?

If it's weddings ... then we have folks on this board including myself that can produce wedding videos with just handicams and DSLRs. If it's professional corporate stuff / news etc then the Z5 kit you have is good.

still very happy with my z5 and much more importantly, still making money with it....

haven't produced a dvd for years - all my work is distributed via the net or hq m4p files (usually distrib on personalised usb sticks).

4k is yet more marketing by a collection of industries running out of sale pitches (3d a couple of years ago, and a few years before that as well ;-))

at the end of the day it's CONTENT that matters, pretty pictures and shallow dof might be icing, but don't add much to lacklustre scripting.

if you want spectacular pictures you will still have to pay for them - good glass costs way in excess of any of the cameras you mention.

what is important is cutting through the hype and knowing what's required for the job, NOT what the reviewers and / or manufacturers tell you you need.

at the end of the day it's CONTENT that matters, pretty pictures and shallow dof might be icing, but don't add much to lacklustre scripting.
Truer words was never spoke.

Nobody cares about your kit. You will neither gain nor lose jobs due to it or the lack of it.

Leslie has, as usual, nailed it.

Thanks for the reply's, I do a lot of wildlife stuff some corporate stuff, football no weddings now but did use to do quite a lot but the bottom fell out of them same for photographers in this neck of the woods.


As for the wildlife hence the Z7, EX3, PMW320 for the interchangeable lens option but if I had known then what i know now the Z7 was good enough but what shocked me i was using the 320 with a 500mm lens and my friend had a EX3 with the standard lens + a century optic's 2x on the front he was getting tighter in than me and the quality was very good too.

So iam looking for a century optic's 2x for my z5 and that should cover me for most wildlife stuff.

Just wanted some feedback on how people felt about the Z5 as i hoped it was not such a downgrade from the cameras i have had

many thanks

I used a Z5 for many years, happily producing broadcast news and corporate work for DVD / web. We've just been upgraded to PMW-200s at the TV station I work at, due to going HD (need that higher bitrate, full HD codec for standards compliance)

My own personal Z5 has just been retired (anyone in the UK want to buy it?) due to being unable to resist a new "toy" - Canon XF200.

But yes, the Z5 is a perfectly good camera for many tasks, I reckon. Not once did I have a corporate client complain or, for that matter, ask for a blu-ray disc...

Cheers
Dave

Bit of a backhanded compliment, I think, implying despite all facts to the contrary that HDV isn't HD (it is, as anyone who has watched anything on The Discovery Channel can tell you, despite the rather silly objections squawked by a few antediluvian networks to puff up their bloated "standards") or that the footage the Z5 produces isn't suitable for Blu-Ray (it most certainly is, and looks miles better than anything shot on film in most cases).

Neither is accurate.

This is like saying, "Bless your little heart with your cute little toys. Now look at my real camera over here." This is cruel and unfair. The Z5 is a beast if you know how to use it.

You have called my bride ugly. No, you have called my children ugly. All five of them. So what if they have red hair and freckles and no one else in my family does. They are mine and I love them. I am deeply and personally wounded and offended. I challenge you to a duel, you knave. Pistols at dawn. Take that.

i'll be adams second ;-)

i have yet to be informed by either a client or regular viewer that there's any difference between hdv and post hdv formats.

if you shoot / light correctly then you'll have great looking footage no matter what.

frankly i think there's a great deal of manufacturers hype and purchasers self-reinforcement going on in many threads i read nowadays.

I agree that the Z5 is a great cam that is still viable. I happen to like the HDV format for a lot of reasons, two being ease and speed of editing and tape archiving. Plenty of quality in the footage for web, DVD, and Blu-Ray use. I can't think of another cam that has the features available on the Z5/Z7, and it's a shame this wasn't carried over to the NX5U. As long as you can get the look you want out of the cam without a lot of post manipulation, and you should be able to with all the in cam controls available, you should not have any problems. Frankly, I think the small 1/3 chips are a more limiting factor than the codec.

Having said that, I wanted a small, light, cheap cam to carry around day to day and a few months ago settled on the Pana DMC-FZ200 bridge camera. Amazing video and photo quality for less than $500. It certainly is not going to replace my Z5's, and I hate working with AVCHD, but a lot of bang for the buck here.

You have called my bride ugly. No, you have called my children ugly. All five of them. So what if they have red hair and freckles and no one else in my family does. They are mine and I love them. I am deeply and personally wounded and offended. I challenge you to a duel, you knave. Pistols at dawn. Take that.

Gosh. Crikey. Hornets nest apparently stirred. Can I just clarify, please?

1) I *like* my Z5. I used it happily for several years.

2) I was *required* to upgrade to the PMW200 by the broadcaster I work for as the 4:2:2 50Mb codec with 1/2 inch chips is what they specify and the camera was issued to me, not my purchase.

3) I have chosen to buy the XF because I'm a sucker for a new toy.

4) I never said the Z5 *couldn't* shoot for blu-rays. I said no client had ever asked for anything other than DVDs. In other words, the continuous push to upgrade one's technology is unnecessary given the requirements of most clients.

Now, having said all that, I am defiantly delighted to be using the PMW200 on a day to day basis as it thrashes my dear old Z5. The images are crisper whether in SD or HD. The handling of highlights and shadows is much better. The ability to cope in dimly-lit environments is *substantially* better. And the lens is constant aperture which is very helpful too.

Please, put down the pistols and go shoot some video instead :-)

Cheers
Dave

Ok... truce for now.

But you'd better be looking over your shoulder, my friend... Leslie and I could be around any dimly lit corner, waiting for you... and our Z5s see in the dark better than you think.

if it's really, really dark mine will have the z96 on it ;-)