Background: Kinematic analysis aimed toward scientific investigation or professional purposes is commonly unaffordable and complex to use. Objective: The purpose of this study was to verify concurrent validation between a cycling-specific 3D camera and the gold-standard 3D general camera systems. Methods: Overall, 11 healthy amateur male triathletes were filmed riding their bicycles with Vicon 3D cameras and the Retul 3D cameras for bike fitting analysis simultaneously. All 18 kinematic measurements given by the bike fitting system were compared with the same data given by Vicon cameras through Pearson correlation (r), intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), standard error measurements (SEM), and Bland–Altman (BA) analysis. Confidence intervals of 95% are given. Results: A very high correlation between cameras was found on six of 18 measurements. All other presented a high correlation between cameras (between 0.7 and 0.9). In total, six variables indicate a SEM of less than one degree between systems. Only two variables indicate a SEM higher than two degrees between camera systems. Overall, four measures indicate bias tendency according to BA. Conclusions: The cycling-specific led-emitting 3D camera system tested revealed a high or very high degree of correlation with the gold-standard 3D camera system used in laboratory motion capture. In total, 14 measurements of this equipment could be used in sports medicine clinical practice and even by researchers of cycling studies.