Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.



So they've ditched the original Shogun and even the newly released Assassin already.....
No where to be seen on their website under the Products menu. wow.
They're clearly aiming for the more affordable portion of the market where 4:2:2 HQ is plenty good enough. If you want Raw, you have the Convergent Design line.Not a word about the RAW.
Ok so it has a nice screen. Big deal.
How about the fact that it is still only doing Prores 422HQ? ...
The DCI support and ability to run longer on batteries is a huge update for me.
Not a word about the RAW.
Ok so it has a nice screen. Big deal.
How about the fact that it is still only doing Prores 422HQ?
Come on it's only half a tease.
That's my problem with this. I JUST bought the Assassin and now it's been replaced. I've worked with tech most of my life and would think it'd be safe to buy when the thing was just announced in September...
http://nofilmschool.com/2015/08/atomos-announces-brand-new-4k-recorder-ninja-assassin
What exactly is no longer safe about your Assassin? Just because other people will no longer be able to buy it doesn't mean yours is instantly junk. Its still a great device if you already have one.
Whats wrong with ProRes422HQ? Considering most HDMI and SDI devices only output 4:2:2 I would consider this a pretty logical move. Heck when it comes to DSLRs none of them output 10bit except for the GH4 so again ProRes422HQ is about as good as 99% of users would ever dream of getting out of their cameras. Saving a 4:2:2 signal into a 4:4:4 file does about as much good as transcoding ProRes422HQ to ProRes4444 in post.
Having a nice screen kind of is a big deal. People pay more than this for just a high quality accurate monitor. There are professionals who actually do want an accurate screen that can show them how their footage actually looks.
Well, for starters 444 is far better for green screen, not to mention tricky situations like night work. I should know I'm a colorist.
Further, why do you assume everyone works on DSLR's? Even my F3 from 5 years ago outputs 444.
The new PIX-E5/7 from video devices even output 444XQ. If these codecs didn't matter to people why would VD have included them?
Further, if you own a Sony F5/55, a RAW recording device might be of use to you.
Atomos has been stuck on Prores 422HQ for a long time now, they have not really evolved as a recorder, more as a monitor.
Further, it is more than a bit disingenuous of them to announce RAW recording and then...guess what?
It turns out that it is only, you guessed it, Prores 422HQ from a RAW signal !
Great, so now you can take all the advantages of RAW recording and straightjacket it in a 10bit 422 codec and call it RAW recording for the sake of your marketing.
Total BS and you are defending this. Nice one.
Who is defending anything? I just asked whats wrong with ProRes422 HQ. The reality is if you do have a camera that can output 4:4:4 you are in the minority. Most cameras are lucky if they output 4:2:2 at 10bits so the Atomos Flame is a very viable product for a very large market compared to cameras that do support 4:4:4 or RAW output.
This product is only BS to you because you have very specific unique needs that does not fit into your workflow. It is not BS to the vast majority of users who in fact use DSLRs or professional or broadcast level video cameras that are in fact limited to 10bit 4:2:2 HDMI or SDI output.
If you feel the marketing for the raw support is BS that again is your right but I think it stills adds value to the Sony f5/f55 depending on if those cameras have the software upgrades or if somebody wants ProRes over XAVC. The standard Sony f5 only records 2k internally so if a user doesn't want the software update to record 4k internally then the Flame allows 4k recording from an otherwise 2k camera.
Besides a single chip bayer camera is kind of debatable how much better 4:4:4 recording is over 4:2:2. We are not talking 2k here but 4k that has much smaller pixels and it gets very difficult due to low pass filtering, de-bayering loss and optics to see a chrome difference at that level. If you are delivering 2k like many big budget FX movies in fact are than if you start with 4k 4:4:4, 4:2:2 or 4:2:0 and down convert to 2k there is not much of a difference at all. If you absolutely must have 4k 4:4:4 then this is clearly not the product for you and you should move on. Your needs however are in the minority and do not reflect the needs of many of the camera owners on this forum.
the Flame allows 4k recording from an otherwise 2k camera.
Interested.
Any links to where this is documented or otherwise mentioned?
cheers,