ATOMOS NINJA on a consumer level HD camcorder?

D

dude40758

Member
the feature that I want to exploit in ATOMOS NINJA is it's capabilities to shoot HD videos at 4:2:2 color sampling(space). since, I'm doing a lot of chroma keying(green screen), keying at 4:2:2 is really helpful especially during action scenes performed in front of a green screen. I don't have the money to spend on a professional camcorder that comes featured with abilities to shoot at 4:2:2.
my question is, does it work? by just purchasing an ATOMOS NINJA and connecting it to a HD consumer level camcorder with an HDMI output could I get good quality 4:2:2 color sampling? or do I really need an expensive proffesional level camcorder?
basically ATOMOS NINJA gives a consumer level cheap HD camcorder some sort of professional features? without having to buy a professional HD camcorder. am I right?

that brings to my next question.. what consumer level HD camcorder should I buy?
could someone here suggest me one camcorder for each budget I listed below?

(350$) shoots at 1080p and have a HDMI output would be nice.. I don't expect to have interchangeable lens with this budget.. but it's fine. plus a film look would also be a nice addition.

(600$)I could also consider buying a 600 dollars camcorder if it's worth it.

(800~900$) I will only spend 900 dollars on the camcorder if it's really worth it.. though I don't see the reason why..

my other options are.. buying a used semi professional camcorder for $1000 dollars that are able to shoot in 1080p and 10 bit 4:2:2 color sampling(space) and skip buying an ATOMOS NINJA altogether.

:(:)
 
Last edited:
also.. since camcorder and Atomos Ninja have different color space than a computer.. won't there be some sort of change in colors when importing to the computer or video editing software? and won't it renders my 4:2:2 shots useless? how do I solve this problem? do I need to import the video to a Apple ProRes capable video editing software? one that could also utilize 4:2:2 color sampling like final cut pro X, sony vegas,etc?
 
Last edited:
The answer is, of course: it depends. It depends on what kind of output that consumer camcorder has. If it has cheap outputs and a lame chroma-screwed-up interlaced signal (like the GH2 has) then no, you will see no improvement from using a 4:2:2 recorder. It will just record the crap it's given, accurately and faithfully.

If on the other hand the camera is outputting a pristine 4:2:2 signal, then the Ninja will faithfully record it and in that case, you would see better chroma-keying results from the Ninja than you would have from the camera's own recording.
 
Barry_Green said:
The answer is, of course: it depends. It depends on what kind of output that consumer camcorder has. If it has cheap outputs and a lame chroma-screwed-up interlaced signal (like the GH2 has) then no, you will see no improvement from using a 4:2:2 recorder. It will just record the crap it's given, accurately and faithfully.

If on the other hand the camera is outputting a pristine 4:2:2 signal, then the Ninja will faithfully record it and in that case, you would see better chroma-keying results from the Ninja than you would have from the camera's own recording.
Click to expand...

so the ninja won't actually upgrades a camcorder, rather, it will add extra features such as the capabilities to shoot at 4:2:2 color space(sampling)? initially the reason I plan on buying the Atomos Ninja is so that I would be able to shoot at 4:2:2 with an affordable HD camcorder that doesn't have 4:2:2 color sampling capabilities.
what camcorder could actually output a 4:2:2 signal?
most camcorders now have 1080 Progressive scanning. do I need to even consider getting an interlaced camcorder?
 
Last edited:
HVX200/HPX170 have 4:2:2 and can sometimes be found for under $2000 on ebay. About double what you're looking to spend, I know. Also has true under and over cranking capabilities which you might like for your action scenes and a few other features that might make the extra dosh worth it. However, bear in mind accessories will easily double or triple that price. I don't believe there is any other camera with these features for anywhere near this price. Progressive scan is far better than interlaced for your purposes, again especially in the action arena. If you are considering the HVX note it is only progressive to 720p and has to use engineering wizardry to upscale images from the sensor to 1080i. Does a pretty good job of it though.

As far as answers from pros go, pay attention to anything Barry has to say. He knows a thing or two in the digital video arena...
 
Egg Born Son said:
HVX200/HPX170 have 4:2:2 and can sometimes be found for under $2000 on ebay. About double what you're looking to spend, I know. Also has true under and over cranking capabilities which you might like for your action scenes and a few other features that might make the extra dosh worth it. However, bear in mind accessories will easily double or triple that price. I don't believe there is any other camera with these features for anywhere near this price. Progressive scan is far better than interlaced for your purposes, again especially in the action arena. If you are considering the HVX note it is only progressive to 720p and has to use engineering wizardry to upscale images from the sensor to 1080i. Does a pretty good job of it though.

As far as answers from pros go, pay attention to anything Barry has to say. He knows a thing or two in the digital video arena...
Click to expand...

if I were to get the HVX200 or HPX170 does that mean I can skip on buying an ATOMOS NINJA? since HVX200 and HPX170 already have built in capabilities to shoot at 4:2:2 color space(sampling).

also, I've come across a cheap way to get 1080p and 4:2:2 color sampling.. if I'm not mistaken a Hacked GF1 could shoot at 4:2:2 color space(sampling)
basically what I want is simple:
1. 1080p or 720p

2. 4:2:2 color sampling for better chroma keying.

3. that smooth 'film look' feel.

if a hacked GF1 could do all of the above, could I skip on a buying a pro camcorder and Atomos Ninja altogether? or is this a bad idea? I would not want to do something illegal..

noted: Barry = Pro

could someone also suggest a HD camcorder at 600 and 900 dollars price range that shoots at 1080p (progressive scan)
I was looking at a Sony HDR CX550V but after reading a user review commented that it's not great for video editing because the camcorder itself only shoots at 1080 60i.. I was immediately put off from buying one.
link to SONY HDR CX550V:
http://www.amazon.com/Sony-HDR-CX550V-Definition-Handycam-Camcorder/dp/B0031RGL1G
 
Last edited:
waiting,reading,and learning patiently.. actually.. I'm being rather impatient. I've been looking on this subject for a week.. still don't know what camcorder or camera to buy~
 
even if a hacked GF1 could shoot at 4:2:2 it's HD video shooting quality isn't very good. so.. I guess a hacked GF1 is not an option anymore..

I'm planning on buying either a panasonic HDC-TM900k or TM700k although both of them could shoot at high quality consumer level 1080p videos they are not capable of shooting at 4:2:2 color space(sampling) buy purchasing the Atomos ninja would that solve my problem? could the ninja give TM900k or TM700k capabilities to shoot at 4:2:2 color sampling?
I'm doing a lot of action scenes in front of a green screen.. so this is a huge deal for me. :(:)

according to Barry even if the ATOMOS NINJA could shoot at 4:2:2 color space(sampling) it wouldn't make any difference if the camcorder itself couldn't output a 4:2:2 signal.. is this true? I thought the whole purpose of buying an ATOMOS NINJA is to give a camcorder that does not shoot at 4:2:2 the ability to..well, shoot at 4:2:2 color space(sampling).
the camcorder I'm getting would either be this:
http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-HDC...1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1329391437&sr=1-1

or this:

http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-HDC...2?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1329392250&sr=1-2

are these HD camcorders good enough to exploit ATOMOS NINJA capability to shoot at 4:2:2 color sampling rate?
 
Last edited:
A week is not a very long time to spend researching this subject. I've spent over 6 months investigating options and it was 3 months before I laid out cash and while I am very happy with what I have bought, I've also learnt so much in the last 3-4 months that I still think I probably purchased prematurely! Additionally be aware that the cost of the camera itself is only a small fraction of what all the supporting gear you will need to accumulate. Your options are pretty much limited by your budget. I'll get you started with a summary of some of the cameras I've considered along the way. You can use these cameras to compare other options to. If you can, buy someone else's dream. Many aspiring filmmakers (with a job) get the bug, buy all the gear and then let it sit unused in the closet for a decade.

The first two cameras I considered were the namesake of this site, the Panasonic DVX100 and the Canon XL1s. These two cameras were king once upon a time. For their day these were the darlings of the indy filmmaker. If you are prepared to give up HD you can get one of these on eBay, complete with all supporting equipment for around $1200-1500 last I looked. Hold out for a bargain and get them even cheaper. Both can be found with low hours if you are patient. Both of these will be excellent for practice and cost effective but the drawback is SD tape-based media. It may be a little archaic for you. They don't have HD, they don't have 4:2:2 but many have acheived a pretty good film look from both of these options.

As an alternative I considered the Canon HV20/HV30/HV40. This has been popular amongst no budget indy filmmakers. It can use 35mm lens adapters and being small and lightweight the lens adapters are a lot cheaper than for a larger camera. It is supposed to match very well with the Letus brand adapter. Hold out on ebay for one that comes with an adapter, extra batteries, maybe a tripod or stabiliser. It is a great setup if the destination is the internet and I believe it has seen some use for internal corporate videos in smaller productions or as a B-camera in that arena. It is less a dinosaur than the previous two I mention but has been around a while. It is HD (not sure if it has 1080p, you'll have to check), it doesn't have 4:2:2 but with a lens adapter will take a couple of large strides towards the film look. Being a consumer camcorder it will have limitations that you will just not be able to overcome but at your budget this could be an excellent tool to practice with.

Current consumer camcorders are freaking amazing but despite all the numbers on the box they are still going to look like video. Family home movies have never looked so good but I think you will quickly find pretty much any current consumer camcorder to be too toy-like very quickly. I find the cameras just too small and fiddly to even consider trying to utilise any limited manual functionality they may have. They pretty much all have HD (1080i at least, though most have 1080p these days), none have 4:2:2 and few have much potential to give you anything remotely like a film look. The small CMOS sensors come with a lot of inherent limitations and flaws. The only real thing to recommend is the price, you can get a brand new camera within your budget. That said, a gem may emerge (or may already have) that I don't know about.

DSLRs are the next option and now things are starting to get interesting. I never considered a DSLR for video when I was researching (I wanted a camera that looked like a movie camera) but if I had it to do again a DSLR would definitely be in the mix. In fact I am considering a GH2 for my backup camera atm. Pretty much any DSLR that has its own forum on this site is worthy of consideration. These cameras can produce some incredibly film-like images. But under other conditions this breaks down, there are some conditions that produce artefacts and distortion such as moire and tearing during a fast pan. Most video capable DSLRs have 1080 (almost all the current generation do), I could be wrong but I don't think any have 4:2:2. But a film look with careful shooting and post production is extremely achievable with these cameras. Canons are popular, the 7D produces some staggering images that I've seen but I think a GH2 (when hacked) is generally understood to be the best bang for buck. Compared to prosumer camcorders DSLRs are much cheaper to accessorise, again primarily due to weight. My knowledge is limited - I would look to the DSLR forums for better information on these cameras. Expect to pay at least $1500 second hand for a setup with all the basic accessories.

The more recent prosumer camcorders have a number of advantages. Unlike all the other cameras mentioned here these aspire to be professional video cameras at a budget price. By budget I mean thousands of dollars instead of 10s or 100s of thousands. They will have varying professional features, often cheating (effectively) the features of far more expensive cameras. They are intended for manual operation and work well used this way. They are infinitely configurable. They usually provide sufficient data to be able to repeat shots. They usually have CCD sensors which don't have most the drawbacks of CMOS sensors (but don't perform as well in low-light conditions). All support 1080i, most support 1080p. They can generally record a number of different formats. I believe the only one in the four figure price range that records 4:2:2 is the HVX/HPX. They all have been conceived and designed with a film look in mind although all go about acheiving it in a different way. Those that have fixed lenses can be supplemented with a 35mm lens adapter (more money) for easy shallow DOF.

Of course none of these cameras will automatically give you the film look. Some come with more potential than others but you need to learn the camera, you need to learn the theory and you need to practice. I would be prepared to do a lot more research, maybe like 2 months and work out exactly what you need and what it all means. In the meantime you can continue to save up and increase your options. In my 3-4 months of research I talked myself from a DVX up to the far more expensive HVX. I got a good deal on the camera and then discovered how much more the accessories were going to cost. Basically I've ended up paying over 4 times my initial estimate to date. But I'm approaching middleage and collect a decent paycheck. I can afford nice toys. Consider your short and long term needs and consider buying a cheaper camera just to practice with if you are on a low budget with a steep learning curve ahead of you.
 
Argh, you posted again while I was typing!

You can probably get pretty reasonable images with those cameras and I frankly I would recommend considering something like that or one of the other cheaper options I've mentioned and learning the basics before getting carried away. The prices you seem to be expecting for the features you are quoting suggests that you don't really understand what it all means. You are looking at many thousands of dollars for the features you want. If you understood what these features really are I don't think you would consider your budget reasonable either.

dude40758 said:
themy other options are.. buying a used semi professional camcorder for $1000 dollars that are able to shoot in 1080p and 10 bit 4:2:2 color sampling(space) and skip buying an ATOMOS NINJA altogether.
Click to expand...

Just noticed this bit, is it new? I doubt you could get a broken for parts only camera capable of 10 bit 4:2:2 for that price. You do not need 10-bit 4:2:2 for keying. It is nice to have but you can't have the best for a budget of $1000. Making movies that look expensive kind of is expensive. But you can learn all the basics with a reasonably cheap setup. What you won't get is a film look but you can still tell stories.
 
1. I've never saw any panasonic dvx100 videos before but I've seen a lot of Canon XL1s videos on youtube. sadly to say yes, I do need HD videos :(
heh.. buy someone else's dream. nice way of putting it.

2. yeah :) current consumer camcorder could really get that pro look with the right color grading :) example:

<span style="color: rgb(255, 255, 255); ">

I'll consider DSLR too.. but users have reports of errors while using DSLR's with the NINJA ATOMOS. however there is a rumour saying that the upcoming MK 5D III will feature 4:2:2 color sampling capabilities. but I'm guessing it'll still be out of my reach with my current budget :( I am however, willing to stretch to 1500 dollars for a used camcorder that is able to shoot at 4:2:2 color space(sampling) and skip buying a ATOMOS NINJA altogether.

I'm ready to upgrade to a better platform because I really need 4:2:2 capabilities. my old camcorder won't cut it anymore.
thanks for your answer I have read each and every letter, word you typed. thank you.
 
well, I could stretch my budget up to 1500 dollars for a used camcorder if it could shoot at 1080p HD and 4:2:2.

telling stories has always been a pleasure of mine. now with the advent of the internet I could finally reach an audience like never before. I hope to give a good presentation to them too :)

P.S, if a camcorder could shoot 4:2:2 by itself, does that mean I could skip on buying an atomos ninja? the sole reason of me considering the atomos ninja in the first place because of it's ability to shoot at 4:2:2
and can't a TM700k or TM900k connect to the atomos ninja via HDMI output and use the ninja ability to shoot at 4:2:2 color sample?

another thing.. since I'll be doing much green screen I won't be using DOF much.. if any, I'll just use gausian blur using a video editing software. (I would love to travel to various places for my shots. currently though, I am limited to using a green screen)
 
Last edited:
I've exhausted my knowledge. Here are some threads about 4:2:2 cameras. These will not require the atomos. I honestly wouldn't sweat the difference between 8-bit and 10-bit. It's a very expensive difference.

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?235127-List-of-Cameras-that-Shoot-4-2-2-or-better
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...sed-8-bit-10-bit-4-2-2-through-HDMI-or-HD-SDI

If you don't want DOF then you don't need an adapter. I am sure the only affordable 4:2:2 camera is the HVX/HPX. If you are an apple user you can record directly to your computer using OnLocation, saving you the cost of P2. Filming exclusively indoors means you won't need batteries or many other accessories. The HPX is lighter than the 5lb HVX which will make the tripod cheaper. If you're really patient and don't mind a camera with a few hundred hours on it (shouldn't be a problem, the tape decks are the only component at real risk of failing in that time) then you should be able to find one come up at around $1500. Otherwise you should be able to come across one for under $2000 on ebay. Might even get a few extras at that price, maybe even a lower capacity P2 card.

I've never used the atomos so I can't comment on the results you will get using it with other cameras. But if you're prepared to pay close to $1000 for the atomos and $900 for a cheaper camera, then you're in the ballpark for a second hand prosumer camera like the HVX anyway. I haven't pulled a key with it yet (still getting my editing equipment together) but it is one of the reasons I got mine and by all accounts it is up to the task. As far as the 'smooth film motion' you wanted, these cameras can record 24fps natively. No 3:2 pulldown from 30p or 60p and the associated judder. It can do 1080i but you will be wanting to use this camera in 720p mode (in this mode you can access all the cool features of the camera). It isn't 1080p but is still definitely HD. It looks better than 1080p on any consumer camcorder I've seen.

I wouldn't rush into either decision right away if you are strapped for cash. Do more research. It sounds like your options are starting to firm up so start keeping an eye on ebay, no need to buy the first one you see - they keep coming up. Try and find footage shot with the choices you have. The User Films section of this forum is good because they almost always mention the equipment used to shoot the films. Often on vimeo mention will be made too. Maybe also ask some questions in the effects section of the forum and find out what setups others are using for greenscreen and see some of the results. Hope it all works out for you and you find an affordable solution that does exactly what you need. I've harped on a lot about the HVX but that's only because it's the camera I've got and know. Don't get one just because I said so but it is definitely worth looking into, it has a surprising amount of features that no other camera in its price range has. It is a camera you can compare your other options to, to see how they stack up in the bang for buck stakes.
 
thank you for sharing your knowledge :) I will put your advice to good use and take my time choosing the best bang for the buck camcorder.
good morning,good evening and good night where ever you are.
 
I think the part you're missing is the recording formats of the camera. The imagers might be capable of creating and outputting 4:2:2, but if the recording format doesn't record 4:2:2, you aren't going to have 4:2:2.

There is no cheap camcorder that records 4:2:2 to its own recording format - period. No AVCHD or AVCCAM or DV or XDCAM HD or XDCAM EX camera is going to record 4:2:2 to its internal format, because their internal recording formats are 4:2:0, not 4:2:2.

Now, the Ninja records 4:2:2. So if the camera can feed it 4:2:2, it will record it. But the point I was trying to get at is: it doesn't make quality magically appear out of the air. Garbage in, garbage out, right? If you're trying to use a cheapo camera, the odds of it having a high-quality video feed aren't great. That's the whole point of cheap, after all, is that they cheap out on the hardware and components in order to get the price down.

The only cameras you're going to find at any manner of low price that record 4:2:2 are going to be a used HVX200/200A or HPX170, or maybe a used Canon XF100. Those have 4:2:2 recording formats.

Now, getting back to your original question -- can you stick the Ninja on any old 4:2:0 camera and reap the benefits of 4:2:2? Maybe, maybe not. It depends on what the camera outputs. If it outputs a true real 4:2:2 on its HDMI port, then yes the Ninja will give you a higher-quality recording than the camera itself could create. But if it doesn't output a good high quality 4:2:2, then you will NOT get a 4:2:2 recording.

Unfortunately, I don't know of any listing of what the camcorders put out on their HDMIs, I don't think there's any sort of testing for that or database of that kind of info.

If I was to advise you, I'd say just get a decent-quality camera, and try keying its native footage. People have been able to pull surprisingly good keys off of 4:2:0 footage. 4:2:2 will be better, but why not just try it as-is and see if it's acceptable, before spending an additional $1000 on a product that may or may not help?
 
Barry_Green said:
I think the part you're missing is the recording formats of the camera. The imagers might be capable of creating and outputting 4:2:2, but if the recording format doesn't record 4:2:2, you aren't going to have 4:2:2.

There is no cheap camcorder that records 4:2:2 to its own recording format - period. No AVCHD or AVCCAM or DV or XDCAM HD or XDCAM EX camera is going to record 4:2:2 to its internal format, because their internal recording formats are 4:2:0, not 4:2:2.

Now, the Ninja records 4:2:2. So if the camera can feed it 4:2:2, it will record it. But the point I was trying to get at is: it doesn't make quality magically appear out of the air. Garbage in, garbage out, right? If you're trying to use a cheapo camera, the odds of it having a high-quality video feed aren't great. That's the whole point of cheap, after all, is that they cheap out on the hardware and components in order to get the price down.

The only cameras you're going to find at any manner of low price that record 4:2:2 are going to be a used HVX200/200A or HPX170, or maybe a used Canon XF100. Those have 4:2:2 recording formats.

Now, getting back to your original question -- can you stick the Ninja on any old 4:2:0 camera and reap the benefits of 4:2:2? Maybe, maybe not. It depends on what the camera outputs. If it outputs a true real 4:2:2 on its HDMI port, then yes the Ninja will give you a higher-quality recording than the camera itself could create. But if it doesn't output a good high quality 4:2:2, then you will NOT get a 4:2:2 recording.

Unfortunately, I don't know of any listing of what the camcorders put out on their HDMIs, I don't think there's any sort of testing for that or database of that kind of info.

If I was to advise you, I'd say just get a decent-quality camera, and try keying its native footage. People have been able to pull surprisingly good keys off of 4:2:0 footage. 4:2:2 will be better, but why not just try it as-is and see if it's acceptable, before spending an additional $1000 on a product that may or may not help?
Click to expand...

make sense.
okay, it seems that a hacked GH1 could record at 4:2:2 but I'm not that impressed with the keying I've seen so far. I'll get a 4:2:0 camcoder. and if that doesn't work out.. well, I could always figure it out later on. thank you Barry_Green.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top