C200: C200 CFast to SSD Solution

rob norton said:
Why pretend a certain solution is bulletproof just because it's popular?
Click to expand...

Lol, see...this is the exact opposite that's being argued here.

I actually agree with your point about unfavorably showing up with something looking like a project; I just think you misunderstood the guy's point and somehow we pointlessly dragged this one.

He was asking rhetorically how is this any less reliable than an HDMI connection?

And you answered by thinking he was saying HDMI is a good connection.

rob norton said:
HDMI is a pretty poor example of a reliable connection.
Click to expand...

Completely missed his point, IMO.
 
And the point is both are sending data through a weak cable and a weak connection...so what's the difference at the end of the day?

Like one method is heavily used in the industry and companies are making millions of dollars off the products and people rarely question this solution except the few on forums who must always make it known how much better a SDI connection is, and the other method is essentially the same thing - although it's currently being put together by people in their basement - yet it's being widely frowned upon by many like it's this bizarre idea.

For the record, people with Blackmagic cameras started these "contraptions" 3 years ago when the C200 was probably not even drawn up yet.

That's all that's being philosophically asked...or at least that's what I'm asking at this time.

At the the end of the day…what's truly the difference?

If data wants to fail...it's going to fail with an HDMI cable, with an adapter...and yes, even with a SDI cable. And even with internal recording!

So far, reliability doesn't seem to be the issue. IDK.

---

But I still hear you...presentation is everything. So maybe that's the difference.
 
Last edited:
NorBro said:
And the point is both are sending data through a weak cable and a weak connection...so what's the difference at the end of the day?

Like one method is heavily used in the industry and companies are making millions of dollars off the products and people rarely question this solution except the few on forums who must always make it known how much better a SDI connection is, and the other method is essentially the same thing - although it's currently being put together by people in their basement - yet it's being widely frowned upon by many like it's this bizarre idea.

For the record, people with Blackmagic cameras started these "contraptions" 3 years ago when the C200 was probably not even drawn up yet.

That's all that's being philosophically asked...or at least that's what I'm asking at this time.

At the the end of the day…what's truly the difference?

If data wants to fail...it's going to fail with an HDMI cable, with an adapter...and yes, even with a SDI cable. And even with internal recording!

So far, reliability doesn't seem to be the issue. IDK.

---

But I still hear you...presentation is everything. So maybe that's the difference.
Click to expand...

To say it's widely frowned upon is incorrect. In this thread, every single person except PD has been either neutral or for the project (PD even said he thought it was cool).

If it's all the same, why are there any different connections?
 
rob norton said:
Johnnie, I like your solution and enjoy your out of the box thinking. I'm sure for any personal projects, shorts, budget narrative, and many other scenarios it's fine. However, you don't have to convince everyone of your methods and need to accept that people have different shooting styles. Just like you think spending thousands on CFAST cards is idiotic, some would think showing up with what looks like a last minute high school project is also idiotic.
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to convince anyone, just throwing it out there for those curious. Everyone complains about CFast prices, now there's a very realistic option and my only pitch to this is if the gig's budget is $5,000 for example and you have to spend $2,000 on CFast cards, you are loosing money when you could spend $300 and be good to go! Also encased you haven't noticed, most rigs look like a hot mess regardless. I think my setup is super clean especially on a gimbal.

rob norton said:
HDMI is a pretty poor example of a reliable connection.
Click to expand...

If you think CFast cards won't fail you, you are sadly mistaken. The point as mentioned is it's no different than using CFast, SD, CF Cards etc, they all have a failure rate. The only real argument you can dish out is the cables on the SSD can get unplugged while a CFast card sits nicely in the slot.

I haven't ran into this issue but I get it. I also get this modification is not for everyone as I said earlier however you no longer have to cut the door which is awesome so if you shoot a lot of video on a tripod or shoulder rig, this should be a no brainier.
 
Last edited:
Barry1908 said:
I normally agree with everything Putedrifting posts, but I find myself siding with Johnie here, assuming he sorts out the ruggedness issue ,how is this any less reliable than say and HDMI external recorder? From my experience in the industry there are generally a lot of these little hacks in use everyday.
Click to expand...

I have an Atomos Ninja Blade and while it's fine for tripod based shooting, I avoid using it for rough and tumble, run & gun shooting exactly because of the lack of reliability. HDMI is the worst connection in the history of pro video and the Atomos recorders, while generally reliable, are not bulletproof. I've had a few formatting/drive issues over the years with mine, I always double record to cover my rear in case the Atomos messes up. To each his own but to me, CFast cards are going to be smaller, lighter and more reliable and I have less than $1,500.00 into mine and they've been bulletproof for almost a year of heavy production with them.
 
Seems like a great solution. I ordered the flat adapter cable. I can’t see how this could be a negative. You could shoot almost 6 hours of footage for the cost of one 1-hour Cfast card. Really glad people kept up on this solution.
 
davekratz said:
Seems like a great solution. I ordered the flat adapter cable. I can’t see how this could be a negative. You could shoot almost 6 hours of footage for the cost of one 1-hour Cfast card. Really glad people kept up on this solution.
Click to expand...

Please do remember that while you recording your 6 hours long session, this solution does have a few points of failure:
first off the obvious sata connection that isn't the best connection out there and can easily get knocked loose .
second this system needs to be powered by a usb powerbank and we all know that usb connectors are even worse than sata connectors.
so you'll run the risk off data corruption by either a loose cable or a run down battery from the power bank.
maybe you can recover the data maybe not???.

would you expose 6 hours of data to that risk?

Its a great out of the box solution but i would rather see a more solid end solution that combines power and data from the internal slot .
 
avian said:
Its a great out of the box solution but i would rather see a more solid end solution that combines power and data from the internal slot .
Click to expand...

This is the best it's going to get and it's perfectly fine. Instead of USB, I run it through a D Tap to USB adapter which makes for a more consistent power source and tighter connection.

Also If the connection becomes loose ie USB or SATA, the footage is still available. The camera names it to a DAT file and you simply rename it back to CRM and it loads perfectly fine.
 
I wonder if you made a version with 2 recorders and some chip that error corrects the copy, and a Dtap, would people feel comfortable with it then...
 
johnniebutters said:
I'm not trying to convince anyone, just throwing it out there for those curious. Everyone complains about CFast prices, now there's a very realistic option and my only pitch to this is if the gig's budget is $5,000 for example and you have to spend $2,000 on CFast cards, you are loosing money when you could spend $300 and be good to go!
Click to expand...

Poor logic. Unless for some reason those cards can only be used for that one project and never again. Or that is the only project you will ever do with that camera and cards. By your logic, I would have been $1,200 in the hole on my first shoot with my P2 VariCam, because the cards were ~$3,000.
 
Run&Gun said:
Poor logic. Unless for some reason those cards can only be used for that one project and never again. Or that is the only project you will ever do with that camera and cards. By your logic, I would have been $1,200 in the hole on my first shoot with my P2 VariCam, because the cards were ~$3,000.
Click to expand...

I'm simply saying people are wasting a ton of money on CFast cards when SSDs are available.

Yeah you keep the cards, it's a one time thing but still.... You lost potential money.
 
johnniebutters said:
I'm simply saying people are wasting a ton of money on CFast cards when SSDs are available.

Yeah you keep the cards, it's a one time thing but still.... You lost potential money.
Click to expand...

Look brother, I think what you did is very cool and I applaud that. I'm not trying to take that away from you or rain on your parade. If people weren't continually trying to improve on what is current, we'd still be in the stone age. But sometimes it can't just be about maximizing every cent. No one wants to spend more money than they have to, especially nowadays with ever shrinking budgets, but to me this goes back to playing the odds and people that buy "unapproved media" to save money and then come on here and say they lost footage or it got corrupted, etc., instead of buying what the manufacturer recommended. No media is 100% bulletproof and we've all heard stories of pretty much every type of consumer and professional media failing at some point(I even have a client that has had approved SanDisk CFast cards for their Amira's die), but how do you tell a paying client that their footage was lost because you didn't want to buy the "proper media" for the camera so that you could save some money? I've never used an external recorder on a camera without rolling in-camera. It's just too easy for something to go wrong, even with professional locking connectors. Even with the relatively rock-solid nanoFlash, there were a handful of times I had to go back to the internal camera recording, because of something that happened with the NF. Who remembers the Firestore(?) external recorder/drives that people used to use with the DVX-200's, etc., because P2 was so expensive and the cards were so small(storage wise) early on? How many stories have we all heard of entire shoots being lost on those? Yes, I know technology has advanced a lot since then, but still.

I hope you do well with this set-up, but I would personally be very hesitant to use it as a sole means of recording on a one-shot paying job.
 
Last edited:
This is in no way a bad thing if it is working. I'm very interested in seeing if it is possible to use this with a raid configuration for real-time on set backups. Personally, I see myself just using this for interviews where the camera is stationary at first.
 
davekratz said:
Please explain?
Click to expand...

Has to be a consistent source. USB can have issues so I prefer to use D-Tap using a D-Tap to USB adapter which can be used on the Ronin or any V Mount. A lot of people are running into issues using small power banks because the USB out doesn't draw enough power then blame the SSD. Any SSD will work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top