C200: C200 RAW Jag spot

[NorBro]

In 2013/2014, the recorders that captured 4K needed to be bigger overall because of the SSDs and internals and even maybe parts to manage the heat, so it made sense to include a 7" screen.

Now - in 2017 - maybe not so much. Almost all decent monitors are 1080p+ and even something like the SmallHD FOCUS in 720p is very nice to look at. A 5" BM Video Assist recording 4K to UHS-II cards would be nice (the 7" model does that).

The 5" PIX-E5 captures 4K in a smaller package, but it also came out 2+ years after the Shogun and 7Q.

---

BMCC, BMPC and KineMINI all have been using SSDs since 2012/13...but you're looking at the big picture in too simple of terms.

There were always other caveats:

- They are not size-friendly when considering how some cameras are built. Part of the internal design may conflict with the required space needed for the SSDs. Some cameras are half the size of SSDs!

- Cameras and SSDs don't all play well together like we're seeing now with CFast cards. They are picky and every camera company has their own compatibility list. So you probably couldn't just throw in any $290 1TB drive and call it a day. You'd probably need something industry-proven like an Extreme Pro and that one has only dropped $200 or so in 5 years:

$200 for 480GB - https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/prod..._sdssdxps_480g_g25_480gb_extreme_pro_ssd.html

$430 for 960GB - https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/prod..._sdssdxps_960g_g25_960gb_extreme_pro_ssd.html

- These companies are making cameras to make money; not to provide us convenience. All with a purpose...either extremely cheap media available to the masses, mid-range media that supports various recording formats, or their own proprietary media they have created for their own products based on the model.

So in theory, I agree with what you're saying, but it's just not practical in all circumstances or everyone would have been doing it a long time ago.

 

[DLD]

My points would be that --

An internal SSD module really doesn't take up much space and should be doable for all but the smallest size (BMD Pocket Cam) models.

An All-I H.264 is 400 Mbps or ~ 150 GB/hr. Long GOP at 150 Mbps is under 60 GB/hr. A 256 GB internal SSD would then be sufficient for the long interviews and so on. (Canon, obviously, crippled this in C200, so not to compete with EVA1 on every front) That means no more fumbling with cards and readers. A single USB-C cord would do.

All the different manufacturer compatibility questions would disappear, as it'd all be controlled by one OEM. Profits would also go directly to the camera manufacturer, the same profits that are now going to Lexar, Angelbird and EgoDisk.

The external recorders needlessly add to the electronic components that are already in the camera. While it makes sense if the external recorder - whether with a monitor or without - adds the computational power to the data coming off the sensor (think Codex or the early FS-700 + Q7 combo), it ought not be required among the mid-range products. I.E., it may help GH5 and Varicam LT/Pure on the opposite ends of the spectrum but anything in $8,000-$20,000 range should be able to handle a high quality recording internally. It may not necessarily be uncompressed Raw, mind you.

Kudos to BMD for the URSA feature set. A C200/200/700 sensor with URSA features and Canon quality DPAF would easily sell for $15,000. And someone will make that camera. Soon.

It's a theological debate. Codex Capture Drive has an internal SATA 512 GB SSD. It's a tad pricey for the time being. But, since it's a computer component, one expects a similar performer from a competitor to be sold for a lot less. Of course, the total amount of data will only keep increasing but, sadly, the human eye has diminishing returns.