F5: F55/F5 Version 3 is out

I'm really pumped about AES as well. I've been planning on a Tascam DR-680 8 channel recorder so I can record sound separately when needed, but it also has digital out so in theory can be used as a quasi mixer with the digital audio feed going straight into the F55 for when I want "sound on tape" for fast delivery.

Doesn't the 680 only have a S/PDIF Digital Output Dennis? How can you input to the F55?
 
You probably know this but the DR-680 does not do timecode, however there is always Plural Eyes or a clapper if you go this route.

Yep no timecode indeed, but I'm use to using a clapper and have given Plural Eyes a go on a recent multi-camera shoot and WOW what a time saver. Load camera A and B footage then press SYNC button and export to XML -> Import to Premiere or other NLE. By the way, there's is a deal going on if you buy a new DR-680 you get Plural Eyes included free. Not sure how long that deal lasts.


Doesn't the 680 only have a S/PDIF Digital Output Dennis? How can you input to the F55?

I've been reading you can connect S/PDIF digital out to digital AES input. On the F55 you use an XLR input, and can still have the 2nd channel available for analog use if needed. I'm still researching this.

What's even more interesting with the advent on AES on these cameras, is that if you just want a simple mixer in-between your mic and camera using AES opens up a whole slew of low cost / high quality alternatives many might not have thought of. For example, many audio interface devices meant to take a mic into a computer also offer digital outputs on them. So conceivably for $99-$199 you can put one of these devices between one or two mics, mix, and send to the camera. Tascam, M-Audio and a few others make these devices. Most only take power over USB however. I just bought the Audio 6 from Native-Instruments as a midi interface & audio device but I'm pretty sure this would work the way I had mentioned.


Dennis, I dont have my camera here so I'll ask you. Shouldnt center scan 2k HFR be as alias free as when shooting 24/25?
Also, correct me but you can not shoot in HD when center scan is selected, only 2K?..

To comment on what Duke just said, if the center scan image is just a hair softer then full scan, all of your lenses just doubled, no pun intended. For instance, my Nikon 17-55 2.8, when I need more reach can effectively become a 34-110 at the flip of a switch with not much of a penalty. So much for that 24-70 I was thinking about buying.

I would think that anything in center scan mode would be alias free and appear the exact same as if it were shot with a native HD sized sensor - except on the F5/F55 of course the FOV is reduced to approximately half because physically the "effective" portion of the sensor is less. But there is no line skipping, pixel-binning, etc.. like there is in HFR mode when using the full sensor size and full FOV possible.

When you go through the menu on the camera under system settings -> base settings -> imager scan mode there are three options: Normal, 2K Full, 2k Center. So if you want HD output you would crop off 64 pixels off each side, or letter box it.

I have a 500mm lens and the thought of getting 1000mm from it is pretty fun.


Red center scan was a mess, however the F55 images seem less noisy in general than Red so I'm eagerly awaiting Dennis's tests without the OPLF. I'll be surprised if the images are softer, but I've been suprised before. (Obviously the ones with OPLF are softer.)

I can't even begin to guess what RED did with their center scan / crop mode that made it so soft. Sony is doing it all in-camera in real-time whereas RED records a compressed bayer pattern image from the sensor and does all the processing on a computer where it has all the processing you would think it needs?

If anyone is seeing soft images on the center scan hopefully they are actually testing it by getting the same frame size with each mode in the camera, and using a f-stop that is optimal for the lens instead of for example shooting "wide open".

Remember that YouTube, Vimeo, etc.. will all fix a lot of "issues" that can only be seen on footage straight out of the camera. I will upload my originals too, but keep them short so they upload/download faster.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Nate, Dennis & Duke. Can wait to get home to my camera and start testing, read the new manual till 2am last night. Loser....
 
I did some center scan tests tonight and didn't find noise too objectionable, but I can see where you'd reach the threshold of what a lens can resolve. I'm using a Canon 30-105 PL, and center scan turns it into a pseudo macro lens. But if I open the iris up, I can start to see aberrations. Just pour on more light I guess.
 
Doesn't the 680 only have a S/PDIF Digital Output Dennis? How can you input to the F55?

I've been researching this a bit more and would need a AES/EBU to S/PDIF adaptor to match impedance. I found this one, http://www.neutrik.com/en/accessories/aes/ebu-impedance-transformers/naditbnc-mx which goes for around $45.

Just thought I would pass along this info.

naditbnc-mx-hinten.jpg
 
That looks pretty good. I'm guessing you would only get stereo out of the 680? You would need two S/PDIF outputs (plus output routing capability) from the 680 to get the four channels.
 
Yes the DR-680 only has one S/PDIF output, so it means only 2 channels unfortunately.

There is also a modification that can be done on the DR-680 to improve the microphone input noise. It is mostly swapping out some op-amps on the board and replacing some capacitors. Still for around $400 it is a great option.

Once I get the Neutrik adapter I will be trying a stand-alone XLR to S/PDIF interface straight into the F55 and see what comes of that. Even having a single channel device that can control mic levels before shooting it over to the camera digitally sounds like an option I could see putting to use.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top