FS100 and Ninja: Yes, No, Maybe?

M

matteo1

Member
I'm just about to buy a FS100 (with much help from this forum) and am wondering about adding a Ninja to my order. The project I"m working on is in the bush in Africa. The FS100 is the "B" camera – Sony 800 is the "A" camera – and the FS100 will be used for run-and-gun. I know FS100 is not the perfect beast for running around baobobs, but for the first shoot I was using a 5D and at least with the FS100, I won't spend so much time syncing. The producer plans to do an Academy run next year, meaning that the documentary will be projected at some point.

Right now I'm planning on purchasing the Sony HXR_FMU128_Flash_Memory_Unit, but I'm wondering if it might make more sense to buy a Ninja instead. I know they do completely different things. We're shooting 1080p 24 and I plan to do some 1080p 60. I realize that the Ninja doesn't really do 24P natively (it takes in the 24P at 1080i 60 and then you have to run it through the Ninja "Stripper" app). And, of course, like all the other digital recorders, it doesn't do 1080p 60 at all.

So . . . . Knowing that I'm shooting 24P and will definitely shoot some 1080p 60 for slow motion, does running everything into a Ninja gain me all that much in image quality to buy the Ninja? Will it help out appreciably down the road when we're color grading the footage?

Also, if you would recommend getting the Ninja, which SSD would you recommend (I don't think it makes sense to use HD for this kind of thing)

Thanks.
 
Last edited:
I'm sticking around for a listen on this as well... The various threads around here go from one extreme to the other in regards to what is possible / sensible wether to shoot on card or recorder.

Have I understood correctly that the FS100 more or less records the same quality to card as one would get from a 5D?? And it's not until you go recorder you get the good stuff? I'm asking since one of my mates have been able to create decent stuff in post with the mediocre quality of the 5D.
 
legrevedotcom said:
Have I understood correctly that the FS100 more or less records the same quality to card as one would get from a 5D??
Click to expand...
No, the FS100's codec is substantially advanced over that which is in the 5D.

And it's not until you go recorder you get the good stuff?
Click to expand...
Well, that depends on the recorder. If you're using the Sony CF recorder, it's no different -- it's exactly the same as what's recorded on the internal cards. If you're using a Ninja or Nano, then the codec can be substantially higher bitrate and with higher color sampling than what gets recorded to the onboard recorder.
 
If you don't mind recording 8bit 4:2:2, the nano has proven itself in demanding environments. Recording at 100mb mpeg2 will enable you to maintain quality in post.
 
I heard the "regular" battery of the FS100 doesn't feed the Ninja in order to get smooth recording, can anybody clear that?
 
It's not my video but Atomos has repeatedly said that Intel drives are the most reliable. I believe they were talking SSD's. Ask the vimeo poster or go to Atomos site to see their recommended drives because not all drives work well for the ninja. Theres also a thread in the Af-100 forum about the ninja where I first saw this video.
 

As far as I can tell, the OP has not shot with the FS100. True?

And as far as I can tell, no one on this thread has both a Ninja and a FS100, so no one posting here has direct evidence of the Ninja producing appreciably better results than the camera itself. True?

The video linked to above is for a Panasonic AF-100... yes, that camera shoots to AVCHD like the FS100, but it's a different sensor. Hell, it's a different manufacturer. Is anyone seriously willing to take a test like this as proof -- actual proof -- of anything with regards to the FS100?

As Barry suggests, the implementation of AVCHD in this camera is quite good.

If you've not shot with the camera, the OP should do so before buying anything like an external recorder. That's my advice.

Here's more advice:

1) Get your FS100 and rent or borrow a Ninja.
2) Shoot your own tests approximating the conditions you're going to be filming under.
3) Consider how the equipment will make things easier or harder.
4) After you've done YOUR tests, ask yourself: Will my audience notice? And if they do notice, will they care?
5) Finally, consider the budget, especially what you have to sacrifice if you get that item. (All budgets are limited, so all choices involve sacrifices in one direction or another.)

I'm not knocking the usefulness of these forums, but to base purchasing/rental decisions on some vimeo test of a recorder with a different manufacturer's cameras… sorry, that wouldn't be enough information for me.
 
@P.Harrill

Improved quality is not the only advantage of using an external recorder, but I won't go into that here.

Just want to mention a couple of things.

First, the Ninja has it's own batteries, made by us, but in the Sony NP format. The supplied batteries will give you a minimum of 5 hours recording time and probably more. It does not take power from the FS100.

Second, we have a lot of satisfied users with the FS100.

Third, as Barry says, AVCHD is an efficient codec that is capable of looking good, and most of the time it does. So casual side-by-side comparisons with ProRes won't show drastic improvements - especially through the fog of YouTube. BUT... when the going gets tough; when you reach the limits of AVCHD, that's when ProRes comes into it's own. You can think of it as a safety net in that sense: it's always going to get the shot, even when AVCHD crashes out with artifacts and other unpleasant stuff. Just try capturing rippling water or rapid motion with high detail in AVCHD. If you're just filming a sleeping dog, then you're not going to see much difference.

Think of it like this. ProRes is visually lossless. It looks the same, even to experts, as uncompressed. Does AVCHD look the same as uncompressed? No.

Dave Shapton
Atomos
 
Mark Crabtree said:
Dave,Does CineForm converted from prores look as lossless as CineForm converted from uncompressed?
Click to expand...

Mark, I don't know because I've never tried that - especially under laboratory conditions. ProRes isn't mathematically lossless; only visually: so I'd imagine that Cineform converted from ProRes would not theoretically be as good as directly from uncompressed, but I would still expect the result to be very good and quite possibly still visually lossless, depending on the exact definition on the term, since these codecs are built to withstand multiple generations of encoding (with generally better results if you stay within the same codec). But this is something you should really be asking Apple and Cineform.

Dave Shapton
Atomos
 
Mark Crabtree said:
Dave,Have the playback features been enabled yet?
Click to expand...

I think I've answered this recently elsewhere. We're very close to releasing a new version with playback, and a whole bunch of other features. We've implemented playback in a really good way which we think all Ninja users will appreciate.

Dave Shapton
Atomos
 
P. Harrill said:

As far as I can tell, the OP has not shot with the FS100. True?

And as far as I can tell, no one on this thread has both a Ninja and a FS100, so no one posting here has direct evidence of the Ninja producing appreciably better results than the camera itself. True?

The video linked to above is for a Panasonic AF-100... yes, that camera shoots to AVCHD like the FS100, but it's a different sensor. Hell, it's a different manufacturer. Is anyone seriously willing to take a test like this as proof -- actual proof -- of anything with regards to the FS100?

As Barry suggests, the implementation of AVCHD in this camera is quite good.

If you've not shot with the camera, the OP should do so before buying anything like an external recorder. That's my advice.

Here's more advice:

1) Get your FS100 and rent or borrow a Ninja.
2) Shoot your own tests approximating the conditions you're going to be filming under.
3) Consider how the equipment will make things easier or harder.
4) After you've done YOUR tests, ask yourself: Will my audience notice? And if they do notice, will they care?
5) Finally, consider the budget, especially what you have to sacrifice if you get that item. (All budgets are limited, so all choices involve sacrifices in one direction or another.)

I'm not knocking the usefulness of these forums, but to base purchasing/rental decisions on some vimeo test of a recorder with a different manufacturer's cameras… sorry, that wouldn't be enough information for me.
Click to expand...


But P.Harrill, you can apply the result of that AF100/Ninja video to most cameras that use AVCHD. Sure they are not the same sensor... But in a prosumer camera like the FS100's price range I would expect the HDMI out to be of better quality than a "compressed" AVCHD. This should give someone at least a good idea on what to expect. IMO the only difference among all of these cameras would be the actual RAW image being fed from the sensor.
 
David Shapton said:
I think I've answered this recently elsewhere. We're very close to releasing a new version with playback, and a whole bunch of other features. We've implemented playback in a really good way which we think all Ninja users will appreciate.Dave ShaptonAtomos
Click to expand...
So, you are going to release a firmware update that will give all Ninja's playback and other features? Are we talking days or weeks?
 


I was making two basic points:


1) You're the best person that understands what you need for a project, so if you want to know whether a piece of equipment is going to work well for you, the best way to know is to test it for yourself.


2) If you're going to forego doing your own tests, use tests that can give you an actual depiction of the items you plan to use and take advice from authorities with direct, first-hand experience (e.g., don't watch tests of an external recorder with a different manufacturer's camera, even if the codec is the same).


If these are controversial opinions on DVXUser, geez, I might as well check out now.


Yes, Ian, the FS100 and the AF100 are kinda the same. But the question isn't whether the Ninja (or any other external recorder) does a better job recording than the camera's codec. (I should hope so, considering you're paying extra for it.) The question -- that is, the question that the OP originally asked -- is:


Is something like this WORTH IT?


And, still, no one has answered that question.


Why? Simple. Because no one on this board (other than David) has any experience with the Ninja (see point #2 above) and because it's difficult to answer questions like that for anyone other than yourself (see point #1 above).





 
David Shapton said:
I think I've answered this recently elsewhere. Dave Shapton, Atomos
Click to expand...

David, sorry to intrude on FS100 thread, but have you implemented a FORCE PROGRESSIVE (1080p25 or 1080p30 for ProRes recorded files) menu item for use with 1080i50/25PsF and 1080i60/PsF60 such as that from the VG10?
 
i have been told there was a firmware update yesterday, has anyone had a chance to test with the revised firmware?

d
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top