C100: Is there room in the world for an SD card hdmi prores/dnxhd mini recorder?

Darren Levine

Darren Levine

Veteran
So, i've been on a tall wall about external recorders, ever since my ex1, and then the af100, and then the c100. The consensus the majority of the time is that the external recorder won't add an appreciable difference.

But once you start talking about high motion, tunes change. And now that i'm more keen to up my dosage of stock footage shooting, i'm once again thinking of external recorders, and wondering if there's something out there on paper that could see the light of day.

i imagine something akin to the nanoflash, but with hdmi, forget sdi for the moment, i'm talking dslrs and the likes here (c100 shooter, yes i'm biasing my particular needs)

So something nanoflash in size, takes SD cards, or the newer variant of CF, either have reached speeds sufficient for prores or dnxhd 4:2:2

Keep it simple, no screen, much like the hyperdeck shuttle, in fact, just how much size could you rip out of the shuttle if you swapped SSD for SD, took out the battery, the SDI ports, and built it less like a tank and more like a prius(terrible metaphors, just stick with me), and kept it in that same price bracket?

my point here is something that doesn't add the bulk and added hassle of external recorders, something that you set and forget, ok so not forgot, but you get the idea, it just works.

am i the only one with such a desire?
 
yes there is, CFast 2.0. around 500mb transfer speed at a size of CF card.

just wait 5 years then the cost of this card will reach a consumer value lol

so you can imagine a C100 mark iii can shoot a 4 2 2 or even 4 4 4 in camera with CFast 2.0



but again, I dont see a need for 4:2:2, for me is 444 or 420.

seriously ? 1k (2k if you add H2S converter + blade, "future proof") for a quarter more color info ? not my dish.

my clients are regular consumers not pixel peepers lol
 
Hi Shawnvfx,

I find your answer quite dismissive with out adding much.

Like Darren said, card speeds are already there, so no need to wait for another standard. It's great that 4:2:0 works for you and your clients. I think it's the same for most people. Internal 420 on a C100 is good enough for a lot of things.

But Darren specifically mentions stock footage as a new revenue stream. It's quite possible that there are interesting SF sites that only accepts footage that has been shot at 422 or better.

If someone would build a ProRes recorder that was auto synced to start-stop recording on a C100 via HDMI, and had two slots for CF (or SD) cards for continuous recording at the size of aprox two matchboxes, I'm sure that would sell well.

$149 ProRes option that doesn't add weight? Most would go for it?
 
Shawn, you managed to post about an entirely different subject than the op....


Andree, I meant to imply that stock footage has me frequently running into high motion scenes, which would benefit from higher bitrates. 4:2:2 is a nice addon as well but not my central need
 
I think the external recorder thing is a fad. Extra weight, bulk, and another point of failure, plus it's usually made by a third party, with media from a fourth party, and needs its own power. I would pay $1000 more for a camera that records 4:4:4 before I'd pay $100 for one that does it to an external recorder.
 
ProfessorU said:
I think the external recorder thing is a fad. Extra weight, bulk, and another point of failure, plus it's usually made by a third party, with media from a fourth party, and needs its own power. I would pay $1000 more for a camera that records 4:4:4 before I'd pay $100 for one that does it to an external recorder.
Click to expand...

You're either trolling, or smoking something. Stating the obvious facts about the use of an external recorder is hyperbole, not useful.

a fad? instagram yes, lomography, hells yes. external recorders...... umm, no.

I'm guessing what you wanted to say was that you don't think they add any benefit, but then you get on that you do like 4:4:4. so which is it?

4th party? are you ordering media from alibaba?

In what magical land have you discovered a camera that outputs 4:4:4 for $100?
 
Yes I would be interested in one but only if it records 10-bit DNxHD in the .mxf container. I don't want anything that records in .mov because I do not want to be crippled by quicktime for Windows (32bit process, 4GB memory max) Another very nice codec I would love to see in a external is AVC-Intra 100 and Ultra 200 but I don't think panasonic would ever license that codec.

To be clear, on Windows, every codec (except Canon DSLR footage) wrapped in .mov has to go through the quicktime engine, and that engine is still a 32-bit process limited to using a maximum of 4GB of ram. It will waste over 20GB of ram editing on a 32GB workstation.
 
Last edited:
Hm, I somehow hoped this was a Kickstarter thread for exactly that same device. Anyways, my main reason for buying an external recorder would recording in an edit ready cocec. The added color resolution and "better" compression are of course great too;)
So taken even the somehow negative posts here in account, I guess a lot of people would end up buying one, if some things would be addressed:

- The company doing it should team up with a company like Zacuto and find a dedicated mounting solution for the most popular cameras out there. Since this is about a small, no (big) screen, SD card recorder, people choosing this device over a Q7 or Ninja, will probably be "no rig shooters" wanting to keep their small form factor. If it´s small enough, you could for example integrate it in a top handle or side grip (I would love another grip on the left side of the C100).

- Sell dedicated cables. Finding good HDMI cables, in the right length, with a smallish footprint is a PITA.

- Make it energy efficient and find a good powering solution. Maybe use GoPro batteries, at least sth generic.

- The price should come in around the price of the blackmagic recorder (without mounting solution).

Now have I said that MY ideal solution would be a screen updated Alphatron VF with build in SDcard recording... ;)

Happy dreaming everyone!
 
I just bought a Pocket Camera - and while testing it I thought - Here is a company that already makes an external recorder, and here is this tiny, light, albeit flawed, camera. What if BMD took the Pocket Camera, eliminated the sensor and lens mount, replaced the micro-HDMI with a standard locking HDMI - the result would be an extremely small external recorder that uses cheap batteries and records ProResHQ and (eventually) raw onto Sandisk Extreme Pro cards. People will say those cards are expensive now, but they seem to be very reliable and, compared to years of using P2 cards, aren't that much really.

The Pocket Camera costs a grand.. without a sensor it could be way less... Two of the "albeit flaws" are that it doesn't display remaining record time, and that the cards need to be formatted in a computer.. but still I'd buy one for the C100 in a NY minute...
 
The C100 has its own little issues. As far as I can see, the internal recording to AVCHD goes through a bit of noise reduction and does some other stuff, making a nice image for 'most' situations.

However, recording to an external recorder (my choice was the Pix200 - but that was for an FS100) reveals that the HDMI output doesn't quite match the internal recording. You get *everything* - warts and all.

As the C100 is an 8 bit camera, there's a bit of 'diffusion dither' going on - hey, it works. But that really stresses the Pix220's ProRes compressor, so if things get active, there's too much info to record even at the standard ProRes422. I've had to use ProRes422HQ to consistently capture the C100 output without macroblocks getting in the way. 60-70% of the time, HQ mode is a bit of a waste of space, but outside of that, it's a life-saver as when things get active, the AVCHD could beat the standard ProRes422 for quality (and leave the LT mode in the dust).

So, I work to this rule: ProResHQ for all recordings except conference/preso records (which can be at LT). I bought the Pix because of its sublime (!) audio circuit that blew the FS100 out of the water. The C100 is far better than the FS100's audio, but the Pix doesn't hear the 'start/stop' stuff so I'm considering switching to the Ninja 2. I'm not sure if I'd be happy to trust a 'headless' recorder like the NanoFlash, just IMHO.
 
Mac said:
...What if BMD took the Pocket Camera, eliminated the sensor and lens mount, replaced the micro-HDMI with a standard locking HDMI - the result would be an extremely small external recorder that uses cheap batteries and records ProResHQ and (eventually) raw onto Sandisk Extreme Pro cards. People will say those cards are expensive now, but they seem to be very reliable and, compared to years of using P2 cards, aren't that much really.
Click to expand...

Now let's imagine a Pocket Camera and a Cineroid Retina EVF had one too many Long Island Iced Teas one night...
 
mcbob said:
Now let's imagine a Pocket Camera and a Cineroid Retina EVF had one too many Long Island Iced Teas one night...
Click to expand...

An external recorder based on the Pocket Camera specs that doubled as an EVF would eliminate a cable, plus you'd know that you were recording without taking your eye from the finder.. If dreams were horses...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top