Nanoflash Recorder Experiences?

E

Emmet Brown

Active member
Hi Folks,

i just read about this interesting hardware:

http://www.convergent-design.com/CD_Products_nanoFlash.htm

Did anyone of you have experience with that tool?

It sounds like a good option to record on cheap CF-Cards and to turn my panasonic-cam into a sony-cam, if the client wants.

But its hard to get informations about workflow with it.
It would only make sense to me, if the Cams record-button simultaneously starts the Nanoflash for example....

Any thoughts, experiences?


Edit: Heres an interesting Statement from an HPX 500 owner: http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/convergent-design-nanoflash/466325-nanoflash-panasonic-hpx-170-a.html
 
Last edited:
This is interesting. I didn't try nanoflash, but imho dvcpro hd has enough quality,
not like sony's 35mbit long gop mpeg2.... why pay 3 grand for what you don't really
need? invest in marketing.

just my 2 cents.
 
The NanoFlash is not limited to 35mbit it actually goes up to 422 220mbit/s feed which would be 2x the bit rate of DVCPROHD

Also check out the larger sized KiPro as well by AJA. 10bit 422 ProRes HQ at 220mbit/s
 
Emmet – We are considering the Nano Flash and will be doing tests with it shortly for a theatrical project. It will be connected to a Sony PDW-700 where we will record at 100mbs. While the XDCAMHD 422 50mbt images from the 700 are very good, we are looking to improve mosquito noise and artefacts within rapid movement, which can be more apparent on the big screen.

Some thoughts for you:

1: The higher the bit rate does not necessarily equate to better images (this is a complex subject) – for example, Convergent Design themselves report that while you can record up to 160+ mbs XDCAM HD 422, the “Sweet Spot” in their opinion is 100mbs and this is virtually indistinguishable from uncompressed. In most circumstances recording at 160mbs would create a lot of processor pain with little or no image quality gain.

2: XDCAM HD 422 is easy to edit as long as you are set up correctly – the Long Gop Mpeg-2 codec is sophisticated and extremely clever. The Nano Flash will record to QuickTime and MXF file formats for easy editing in all major NLEs. Clearly these folks at CD have done a great job.

3: As far as I have heard from those who regularly use the Nano Flash, there have been no issues with the cards.

4: There have been quite a few tests done – just google Nano Flash review or test. There are plenty movies on the net to get accurate information.

5: Tomas has a point when he asks whether you actually need this equipment, as compared to marketing yourself and getting work that will enable you to purchase anything you require. Course only you can answer that.


Regards: Stu
www.studioscotland.com
 
Thanks for your input!

And im with you, i dont need that tool absolutely. But in my area it is turning out slowly, that XDCam will be the favored format... So i began to torture my brain, looking for different possibilities and found that Nanoflash...

I dont want record 100MB/s, because i can record AVC-1 100, which is great. But unfortunately this is the only fullraster 1920/1080 codec in my 300 and it needs much space....I would record 35 or 50 MB/s with the Nanoflash, if the client wants XDCam or i just want to save space... Or just as backup and archiving CF-Cards like Tapes...

I will not order a Nanoflash now. I just want to collect informations, opinions and experiences.

So thanks again and greetings.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top