It's funny it's advertised as small broadcast camera, but it doesn't have broadcast codec.... strange logic. And even though BBC approved XF300/305 series for the broadcast standard, they will most likely not allow XF100/105 due to single chip design.
so much for that thought.... everyone is selling it for $1999.99 , B&H Photo, Adorama, etc. ( as of today, April 12, 2011 )
Originally Posted by scotthampton
now that we are in April, and there's tons of footage from the Canon XA10 out there on Youtube and Vimeo, the question is....
have any of your minds changed ?
I love my HV20, but it's time to upgrade. This camera does indeed look awesome, I've been scouring the net for reviews, and from what I've seen and read this camera is going to be a BIG hit. People love the video it shoots, the fully manual operations you can do with it, and the lens and the focus ring.
Most of you posted your thoughts months ago, what are your opinions today ? ... I'm aware though, if you are not really in the market for a new camcorder, that you may not be up to speed on all the reviews, videos available at this time ( April, 2011 ) so I'll keep that in mind.
I've been on the fence with this thing, but here is my line of thought:
$1,999 for a fancy AVCHD camera = waste of time
but...
$1,999 + $1,000 for Ninja = lossless capture/full manual control/xlr inputs etc...
This makes it seem much more worthwhile. Let's face it, they will never give you lossless capture in a cheap camera. So for about $3,000 you are getting something that is a definite step up from an HV, and theoretically better than the more expensive model with the 50Mbps 4:2:2 codec. Won't exactly be run-and-gun with a recording box mounted on it...but does that matter?
My only question is: have they crippled the HDMI output like they have on the DSLRs? Are you getting full raster uncompressed 4:2:2?
I would not buy Ninja at the time. Right now you can only record 24p in 60i stream, which requires the pulldown. The other frame rate is 60i. They are saying other frame rates will be updated in later firmware releases, but who knows when. Also you can't trigger recording Ninja with start/stop button on the camera. It's a half way finished product and the buyers are beta testers.
Can somebody explain what Ninja is ? I did a Google and couldn't find any info. Who makes it ?
This video is a product demo of the Atomos Ninja for those who may wonder what the link is.
Interesting indeed. so this is NOT a camera, it's a hard drive that can be connected to any DSLR that has an HDMI port.
I was under the assumption that the HDMI port on a Canon T2i, T3i, 7D, 60D, was an HDMI out, to run a signal to a TV, or addon monitor.
so you can run a full 1080p signal through this HDMI port, and RECORD this to an external recording device ? very interesting.
I guess this differs from a laptop with HDMI, as the HDMI on a laptop is an out-only, so NO recording from a DSLR is possible.
Very interesting, thanks for the vidoe link which really clears things up.
No you can't record from DSLR as the signal cadence is not perfect. That is a know fact for the past 3 years, that is a reason no capture device or recording unit will ever be able to capture video signal from the cameras you mentioned. DSLR's are NOT video cameras, so they pretty much are limited to their usability.
maybe I'm missing the point then, so that unit ( the Ninja ) what is it used with ? a video camcorder you mean ? ... I guess I missed the pointwhy would somebody want that if you have the XA10 for example ? , it comes with 64 gigs of memory, and you can load another 64 gigs into it via SD cards... so that's 128 gigs of memory. I guess I'm missing the point.
maybe I'm missing the point then, so that unit ( the Ninja ) what is it used with ? a video camcorder you mean ? ... I guess I missed the point
External recorders like the one mentioned above are used mainly because you can bypass the camera's compression, codecs and/or bitrates and record the video at a higher quality than the camcorders internal recording. This is useful for broadcast use, advanced color grading, chroma key work, etc.
Not true. Native 24p is available now. For the price it blows away the competition. It is well made and functions as advertised. They have done 3 firmware releases already.
HD 1080i60, 1080i59.94, 1080i50, 1080p30*, 1080p25*, 1080p24, 1080p23.98, 720p60, 720p59.94, 720p50, SD 480i, 576i
* from firmware v1.1
But I don't suppose it'll suddenly record XA10 or HF G10 footage at 4:2:2? Neither will it give more manual controls... so I still wonder what the added value is over say an XF100 which comes at the same pricetag.
interesting new product, but somehow not entirely convincing... although 24Mbps bitrate sounds cool
"The most important thing is not what's inside the camera, but rather what's in front and behind it"
Value added:
1) The XA10/G10 sensor is the same as the XF100 sensor, so you should be getting 4:2:2 out of the HDMI
2) The Ninja can record at 220 Mbps. The XF100 can only record at 50 Mbps.
3) The Ninja uses cheap notebook hard drives. You can get many hours of recording, and they can be swapped out in the field.
4) The Ninja can move along with you to your next camera. It is a 10 bit recorder and these cameras are only 8 bit. Built in future proofing.
If you are happy with AVCHD then this shouldn't really mean much to you.
You'll need one per camera though, and ít'll make your setup bulkier. Plus your camera isn't going to be easier to handle.
still, it's a small price to pay for 422 sampling and 10 bit color depth at such high bitrate. You could buy almost any fairly decent HDV CAM with hdmi out plus the ninja = greatness! glory!
"The most important thing is not what's inside the camera, but rather what's in front and behind it"
Sorry - still not convinced. Although my geek-side likes the tech, I would sooner consider to buy an XF100 if I had that much money to spend... Solely based on the following:
1) High bitrates are nice and so, but imho these huge files will prolly be almost as hard, if not harder to work than the avchd codec. And the final project will be downconverted anyway.
2) Cheap Notebook drives can't stand near the same abuse as CF or SD cards. Wouldn't want to loose my precious data.
3) You still miss out on manual controls during your shoots.
4) You add hardware and additional cables to your setup, making you less mobile and adding to the risc factor of your equipment malfunctioning at moment supreme.
5) It's only as future proof as any new gadget. There is bound to be something better available at the time of your next upgrade. And this particular gadget is needed for each camera. So you can forget multile camera setups and saving costs.
Last edited by Flozem; 2011 May 5th at 00:52.
have you ever worked with prores422? it's extremely efficient and although the file SIZE is huge, any dual core mac can handle it decently. That's why I consider the Ninja to be a good alternative, since the output codec is very reliable.
"The most important thing is not what's inside the camera, but rather what's in front and behind it"
AVCHD = worked with it already and when I log and transfer into FCP I always end up decompressing it into prores 422 anyway
plus, your final render is not "downconverted" since you rarely will output back to avchd again. The master sequence in prores can generate many copies to whichever compression you like, with very little generational loss , since it's a visually lossless codec. That's where the magic happens, at codec algorithm level.
"The most important thing is not what's inside the camera, but rather what's in front and behind it"
1) Wrong. Prores is way easier to work with as pointed out by LOGOS PATHOS ETHOS. I've been using something similar (CineForm) for years. Far less taxing on a system. Plus I want the best possible master.
2) If you don't trust hard drives, what are you ultimately storing stuff on? Notebook HDs are extremely reliable. Not the weakest link in the chain IMO.
3) How are you missing out on manual controls because of a recorder? Camera controls are on the camera. Ninja is just a recording box. XF100 and XA10 both have manual controls, although admittedly the controls are easier on the XF100.
4) This is weak. What about people who use external monitors, mics, DOF adapters? Should they stop using them because they might fail? The Ninja can be easily mounted between camera and tripod. There was a time, not so long ago, when lossless capture meant being tethered to a PC. This setup is extremely mobile.
5) Camera makers won't be giving us lossless capture in cheap cameras anytime soon. They would be killing their own market for the high end stuff. However, we are starting to see lower end 10 bit capable cameras and they will drop in price over the next few years. So yes, there is some future proofing in a Ninja.
If you are happy with AVCHD, then be happy with it. You don't need to rationalize it somehow being better than lossless capture. If youtube output and Indiana Jones level of mobility are high priority for you then there is nothing wrong with AVCHD. Some of us on this board have been waiting for devices like the Nano and Ninja for years.
I'll give you that the cpu has less work decoding the cmpressed data, but working with a multitude of gigabytes or even terabytes of data stored on notebook drives isn't my idea of easy editing. I'd have to invest in a NAS to be able to load data into my editing program simply because my tower is already stuffed with drives.
And yes - I too would like the best possible master and highest possible bitrates, but if my output has to fit on a dvd or blueray disk, I'll have to downconvert and compress my data anyway. Sounds good on paper to me. But I think it compares to those few people that like to invest in hifi installations with broad frequency ranges and fancy cables while they can't even make out the difference when listening to the output.
I am not saying I do not trust hard drives. I am merely saying that cheap harddrives are not meant to be used whilst moving around all the time. Let alone hotswapping multiple notebook drives. It's not the most mobile setup and just can't take the same abuse as flashcards. Yes you can take SSD's, but then you will pay for storage capacity bigtime. The drives I use to finally store my data are safe and sound on my desktop, and final projects are copied on DVDs.
I am not saying that people should stop using hardware. But with every piece of equipment added to your rig, there is a higher risk that your rig won't function as a whole as intended.
No I am not happy with avchd, but as things are they are currently the camera's in my budget range. I know it's a compression technique and I know I loose some data in the process. I also know it kills my current cpu decompressing the mts files. I am not ratinalizing avchd being better than lossless capture... how could I?
BUT....
I might have been interested if the device didn't increase the costs of my rig to the same level as an XF100 which gives you native 4:2:2 sampling and a half decent bitrate with lots of manual controls on the camera body. Anyway - we don't share opinions. Let's keep it at that.
Last edited by Flozem; 2011 May 5th at 17:22.
The fact that you will ultimately deliver to dvd or even a high h.264 compression is not what this is really about. You will always end up with a better result in a distribution format when the SOURCE material is of higher quality.
$hit in , $hit out.... better $lalalala in,.... well.
Very few people deliver in HD (bluray) , but they still shoot their footage in the best, as uncompressed-as-possible way.
Most of us, who deliver SD DVDs work with HD, if we had to think continuosly "oh but why bother, we have to downconvert it anyway" then we would not have moved on from DV.
"The most important thing is not what's inside the camera, but rather what's in front and behind it"
Tested this thing [a friends]in low light its better than a 550D I had with a f 2.5 lens,in daylight the colours and resolution are great.Be perfect for weddings.
I'm a bit confused, what "thing" ?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote