With regards to the nanoflash (or even other recorders), what are the advantages or disadvantages to recording from the HD-SDI output rather than the HDMI output of a camcorder ? I am familiar with the data rate of HD-SDI, but have no idea what the HDMI output looks like.

The advantage of SDI is the locking connector and that most of the pro gear can be plugged in.

In most every other aspect - from bandwidth to features - HDMI blows SDI out of the water.

Frank

Timecode is not standard with HDMI :-( You can run HDSDi up to 100m with good quality cables, not that you'd normally put a recorder that far away. HDMI tends to exhibit more lag and signal delay than HDSDi.

It depends on what you're doing. I love HDSDI and our switcher and capture computer are well over 100' away from any camera in our studio, but there have been no issues even up to 300 ft. A BNC with two wires (shield and conductor) either works or not and carries component digital video, multi track audio (16 vs HDMI's 8 channels) and timecode.

If the coax cable does not work or is intermittent, I can cut the end off and put a new BNC on it in under 5 minutes. Try that with HDMI.

HDMI copper cable length goes 50' (some claim 100 ft.) with heavy duty cables, but then you've got a thick cable, that can produce a lot of torque, inserted into a weak - sometimes motherboard-mounted connector with lots of pins. Lots of people have had their gear's HDMI's connectors go bad and their shoot shot. The HDMI connector is not locking - really bad. Did I mention how many pins are inside there that may be needed to pass signal or you've got a problem? 19 or even as many as 29! One word - yuck.

If the HDMI connector gets mangled, that expensive thick cable is close to toast because very few want to take on the horrid task of re-connectorizing it - not me brothers.

Don't get me wrong. HDMI is great for a lot of stuff, and 1.4 can carry 4K,
but imo, I would avoid it if possible for use on set.

As always, YMMV.