On the B&H website it says that the nano is "no longer available", although it still has the nanoflash for sale bundled with other hardware (e.g., battery, ballhead, etc). Also, Lensrentals says they no longer stock it.

Is the nanoflash at its end of life?

...Is the nanoflash at its end of life?
Not for me, it's still an incredibly useful recorder and problem solver.

However, if the years of promised but unfulfilled firmware updates are really to be closed out by end-of-life for the Nanoflash by Convergent, I'll be sure to never consider another product from them. I don't understand why a manufacturer that doesn't show dedication to its existing customers would expect loyalty in return.

I don't *know* that this is the case with Convergent Design and the Nanoflash, but it sure seems that all their resources that were to be used for NF firmware updates have gone towards new product development, as months turn into years. If I re-upped for a Gemini or whatever is that what I should expect in the future?

It's now been 2-1/2 years since the last firmware update, with the number one issue seeming to be no ability to start/stop recording on this or that new camera. If CD releases new firmware for NF I will very happily eat my hat and post pictures, too, but it's been a pretty long run of "all our people are working on the Gemini" and "the Odyssey is so exciting..."

Hear hear! Seth though CD are prompt in replying to my questions re my nanoFlash so there is still some life there.

Ron

I have also been advised by Convergent Design that the nanoFlash has been discontinued. When I asked about the long awaited firmware updates I received the following reply: -

“As for the firmware fix, this is in the que but may not be available till next year, since we are currently working on getting the Odyssey 7 out, then will need to revisit Gemini 4:4:4 and nanoFlash, to fix any current issues”.

In before they're too busy on a new groundbreaking product for NAB, then the Gemini and Nano get sidetracked again.

I agree with Seth usually, but not this time. CD came out with unpromised, no charge feature upgrades after the purchase, and addressed a lot of issues and concerns over its span, before it all stopped. I think they were over the top in customer support. How long did it take Sony to upgrade the FS700 to 4k? Was it free? (No...) Did CD ever charge for feature upgrades? (No...)

As it stands with me, I am not owed anything. I still think the Nanoflash is a fine product. It works perfectly on my PMW350, and extends it's usefulness by permitting compliant XDCAM 422 videos for those organizations that require it, as well as many other features.

I'm seriously considering getting a nanoflash to run with my Canon C100, specifically to get timecode matched with my other F3 (which has timecode).

Good idea?

Yes, the nanoFlash has gone end of life. Sony discontinued their current MPEG2 CODEC module, so we were forced to cease production. The nanoFlash has been a tremendously successful product for Convergent Design and can be found worldwide on TV, commercial, documentary, advertising and corporate video production. In total, we delivered over 5,500 nanoFlash units.

Over the lifespan of nanoFlash we added many many software features, greatly extending it's capabilities and value. Yes, these new features also increased the sales and market acceptance of the product, but all these added functions were provided at no additional charge to existing customers.

We wanted to add a couple of new features, in particular, HDMI timecode and HDMI record trigger, but found that the HDMI chips used in the nanoFlash simply did not support the required HDMI protocol. Unfortunately, HDMI chips that offered this support, simply did not exist when we designed the nanoFlash. There were also a couple of other minor features we would like to have added, but overall, the nanoFlash still stands as one of the most full-featured affordable recorders on the market today (at least for compressed HD work).

So we bid farewell to nanoFlash, which still has a very substantial following and active user base. We plan to service and support (via hardware repairs and tech support) the nanoFlash for at least the next 3 years. We're taking all we have learned about the nanoFlash (and the Gemini as well) into our new Odyssey family of recorders. All indications point to continued success.

Mike Schell
Convergent Design

Thanks Mike.

I'm still thinking of picking one up to run on my C100 so I can sync timecode with my other, timecode-enabled, cameras (would jam timecode from my F3 to the NF). Would this work?

Glad to hear you're still servicing. Any possibility of discount pricing now! :)

Thanks Mike.

I'm still thinking of picking one up to run on my C100 so I can sync timecode with my other, timecode-enabled, cameras (would jam timecode from my F3 to the NF). Would this work?

Glad to hear you're still servicing. Any possibility of discount pricing now! :)

Hi Steve-
Yes, the nanoFlash will read the timecode from the F3 camera. You can also use time of day timecode from within the nanoFlash.

You'll have to check dealer stock for any possible discounts, but given the end-of-life, I don't think they will be discounted.

Not for me, it's still an incredibly useful recorder and problem solver.

However, if the years of promised but unfulfilled firmware updates are really to be closed out by end-of-life for the Nanoflash by Convergent, I'll be sure to never consider another product from them...
I agree with Seth usually, but not this time. CD came out with unpromised, no charge feature upgrades after the purchase, and addressed a lot of issues and concerns over its span, before it all stopped. I think they were over the top in customer support...
Mike Schell shared above some convincing information about CD's view of the NF's life-cycle, and it sounds reasonable to me.

My rant is still editable, but I've decided not to tone it down. It's how I felt at the time. Tom has perhaps been a longer-term user of the NF than me; over the period of my ownership there have been firmware updates discussed on this forum by CD representatives, but never delivered, whether free or at a cost, over 2-1/2 years, they don't exist. That Tom got what he needed is great, I didn't, and neither did some other forum contributors.

NOW we learn that HDMI timecode functionality, at the root of many (most? all?) of the desired firmware updates just couldn't be adequately implemented through firmware, it would require hardware. Fair enough. The MPEG/MXF module from Sony is being discontinued, fair enough.

Rant mode re-engaged:
"We're looking at that camera..." "Odyssey is taking all our resources..." "Gemini update..." "Maybe after NAB..." Convergent Design, I'm talking to you; IMO you need to be more forthright in your customer communication in this forum. HDMI hardware in the NF doesn't support TC the way you want it to? TELL US! Don't leave users hanging. Read back over this forum and you'll find quite a history of users wondering what happened to that next update.

I'm glad we're finally getting more info about the nanoFlash's firmware vs. hardware challenges with HDMI, it's just a little late, don't you think?

Having ventilated my views I feel better... as I said in my first line of my post above I still find the nanoFlash to be an incredibly versatile and useful recorder and problem-solver.
... When I asked about the long awaited firmware updates I received the following reply: -

“As for the firmware fix, this is in the que but may not be available till next year, since we are currently working on getting the Odyssey 7 out, then will need to revisit Gemini 4:4:4 and nanoFlash, to fix any current issues”.
And apparently there may yet be new firmware for the nanoFlash. EOL but the saga continues...

Okay, looks like I have to purchase a HDMI to HD-SDI adapter now. I have no doubts the issue regarding illegal HDMI levels will not be solved, so I am forced to use a HDMI to HD-SDI adapter to record anything with black video with the Nano.

Hi Seth-
You make a very valid point. We (I) did not handle this message (the intrinsic lack of HDMI timecode support) properly. We should have been more forthcoming. I apologize. We'll do our best to get this corrected in the future.

We also did not hire enough engineers to keep up with the workload of developing new products while supporting current (and older generation) products. We have made significant strides in this area and plan to hire additional engineers later this year.

So, I would ask your patience as we try to correct some of these shortcomings.

Okay, looks like I have to purchase a HDMI to HD-SDI adapter now. I have no doubts the issue regarding illegal HDMI levels will not be solved, so I am forced to use a HDMI to HD-SDI adapter to record anything with black video with the Nano.

Hi Jack-
Not quite sure why you feel the need for an HDMi to SDI converter? I don't think the nano has any problems with black video. The nano does not support HDMI timecode, but I am not aware of any problems with the video.

Mike Schell shared above some convincing information about CD's view of the NF's life-cycle, and it sounds reasonable to me.

My rant is still editable, but I've decided not to tone it down. It's how I felt at the time. Tom has perhaps been a longer-term user of the NF than me; over the period of my ownership there have been firmware updates discussed on this forum by CD representatives, but never delivered, whether free or at a cost, over 2-1/2 years, they don't exist. That Tom got what he needed is great, I didn't, and neither did some other forum contributors.

NOW we learn that HDMI timecode functionality, at the root of many (most? all?) of the desired firmware updates just couldn't be adequately implemented through firmware, it would require hardware. Fair enough. The MPEG/MXF module from Sony is being discontinued, fair enough.

Rant mode re-engaged:
"We're looking at that camera..." "Odyssey is taking all our resources..." "Gemini update..." "Maybe after NAB..." Convergent Design, I'm talking to you; IMO you need to be more forthright in your customer communication in this forum. HDMI hardware in the NF doesn't support TC the way you want it to? TELL US! Don't leave users hanging. Read back over this forum and you'll find quite a history of users wondering what happened to that next update.

I'm glad we're finally getting more info about the nanoFlash's firmware vs. hardware challenges with HDMI, it's just a little late, don't you think?

Having ventilated my views I feel better... as I said in my first line of my post above I still find the nanoFlash to be an incredibly versatile and useful recorder and problem-solver.

And apparently there may yet be new firmware for the nanoFlash. EOL but the saga continues...

+1.

Should I have known there won't be HDMI TC or triggering for my FS100, I'd have sold my nanoFlash long time ago - and who knows? Maybe even used the money towards some 'later & greater' CD's product?

Piotr

Hi Jack-
Not quite sure why you feel the need for an HDMi to SDI converter? I don't think the nano has any problems with black video. The nano does not support HDMI timecode, but I am not aware of any problems with the video.

I go in depth with this in a previous thread that illegal HDMI levels below 16 will cause the nano to stop recording. SDI does not do this.

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/convergent-design-odyssey/504607-different-signal-detection-options-nano.html

I agree with Seth usually, but not this time. CD came out with unpromised, no charge feature upgrades after the purchase, and addressed a lot of issues and concerns over its span, before it all stopped. I think they were over the top in customer support. How long did it take Sony to upgrade the FS700 to 4k? Was it free? (No...) Did CD ever charge for feature upgrades? (No...)

As it stands with me, I am not owed anything. I still think the Nanoflash is a fine product. It works perfectly on my PMW350, and extends it's usefulness by permitting compliant XDCAM 422 videos for those organizations that require it, as well as many other features.

Tom, how do you dock your Nano to the PMW350? I have the PMW320 with an AB Dionic 160 and the Ni-MH 140. Both batteries have velcro on top and are perfect sized seats for the Nano. The camera never goes out without it and its higher quality capabilities and backup files recording.

I still would like to use my nanoFlash - if only to fulfill the broadcast required minimum of 50 Mbps/4:2:2 for some of my material. Recently the internal clock in my unit stopped working; i..e. after I dial-in the correct time and date, it keeps them only until rebooted. The files are recorded with some 1999 time stamp :(

Is replacing some internal battery necessary, or will it charge after keeping it connected to external source for some time (I didn't use my nanoFlash for several months)?

Thanks,

Piotr

Check with CD but it sounds like your backup battery has died and needs replacing. I believe the battery is a BR1225A unit like these:

New Fresh Panasonic BR1225A Battery Solder Leads | eBay (http://goo.gl/UuICiF)

Again confirm that battery designation with CD. A competent tech should be able to replace it fairly easily one would think. Otherwise it's send it back to CD for its R & R.

These guys might also be able to give you the correct info.

nanoFlash.net (http://www.nanoflash.net)

Chris Young
CYV Productions
Sydney

Christopher, there's a teardown video of the NanoFlash on Youtube, you could potentially see which type of battery is required.

Good one Jack.

Teardown looks pretty simple. Hard to tell but I am pretty sure that the battery shown is the BR1225A Panasonic cell I linked to. Think I will order at least one of those batteries and check it out and keep it as a standby if it's correct.

BTW I think there is something going on at CD re discussions on a possible sucessor to Nano. Now that could be an interesting development!

Chris Young
CYV Productions
Sydney

Dear Dan,

Can you confirm our Friends' here finding on the exact type of backup battery nanoFlash uses?

I have written to CD support but all they did was assigning an RMA for me; now sending a nano between Poland and the US is a royal p...a and awfully expensive so I asked them about the battery type so I could replace myself (my nanoFlash is out-of-warranty anyway, so what's the problem?)

Unfortunately they never responded :(

Dan, please?

Check out these posts. The BR1225A batery looks to be the correct one, confirmed by CD. They are around as per that eBay link I posted further up. After viewing the Youtube tear down video I think any reasonable tech with a soldering iron could swap the battery out with the minimum of difficulty.

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/convergent-design-odyssey/517924-nanoflash-life-expectancy-internal-battery.html

Chris Young
CYV Productions
Sydney

Is there room to install a battery holder to the next change is easier?

Check out these posts. The BR1225A batery looks to be the correct one, confirmed by CD.

Chris - where and when it was confirmed by CD? If it was, I'm OK and all I can say is Thanks to you.

:)

Cheers

Piotr

My Nano battery died a few months ago, finally got around to ordering a new battery, which arrived yesterday. I haven't had time to install it yet (maybe next week).

Five (5) for $10.88, free shipping. Mine came in less than a week (California to NYC). They're tiny...

ebay Link: 5 BR1225A Panasonic 3V 48mAh 12 5mm Coin Battery w Legs (http://www.ebay.com/itm/251630306232)

Is there room to install a battery holder to the next change is easier?

Chris

Viewing the tear down I would say there is but if I only have to replace one once every five years or so I would be quite happy to unsolder and resolder one. Since the last post I have now discovered just using Google that there are dozens of sources for these Panasonic BR1225A batteries.

Chris Young
CV Productions
Sydney

Thats reasonable. I don't like to solder to a board more than a couple of times. Things can get a bit wonky after a few times. Also if you end up with a bad battery or one with an unusually short life its easier to drop in one in a holder.

Realistically though The NanoFlash should be pretty much obsolete within a couple battery lifetimes so I guess it may not be of a real benefit.

Fully agree. Normally in a situation like that I would cut the tabs close to the battery body and solder the new battery to the now existing tabs sticking up from the PCB rather than risking lifting tracks on the board.

As you say though Nanos will most likely be obsolete in a few years time. Currently they still have their place. I hang one of the vision switcher on multicam shoots just as a back up to the ProRes and XDCam disc recorder masters. Would have to be real unlucky for all three records to go down :)

Chris Young
CYV Productions
Sydney

Sorry about re-joining this thread a year late.

Those of you still using the Nanoflash and don't mind opening it up, Digikey also offers these batteries if you want to solder one in yourself:

https://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/BR-1225A%2FFAN/P290-ND/447501

Digikey is a better source than eBay the majority of the time.