I think the move by Convergent Design to make their Odyssey 7Q SSD media proprietary is a huge error of judgement.

First a cautionary tale: this has been tried before by companies like Avid who used to sell proprietary drives for their systems (it was a firmware hack on the drives - nothing more) - it had two direct effects. It alienated end users, who could see the exact same drives selling for significantly less on consumer channels - and remember this was before the days of internet shopping. Avid would argue that they only used server grade drives (sound familiar?). Secondly it meant that if you did have a problem with your drive you had to go back to Avid and wait for them to replace it or carry around a hot spare. That's an expensive option. Avid - didn't mind - they were pretty much the only game in town.

Until the more hardware independent Final Cut Pro came around Avid could not respond quickly and basically got their pants pulled down by the competition. That's a simplistic view I know - there were other factors (mostly to do with overpriced proprietary hardware) but the mindset throughout Avid was the same.

Now Convergent Design can argue all they like about "server grade" SSDs but the truth is they have a fantastic product that they've crippled by going down this path.

1. SSD technology is evolving at an incredible rate - the drives today are 4x as fast as the first generation, so any "server grade" drive is likely to be caught and passed by off the shelf SSDs in the next 12 months. They are already much more reliable than spinning disks, so server grade means little. And some drives specs (2 striped together) already exceed the theoretical SATA3 saturation point (6Gb/s = 750MB/s and two striped drives will easily saturate that buss).

2. Imagine you are in the middle of a shoot and an SSD goes down. Convergent Design is not Avid - they have an even more limited distribution chain. Getting a replacement is not merely a matter of popping into a local computer shop. I'm in Australia - none of my local guys sell Convergent Design. So you'll probably have to carry a hot spare.

3. Convergent Design has brought the price down but I note I can buy a Sandisk SSD of twice the capacity and similar specs off the shelf for less. In 6 months it might be cheaper and faster and twice the capacity again.

This is just my opinion but Convergent Design are a market leader here and they risk guys like Ninja. AJA, BMD and others catching up and going past with such a short sighted policy. Sure they'll make a few extra bucks up front but is it worth it? How many less Odyssey's will they sell?

One thing to keep in mind if you read the BMD forums is just how many issues users are having with trying to use unsupported drives even though there is an exhaustive list of what is KNOWN to work.

Users always blame the manufacturer when hardware doesn't work even if they themselves have ignored the best advice.

I don't own any CD gear yet so I'm not a "fan boy" - just someone who tries to play Devil's Advocate and see things from a holistic perspective.

SSDs for on-demand constant data rates like high bitrate video as opposed to easily packetized data which doesn't NEED to constantly meet a data rate target each and every second are sort of a hit-and-miss commodity still.

One thing to keep in mind if you read the BMD forums is just how many issues users are having with trying to use unsupported drives even though there is an exhaustive list of what is KNOWN to work.

Users always blame the manufacturer when hardware doesn't work even if they themselves have ignored the best advice.

I agree Shaun - and no doubt that is one of the reasons CD decided to go down this path. I merely point out the pitfalls of doing it. I think it is far better to put out a list of approved drives and then it is buyer beware if they buy an unapproved drive and it doesn't work.

BTW - I don't see any issue with CD selling drives as part of a package to the end user or in charging a premium for that service. My only issue is tying them to the use of the device.

One question that arises from the whole Server grade angle is are these SSD's utilising SLC NAND? If they are then I have no complaint because those things are expensive, fast and longer lasting than MLC based NAND.. but AFAIK they don't come in capacities higher than 240-256GB.

I have the Sony AXS-R5 raw recorder so I have the mother of all proprietary "SSD"s with the 512gb AXS card. This $2,000 card won't fit in any other device on the market. Would I have liked to use standard Sandisk SSD's in the R5? You bet. But I know that the AXS card will be rock solid, tested and reliable. I'm sure CD feel the same way about their SSD media.

I have the Sony AXS-R5 raw recorder so I have the mother of all proprietary "SSD"s with the 512gb AXS card. This $2,000 card won't fit in any other device on the market. Would I have liked to use standard Sandisk SSD's in the R5? You bet. But I know that the AXS card will be rock solid, tested and reliable. I'm sure CD feel the same way about their SSD media.

Peter I'm not sure what one has to do with the other? Sony is a giant multinational company who has been down this path many times before and nearly always failed so they actually help to make my case. Remember how people found away around SxS cards so they could use cheaper SD card media? A lot of people I know with EX1's and 3's only had the 8G cards that came with the camera and shot everything else on SD cards via an adapter. Remember Sony Memory stick and Memorystick pro? Remember Betamax?

And your AXS card had better not be tested too much because you actually wear it out a bit after every cycle. That is the nature of NAND memory.

I think it is far better to put out a list of approved drives and then it is buyer beware if they buy an unapproved drive and it doesn't work.

Again, I don't disagree with you but go read the BMD forum on this issue. The average end user is a whiny jerk who won't take responsibility for his/her actions in contravention of solid advice.

From a PR perspective, Convergent have cast their vote and I understand why they have done what they have done.

Of course, we (and specifically you in this case) can vote with your dollars as you see fit. Don't like it? Don't buy it.

Not being a troll here, just pointing out that companies can do as they see fit to serve their own business model and sense of risk in the marketplace.

Take a look at the auto market:
North American manufacturers typically allow custom ordering of individual options on their cars for custom build (which almost NO ONE takes advantage of) which allows the consumer to feel like they are in control while Asian auto makers typically provide 3 trim levels with set option packages.

Which is "right"?

Both have proven themselves in the marketplace.

I agree with the original poster. Certifying the SSD as server grade is not the same as guaranteeing it will always work, but for sure if it's not certified, it's guaranteed NOT to work. Don't see a benefit.

Dear John,

First, I would like to thank you for posting your thoughts and opinions. This is a great forum that allows us to discuss this topic openly and frankly.

Our Primary Goal is Reliability.

All of our hard work, designing and building the Odyssey7Q and Odyssey7 is worthless, if users in the field have reliability problems with our device, or the SSD’s that they use in the device.

We consider our Odyssey7Q and Odyssey7 professional devices, suitable for high-end professional use, even though we have priced them very reasonably.

Thus, we design and build them to be professional devices and we need reliable, professional media as well.

-----------------

With our nanoFlash, we supported a wide range of CompactFlash cards. We devoted a great deal of effort to testing and qualifying CompactFlash cards, then we posted the qualified cards.

While this is a vastly different case, our experience was that many used CompactFlash cards that were not on our qualified card list, with varying degrees of success.

We devoted a lot of time attempting to recover footage from non-qualified cards for our customers.

Then we had the issue of certain manufacturers frequently changing their CompactFlash cards.

The controller chip, the controller chip firmware, and or the basic technology in a specific brand/type of card would change over time. This meant that while we fully qualified one brand/type of card, if the manufacturer changed the firmware and electronics in the card, the new card would not always work reliably.

Certain CompactFlash card manufacturers would work with us so we did not have this problem.

CompactFlash cards are in a different league from Solid State Drives (SSD’s). SSD’s are far higher in performance, and there are vast differences among SSD brands and types.

-----------------

While many consider SSD’s to be a commodity item, with the assumption that they are fully interchangeable; at the level of performance that we need, they are not.

We tested over a dozen SSD’s, for months.

We needed very fast continuous write speeds, without using compression of the data, and we needed power protection, to ensure that data is not lost when power is lost, and we needed very low power consumption.

Low Power Consumption is much more important than it would first seem.

Low Power Consumption, while writing data, continuously at 400 to over 500 Megabytes per second, is not something one typically finds in the SSD spec sheets.

Our SSD’s have the lowest Power Consumption, by far, of any SSD that we tested.

A higher Power Consumption means higher heat in the device, and higher heat can interfere with using our units in extreme conditions.

Higher Power Consumption means that we would have to build a bigger heatsink, making our devices larger and heavier.

-----------------

You mentioned SanDisk SSD’s, which seem to have similar specs.

Our testing showed that their power consumption was approximately two times the SSD’s that we use.

I could find no mention of power protection in the SanDisk SSD specifications.


SSD Power Protection is vital for our application.

One can reasonably expect, that a battery or power source will die during recording or playing back.

With many SSD’s, this can cause loss of data, and it can occasionally cause harm to the SSD itself, causing all data of the SSD to be lost.

Our SSD’s have Power Protection built in.

If power is lost during a record, you may loose the last 2-3 seconds of video due to internal buffering in the Odyssey7 or Odyssey7Q, but all the data previously transferred to the SSD will be safe.

Our SSD’s have the best Power Protection of all of the many SSD’s we tested.

-----------------


We have spent months testing our SSD’s, and frankly, we seriously abuse them during our testing.

For example, while recording, we will turn off the power, and at other times, we will pull an SSD while we are recording.

Our SSD’s pass these tests.

Internally, a SSD consists of the Controller Chip, Controller Firmware, and non-volatile memory chips.

Our SSD’s include Controller Firmware that has been optimized for our application, which is long duration, continuous high-speed writes to the SSD.

This Controller Firmware, the Controller Chip itself, and the memory chips are “locked down”, they will not change (without the manufacturer letting us know well in advance so we can test.)

-----------------

An important note, is that we are using a well-known, leading SSD manufacturer. A company that builds the Controller Chip, the Firmware, and the Memory Chips.

This SSD, with this specific firmware, is not sold through regular retail channels.


If you read the SSD specifications carefully, you will see many specifications, such as “Maximum Write Speed” listed as “up to”.

We have found that many SSD’s, from certain manufacturers, will live up to these specifications,
but then there are specific individual SSD’s that just do not perform as well as most others of the same brand and type.

Thus, if one purchases an SSD from normal retail channels, one is not assured that it will work as well as the next SSD.
This is unacceptable for professional recording.

-----------------

Every SSD that we sell is individually tested, in our devices, such as the Odyssey7 and Odyssey7Q, at both normal room temperature and at very elevated temperatures.

The ones that do not pass our extensive testing are not delivered to our dealers.

-----------------

John, I hope you feel that I am not lecturing you, I am just attempting to answer the questions that you have raised.

The issue of whether we use Proprietary SSD’s or not is certainly debatable and one can reasonably take both sides.

Our SSD’s are very special, very high end, high performance SSD’s, with a Locked Down Bill of Materials, with very low power and great Power Protection and they are available only through our dealers. Thus a reasonable person could call them Proprietary.

On the other hand, our SSD’s, are the same form factor, have the same electrical interface (SATA III, 6.0 Gigabits per Second), use the same voltage as regular SSD’s and may be used interchangeable with most any other SSD. Thus, a reasonable person would not call them Proprietary. Our SSD’s may be freely used in computers.

Many other manufacturers use custom designed interfaces, form factors, etc, and thus I would consider their devices to be Proprietary.

I readily admit that some will call our SSD’s Proprietary, but I do not.

-----------------

We took the criticism of our SSD’s being too expensive, so we negotiated with our SSD supplier to obtain lower prices and we passed these lower prices on to our customers.

Our 256 GB SSD, is priced at $395 (US Price) while our 512 GB SSD is priced at $795 (US Price).

I do feel that these are fair prices for what we are offering and for the testing that we perform to ensure that you have a successful shoot with our Odyssey7 or Odyssey7Q.

A price comparison to SSD’s that do not have all of the same features will show that the lesser SSD will usually cost less.


-----------------

Since the Odyssey7Q and Odyssey7 are very popular products, we expect to add many more dealers around the world, including Australia.

-----------------

John, you mentioned “the theoretical SATA3 saturation point (6Gb/s = 750MB/s”.

I would like to politely point out that the theoretical SATA3 saturation point is 600 MB/s (Megabytes per Second).

There is overhead due to the Error Correction Codes used.

From a practical standpoint, the maximum is around 550 MB/s/

-----------------

I have one last point, our SSD’s should be considered a critical part of our Odyssey7Q and Odyssey7.

They were selected for use with our Odyssey7Q and Odyssey7.

They have been extensively tested with our Odyssey7Q and Odyssey7.

Our firmware has been designed to take advantage of the specific Controller Firmware in our SSD’s.

Our firmware has been optimized to achieve the highest performance with these specific SSD’s.



Our Primary Goal is Reliability.


Respectfully,

Dan I can't and won't argue with any of that - thankyou for the very comprehensive explanation. It also will help clear the air of any misconceptions that end users like myself may have had and it is far more comprehensive than anything on your website.

The primary thought behind my original post was that a lot of shooting would still only be DNxHD/ProRes @ 1080P... and this media seems totally over-specified for that data rate. I would have liked the option to use cheaper media in that situation..but the heat and power issues would seem to put paid to that.

At the end of the day your entry point is the cheapest one out there so I know you'll do well with this product. I only hope that as SSD technology moves ahead we see corresponding value in your drives.. ie 750GB will be a common size soon. Because when consumer SSDs get down to 50c or 40c a Gigabyte (soon) I would like to see CD address the value proposition.

BTW - are you saying that the specs (400-500MB/s write speeds) for your SSDs are for uncompressed data?!!

Dear John,

Thank you for your reply to my post.

Mike Schell and I debated quite a lot about the possibility of offering a less capable SSD, at a lower cost, for when one is only recording compressed footage. And this SSD may also have lower capacity, say 128 GB instead of 256 GB.

But, the lower capacity SSD's, within the same line of SSD's, from the same manufacturer, have less performance.

This created quite a dilemma and caused us to be very concerned.

If we added these 128 GB SSD's to our offerings, then they can not be used for certain modes of recording, say recording from the FS700 in 2K, at 120 fps or 240 fps, or in 4K at 60 fps. And these restrictions would also apply to high-bandwidth modes for other cameras as well.

Based on past experience, we can fully expect for someone to purchase the wrong SSD's for the type of shooting that they plan to accomplish.

Or they may plan, for a specific shoot, to only shoot uncompressed, but at the last minute they want High Speed footage and would need different SSD's.

We came to the conclusion, that no matter how much we document that certain SSD's can only be used for certain modes, someone, sometime, will have the wrong SSD's on set, and it will be a serious problem for that shoot. And we feel that our Odyssey7Q or Odyssey7 may be blamed, as unfair as that is.

I hope this helps.

Respectfully,

When the GH2 got hacked, I saw a lot of rumbling about how manufacturers "stifle" their cameras capabilities, and why doesn't Panasonic/Canon/Sony/ect. let people shoot high end codecs on SD card media, yadda yadda yadda. The fact that certain of the GH2 were unusable with most SD cards on the market seems to completely fly over their heads.

Now, in 2013, Blackmagic Design releases their Pocket Camera that shoots ProRes HQ to SD card media. Just what everyone wanted, right? Oh, except it only really works with very specific cards, and now people are complaining about that. As Shaun pointed out, end users will use some cheap brand that won't work well, and it won't be their cheapening out on a necessity in this business, no, it will be Convergent Design's fault. This is their way of insuring that the unit will perform as expected as reliably as SSD technology can possibly allow.

Frankly, FS700, C500, and Alexa shooters should be sending Dan and his team birthday and holiday cards for the foreseeable future for providing such an elegant solution. Have you see the alternatives? And on top of that, the Odyssey isn't even available yet, but CD has already dropped the price of the media. That tells me they're not trying to squeeze out significant income from that.

BTW - are you saying that the specs (400-500MB/s write speeds) for your SSDs are for uncompressed data?!!

Dear John,

Recording at 400 to 500 MB/s is for recording 2K Raw, from the FS700, Raw from other cameras, and for full uncompressed.

The Odyssey7Q comes standard with the ability to record full uncompressed. Note: The Odyssey7 does not record full uncompressed.

Specifically, for the FS700, when we are record 2K Raw, in 12-Bit Linear, one needs one of our SSD's to record at 120 fps, and two for recording at 240 fps.

As a side note, our recording of 2K Raw, from the FS700, is a major advance over the high-speed modes in the original, non-upgraded FS700.

Since our recorder, and the Sony R5 recorder also, can accept the video data in real-time (without the camera needing to buffer or cache the data), the operation of these modes is great, just press record, then stop. This is very easy.

In the original FS700 high-speed modes, one loaded the buffer, then dumped out the contents of the buffer (which took time). This was problematic for many as they could miss important shots, while waiting for the buffer to write out its contents.


Respectfully,

Dear Gary,

I personally, and our entire Convergent Design team, appreciates you post.

You have stated, very well, why we want people to use our fully supported, and fully tested SSD's instead of opening it up to allow any SSD to be used, with predictable undesirable results.

Respectfully,

Dear Friends,

Here is a link to our website, where we have a comparison of our SSD Media, to other professional media.

Odyssey SSD Media (http://www.convergent-design.com/Products/Odyssey7/OdysseySSDMedia.aspx)

Respectfully,

well thanks for the test, but looking only at the number you provide, your drive is exactly the same as the samsung 840 pro but more expensive.
and just for logic, the Sound Device sata drive for almost same size and same price is rated a lot more expensive at price/Gb (2.15) while 395/240=1.64

well thanks for the test, but looking only at the number you provide, your drive is exactly the same as the samsung 840 pro but more expensive.

And you've independently verified that the marketing Samsung is using for that drive match up with real-world performance?

I used a Samsung 830 Pro SSD in a Blackmagic Cinema Camera and you know what I got? Dropped frames, that's what I got.

Dear Giroud,

I am sorry for our mistake in pricing of the per Gigabyte price of the Sound Devices SSD.

We will correct this as soon as possible.

Amber, who manages our website is at IBC, so please allow her some time to make the correction.


You also mentioned that our drive is exactly the same as the Samsung 840 Pro drive but more expensive.

While this may appear to be the case on the surface, our SSD actually has much lower power consumption, and it has a very important feature: Power Protection. This one feature is vital for safe operation during a shoot, where it is not that unusual for a camera/recorder to lose power, while recording.

Also, one cannot tell when an SSD is busy doing things in the background, for example when we are not recording or playing back from the SSD. Without Power Protection, pulling the SSD can cause problems.

The Samsung specs do not show the actual power draw while writing to the drive at 400 to 500 Megabytes per second.

And the firmware in our SSD, is fine tuned for the types of write that we do, which is entirely different than what occurs in a computer.

I elaborated on this just to point out that one cannot compare the spec's and determine that two SSD's are the same.

Respectfully,

Well for me at least, this thread is really pointing out one thing, that CD has really thoroughly thought out their product and is trying to come to market with something that has predictable and tested results. That is the most important thing in a product that will be used in a professional setting. It's one thing to be beta testing technology on a fun hobby shoot. But it can be a complete embarrassment and business killer if your doing it with a clients project.

I'll wait a few more months or pay a few dollars more to know that a product I'm relying on will work. As a nanoFlash user for several years I can honestly say that the only errors I've had with it were due to my own user error (usually because I was rushing to squeeze off a shot).

Dear Garrett,

Thank you for the vote of confidence.

And I can confirm that we thoroughly test the SSD's before we select one for production, then we test each and every one individually.

I appreciate your post.

Respectfully,

HI Dan

Small errata in the Sony SxS column of your table - you list the price per GB as $1.50 where as I make it $1800 /512 = over $3.51 per GB . Also you list it as 200MB/s but Sony claims 2.4Gb/s = 300 MB/s not sure who is correct here :)

And you've independently verified that the marketing Samsung is using for that drive match up with real-world performance?

I used a Samsung 830 Pro SSD in a Blackmagic Cinema Camera and you know what I got? Dropped frames, that's what I got.

Gary - a seemingly good point but the 840 Pro is a completely different drive and architecture to the 830Pro.

Whether an SSD will work at sustained data rates comes down to a number of factors -its true uncompressible data rate which is never really stated in the specs, whether it use multi-level (slowest), dual level or single level (fastest) NAND and perhaps more important than anything - the controller chip.
But as Dan rightly points out - CD's drives actually work with the 7Q - I'm convinced and the price isn't too bad.

Of course the long term point is - can they remain competitive enough with proprietary drives over a period of time. I guess that comes down to comparing them with other solutions and they are at the moment the cheapest.

I expect they will have to introduce new models as improvements are made and the current tech becomes unavailable or too expensive.

Easy and simple solution;

CD unlocks the Odyssey firmware and allows any drive to be used.

Provide onscreen warning message that states that only CD drives are supported and any other drive is "use at your own risk."

Let the buyer take his own chances and make his own choices.

Everybody wins!

Dear Cliff,

We are trying hard to find a solution to this dilemma.

We want our Odyssey7Q to be flawless.

Some of our potential customers want to use any SSD.

When a shoot goes bad, and the cause of the problem, was that unsupported SSD's were used,
many can be left with the impression that the Odyssey7 or Odyssey7Q was to blame.

While there will be some on-set that may or may not know that unsupported SSD's were used,
many others both on and off the set will only know and remember that there was a problem with our Odyssey7 or Odyssey7Q.

This is not just a suspicion on our part, this occurred many times when unsupported media were used in our nanoFlashes.

I do hope everyone understands that we are actively attempting to find a solution.

Respectfully,

Gary - a seemingly good point but the 840 Pro is a completely different drive and architecture to the 830Pro.

Whether an SSD will work at sustained data rates comes down to a number of factors -its true uncompressible data rate which is never really stated in the specs, whether it use multi-level (slowest), dual level or single level (fastest) NAND and perhaps more important than anything - the controller chip.
But as Dan rightly points out - CD's drives actually work with the 7Q - I'm convinced and the price isn't too bad.

Of course the long term point is - can they remain competitive enough with proprietary drives over a period of time. I guess that comes down to comparing them with other solutions and they are at the moment the cheapest.

I expect they will have to introduce new models as improvements are made and the current tech becomes unavailable or too expensive.

Dear John,

As you may know, we reduced the price of our SSD's when we obtained a better price on them.

Just yesterday we were again negotiating for a better price.

Thank you for your support.

Respectfully,

Provide onscreen warning message that states that only CD drives are supported and any other drive is "use at your own risk." Let the buyer take his own chances and make his own choices.

Apparently, you are woefully unaware how this doesn't stop anyone from blaming CD when their knockoff SSD they bought for cheap off eBay crashes and burns.

Apparently, you are woefully unaware how this doesn't stop anyone from blaming CD when their knockoff SSD they bought for cheap off eBay crashes and burns.

Gary - I don't disagree with you, I think Dan has made his point and but please remember others are entitled to their opinion. That's what this forum is about.

Cliff - I don't think CD is going to change their position and really they are under no commercial pressure to do so (given they will be the cheapest solution on the market by far). I've already said after Dan's first excellent and comprehensive reply that I'm convinced. I don't see any reason to flog a dead horse.

Thread title changed per request of OP.

CD is not in an unusual position concerning the use of their products in tandem with other companies products. It happens in many industries. Look at the entire computer industry! (I have never blamed my Dell computer for my bad USB Seagate hard drive)

Closer to home, look at Sony XDCAM. Sony allows the use of any SD card in place of true Sony SxS cards. They simply state that SD cards can be used "in case of emergency". (I have been using fast Sandisk cards for years with no troubles at all.)

Ford wants us to use authentic MotorCraft alternators, batteries and brake pads in their cars but certainly does not block you from using something else that is not approved by Ford. Would you buy any car that restricted you like that?

Every camera company wants you to buy their CF/SD cards. However, non of them "block" you from using Sandisk or Lexar media. (that would seriously hurt camera sales...look at Sony's "Memory Stick" socket complaints of the past. That forced them to open up on SD media)

Obviously this issue is a marketing gamble that CD has decided to make. There is a competing product that comes from an Australian company that goes as far as allowing spinning disk drives in their recorder. (if you decide to take that chance)

I can assure anybody that this Australian company is VERY happy that CD is "forcing" it's high priced (and yes,..excellent quality) drives on their customers. In fact, the very last thing CD's competition wants is for CD to change their policy on this.

Again, I'd be happy if CD placed a small "blinking" message under the red record graphic that says;

"WARNING - UNSUPPORTED SATA DRIVE"

I think that would send a nagging message to any user (and any set guy or producer looking on) that they are taking a risk with their recordings.

In the end, my single opinion means very little. True market forces will eventually prevail. Maybe CD will be rewarded for this aggressive strategy or maybe they will be forced to amend it in time.

One thing is certain...again, the competition is very happy with CD's strict policy right now.

CT

Edit: Many of us plan to use a recorder simultaneously with our cameras on-board codec. So, for instance, I shoot XDCAM along with DNxHD (outboard). This means that a catastrophic HD failure on my outboard recorder would never be the end of my world. I would simply revert down to my XDCAM files. I suspect you would have many customers that will simply do the same.

Could you allow DNxHD to record to any media and lock the other formats to only CD cards? Is that a new idea? DNxHD and the "other popular .mov" codec are NOT hard to write to anymore by today's HD standards. (RAW is a whole 'nuther story!)

Just adding 2 more cents to the discussion...

Wondering about the power draw / cooling aspect of potentially using off-the-shelf ssd's... Would an ssd that uses 50% more power also generate 50% more heat? or even 20% more?... and if so, could this pose a potential problem for both the ssd itself and for the rest of the components if the Odyssey is built to only dissipate a limited amount of heat (based on the power specs for their drives)? One of the things that I like about the NanoFlash and Gemini is their small, lightweight design - highly power efficient without the need for large batteries or cooling fans. I truly dread every time I have to go handheld with onboard PIX recorders because of their additional weight - not just the unit itself, but the weight and bulk of the additional batteries since I'm too nervous about the Pix power draw to run it simultaneously from an onboard camera battery. I'm guessing that part of keeping the Odyssey to a manageable size and weight is not having to go overboard with cooling systems. My vote is for small and light and less power used, whatever that takes...

Cliff Totten, requiring the use of proprietary REDMAGs doesn't seem to have stopped people from buying the RED Scarlet. I think there are several factors that have gone into CD's decision. I know plenty of EX1/EX3 owners who used SD cards and when they got errors blamed the camera. After a little education they figured that certain cards were not capable of being used but despite all of the warnings and disclaimers it didn't stop them from first blaming the camera. Sony is a large corporation that can handle some bad press however misinformed it may be. CD is not on that scale and it could be very damaging if people started to blame their product for errors that were actually the fault of the user for choosing to use non compliant media. It isn't a marketing gamble it is called risk management and I cannot fault them for taking this strategy.

As far as how it would be perceived if a clients shoot were ruined because of faulty media, I have not once heard of a client asking what media was being used when there is a technical error. They don't care, they just know that you were using X camera capturing to Y recorder and it failed. That's how certain equipment gets a reputation for being unreliable and thus not wanted to be used on commercial shoots.

That Australian competitor you speak of has gained that reputation with some of the clients I've dealt with. So your example, at least in the market I'm in, actually doesn't support allowing the use of any media.

My vote is for small and light and less power used, whatever that takes...

Completely with you on this. I'm not looking forward to the next two days of shooting on a power hungry RED. Huge battery suck and we're having to shoot about 2 half days of handheld. My back is in for a workout.

That Australian competitor you speak of has gained that reputation with some of the clients I've dealt with. So your example, at least in the market I'm in, actually doesn't support allowing the use of any media.

What's funny is that it's not even a competitor. It does the very basic that the Odyssey does, and if you need just basic functionality, then yes, perhaps it's not for you.

But like Garrett mentioned, I'm seeing a lot of negativity from people...they are trying to run-and-gun with spinning 5,200k drives and then its' the UNIT that's the problem when it drops out, not the fact they were trying to get 500GB of storage for $70.

I'll say something that will seem inflammatory, but is really meant to be practical.

While the idea of paying $800 for a 512GB SSD seems insane at first, it's pretty cheap overall. I was paying $800 just a few years ago for 32GB of SxS storage and those WERE the cheap cards. But what does that price actually pay for? Security. The proprietary cards and the extra price they bring with them are insurance. It's the same reason I paid so much more for real SxS cards and never risked my footage on SD cards and adaptors. Sure, they may work fine, but what about when they don't? Why would anyone want to monkey around with the integrity of THEIR MASTERS just to save a few dollars that would likely be amortized over several shoots anyway? If we're spending thousands upon thousands for our cameras, our lenses, our lights, our monitoring systems... why suddenly get frugal and gamble on the safety of your actual footage. Without the integrity and security of the hard drives to contain the footage, all of your equipment, as well as your talent and time, is useless. And for what? To save $350 on a card when you've already spent $10,000+ on the rest of your gear?

I appreciate that CD have gone to the considerable time and trouble to find SSDs they are willing to certify. It's the insurance and peace of mind I need for my shoots. The footage is the most important thing.

Now if I just knew when I could buy one!!

If we're spending thousands upon thousands for our cameras, our lenses, our lights, our monitoring systems... why suddenly get frugal and gamble on the safety of your actual footage.

This is exactly what I don't understand about some people. I will definitely cheap out on some gear, but the basic gear you need to shoot an image and store it properly is something I will never do that on.

A few years ago I was shooting with SD card media and had one in my stable that was a cheaper brand. It worked great up until it physically fell apart. I was able to pull the data off of it, but I would have been in dire straights had I not been able to. That was all I needed to experience, and it's been all high-end SD card media since then.

I'm considering an Odyssey myself, and I find the added cost for the security benefits of the CD drives to be a no-brainer.

Obviously this issue is a marketing gamble that CD has decided to make. There is a competing product that comes from an Australian company that goes as far as allowing spinning disk drives in their recorder. (if you decide to take that chance)

I can assure anybody that this Australian company is VERY happy that CD is "forcing" it's high priced (and yes,..excellent quality) drives on their customers. In fact, the very last thing CD's competition wants is for CD to change their policy on this.

.

AFAIK BMD do not recommend or advise anyone to use spinning disks in the HDS 2 - if you do you're taking crazy risks and will almost certainly drop frames.

In fact that unit has a very small and strict list of SSDs that are approved for use. The AJA Ki Pro is the only unit I know that officially supports spinning disks.

Go back and read what Dan Keaton said in his excellent post. If anything this is the opposite of a "gamble" - I'm prepared to take take what Dan said at face value. Also read in anothe post from Dan that they continue to look for other solutions. Thats good. Lets wait and see - I think the bigger concern is they've missed 2 proposed shipping dates

"AFAIK BMD do not recommend ..."

-- If you take a look at the atomos website, you'll see listed as a key feature of each of their field recorders: "Uses inexpensive 2.5” HDD/SSD media" - I think that's the reference.

On another topic - I did get a chance to play with one of the 7Q's for a while at CineGear Expo in NYC, and was particularly impressed with the screen. (Remember, the Odyssey is listed first as a Monitor, then as a recorder.) Off axis viewing was significantly better than I had expected, and I think it will be the perfect on-board addition for almost any rig. The biggest problem is that it looks so good that the director (and who knows who else) is probably going to want to hang around the camera watching it rather than staying back in video village out of our hair!

Thanks Dave - had no idea ATOMOS was Australian...

Still would not use spinning disks in an on camera recorder - I used to use a DV recorder that had spinning disks but we are talking totally different data rates.

On another topic - I did get a chance to play with one of the 7Q's for a while at CineGear Expo in NYC, and was particularly impressed with the screen. (Remember, the Odyssey is listed first as a Monitor, then as a recorder.) Off axis viewing was significantly better than I had expected, and I think it will be the perfect on-board addition for almost any rig. The biggest problem is that it looks so good that the director (and who knows who else) is probably going to want to hang around the camera watching it rather than staying back in video village out of our hair!

Good feedback.. and good to know.

Dear Friends,

I have been traveling extensively recently, thus I have not been able to respond as quickly as I prefer.

In my travels, many industry professionals with high-end cameras, have decided to purchase at least two of our Odyssey's for each camera.

While this, of course, is music to my ears, it also makes sense.

One for the camera operator and one for the focus puller (1st AC).

One company who shoots high-end car commercials wanted even more units for each camera.

Respectfully,