nanoflash with converted analog input?

Dave Stern · November 12th, 2009, 07:07 AM

Lance - thanks. this is why I am giving some thought to whether this approach is practical for a battery powered application, at least for right now, for me. it's interesting that the power requirements of the converters cause more difficulty than the signal conversion itself (which I would not have expected), at least on paper.

The AJA HD10AVA has the most flexibility in terms of power requirements (5-18volts) however that unit also has a gigantic breakout cable to be dealt with, not to mention the large proprietary cable that the canon XHA1 uses to plug into the camera to provide component output. (at the time I could not justify the canon with the SDI outputs, and it was the canon I was after). This would be more manageable for events where I am recording from a tripod with a cart for audio, however for those same events I would also have AC mains power available so that point would be moot. (the hd10ava also has audio embedding which would be great, but it would be the icing with a difficult to power cake).

Also, the HD10AVA happens to be twice the cost of the blackmagic design unit, further complicating the picture (in addition to the ppower cabling and ptap distribution I would have to have).

So, while technically feasible, the work and cost are higher than other approaches.

I really like the nanoflash concept from all of the postings here, however it takes some more thought (and cost) for cameras without SDI. And, this is no fault of C-D in my opinion, it's a different market (which is also why I was asking them about the 19meg and 50 meg file sample files, whereas the current focus on the firmware and I'm sure the folks at C-D is on 280megs and pushing that side of the envelope, so less focus on having time (I assume) to post the lower bitrate samples, etc.).

I really like the flexibility of the unit in terms of bitrates, it's size of course, the frequency and focus of CD on continual firmware upgrades and product enhancements, their presence here on the board, and also that it's using an mpeg codec (vs. prores) as I am a vegas user on a PC (who would have thought about wanting to edit mpeg based material a few years ago .. not me anyway, but times change).

so, further thought and consideration on my part... other opinions / thoughts welcome!

Dan Keaton · November 12th, 2009, 07:29 AM

Dear Dave,

Our next release also adds an 18 Mbps 4:2:0 mode, which is designed for Proxy recording.

Yes, we have been slow to post lower bit-rate samples. We should do that.

We are working on a complete revamp of our website. It is long overdue.

Dave Stern · November 12th, 2009, 08:00 AM

Dan, no worries, I don't get to decide your priorities :-)
my interests are in the 18/19, 25 and 50 megbit range and I'm sure I would throw in a project or two at the 100 megbits but for me, for now, don't need 140/160, 220, etc. so, a slightly different use of your product I suspect.

that said, my bigger issues are power mgt for an analog to mini SDI converter in this application (rather than the bitrates, which I'm sure the encoder is doing nicely, did you say you use a sony encoder? my dvd recorder with a sony encoder does great at low bitrates so your chip should too), and to be honest, I don't know how many users you would have like that. my guess would be that most who are paying for your product, for the expensive CF cards, etc etc are also more likely to be using cameras with SDI.

so it may be more of a niche, not sure ...

thanks for all your support on this forum...

Dan Keaton · November 12th, 2009, 08:35 AM

Dear Dave,

I believe that the Sony MPEG-2 does a great job at the low bit-rates. But, of course, the image quality can never be as good as the higher bit-rates (obvious!).

Our 35 Mbps and below are 4:2:0.

To me, the biggest concerns are:

1. How much of a quality loss you will experience since the digital signal has to be converted to analog in the camera for the component output, then converted back to digital to create HD-SDI. We know that there is a quality loss, we just do not know how much. A good quality Component to HD-SDI converter should be used for best quality.

2. While I have never had a problem with the component output cable that Canon supplies with the XL H1, and never a glitch, I worry about that cable if there is going to be much camera movement. This could turn out to be a non-issue, and you could easily test this with any component monitor or TV.

Overall, I would check into selling your existing camera, then purchasing one with HD-SDI. There are some great bargains out there at this time for good to great cameras with HD-SDI output. HD-SDI is great, since it is so clean, and the cables are secure and low cost.

I am assuming that you have the excellent XH A1, a great camera that has a high resale value. You could upgrade to an XL H1 if you could find a bargain. Of course, you may like the smaller size of the XH A1.

Dave Stern · November 12th, 2009, 03:33 PM

Dan, thanks. believe it or not I actually did give that some thought as well. Probably won't do it now, but I did give it some consideration already. I agree w/ you.

November 12th, 2009, 07:29 AM	#17
Dan Keaton Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Augusta Georgia Posts: 5,421	Dear Dave, Our next release also adds an 18 Mbps 4:2:0 mode, which is designed for Proxy recording. Yes, we have been slow to post lower bit-rate samples. We should do that. We are working on a complete revamp of our website. It is long overdue. __________________ Dan Keaton Augusta Georgia

November 12th, 2009, 08:35 AM	#19
Dan Keaton Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Augusta Georgia Posts: 5,421	Dear Dave, I believe that the Sony MPEG-2 does a great job at the low bit-rates. But, of course, the image quality can never be as good as the higher bit-rates (obvious!). Our 35 Mbps and below are 4:2:0. To me, the biggest concerns are: 1. How much of a quality loss you will experience since the digital signal has to be converted to analog in the camera for the component output, then converted back to digital to create HD-SDI. We know that there is a quality loss, we just do not know how much. A good quality Component to HD-SDI converter should be used for best quality. 2. While I have never had a problem with the component output cable that Canon supplies with the XL H1, and never a glitch, I worry about that cable if there is going to be much camera movement. This could turn out to be a non-issue, and you could easily test this with any component monitor or TV. Overall, I would check into selling your existing camera, then purchasing one with HD-SDI. There are some great bargains out there at this time for good to great cameras with HD-SDI output. HD-SDI is great, since it is so clean, and the cables are secure and low cost. I am assuming that you have the excellent XH A1, a great camera that has a high resale value. You could upgrade to an XL H1 if you could find a bargain. Of course, you may like the smaller size of the XH A1. __________________ Dan Keaton Augusta Georgia

November 12th, 2009, 07:07 AM	#16
Dave Stern Major Player Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Northern New Jersey Posts: 391	Lance - thanks. this is why I am giving some thought to whether this approach is practical for a battery powered application, at least for right now, for me. it's interesting that the power requirements of the converters cause more difficulty than the signal conversion itself (which I would not have expected), at least on paper. The AJA HD10AVA has the most flexibility in terms of power requirements (5-18volts) however that unit also has a gigantic breakout cable to be dealt with, not to mention the large proprietary cable that the canon XHA1 uses to plug into the camera to provide component output. (at the time I could not justify the canon with the SDI outputs, and it was the canon I was after). This would be more manageable for events where I am recording from a tripod with a cart for audio, however for those same events I would also have AC mains power available so that point would be moot. (the hd10ava also has audio embedding which would be great, but it would be the icing with a difficult to power cake). Also, the HD10AVA happens to be twice the cost of the blackmagic design unit, further complicating the picture (in addition to the ppower cabling and ptap distribution I would have to have). So, while technically feasible, the work and cost are higher than other approaches. I really like the nanoflash concept from all of the postings here, however it takes some more thought (and cost) for cameras without SDI. And, this is no fault of C-D in my opinion, it's a different market (which is also why I was asking them about the 19meg and 50 meg file sample files, whereas the current focus on the firmware and I'm sure the folks at C-D is on 280megs and pushing that side of the envelope, so less focus on having time (I assume) to post the lower bitrate samples, etc.). I really like the flexibility of the unit in terms of bitrates, it's size of course, the frequency and focus of CD on continual firmware upgrades and product enhancements, their presence here on the board, and also that it's using an mpeg codec (vs. prores) as I am a vegas user on a PC (who would have thought about wanting to edit mpeg based material a few years ago .. not me anyway, but times change). so, further thought and consideration on my part... other opinions / thoughts welcome!

November 12th, 2009, 08:00 AM	#18
Dave Stern Major Player Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Northern New Jersey Posts: 391	Dan, no worries, I don't get to decide your priorities :-) my interests are in the 18/19, 25 and 50 megbit range and I'm sure I would throw in a project or two at the 100 megbits but for me, for now, don't need 140/160, 220, etc. so, a slightly different use of your product I suspect. that said, my bigger issues are power mgt for an analog to mini SDI converter in this application (rather than the bitrates, which I'm sure the encoder is doing nicely, did you say you use a sony encoder? my dvd recorder with a sony encoder does great at low bitrates so your chip should too), and to be honest, I don't know how many users you would have like that. my guess would be that most who are paying for your product, for the expensive CF cards, etc etc are also more likely to be using cameras with SDI. so it may be more of a niche, not sure ... thanks for all your support on this forum...

November 12th, 2009, 03:33 PM	#20
Dave Stern Major Player Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Northern New Jersey Posts: 391	Dan, thanks. believe it or not I actually did give that some thought as well. Probably won't do it now, but I did give it some consideration already. I agree w/ you.