FS100 curiosity, ninja & sdhd

[Martin Noboa]

Please, can someone explain to me why I have
178 min FX 25p recording time on a Trascend 32 gb SDHD

while only 1 hour and 50 min HQ in a Intel 160GB X25-M SATA disk on the Ninja???

Thank you!!

[Dave Sperling]

Different recording codecs -- and widely different bit rates required for those codecs. FS100 uses an avchd codec which does an amazing job compressing a lot of image into a relatively small file size - but is also a bear for certain edit programs to deal with. The Ninja records in ProRes, which is easier for NLEs to deal with, but records at many times the data rate of the FS100 codecs. If budgeting for shoots with external recorders, remember to allow for extra hard drives and additional transfer time to make primary and backup copies of your data!

[Martin Noboa]

Thx Dave. The funny thing is that the avchd FX file and the ProRes file on fcp look pretty much the same. And yes, the avchd is 10 times lighter. Almost no difference in terms of image quality though.

My first motivation to buy the Ninja was because I though that 422 8 bit out of HDMI was going to look better than the avchd files. But it doesn't. Also to my surprise, the transfer of the avchd file into fcp is quite fast.

So finally what are the advantages of having an external recorder with the FS100 then, besides winning a bit more time in transfer? Also the S&Q function only works with avchd. I guess I should have done more research before.

thanks

M

[John Vincent]

I think it's there for people who do heavy-duty grading in post (using S-logs or an equiv), or for those doing a lot of green screen and effects work. For doing an interview, a video aimed directly at the net, or a low budget commercial, 4:2:0 would seem to be just fine - after all, that's all the Canon DSLR lineup does, but even further numbed by line skipping.

I'm sure the 4:2:2 does looks better - but is it worth all that extra time and drive space to get it? That's the real question.

[Martin Noboa]

Thanks for the explanation John! I guess I will do my project using both the ninja and avchd.

Cheers
M

[John Vincent]

Why not if you have the drive space? I just got a 1 TB USB3 hard drive for $80 from Amazon (plus $5 shipping).

If you're not shooting a full length film, I'd think it's a no-brainer (assuming you're in a situation where you have time to back up to a hard drive).

[Martin Noboa]

This is a test I did comparing the Ninja and AVCHD in progressive mode, and I'm chocked with the result. AVCHD does such a better job. Just look at the lines on top of the head of the doll, or on the top of the right arm. No color correction and the photo is already compressed by photoshop, but the difference is big

I will do a test in interlaced...

[Martin Noboa]

sorry, forgot the photo

[David J. Buchanan]

I hope you're wrong. I just purchased a Atomos Ninja...

[Martin Noboa]

Originally Posted by Martin Noboa

This is a test I did comparing the Ninja and AVCHD in progressive mode, and I'm chocked with the result. AVCHD does such a better job. Just look at the lines on top of the head of the doll, or on the top of the right arm. No color correction and the photo is already compressed by photoshop, but the difference is big

I will do a test in interlaced...

Indeed, I was wrong. Sorry for that. Change the firewire and the problem is gone. I tried to delete the post early today but I couldn't.

cheers

[Matt Davis]

FWIW, another reason why a Ninja is 'better' than the built-in AVCHD is if you're doing fast turnaround stuff, even taking into consideration the time taken to copy from the Ninja HD to an editing HD.

Yes you can edit AVCHD in some NLEs, but all NLEs will be much happier with a frame based codec.

And an extra viewfinder for when the camera's above eye level is handy - as is the use of the same batteries...

I did a test shooting chromakey with EX1 to SxS XDCAM-EX and to Ninja, and didn't see enough difference to warrant it. However, following chromakey tests with the FS100, I've got to try again with the Ninja as in this case it may help.

[David J. Buchanan]

I'm not really noticing a difference. I just bought the Ninja and comparing the AVCHD with ProRes. This is a bit upsetting. If I don't see a difference by the time I go on this commercial shoot, I'm sending this thing back.

[Jean-Philippe Archibald]

Why people expect to see any difference with out of the box footage? Of course there is almost no difference. Do you think a camera manufacturer will sells you a camera with a codec that can't do justice to the rest of the hardware? Not going to happen. Only a few extreme scenario will ends up being better with the external recorder. Getting better performances out of the box shouldn't be the reason to buy an external recorder.

Resons should be:
Different / better suited for a specific application workflow
Redundancy
Stronger codec in case there is a lot of post processing planned
broadcast compliance
etc...

[Doug Jensen]

Jean, you are exactly right.

[Steve Kalle]

Originally Posted by Martin Noboa

Indeed, I was wrong. Sorry for that. Change the firewire and the problem is gone. I tried to delete the post early today but I couldn't.

What do you mean by 'change the firewire'? The Ninja records via HDMI so I don't see any relevance to firewire.

To me, the issue looks like the Ninja did not convert the 60i signal to progressive. Last time I checked, the Ninja lacked some pull-down features. Maybe it still does or has not been updated?