Steve M. Posted February 20, 2015 Share Posted February 20, 2015 I have a stupid question that is probably common knowledge for most of you, but here goes...I've read the NX1 does not output a clean HDMI 1080p signal, okay I understand that part, but lets say it did, and you wanted to use a Ninja Star to record that 1080p to ProRes. The Ninja Star records to 10bit 4:2:2 in all the ProRes flavors, however, the NX1 shoots at 8bit, correct? So, my question is, if that's true and you could record to the Ninja, are you getting a true 10bit 4:2:2 file? It would seem to me that's like importing ProRes proxy files into your NLE and outputting to ProRes HQ, you gain nothing in that uprez. Second question, the NX1 records to H.265, would the NInja Star even record that codec? Does the Shogun record that codec? I appreciate your input! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
50asa Posted February 20, 2015 Share Posted February 20, 2015 hei dont have a shogon but on there website i can read4K 2160p30 onlyNo clean out with HD and at dpreview...For NX1 owners there isn't as much of a beneift over in-camera recording (8 bit 4.2.0 vs 8 bit 4.2.2 and no compression), but I.... maybe this is helping? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herb Posted February 20, 2015 Share Posted February 20, 2015 I hope DPreview is wrong about the difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve M. Posted February 20, 2015 Author Share Posted February 20, 2015 hei dont have a shogon but on there website i can read4K 2160p30 onlyNo clean out with HD and at dpreview...For NX1 owners there isn't as much of a beneift over in-camera recording (8 bit 4.2.0 vs 8 bit 4.2.2 and no compression), but I.... maybe this is helping?It does help, Thank you! The question still remains, Hypothetically, if NX1 did output clean 1080, and you hooked to a Ninja Star, which states it records 10bit 4:2:2, so if I hook the NX1 up would it record 8bit? The benefit is not transcoding the H.265, That in my mind is worth the cost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattH Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 I very much doubt the NX1 will output 10 bit. Probably 8 bit 4:2:0. The star will output a 10 bit 4:2:2 file but it wont be true 10 bit 4:2:2. But it will be all i-frame unlike what is recorded in camera. Uncompressed output means that you are getting it before the h.264 or h.265 bullshit gets to it so neither the ninja star nor the atamos shogun will record h.265, so you can forget h.265 exists. So yeah you are paying to use one of the easiest codecs instead of using the codec that is the biggest pain in the ass. The problem with the star is that you would have to be sure you wanted to shoot HD most of the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve M. Posted February 21, 2015 Author Share Posted February 21, 2015 I think I grasp that. So, anything coming out of the NX1 externally would be uncompressed, which throws the H.265 out of the equation. I guess all of which is a moot point since the NX1 doesn't offer a clean 1080 output. At the price the Star is going for, It would only make sense to record to that an avoid the transcode, especially for the slo-mo aspect. Let me guess, the camera wouldn't output the slo-mo!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cojocaru27 Posted May 17, 2017 Share Posted May 17, 2017 hey guys, any updates on this regard? looking for an external recorder to overpass the h.265 codec and to get the maximum quality of this amazing cam, would be mind blowing 10bit 4.2.2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kisaha Posted May 17, 2017 Share Posted May 17, 2017 This camera has nothing to do with 10bit video. It is not possible in any way. I was considering an external recorder option, just because the H265 wasn't supported by anyone, back then, but then Adobe adapted the codec, and now almost everyone has H265 native support, so I didn't bother. People have said before that they can not spot a real increase in quality, I would guess that upping the internal codec bitrate, from 80Mbps to 120Mbps is the best bet for some incremental increase. You can go 160Mbps stable, from up there things complicate, I have only experience with 120Mbps, but for the use I have, the normal Pro quality is enough - recording long 73minute continuous takes, not wasting too much card and hard drive space. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tugela Posted May 17, 2017 Share Posted May 17, 2017 On 2/20/2015 at 6:48 PM, Steve M. said: I think I grasp that. So, anything coming out of the NX1 externally would be uncompressed, which throws the H.265 out of the equation. I guess all of which is a moot point since the NX1 doesn't offer a clean 1080 output. At the price the Star is going for, It would only make sense to record to that an avoid the transcode, especially for the slo-mo aspect. Let me guess, the camera wouldn't output the slo-mo!? Everything that comes out of HDMI is uncompressed, other than the color coding used, which will always be 4:4:4 or 4:2:2 with HDMI up to version 1.4. To get 4:2:0 you would need version 2.0 or higher and even then that only applies to 4K. If a camera claims to use HDMI 1.4 or lower, and actually outputs 4:2:0, it does NOT conform to the HDMI specifications. When manufacturers refer to compressed output what they mean is that the signal is first encoded in the camera, then decoded and output through the HDMI port as 4:4:4 or 4:2:2 (for most cameras). Uncompressed output happens when the signal is sent directly to the HDMI without first being encoded then decoded. The camera itself may use a different color coding scheme to prepare the signal (such as 4:2:0) and that will alter the image colors, but technically what comes out of the HDMI port will conform to the specs of the larger color coding method even though it might look like 4:2:0. Also, nit picking, but "clean HDMI output" means that the signal does not have the overlays that you normally see on your camera screen, such as mode, shutter speed, aperture, etc. It does not refer to anything else. Clean output allows you to record to an external recorder, which you otherwise would not be able to do with the overlays. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronFilm Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 You can never record at a higher quality than at what is outputted. I don't care if your recorder can do 128bit deep 16x16x16 color space at one Terrabyte per millisecond! It still won't do better than whatever the camera is outputting it at, that is the limit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cojocaru27 Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 so, what is the quality that camera outputs? what is the absolute quality that u can squeeze out of it? which format and bit rate ? is it worth getting an external recorder or not, just for quality not other things like better viewing and focus checking? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.