nanoFlash and Sony F3

David Imedashvili · July 4th, 2011, 04:50 PM

also when making movies you don't need many hours of footage. for example last full length future film i made footage was just 4 hour and i was shooting 30 days. sorry for my English guys!!!:)

Adam Stanislav · July 4th, 2011, 08:56 PM

So, assuming 24 fps, by your chart you would have needed eleven 250 GB drives, which would cost about $5,000 - $6,000. NanoFlash costs a lot less!

David Imedashvili · July 5th, 2011, 12:52 AM

per Hour 450 GB.for 4 hour i need 8 250GB SSD also I didn't it all together. after every shooting day i will transfer it editing system or external raid so i need just two ssd. i think so it will be ok. if not say and i will not buy it. Crucial Technology 256GB RealSSD C300 2.5" SATA 6Gbps Solid State Drive - $394.00.

Adam Stanislav · July 5th, 2011, 06:42 AM

You do what you think is best to you. But I am not jumping on the HyperDeck Shuttle bandwagon yet. The hidden costs are way too much for me. Plus, if I wanted uncompressed, I would want 4:4:4. Better yet, the ideal device would be compressed but using a non-lossy compression. Until that happens, nanoFlash is the way to go as far as I am concerned.

David Imedashvili · July 5th, 2011, 01:27 PM

Yes I Agree about Uncompressed heavy bit rate. I don't know what to do.NanoFlash is great but it is not low cost. I all ready have one of NanoFlash. also nano is 8 bit. maybe Atomos Samurai will be good solution, but i don't like this touch screen. :))) so need good suggestion. I need Gemini for 2k. :)))

July 4th, 2011, 04:50 PM	#16
David Imedashvili New Boot Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Tbilisi, Georgia Posts: 20	Re: nanoFlash and Sony F3 also when making movies you don't need many hours of footage. for example last full length future film i made footage was just 4 hour and i was shooting 30 days. sorry for my English guys!!!:)

July 4th, 2011, 08:56 PM	#17
Adam Stanislav Trustee Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Rhinelander, WI Posts: 1,258	Re: nanoFlash and Sony F3 So, assuming 24 fps, by your chart you would have needed eleven 250 GB drives, which would cost about $5,000 - $6,000. NanoFlash costs a lot less!

July 5th, 2011, 12:52 AM	#18
David Imedashvili New Boot Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Tbilisi, Georgia Posts: 20	Re: nanoFlash and Sony F3 per Hour 450 GB.for 4 hour i need 8 250GB SSD also I didn't it all together. after every shooting day i will transfer it editing system or external raid so i need just two ssd. i think so it will be ok. if not say and i will not buy it. Crucial Technology 256GB RealSSD C300 2.5" SATA 6Gbps Solid State Drive - $394.00.

July 5th, 2011, 06:42 AM	#19
Adam Stanislav Trustee Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Rhinelander, WI Posts: 1,258	Re: nanoFlash and Sony F3 You do what you think is best to you. But I am not jumping on the HyperDeck Shuttle bandwagon yet. The hidden costs are way too much for me. Plus, if I wanted uncompressed, I would want 4:4:4. Better yet, the ideal device would be compressed but using a non-lossy compression. Until that happens, nanoFlash is the way to go as far as I am concerned.

July 5th, 2011, 01:27 PM	#20
David Imedashvili New Boot Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Tbilisi, Georgia Posts: 20	Re: nanoFlash and Sony F3 Yes I Agree about Uncompressed heavy bit rate. I don't know what to do.NanoFlash is great but it is not low cost. I all ready have one of NanoFlash. also nano is 8 bit. maybe Atomos Samurai will be good solution, but i don't like this touch screen. :))) so need good suggestion. I need Gemini for 2k. :)))