Hi!

I'm really looking forward to shooting 1080 50p with AF100 when I get it into my hands. But the low bit rate acquisition codec has got me looking up external recording devices and so my eye landed on the upcoming Atomos Ninja. But I don't know if it supports 1080 50p.

Anybody knows anything about this??

There is no mention of 1080p50 support on the Atomos website, so it doesn't look like the Ninja will support it.

This looks interesting and flexible, but I can't see anywhere to buy in the US. Any-one knows who might be carrying it, or does it need to be ordered from Atomos?

Thanks.....

1. Atomos says they're shipping...
Enter The Ninja (http://www.atomos.com/)

2. These guys in Britain are the first reference I've seen to someone, somewhere having them in stock for sale. I know nothing about them myself.
Ninja | Atomos | Global Distribution (http://www.globaldistribution.com/products/atomos/portable_field_recorders/product/ninja/)

Found a new video presentation on Vimeo of the Atomos Ninja.
They also announce having the Atomos Samurai - an HD-SDI version of the product, for NAB.

Atomos Ninja demonstration on Vimeo

wonder if the monitor is sharp enough to draw focus?

Dano

wonder if the monitor is sharp enough to draw focus?
Dano

I doubt it. At 480x270, it's a low-resolution screen, so adequate for menus and verifying that you are recording and what, but focus? I can't imagine. I'd be looking for a 800x480 screen, minimum, for that.

The specs on the website say that the Samurai will have an 800 x 480 screen resolution, and the panel will be 5" as opposed to the Ninja's 4.3". I can't see anyone being able to judge focus with the screen on the Ninja...

I just received my Ninja last week, purchased from BH Photo. Pleased with results from initial tests, but need a little more time to work out my exact rig and workflow. So far, footage going into Apple Color for grading is looking amazing. Appears much cleaner than importing from HDV into ProRes (purely subjective at this point).

I am supposed to shoot some footage at an equestrian event next weekend, so hopefully some great fast motion clips that I can reference once editing and post are complete.

I am using the Ninja with my Sony HVR-V1U. Purchased 2 of the Hitachi 500GB 7200RPM drives for it.

The drive caddies where very tight initially, causing difficulty in removing them from the unit and the docking station, but appear to be working better after a few cycles.

Rest of the Ninja system arrived and works as advertised.

Hi Jeff,

Very keen to hear your feedback on the unit. The batteries look like Sony NP-F types - the same as used on your V1, is that right? Would be handy if that were the case.

I don't like the idea of touch-screen controls - would prefer a physical button for record start/stop : how are you finding it?

Thanks,

Josh

Josh,

Yes, they are the same battery type as used on the V1U, NP-F type. Extra nice, since I have the Sony Dual Charger unit, and from the user guide, the AC battery adapter that comes with the sony charger also works with the ninja. (although I haven't test that yet, and probably won't have much use for it, since for long shoots, I will use the adapter on the camera, and then use the hot swap battery feature on the Ninja, and use my extra V1U batteries to ensure enough record time).

The ninja also has a LANC pass through, and is supposed to be able to start/stop recording via LANC. I just ordered an additional cable for my Manfrotto remote so that I can see how well that will work with my rig. I agree that the touch screen record option is less than optimal.

I will post my results regarding the LANC operation as soon as I can try it out. My cable has shipped, and I have an event to shoot this weekend, so keeping my fingers crossed it will arrive in time, and work as advertised.

Update to my previous post: Received my additional LANC cable, and the LANC control passes through the Ninja nicely! I tested out zoom, etc. controls. Everything works as expected. Also tested record function from the remote both with and without an HDV tape installed. In both instances the Ninja started recording as expected. Without the tape in the V1U it gives you a "No Tape Installed" type of message on the LCD, but that has no impact on the record function or the video going into the Ninja. Although there is a alert sound that is played that was picked up by the microphone when the alert was displayed. Of course, that can be easily cut via edit, or removed by an audio replace in most instances.

My plan is to shoot this weekend at an equestrian event using both tape and Ninja, since the shots will be 5 min or less in most instances, and use the HDV tape as a backup. I will post back with my experience. All shots will be outdoors in bright daylight, where the V1U excels.

Jeff,

How is the audio recording via the hdmi???

also is the actual picture sharper and finer than the original hdv picture?

would love a couple grabs to compare!!!!

thanks.

Dale,

The picture appears sharper to me (since it is full 1920X1080 and not 1440X1080, plus not HDV) but I should have some good compares after I shoot this weekend (I will be shoot simultaneously on HDV and the Ninja). I will be doing fast motion (equestrian jumping competition) and will try to do some still exports. When I was color grading some test footage, it appeared to me to have much more latitude as well. You can see the test results here:

Vimeo Version - Atomos Ninja Test Footage on Vimeo

YouTube Version - YouTube - NodeProductions's Channel (http://www.youtube.com/nodeproductions#p/u/0/HTKekShwwDw)

of course, they are heavily compressed to post to YouTube and Vimeo, but I was very pleased with the richness of the shots after grading in Color. The shots seemed to retain much more of their detail than when working with HDV transcoded to ProRes. I added a blur vignette around the edge as well to see how the blur affected the detail, and it seemed very smooth.

Hopefully some better examples after this weekend though.

Additionally on the Audio, it appears about the same to me. I was recording directly through the HDMI cable/signal. But the audio I was recording was not very challenging.

Jeff,

Thank you for taking the time to show us what you are getting!!! I must say, that the cleanliness of the video was first class.

I would LOVE to see a double screen shot of HDV footage and the pro res 422 over and under each other!!!

I am a PC editor using both Edius and Vegas, apparently I can bring it in but will have to output in something else in Vegas. Not generally a problem sense I go to blu ray as a rule.

Now the Question, would the improvement of image also be recognizable on the big sdcreen via blu ray?

looking at you vimeo footage I reckon that would be an afirmative.

what camera did you shoot with?


thank you for taking the time, truly appreciated.

dale guthormsen

Dale,

I shot the video with a Sony HVR-V1U camera.

I am going to try and do some more test shots this weekend, trying out a few different modes and methods. Also going to try some longer duration shots as well since I have a clinic coming up and one of the reasons I got the Ninja was so that I would not be limited by the 60min HDV tape. I will try to post some side by side/split screen comparisons of the HDV versus the ProRes Ninja. However, I am not sure that there will be that much noticeable visual difference especially when compressed for web delivery, although I will try to zoom in a little as well to try and demonstrate anything I can find. Where I did notice a difference was in the latitude and quality when I was color correcting. Seemed like there was just more there to work with, and the color correction looked very clean and smooth when I was finished.

Of course, not having to log and capture hours of HDV tape, and not being limited to an hour per tape was worth the price of entry for me alone. The additional benefits are icing on the cake.

It may be a week before I can get anything posted, but I will try and come back with a post here once I get something up, or note that there was not enough visual difference to post.

Jeff,

What I am most interested in is whether the pro res image is significantly sharper than the hdv image.

I have used cineform for ages which is a 422 color space and helps with the coror grading big time.

Look forward to what you will post!!!


dale

Dale,

I always use ProRes-422 as well for color grading, but I used to have to transcode the HDV content to ProRes, then be able to use the 422 color space within Apple Color. However, since the HDV master is from a 4:2:0 color space, then transcoded to a 4:2:2 ProRes then graded, it didn't seem to have the same latitude as I do now. Everything just appeared to grade much smoother and looked better when originated in 4:2:2 from the Ninja (1920X1080 rather than 1440X1080 probably helps as well), which is something I expected, but also really enjoy.

Another general observation, purely subjective, is that the encode for web delivery also appeared to look better. I assume that since it is coming from a better quality source, with less transcoding, it is a better quality output, but maybe it was just my imagination.

BTW, I completed my long shot test today, getting ready to do some other shots now, and tomorrow. The long shot was broken into segments by the ninja (due to the disk format type I assume) in 4.29GB sections. However, when I drop the folder onto the timeline that contains the clips, Final Cut Pro does a nice job of automatically putting them all on the timeline, and in the right order. Not sure what the behavior other NLE's will exhibit with the clips. I shot in ProResLT, which gave me around 5.5 min per clip.

I will do a "side by side" of Ninja-to-HDV with my shorter shots planned for today and tomorrow, will post any observations and video if relevant.

All, I have uploaded a new test video on Vimeo in 720P of footage that I shot over the weekend to demonstrate the depth and quality of footage that I was able to capture using the combination of the Ninja and my Sony V1U. Hope folks find this useful. Hope to look to the "Bake-off" next of HDV to Ninja in a side by side, but will take me a couple of days to get that done.

Here is the vimeo link:
Atomos Ninja Test Video on Vimeo

Edit: BTW, you can also download the x.264 file from the Vimeo page, which looks even nicer, but a larger file.

Jeff,


finally got back to this, A couple things, does the ninja always throw 4.6 gb clips (like its fat 32) or have you gotten by that??

Also, If you could muster the time and effort!!! I would very much like to see a split screen of hdv and pro res hq footage, both raw with no correction.

I was looking for video on line and I can't really find any that gives the info I need before I spend a grand for a better image.

Now, do the clips not have time code on them? If so how does that go in the edit sweet? Or should I say how do you tackle that?


thank you so much for the help!!!

We currently use FAT 32 so we do split video into 4GB chunks, there are ways to handle this though and FCP does it automatically.

A couple of things: We are going to change the filesystem or make other filesystems optional, so this isn't a permanent feature. And we are very shortly going to implement Time Of Day timecode in the files.

Dave Shapton
President
Atomos EMEA

Dale,

Looks like Dave did a good job at addressing the technical questions that you raised (Thanks Dave! Always best to get the information straight from the source).

As to the quality, I have looked at the following scenario:
ProResHQ from the Ninja - Matched with HDV captured as ProRes during capture into the Mac from my V1U.

When zoomed in, you can see a major difference between the images. The HDV to ProRes version has visible "blocks" that look rectangular. The Ninja does not exhibit this. Depending upon the content, it is more or less noticeable. I found that on "black" content, it was pretty noticeable. Also, on larger portions of a semi consistent color/smooth surface texture, it also appears blocky/smeary as well. I assume that this is due to the HDV 4:2:0 and 1440X1080 compression compared to the ProRes native (4:2:2, 1920X1080). ProRes is great, but if it is being built from the HDV source, it will inherit its limitations.

I don't see a huge difference in the overall quality when viewing in normal conditions (viewing after compression for the web or delivery on DVD, etc.), but I do see the difference during and after color correction. I think you get more latitude during color correction due to the lack of compression artifacts if working with the ninja footage. Meaning, that if you are doing color correction, or other compositing work, then I think the Ninja is worth it based on image quality. If you are not doing these actions, then you may not see much if any difference. Purely from an image quality perspective, and depending upon your delivery method.

Of course, eliminating the tape base workflow elements can also be very compelling as well. These benefits were some of the major reasons that I purchased.

I am not sure if I output my test, and then compress for the web, if it will really demonstrate the difference. However, I will try to take a few screen shots of the side by side footage and post them so that you can see what I describe above.

One other item, yet to be confirmed, is that my low light performance on my V1U appears to have been improved by the ninja as well. The V1U is known for its poor low light performance, and it appears to me to be improved by bypassing the HDV compression process. But, I have yet to confirm this in specific tests.

Hope this information is useful. Will try to get the screen shots up either late today or tomorrow.

Regards,
Jeff

Jeff,

Thanks for all this feedback! You're also benefiting from the extra 2 bits of resolution that you get when you record in ProRes. Of course, this doesn't improve the quality of the original material, but it does give you more levels to play with when you are grading and will tend to give a smoother result.

Dave Shapton
Atomos

Excellent point Dave. Forgot about that when mentioning the differences. Therefore, we have the 4:2:2 to 4:2:0 difference, the 1920X1080 to 1440X10180 difference, the bit depth difference, and the overall codec difference (ProRes Intra-frame compared to HDV).

I think all of these stacking up can make quite a difference when performing compositing or color correcting tasks on the footage.

I wish I had a good green screen setup, as I would imagine that keying would be a very different experience using original Ninja footage when compared to HDV original footage.

Regards,
Jeff

Okay, here is a still image taken from my Ninja-HDV compare video. I think this is probably the best way to demonstrate the differences that I mention above.

This is a still frame grab (TIFF) from my split video. The left side is Ninja footage captured in ProRes from my Sony V1U. The right side is HDV video, as captured onto tape. I then converted to ProRes during the import. Since this is my normal work flow, it was what I used to see if my perception of color correction differences, etc were actually real based on image definition and quality using my existing work flow. No color correction was done on the image. Pure Ninja/ProRes and HDV/ProRes stacked on the timeline.

I did zoom in, so that the differences were more obvious. This is an action shot, taken outdoors in good lighting conditions.

As you can see in the image, there is a big difference between the left hand side and right hand side. I did compress to jpg for posting here, but I don't think it changed the overall difference too much when comparing left to right. (be sure to click on the image to see a larger version)

As I have mentioned previously, I don't see a "major" difference when playing back the video at speed and normal size, although I do believe that the image is better. However, when taking the footage into Apple Color, I believe I see a major difference in the output and the quality. I imagine compositing/keying would also show a major difference as well based on the artifacting that can be seen. I also believe that my encodes look better when compressing for the web in h.264 or x.264.

Jeff,

First, thank you for taking the time to put together this comparison!!

The real sign of the difference is the fence and the trees in the back ground!! They are significantyl better.

My work flow will be down load to Vegas, transcode to m2v for blu ray output.

Color grading is a real important facite of my work so it will be a worhty investment if for no other reason than that!!

I only have two concerns:

1. How do I deal with no timecode (can I put timecode on in post?)

2. How will Vegas (which will work with pro res) deal with the small files!



Thank you again, I know others investigating this product will have the same questions.

Does the Ninja have the ability to start recording when the user presses the connected camera's record button?

I mean, it would be a plus if the Ninja could be controlled by the camera's own record button.

Dale, you can use the LANC control pass through if you camera supports it. That is how I usually capture with my V1U. I use a LANC remote for my focus, standby, and record functions. Works pretty well with the ninja. Especially helpful if you are capturing to both tape and the ninja at the same time. I press record on my remote, and the camera and the ninja begin recording simultaneously.

Without the tape in the V1U it gives you a "No Tape Installed" type of message on the LCD, but that has no impact on the record function or the video going into the Ninja.