E to E output to HDMI with source as HD-SDI at DVinfo.net

Andrew Stone · February 2nd, 2011, 05:06 PM

I don't have an HDMI based monitor to test this out so I have a question about monitoring from the HDMI port on the nanoFlash.

The scenario. Getting an HD-SDI signal into the nanoFlash, can one have it set up with E to E output and get a monitor out signal on the HDMI port and can one use both the HD-SDI and HDMI output ports concurrently?

This will be an important feature for Sony F3 users especially if Sony does not update the camera firmware to allow simultaneous use of the HD-SDI and HDMI ports when recording.

Dan Keaton · February 2nd, 2011, 07:44 PM

Dear Andrew,

If we leave out the E to E part, the answer is easy:

If one inputs HDMI, one gets HDMI and HD-SDI outputs simultaneously.

If one inputs HD-SDI, one get HDMI and HD-SDI outputs simultaneously.

With E to E active, the answer is the same.

Andrew Stone · February 2nd, 2011, 10:05 PM

Thanks Dan. This will be welcome news to would be owners of the Sony F3 who will for the most part be attaching one the new HDMI driven EVFs* on the market or an external monitor. Having both HDMI and HD-SDI as a monitor input option will allow people to choose from a broader spectrum of monitoring solutions.

*Electronic Viewfinder

Charles Papert · February 3rd, 2011, 02:26 AM

Dan, in these scenarios, is there any latency to the output image? I did a shoot recently and noticed the audio was delayed from the headphone output--is it the same delay with the image?

Dan Keaton · February 3rd, 2011, 04:08 AM

Dear Charles,

Our E to E Direct mode is designed specifically to reduce video latency to an absolute minimum.

For HD-SDI, this is almost as simple as HD-SDI In to HD-SDI out. A non-technical answer (a flippant answer, not an actual measured test, but based on how this works from our engineers) would be around 1 microsecond of video latency with E to E Direct enabled.

From a technical point of view, I do not know how much more processing is required to get the signal prepared for the HDMI output. If one has an HDMI and HD-SDI monitor, a visual test would be easy.

Without E to E Direct enabled, we have quite a lot of work to so, such as converting PSF to Progressive, processing audio, etc., which takes time, thus there is a noticable delay.

Are you using our latest firmware, 1.6.248?

Earlier firmware from early last year had high audio latency issues. We redesigned the code for lower audio latency.

Just to be clear, our E to E Direct mode lowers the latency for video, not for audio.

And, our audio headphone output and our level meters are both designed to allow you to check the audio, but are not designed as zero latency. Thus, generally, after one ensures that the audio is present and the levels are correct, I would recommend monitoring from the camera's audio out or a mixer's audio headphone out if one wants zero latency audio.

I hope this helps.

Charles Papert · February 3rd, 2011, 10:35 AM

Good info there Dan. I've been meaning to test the Nanoflash on my DSLR setup as an HDMI to HD-SDI convertor for monitoring instead of the Blackmagic box. Obviously the NF is overkill for just that application, but the BM box is so flaky. Just wanted to make sure that latency wasn't an issue

Andrew Stone · February 3rd, 2011, 06:43 PM

I operate the nanoFlash in E to E mode almost exclusively with the output going to a Decimator and then to a std def monitor on a Steadicam. No latency. Granted this is with an HD-SDI source but I couldn't see the nanoFlash adding latency with an HDMI source.

February 2nd, 2011, 05:06 PM	#1
Andrew Stone Major Player Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 975	E to E output to HDMI with source as HD-SDI I don't have an HDMI based monitor to test this out so I have a question about monitoring from the HDMI port on the nanoFlash. The scenario. Getting an HD-SDI signal into the nanoFlash, can one have it set up with E to E output and get a monitor out signal on the HDMI port and can one use both the HD-SDI and HDMI output ports concurrently? This will be an important feature for Sony F3 users especially if Sony does not update the camera firmware to allow simultaneous use of the HD-SDI and HDMI ports when recording.

February 2nd, 2011, 07:44 PM	#2
Dan Keaton Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Augusta Georgia Posts: 5,421	Dear Andrew, If we leave out the E to E part, the answer is easy: If one inputs HDMI, one gets HDMI and HD-SDI outputs simultaneously. If one inputs HD-SDI, one get HDMI and HD-SDI outputs simultaneously. With E to E active, the answer is the same. __________________ Dan Keaton Augusta Georgia

February 3rd, 2011, 02:26 AM	#4
Charles Papert Wrangler Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 6,810	Dan, in these scenarios, is there any latency to the output image? I did a shoot recently and noticed the audio was delayed from the headphone output--is it the same delay with the image? __________________ Charles Papert www.charlespapert.com

February 3rd, 2011, 04:08 AM	#5
Dan Keaton Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Augusta Georgia Posts: 5,421	Dear Charles, Our E to E Direct mode is designed specifically to reduce video latency to an absolute minimum. For HD-SDI, this is almost as simple as HD-SDI In to HD-SDI out. A non-technical answer (a flippant answer, not an actual measured test, but based on how this works from our engineers) would be around 1 microsecond of video latency with E to E Direct enabled. From a technical point of view, I do not know how much more processing is required to get the signal prepared for the HDMI output. If one has an HDMI and HD-SDI monitor, a visual test would be easy. Without E to E Direct enabled, we have quite a lot of work to so, such as converting PSF to Progressive, processing audio, etc., which takes time, thus there is a noticable delay. Are you using our latest firmware, 1.6.248? Earlier firmware from early last year had high audio latency issues. We redesigned the code for lower audio latency. Just to be clear, our E to E Direct mode lowers the latency for video, not for audio. And, our audio headphone output and our level meters are both designed to allow you to check the audio, but are not designed as zero latency. Thus, generally, after one ensures that the audio is present and the levels are correct, I would recommend monitoring from the camera's audio out or a mixer's audio headphone out if one wants zero latency audio. I hope this helps. __________________ Dan Keaton Augusta Georgia

February 3rd, 2011, 10:35 AM	#6
Charles Papert Wrangler Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 6,810	Good info there Dan. I've been meaning to test the Nanoflash on my DSLR setup as an HDMI to HD-SDI convertor for monitoring instead of the Blackmagic box. Obviously the NF is overkill for just that application, but the BM box is so flaky. Just wanted to make sure that latency wasn't an issue __________________ Charles Papert www.charlespapert.com

February 2nd, 2011, 10:05 PM	#3
Andrew Stone Major Player Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 975	Thanks Dan. This will be welcome news to would be owners of the Sony F3 who will for the most part be attaching one the new HDMI driven EVFs* on the market or an external monitor. Having both HDMI and HD-SDI as a monitor input option will allow people to choose from a broader spectrum of monitoring solutions. *Electronic Viewfinder

February 3rd, 2011, 06:43 PM	#7
Andrew Stone Major Player Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 975	I operate the nanoFlash in E to E mode almost exclusively with the output going to a Decimator and then to a std def monitor on a Steadicam. No latency. Granted this is with an HD-SDI source but I couldn't see the nanoFlash adding latency with an HDMI source.