Re: Odyssey7 / Odyssey7Q and nanoFlash
 

Dan, Does this mean it will be available with the release of the compressed codec(s) or does it mean it may become a future firmware upgrade?

Re: Odyssey7 / Odyssey7Q and nanoFlash
 

Dear Cees,

Regretfully, I do not know the timing of the Cache Recording feature for the Odyssey7 and Odyssey7Q.

Our engineers are working very hard to finish the Avid DNxHD codec for the Gemini 4:4:4, Odyssey7 and Odyssey7Q.

Of course we would love for the Cache Recording (Pre-Buffer) feature to be ready at the same time.

Respectfully,

Re: Odyssey7 / Odyssey7Q and nanoFlash
 

Dan .......any idea of the 7Q's capability with the 480 and 960 fps selections on the FS700? I'm curious if there will be any enhancements in resolution. I understand whats possible with 120 and 240fps.

cheers....mark

Re: Odyssey7 / Odyssey7Q and nanoFlash
 

Dan, do you see the NanoFlash as an end of life product, or will you continue to produce, support, and upgrade it?

Re: Odyssey7 / Odyssey7Q and nanoFlash
 

Dear Ron,

We do expect more of our customers to be migrating to the Odyssey7 or Odyssey7Q.

We feel that this is only natural, as our customers asked for a built-in monitor, and have asked for Avid DNxHD and Apple ProRes.

We are currently offering Avid DNxHD in the initial firmware release of the Odyssey7Q, and we plan on supporting another very popular codec later.

But, the nanoFlash is a very unique product as it is so versatile, and can record at true Broadcast Quality at only 50 Megabits per second.

The Odyssey7 and Odyssey7Q will offer compressed codecs, but the Sony XDCam codec used in the nanoFlash is outstanding for lower bit-rate recordings, and is very widely supported.

We will continue to support it for many years to come, and provide at least one more firmware upgrade, maybe more.

We use the Sony XDCam 4:2:2 module as an integrated part of the nanoFlash. We can continue to produce the nanoFlashes as long as we can obtain this module from Sony. When Sony discontinues the manufacturing of this XDCam module, then we will have to purchase as many as we think is prudent.

I hope this helps.


Respectfully,

Re: Odyssey7 / Odyssey7Q and nanoFlash
 

Dear Friends,

I just wanted to update the status of our Avid DNxHD codec project.

There are three main parts of this project.

We started with the codec "decoder". This is done and is working perfectly, We used a SMPTE Standard Test file and it looks great after being decoded.

I understand that our encoder is also working now, but I am certain that we have at least some more work on this portion before we can say it is 100% finished.

We are also working on the Quicktime (".MOV" wrapper), but we have extensive experience in this area.

So, overall, our team is making very good progress.

As soon as we can share some end to end test results, I will do so.

This project applies to both the Gemini 4:4:4, and the Odyssey7/Odyssey7Q.

This will be a free firmware upgrade for the Gemini 4:4:4 and will be standard on both the Odyssey7 and Odyssey7Q.

Respectfully,

Re: Odyssey7 / Odyssey7Q and nanoFlash
 

Thank you Dan. That is very helpful. It looks like the NanoFlash will be useful for sometime so I feel good about that. The Nano works good for green screen work. What codec on the Odyssey would be the equivalent of the XD Cam on the NanoFlash?

Re: Odyssey7 / Odyssey7Q and nanoFlash
 

Dear Ron,

I highly recommend, that if someone loves their nanoFlash, then if they get an Odyssey7 or Odyssey7Q, then they should hold on to it.

The Avid DNxHD 220 should be as good as Sony XDCam 50 Mbps.

We will know more later, and there are other Avid DNxHD bit rates available.

Respectfully,

Re: Odyssey7 / Odyssey7Q and nanoFlash
 

Thanks again Dan you have been very helpful.

Re: Odyssey7 / Odyssey7Q and nanoFlash
 

This will certainly be the case.

However, for my kind of shootings, wildlife documentary, the Odyssey7 is too big and the Gemini too expensive (an Odyssey5 would be perfect!). So there is no real successor to the NanoFlash from Convergent Design, for the moment, in my opinion.
Anyway, I'm happy with it and still look for a firmware upgrade, if it comes.

Re: Odyssey7 / Odyssey7Q and nanoFlash
 

Dear Ronan,

We appreciate your suggestion and comments.

We decided to go with 2.5" SSD's for a variety of reasons.

And, to accomplish some of our goals, such a being able to support both 4K and 60 frames per second, and HD/2K at very high frame rates, such as 2K Raw at 240 fps, we needed to have two SSD's available for recording.

And having two SSD's will allow us to record to two SSD's simultaneously, or to extend the recording time.

We feel, for proper heat management, without using a fan, the two SSD's need to be side-by-side, as opposed to stacked on top of each other.

Thus, this dictates a unit that is wider than the nanoFlash.

We can certainly consider a Odyssey5 model.

On a personal note, I found that the 7.7" diagonal spec seems bigger than it actually is.

The dimensions are 6.1" High and 7.9" wide, and about 1" thick, weighing 1.2 pounds.

Before I saw the and held one for the first time, I made a cutout to envision the actual size. I was surprised that it was smaller than I had expected.

At NAB, our brochure was actual size so our friends could envision it on their cameras.

Again, thank you for your suggestion and we will give it serious consideration.

Respectfully,

Re: Odyssey7 / Odyssey7Q and nanoFlash
 

I'd be more open to a Odyssey5 or an OdysseyEVF if the codec options are fixed and non-upgradable (for instance, with proprietary encoding hardware)

Having everything you need already in box at purchase (without activation needs) IMHO is better than buying options for a "Monitor." It works out better for a smaller form factor and for run and gun shoots. If size is not an hurdle, (like on a cinema shoot) the purchasing options seem more logical for the Odyssey7 and 7Q.