Sixnon Posted December 31, 2015 Report Share Posted December 31, 2015 On 29 December 2015 at 7:05 PM, Olle Sjostrom said: Exactly. It seems biased, that's the word I was looking for. To me, the 633 is the closest competitor to the F8 in terms of size, channels and features (given that the F8 has more physical inputs). The 633 is not the much more expensive, and has that Workhorse feeling. Sorry Olle, but in Australia a 633 costs $5,040, an F8 $1495. That's exactly the kind of bias you're suggesting in the Sound on Sound article! 3.35 times the price is hardly "not much". The SOS article mentioned also weather proofing as being potentially less on the Zoom, but in fact the F8 has better protection for media slots than, for example, the exposed CF slot for 7 series recorders...for example... Whilst I don't doubt the 633 more of a workhorse, I do think it's fair to say that the F8 offers incredibly good value for what it offers, and it's build quality is a significant step up from Zoom's earlier consumer recorders...as it's preamp performance. The 2.0 firmware revision does address some odd shortcomings such as a lack of channel ganging and improved metadata, very soon after it's release...addressing earlier assumptions by some that firmware would be ignored at the expense of new products. I'm not endeavouring to be inflammatory, nor do I think it will replace professional location sound recordists daily use machines, I simply think it can't be dismissed out of hand as "just a Zoom" [which is something I've done myself in the past]. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZoomOfficial Posted December 31, 2015 Report Share Posted December 31, 2015 On 12/27/2015 at 6:20 AM, efksound said: Playing a bit with the new 2.00 firmware there are loads of improvements, that make this little machine very powerful now ! I've notice also that the machine is configured in Rec Priority mode, so that you can go in record mode from almost any screen on the menu, except from the FINDER, So for example if you are correcting Metadata info for previous takes and need to go into record, you need to exit first and go to the home screen which means a lot of pressings on the menu button (to exit) it would be nice if this could be changed somehow Also entering Note Metadata but only for the NEXT take is a bit awkwards, how will you know that the next take will be good or bad ? It would be good also to have the ability maybe to edit Metadata while recording Would be also nice to have a Edit Note shortcut for example : STOP +TR4 ( which is not used ?) Thanks for listening Zoom ! Hello, Thanks for the thoughts. These are all great comments. I will pass them on for consideration as we look to improve the F8 further! You can edit note Metadata on past take in the Finder menu. Thank you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Visser Posted December 31, 2015 Report Share Posted December 31, 2015 1 hour ago, ZoomOfficial said: Hello, Thanks for the thoughts. These are all great comments. I will pass them on for consideration as we look to improve the F8 further! You can edit note Metadata on past take in the Finder menu. Thank you Just my own insight to this, rolling, plane flies overhead, would be nice to enter a note on the currently running clip. "Cut" is called, PL to boom op (through external mixer since there's no communications feature on board the F8) "no good for sound, plane" and immediately the director tells the AD to go again and we're already speeding up for the next take - no time to go into menus and revisit past clips. This is one of the reasons I still use paper reports, there's no menus, firmware, or reliability issues with pen v2.0 (upgraded to roller ball from fountain nib) and paper v3.0 (papyrus to immulsified pulp to carbons) or when there is, don't bother contacting the manufacturer or sending in for service, just replace with new one. Being able to immediately enter notes would be one hurdle to overcome for me to adopt electronic reports. The other would being able to print directly from the unit. I don't bring a computer on set and need to hand over reports immediately to production (as we pull equipment through mud and jungle vying for dwindling space on the stake bed trucks in order to get back to base camp). My question though, could for example, pot #1 be assigned to input gain for the boom mic on channel 1, and then pot #2 be assigned to channel 1 fader? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VM Posted January 3, 2016 Report Share Posted January 3, 2016 We have done a short review, F8 vs SD633, with a few sounds that can be heared : http://leblogsonore.com/test-du-zoom-f8/ It was with the first firmware. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Toline Posted January 3, 2016 Report Share Posted January 3, 2016 None of the test sound links work in your posting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Reineke Posted January 3, 2016 Report Share Posted January 3, 2016 I got a little lost in the translation. Otherwise, according to José and Samual from Zoom, the line inputs (via 1/4" TRS) are +4dB. ( the manual's specs state max input level as "+34 dBu (at 0 dBFS, limiter ON)" The main and sub mix outputs are -10dB line or mic level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ze Frias Posted January 3, 2016 Report Share Posted January 3, 2016 1 hour ago, Rick Reineke said: I got a little lost in the translation. Otherwise, according to José and Samual from Zoom, the line inputs (via 1/4" TRS) are +4dB. ( the manual's specs state max input level as "+34 dBu (at 0 dBFS, limiter ON)" The main and sub mix outputs are -10dB line or mic level. Correct, line level inputs (1/4" TRS) are +4dBu. Outputs are switchable between consumer line level, or "Normal" level as the F8 calls it (-10dBV), and mic level (-40dBV). VM, Merci pour votre avis. Je dois encore essayer le nouveau firmware. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greyfoxx Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 I received my replacement unit and it also fails the SD performance test with the Delkin cards the dealer provided. Apparently the first unit was perfectly fine and the dealer failed to test the cards like they said they did. At least I know now that the F8 isn't defective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VASI Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 On 3/1/2016 at 6:19 PM, VM said: We have done a short review, F8 vs SD633, with a few sounds that can be heared : http://leblogsonore.com/test-du-zoom-f8/ It was with the first firmware. Audio samples, not working. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZoomOfficial Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 On 12/31/2015 at 4:11 PM, Tom Visser said: Just my own insight to this, rolling, plane flies overhead, would be nice to enter a note on the currently running clip. "Cut" is called, PL to boom op (through external mixer since there's no communications feature on board the F8) "no good for sound, plane" and immediately the director tells the AD to go again and we're already speeding up for the next take - no time to go into menus and revisit past clips. This is one of the reasons I still use paper reports, there's no menus, firmware, or reliability issues with pen v2.0 (upgraded to roller ball from fountain nib) and paper v3.0 (papyrus to immulsified pulp to carbons) or when there is, don't bother contacting the manufacturer or sending in for service, just replace with new one. Being able to immediately enter notes would be one hurdle to overcome for me to adopt electronic reports. The other would being able to print directly from the unit. I don't bring a computer on set and need to hand over reports immediately to production (as we pull equipment through mud and jungle vying for dwindling space on the stake bed trucks in order to get back to base camp). My question though, could for example, pot #1 be assigned to input gain for the boom mic on channel 1, and then pot #2 be assigned to channel 1 fader? Hey Tom, I hear your concerns with the notes and reports. I will pass along. The pot use that you describe would be interesting. Haven't heard that from anyone yet. Thank you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Visser Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 5 minutes ago, ZoomOfficial said: Hey Tom, I hear your concerns with the notes and reports. I will pass along. The pot use that you describe would be interesting. Haven't heard that from anyone yet. Thank you No, thank YOU for participating. This communication and interest from the manufacturer makes me feel it is the first time I can take Zoom seriously as a company for "our" professional needs and the F8 still seems quite interesting for me because of a few of the positive design features. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ze Frias Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 I've revised my review to reflect the updates on the new firmware 2.0 release: http://mixeli.us/technology/zoom-f8/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJBerto Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 Has anyone tried it as a computer interface yet? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VM Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 9 hours ago, VAS said: Audio samples, not working. It is html 5. Some web browsers seems not to read html 5 sounds :Internet Explorer up to version 8.0, Firefox and Opera. So.. I have just put a reader. It should be OK now. Let me know (maybe by PM not to disturb this post) Vinc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
efksound Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 On 29/12/2015 at 9:47 AM, greyfoxx said: I look at as somewhere in between the 744t and the 633. Its a 4 channel if you want the safety tracks(compensate for the limiters). I would chose a 633 over it however I personally think its better than a 744t. Now what we need is someone to develop taller knobs that would attach to the F8 knobs. Seems like there could be a market there. On 29/12/2015 at 10:42 AM, Tom Visser said: These may already exist. Anyone know what the shaft type is? D-flat? 6mm? Someone on Facebook has just posted this pic using 788T trim knobs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Panfeld Posted January 6, 2016 Author Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 Sounds like a one-way mod. Can you revert back to the original?? Also, do the 788 knobs attach with super glue, the hex screws, or are they just popped on (i.e., easily popped off)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Constantin Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 So you have to butcher your 788 to make your F8 work better? Sonething's wrong with this... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philip Perkins Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 I think that's a good fix for the F8 knobs if it doesn't require glueing. SD knobs have setscrews. I've done lots of swaps with them, like having earier to read black 302 knobs on a 744 etc. Nice that they fit on the F8, would be easier to use for sure. You can buy spare knobs easily from SD, no butchering needed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Toline Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 There is no way the 788 knobs can be mechcanically attached to the F8 as shown in the picture. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
efksound Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 These are the other 2 pictures posted, it doesn't look to me that you can screw the SD knobs, the shaft looks too small, so I presume or they pop in, or they need to be glued..... (not so good then) But for sure even if they are still small, it must be way more comfortable to turn them BTW the knobs look to me like a thirdparty version rather than original SD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisvankat Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 Does anyone have recommendations on external DC power options for the F8? I am looking at an option from Switronix ( http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/333349-REG/Switronix_NP_50_NP_50_NiMH_NP_1_Style.html ), but would love any insight in to what others are using. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Reineke Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 Any of the usual external batteries should work. Obviously with a NP-1 you will need a cup, and a Hirose HR10A-7P-4P plug at the recorder end with 9-16 volts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
engaudio Posted January 6, 2016 Report Share Posted January 6, 2016 Just be aware often NP1's come off the charger at over 16v, may be best to use a regulated supply? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olle Sjostrom Posted January 7, 2016 Report Share Posted January 7, 2016 Just be aware often NP1's come off the charger at over 16v, may be best to use a regulated supply? +1 Samuel from zoom said in this very thread to not exceed 16v as it may damage the recorder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deep owl Posted January 9, 2016 Report Share Posted January 9, 2016 On 1/7/2016 at 11:21 PM, Olle Sjostrom said: +1 Samuel from zoom said in this very thread to not exceed 16v as it may damage the recorder. Hey, I run mine with dual npf970 batts at 16.4V when fully charged and it does fine. Sam's post says not to exceed 17V. Nomad's maximum input voltage is 18V so that's not a whole lot higher. 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.