Jump to content



Photo

Lightweight receiver for Bolt PRO 2000


  • Please log in to reply
86 replies to this topic

#1 Alec Jarnagin SOC

Alec Jarnagin SOC

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPip
  • 1800 posts
  • New York City, USA

Posted 10 February 2015 - 03:59 PM

Hi all,

 

It has come up on a number of shoots recently that it would be great to have a smaller, lighter version of the Bolt PRO 2000 receiver.  This would not replace the current one, rather augment it.  In other words, you'd use the existing one at video village as the long range one.  Then you would have a smaller, lighter, cheaper, shorter range one (much the form factor of the 300) for the AC's monitor or handheld Director's monitor.  While I love my PRO 2000, the receiver with the external antennae is just a bit big for these situations and frankly overkill.  I'd love to own an additional receiver like the Bolt PRO 300. 

 

So, I emailed Mike Gailing from Teradek this suggestion and he tells me that others have suggested it too, but that the "Powers that Be" need a proverbial raising of hands to show interest.  So....

 

Who thinks this is a good idea?

 

Thanks all.


  • 0

#2 Walter F. Rodriguez

Walter F. Rodriguez

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 176 posts

Posted 10 February 2015 - 04:02 PM

I am interested. Especially if it cost less.
  • 0

#3 Brian Wells

Brian Wells

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts

Posted 10 February 2015 - 04:18 PM

I have two Bolt Pro 2000 systems and here are my thoughts: Yes this situation comes up from time to time. But let's look at the cost.... A Bolt Pro 300 extra RX is 1690.00. It does not do DFS Channels-- which limits you to four channels instead of nine. But it is a little bit cheaper.

The cheapest extra receiver for the 2000 system is now the HDMI only model for 3490.00. Works fine with HDMI monitors like the Sonys everybody uses nowadays.....

Is it worth a $1700 savings to lose half your channels?

To me, no it is not.
  • 0

#4 Alec Jarnagin SOC

Alec Jarnagin SOC

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPip
  • 1800 posts
  • New York City, USA

Posted 10 February 2015 - 04:34 PM

Brian (please change your display name to your full last name - its our policy), I'm not talking about using a 300 receiver; I'm talking about them developing something of similar size, etc.  No external antennae and maybe no LCD.  Small, light weight.  I'll gladly give up some range for this purpose as long as I still have the "Big Brother" one.  As for the HDMI one you mention, I live in an SDI world (didn't even bother to get HDMI on my 2000).  

 

Maybe its me, but it keeps coming up.  I've ended up retransmitting from village with a 300 or even carrying both transmitters when village is too far away.  Sure, I've thought about buying a 2nd receiver but after watching a Director fumbling around with that thing on the back of a Small HD monitor the other day, I'd much rather another option.


  • 0

#5 Kyle Wullschleger

Kyle Wullschleger

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 49 posts

Posted 10 February 2015 - 04:45 PM

Absolutely would love this for the 600 as well.
  • 0

#6 Brian Wells

Brian Wells

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts

Posted 10 February 2015 - 04:55 PM

Brian (please change your display name to your full last name - its our policy), I'm not talking about using a 300 receiver; I'm talking about them developing something of similar size, etc.  No external antennae and maybe no LCD.  Small, light weight.  I'll gladly give up some range for this purpose as long as I still have the "Big Brother" one.  As for the HDMI one you mention, I live in an SDI world (didn't even bother to get HDMI on my 2000).  
 
Maybe its me, but it keeps coming up.  I've ended up retransmitting from village with a 300 or even carrying both transmitters when village is too far away.  Sure, I've thought about buying a 2nd receiver but after watching a Director fumbling around with that thing on the back of a Small HD monitor the other day, I'd much rather another option.

My last name is Wells. I'm on an iPhone at the moment. When I can get a chance to access this site from my MacBook Pro I am happy to change my login appearance.

My only point was that the device you're seeking essentially already exists.. I have owned the 2nd gen 300 and 2000. They're physically the same size. I rarely use HDMI either. I suspect Teradek would simply re tune the existing 300 2nd gen RX to hear the 2000 TX and call it a day. If that's all that's in the pipeline, then no I'm not interested. However, if what they're considering is shrinking the 2000 (2nd gen) RX by half, making it plastic with internal antennas, killing the grab engine, and the format conversion, their proprietary FPGA, and all the stuff that makes it bigger, then yeah, sign me up for two of them!

Otherwise, a 300 2nd gen sized RX that only does 4 channels, and isn't much smaller, doesn't really offer a compelling reason to buy that instead of another 2000 SDI RX.

Edited by Brian W, 10 February 2015 - 05:02 PM.

  • 0

#7 Brian Wells

Brian Wells

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts

Posted 10 February 2015 - 05:10 PM

For what it's worth, even more than a half baked midget RX, I would much rather see them direct their finite development resources to combining their efforts with the newly Vitek acquired Small HD and give us a handheld OLED with built in receiver(s). Possibly with a dual RX, split screen or toggle, ability to receive at least two cameras, on a single battery. That category of product is a whole lot more interesting...... And also sets them apart from competitors offering (IMHO) inferior solutions......
  • 0

#8 Brad Smith

Brad Smith

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 133 posts
  • Sydney, Australia

Posted 10 February 2015 - 06:42 PM

I've got a bolt 600 and I'd buy a second receiver immediately if it where available. I agree Alec the current form factor is not ideal for a handheld directors monitor.
  • 0

#9 brooksrobinson

brooksrobinson

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 267 posts
  • Los Angeles

Posted 10 February 2015 - 06:54 PM

I'm also interested in a smaller 2000 receiver for hand-held monitor use. The range (as mentioned before) wouldn't need to be as robust as the standard 2000 RX.

Brooks Robinson
  • 0

#10 Mike Gailing

Mike Gailing

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 139 posts
  • Irvine, CA

Posted 10 February 2015 - 08:03 PM

I have two Bolt Pro 2000 systems and here are my thoughts: Yes this situation comes up from time to time. But let's look at the cost.... A Bolt Pro 300 extra RX is 1690.00. It does not do DFS Channels-- which limits you to four channels instead of nine. But it is a little bit cheaper.

The cheapest extra receiver for the 2000 system is now the HDMI only model for 3490.00. Works fine with HDMI monitors like the Sonys everybody uses nowadays.....

Is it worth a $1700 savings to lose half your channels?

To me, no it is not.

 

Brian,

 

All 2nd generation Bolt models use DFS channels. If you are running older firmware, Broadcast mode will block the DFS channels. Upgrade your unit when you get a chance - the latest update really enhances functionality. 


  • 0

#11 Christopher Moone

Christopher Moone

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 39 posts
  • New York

Posted 10 February 2015 - 08:12 PM

Brian, the problem with building an Rx into a monitor is obsolescence. I love the idea but the pace of monitor technology is outpacing transmitters significantly. I also don't want to be locked into one monitor, what if I want an odyssey?

I'd be very interested in a smaller Rx. The 300 Rx is much smaller than the 2000 and I dont see much need for lots of very large receivers. Having a smaller one for the director/Ac monitor would probably make me consider buying one. It's convenience and portability. Directors already whinge with carrying a simple monitor.
  • 0

#12 Brian Wells

Brian Wells

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts

Posted 10 February 2015 - 08:15 PM

 
Brian,
 
All 2nd generation Bolt models use DFS channels. If you are running older firmware, Broadcast mode will block the DFS channels. Upgrade your unit when you get a chance - the latest update really enhances functionality. 

I have the December 2014 firmware on my 2000's... I agree it is a substantial upgrade and I am grateful.

But, are you saying the second generation Bolt Pro 300, the version that sells for around 3 Grand all-in, now has access to all 9 channels, including the DFS ones, in broadcast mode? That's news to me. I previously owned two of these systems and sent them back and got the 2000's instead cause I needed the range. Back when I owned them, a month or so after they started shipping last year, in September I think, they were only using 4 channels. And, if someone wanted 9 channels, you had to get the 600 or the 2000. Can you confirm this has changed?

Edited by Brian W, 10 February 2015 - 08:16 PM.

  • 0

#13 Brian Wells

Brian Wells

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts

Posted 10 February 2015 - 08:21 PM

[quote name="Christopher Moone" post="108306" timestamp="1423617163"]
The 300 Rx is much smaller than the 2000 and I dont see much need for lots of very large receivers. /quote]

I feel any more comment from me on this topic will be perceived as overbearing and argumentative.. So at great personal risk, I will say this: having owned both of them, the current generation 300 and 2000 receivers are exactly the same size. The only difference is the antennas. The 300 has pcb mounted internal antennas and the 2000 has external antennas. I would agree that the first generation "Bolt" or "Bolt Pro" devices do indeed have receivers that were substantially smaller than the current "Bolt Pro 300" receiver that exists and is for sale on Teradek's site...

I just happen to think we're all dreaming to think Teradek will make a second generation receiver that's the same size as the first generation "Bolt" receiver. But, if they do, I promise I will be right here with you guys, in line with cash! :-)

(The original "Bolt" and "Bolt Pro" receivers also had noisy fans, were made out of plastic, and broke often, all alarming issues which prompted the total redesign. Right, Mike?)

Edited by Brian W, 10 February 2015 - 08:29 PM.

  • 0

#14 Mike Gailing

Mike Gailing

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 139 posts
  • Irvine, CA

Posted 10 February 2015 - 08:22 PM

I have the December 2014 firmware on my 2000's... I agree it is a substantial upgrade and I am grateful.

But, are you saying the second generation Bolt Pro 300, the version that sells for around 3 Grand all-in, now has access to all 9 channels, including the DFS ones, in broadcast mode? That's news to me. I previously owned two of these systems and sent them back and got the 2000's instead cause I needed the range. Back when I owned them, a month or so after they started shipping last year, in September I think, they were only using 4 channels. And, if someone wanted 9 channels, you had to get the 600 or the 2000. Can you confirm this has changed?

Hey Brian,

 

Only the original 1st generation gave you an option: the regular Bolt with no DFS, or the Bolt Pro w/ DFS. As I mentioned above, all second generation Bolts 300, 600, and 2000 are DFS capable and always have been. Prior to the December 2014 firmware update, you had a choice between Broadcast Mode or Unicast Mode, with Broadcast Mode blocking the DFS channels. You could change this at any time using our Bolt Manager. Firmware V.1.1.1 has now combined Broadcast and Unicast Mode w/ DFS channels available.


  • 0

#15 Brian Wells

Brian Wells

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts

Posted 10 February 2015 - 08:32 PM

Hey Brian,
 
Only the original 1st generation gave you an option: the regular Bolt with no DFS, or the Bolt Pro w/ DFS. As I mentioned above, all second generation Bolts 300, 600, and 2000 are DFS capable and always have been. Prior to the December 2014 firmware update, you had a choice between Broadcast Mode or Unicast Mode, with Broadcast Mode blocking the DFS channels. You could change this at any time using our Bolt Manager. Firmware V.1.1.1 has now combined Broadcast and Unicast Mode w/ DFS channels available.

 

I believe you. What threw me off, was that in September 2014, on the second generation Bolt Pro 300, in the Bolt Manager, I was only able to manually select 5190, 5230, 5755, and 5795 and the DFS channels were greyed out, because obviously DFS channels were only available in Unicast mode, and the Bolt Pro 300 has never had a Unicast Mode! Only since December 2014 has the Bolt Pro 300 had DFS Channels. So, while you would technically say that the Bolt Pro 300 may have "always been capable..." of DFS Channels, a more accurate depiction of the product's capabilities would be to say that, "prior to December 2014, the Bolt Pro 300 only worked with 4 channels and after December 2014, it works with 9 channels" right? ;-)


Edited by Brian W, 10 February 2015 - 08:40 PM.

  • 1




PLC - Bartech

Paralinx LLC

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

rebotnix Technologies

PLC Electronics Solutions

Teradek

Boland Communications

Betz Tools for Stabilizers

Varizoom Follow Focus

Ritter Battery

Engineered Cinema Solutions

SkyDreams

Omnishot Systems

BOXX

Wireless Video Systems

GPI Pro Systems

IDX