VideoHelp Forum

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 29 of 29
Thread
  1. Are Foinnex hyper thin and hyper light (2 mm) 8K@60 HDMI cables the best for Gimbals?


    Watch:
    https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005002244267188.html?spm=a2g0o.detail.1000060.2.3fae4...:%223339%22%7D

    I always use them during I record videos via HDMI on Gimbal.
    Last edited by Truthler; 24th Nov 2021 at 11:17.
    Quote Quote  
  2. Member Cornucopia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Deep in the Heart of Texas
    Search PM
    Science says "Nope".

    You want thin & lite, go with fiber optic transceivers.


    Scott
    Quote Quote  
  3. Originally Posted by Cornucopia View Post
    Science says "Nope".

    You want thin & lite, go with fiber optic transceivers.


    Scott
    Corni,

    Fiber optics is good for very long cables. (TV studios often need very long cables)

    For handheld gimbals between 1m and 2 m is more than enough. Optical cables have no real practical advantages in such short distance.


    I have for example optical internet since 2009. How is it possible that you have low speed Internet in Texas? I simply can't believe that. Doesn't you have optical internet even in the toilets in villages? I have never been in Texas, just in a short trip in New York and LA, but there were optical internet and fast mobile internet even Wi-fi in these places. What happened with Texas ?
    Last edited by Truthler; 23rd Nov 2021 at 08:56.
    Quote Quote  
  4. Let's see the optical HDMI cables
    https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2334524.m570.l1313&_nkw=optical+hdm...hdmi&_osacat=0

    Optical cables are usually thinner and lighter than traditional copper-based HDMI cables, but they are not thinner or lighter than the 8K@60 Foinnex copper cables.
    And optical cables have proven advantages only for long cables.
    Last edited by Truthler; 23rd Nov 2021 at 09:39.
    Quote Quote  
  5. Member Cornucopia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Deep in the Heart of Texas
    Search PM
    You need to stop believing everything advertisers tell you.

    Maybe you don't really care about the signal reliability. Your loss.

    Scott
    Quote Quote  
  6. Originally Posted by Cornucopia View Post
    You need to stop believing everything advertisers tell you.

    Maybe you don't really care about the signal reliability. Your loss.

    Scott
    So a 8k@60p 1m SHORT HDMI copper cable can not normally handle a 4K@30p signal in reliable way ?
    Last edited by Truthler; 23rd Nov 2021 at 12:35.
    Quote Quote  
  7. Member Cornucopia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Deep in the Heart of Texas
    Search PM
    Depends on how it is built (gauge, winds, connection materials, shielding, etc). And I wouldn't trust that one to be reliable, no.

    Scott
    Quote Quote  
  8. Originally Posted by Cornucopia View Post
    Depends on how it is built (gauge, winds, connection materials, shielding, etc). And I wouldn't trust that one to be reliable, no.

    Scott
    I already ordered an optical HDMI cable, I will bring it tomorrow and I will compare it with the very thin copper cable. And I will post the result in pictures.



    But why are copper wires in an OPTICAL CABLE? I know its chipset needs electric power transmission too, but I think there is data exchange too.
    Last edited by Truthler; 23rd Nov 2021 at 15:48.
    Quote Quote  
  9. Corni!

    After the HDMI=> USB3 transformation, the signal will go to the copper USB3 cable, than it travel on copper vire in the computer... So where will be the adventage of light speed?
    Quote Quote  
  10. Corni, at the shop I could chose between 8 type of Optical HDMI cables, all of them were bulkier/ ticker and heavier than the foinnex cables.
    Quote Quote  
  11. Member Cornucopia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Deep in the Heart of Texas
    Search PM
    It seems you still haven't learned that size and weight are not the only, or even MOST, important factors when choosing a video cable.

    But if you like/want those particular cables, do what you will.
    Not going to convince me of any benefit in using them - I have seen firsthand too many instances of "ultrathin" cables failing often and not living up to their hype.
    And ultimately it is naive to think you can get around plain physical constraints, like magic's "something from nothing".

    Also, I find it odd that anyone would strap ANY cabling to a cam that was gimballed, as that would counteract the free range of motion expected.

    But do have fun with your "Foinnex".

    @Nizzon, thanks for that interesting find!

    Scott
    Quote Quote  
  12. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Cornucopia View Post
    It seems you still haven't learned that size and weight are not the only, or even MOST, important factors when choosing a video cable.
    Yes. The best cable typically means the cable that has the best construction and delivers the highest-quality signal. Physics dictates that passive, ultra-thin copper wire HDMI cables can't be the best, even at a 2m length. The wires are too thin and probably lack adequate shielding.
    Ignore list: hello_hello, tried, TechLord, Snoopy329
    Quote Quote  
  13. Tomorrow I will compare the hyper thin copper cable with the optical cable.
    Quote Quote  
  14. Member Cornucopia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Deep in the Heart of Texas
    Search PM
    How so? With that tester box? Or are you eyeballing it? Under what stresses?

    But you go ahead and do that.


    Scott
    Quote Quote  
  15. Originally Posted by Cornucopia View Post

    Also, I find it odd that anyone would strap ANY cabling to a cam that was gimballed, as that would counteract the free range of motion expected.



    Scott
    But Scott, you also know that only the barbarians shot video with lossy codecs on memory cards.



    I can autocalibrate the gimbal for that cable weight too.
    Quote Quote  
  16. Originally Posted by Cornucopia View Post
    How so? With that tester box? Or are you eyeballing it? Under what stresses?

    But you go ahead and do that.


    Scott
    If you could walk in my shoes, how would you do this test?
    Quote Quote  
  17. Member Cornucopia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Deep in the Heart of Texas
    Search PM
    No. Bad news about shoddily-manufactured cables. Simple answer: don't buy those cheap-ass brands.
    Quote Quote  
  18. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Cornucopia View Post
    No. Bad news about shoddily-manufactured cables. Simple answer: don't buy those cheap-ass brands.
    ...and if one mistreats copper wire cables or optical fiber cables (also mentioned in the video), should one be surprised that it leads to signal problems?
    Ignore list: hello_hello, tried, TechLord, Snoopy329
    Quote Quote  
  19. Originally Posted by Cornucopia View Post
    No. Bad news about shoddily-manufactured cables. Simple answer: don't buy those cheap-ass brands.
    Corni, Can you explain it please?

    What is the advantage of optical cables, (if we speak about short distance). As my last posted video reveals that the optical cables are also vulnerable like their copper opponents.
    And the main question: what is the adventage of optical cables, if I had to transform the HDMI to USB3 (Cam link 4K) and its USB3 cable is a copper based cable, and let's don't forget the computer motherboards have extreme thin integrated copper wires? (Motherboards are copper wired systems)
    Last edited by Truthler; 25th Nov 2021 at 06:09.
    Quote Quote  
  20. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Truthler View Post
    Originally Posted by Cornucopia View Post
    No. Bad news about shoddily-manufactured cables. Simple answer: don't buy those cheap-ass brands.
    ... and let's don't forget the computer motherboards have extreme thin integrated copper wires? (Motherboards are copper wired systems)
    Motherboard traces are very short as well as very thin. Length also matters as you must surely know.
    Ignore list: hello_hello, tried, TechLord, Snoopy329
    Quote Quote  
  21. Originally Posted by usually_quiet View Post
    Originally Posted by Truthler View Post
    Originally Posted by Cornucopia View Post
    No. Bad news about shoddily-manufactured cables. Simple answer: don't buy those cheap-ass brands.
    ... and let's don't forget the computer motherboards have extreme thin integrated copper wires? (Motherboards are copper wired systems)
    Motherboard traces are very short as well as very thin. Length also matters as you must surely know.
    But the signal can flow on many many many such a "small" traces, in an environment of electromagnetic chaos...
    Quote Quote  
  22. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Truthler View Post
    But the signal can flow on many many many such a "small" traces, in an environment of electromagnetic chaos...
    Nice try, but the layouts for circuit boards are designed to minimize the effects of electromagnetic interference.
    https://www.vse.com/blog/2021/01/28/how-to-avoid-electromagnetic-interference-emi-in-p...ircuit-boards/
    Ignore list: hello_hello, tried, TechLord, Snoopy329
    Quote Quote  
  23. Originally Posted by usually_quiet View Post
    Originally Posted by Truthler View Post
    But the signal can flow on many many many such a "small" traces, in an environment of electromagnetic chaos...
    Nice try, but the layouts for circuit boards are designed to minimize the effects of electromagnetic interference.
    https://www.vse.com/blog/2021/01/28/how-to-avoid-electromagnetic-interference-emi-in-p...ircuit-boards/
    Yes, the interferece decreases by 10-15%. A very huge "break-through".
    Quote Quote  
  24. Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by Truthler View Post
    Originally Posted by usually_quiet View Post
    Originally Posted by Truthler View Post
    But the signal can flow on many many many such a "small" traces, in an environment of electromagnetic chaos...
    Nice try, but the layouts for circuit boards are designed to minimize the effects of electromagnetic interference.
    https://www.vse.com/blog/2021/01/28/how-to-avoid-electromagnetic-interference-emi-in-p...ircuit-boards/
    Yes, the interferece decreases by 10-15%. A very huge "break-through".
    The main EM problem with copper cables is cross-talk. Shielding is used to reduce that problem with copper cables, but there is no cross-talk with optical cables.

    Circuit board layouts are designed to reduce cross-talk too. However, this whole circuit board discussion is just a distraction.

    You were given good advice. Take it or don't take it. There is no benefit in arguing this point any further.
    Ignore list: hello_hello, tried, TechLord, Snoopy329
    Quote Quote  
  25. Member Cornucopia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Deep in the Heart of Texas
    Search PM
    OK, I'll respond to some of your past posts that I hadn't previously responded to...

    Post (paraphrasing):
    #8 - Why are copper wires in an optical cable?
    They aren't. They are in a HYBRID cable. The hybrid cable is PROBABLY designed so that it can provide power (not yet possible with pure optical). Possibly also ethernet (part of the extended HDMI spec).

    #9 - If converting anyway, where is the advantage of optical speed?
    There is not one in this instance (short cable lengths). There WOULD be one with longer lengths.

    #10 - At the shop, all opticals were heavier bulkier than the foinnex cables?
    OK, but that may just be the shop you chose. Regardless, thinness is not often the prime motivator for choosing a cable. Nor should it be: (assuming cost is not a majore constraint) RELIABILITY is most important.

    #11 - tomorrow I will compare hyper-thin foinnex cable.
    How did that go, based on the rigorous criteria I suggested to you in my lengthy PM response?

    #12 - Only barbarians shoot video with lossy codecs on memory cards.
    First, NO. Plenty of pros do this as well. There is nothing inherently "bad" with a lossy codec, it is just a certain compromise. If the compromise is worth it for the workflow/situation, that is fine. This often has little to do with end-use "detail", especially as regards cable quality. And memory cards are perfectly fine, as long as they are fast enough, large enough, and are reliable (not easily corrupted) - this is all testable beforehand. Second, Ha, ha! Third, why are you giving shade to barbarians?

    #12 - I can autocalibrate the gimbal for that weight too.
    It isn't the cable weight that I would be concerned about in a gimballed cam stabilizer setup, it is the fact that cables are connected (anchored) on 2 ends, and that means there is a tendency for a cable to RESIST motion (similar to a spring). The whole point of the gimballed setup is to allow gimbal motion to counteract the unwanted body/cam motion. If it is being resisted, it cannot properly do that.

    #21 - Can you explain please the advantage of optical cables?
    1. Less signal loss vs cable length (not an issue for short cables). 2. Immunity to EMI/RFI. 3. Resistance to weather elements (especially water). 4. (Usually) thinness.
    Disadvantage? (you didn't ask, but I thought I should say for fairness) - 1. Fragility, especially regarding bends/kinks, 2. Cables usually require transducers (electrical <-->optical and optical<-->electrical) to operate and this must be accounted for.

    #21 - optical cables are also vulnerable.
    Yes, they are not perfect. And cheapo manufacturers make shoddy cables, whether electrical or optical. And those will show up on test reports. BUT, in the case of optical cables, it almost always is an issue with the connector/transducer. If the cable itself were of such low quality (such as with a kink/break), it would not pass ANY signal and would be obvious.
    Solution: buy good quality cables from well-known manufacturer/distributors. Then test them.

    #23,25 - motherboard traces...blah,blah,blah...
    Motherboards are going to be a link in the chain REGARDLESS of the choice of cable, and so should not factor into a comparison of cables. If motherboards were as "vulnerable" as you are implying, we wouldn't be able to be using the hundreds of millions that we all are using. And if there is a possibility of EMI/RFI, that can be tested for, and counteracted. Since both cables and Mobos, etc. are dealing with DIGITAL signals, if a reduction of 10-15% results in raising the threshold enough beyond error correction, then there is no worry, as it will be corrected.

    OK, so how about you stop going off on side topics? The OP was what some of us might think of those cables for that stated scenario. I and others gave you our educated opinions and recommendations/caveats, along with some scientific justification for those evaluations. If this all was truly a question, it has been answered.

    Scott
    Quote Quote  
  26. Originally Posted by Cornucopia View Post
    OK, I'll respond to some of your past posts that I hadn't previously responded to...

    Post (paraphrasing):
    #8 - Why are copper wires in an optical cable?
    They aren't. They are in a HYBRID cable. The hybrid cable is PROBABLY designed so that it can provide power (not yet possible with pure optical). Possibly also ethernet (part of the extended HDMI spec).

    #9 - If converting anyway, where is the advantage of optical speed?
    There is not one in this instance (short cable lengths). There WOULD be one with longer lengths.

    #10 - At the shop, all opticals were heavier bulkier than the foinnex cables?
    OK, but that may just be the shop you chose. Regardless, thinness is not often the prime motivator for choosing a cable. Nor should it be: (assuming cost is not a majore constraint) RELIABILITY is most important.

    #11 - tomorrow I will compare hyper-thin foinnex cable.
    How did that go, based on the rigorous criteria I suggested to you in my lengthy PM response?

    #12 - Only barbarians shoot video with lossy codecs on memory cards.
    First, NO. Plenty of pros do this as well. There is nothing inherently "bad" with a lossy codec, it is just a certain compromise. If the compromise is worth it for the workflow/situation, that is fine. This often has little to do with end-use "detail", especially as regards cable quality. And memory cards are perfectly fine, as long as they are fast enough, large enough, and are reliable (not easily corrupted) - this is all testable beforehand. Second, Ha, ha! Third, why are you giving shade to barbarians?

    #12 - I can autocalibrate the gimbal for that weight too.
    It isn't the cable weight that I would be concerned about in a gimballed cam stabilizer setup, it is the fact that cables are connected (anchored) on 2 ends, and that means there is a tendency for a cable to RESIST motion (similar to a spring). The whole point of the gimballed setup is to allow gimbal motion to counteract the unwanted body/cam motion. If it is being resisted, it cannot properly do that.

    #21 - Can you explain please the advantage of optical cables?
    1. Less signal loss vs cable length (not an issue for short cables). 2. Immunity to EMI/RFI. 3. Resistance to weather elements (especially water). 4. (Usually) thinness.
    Disadvantage? (you didn't ask, but I thought I should say for fairness) - 1. Fragility, especially regarding bends/kinks, 2. Cables usually require transducers (electrical <-->optical and optical<-->electrical) to operate and this must be accounted for.

    #21 - optical cables are also vulnerable.
    Yes, they are not perfect. And cheapo manufacturers make shoddy cables, whether electrical or optical. And those will show up on test reports. BUT, in the case of optical cables, it almost always is an issue with the connector/transducer. If the cable itself were of such low quality (such as with a kink/break), it would not pass ANY signal and would be obvious.
    Solution: buy good quality cables from well-known manufacturer/distributors. Then test them.

    #23,25 - motherboard traces...blah,blah,blah...
    Motherboards are going to be a link in the chain REGARDLESS of the choice of cable, and so should not factor into a comparison of cables. If motherboards were as "vulnerable" as you are implying, we wouldn't be able to be using the hundreds of millions that we all are using. And if there is a possibility of EMI/RFI, that can be tested for, and counteracted. Since both cables and Mobos, etc. are dealing with DIGITAL signals, if a reduction of 10-15% results in raising the threshold enough beyond error correction, then there is no worry, as it will be corrected.

    OK, so how about you stop going off on side topics? The OP was what some of us might think of those cables for that stated scenario. I and others gave you our educated opinions and recommendations/caveats, along with some scientific justification for those evaluations. If this all was truly a question, it has been answered.

    Scott
    There is small vibration when the heavy cable is connected, but it is visible only, if the optical steadyhot stabilizator is turned off.
    So it is not important if it is not ideal for the gimbal when the optical steadyhot do its job.
    Quote Quote  
  27. Member Cornucopia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Deep in the Heart of Texas
    Search PM
    Wait, so you are using a gimballed stabilizer system AND an in-cam digital optical stabilizer ("steadyhot".sic) at the same time?

    SMH...
    Quote Quote