-
BMD Ultrastudio 3D or AJA IOXT
Hi. Has anyone used both the BMD Ultrastudio 3D and the AJA IOXT?
I intend to use with FCPX as a monitoring device primarily. The biggest sales point of the AJA IOXT is the 2nd thunderbolt port, as I would like to use a non-thunderbolt iMac as a second display via target display mode, but apart from the extra port, are there any major differences in performance or stability?
Thanks
-
4 Replies
-
Go with AJA. ULtrastudio is BUGGY with Premiere and FCPx even with latest drivers. Depends on your need but you should try before with your workflow. It works like sh$t on mine. Selling mine and looking for something else. And forgot to mention that it is BURNING hot. I could fry eggs with it.
-
That’s interesting. I thought my Matrox MXO2 Mini was buggy so I am selling mine to get BMD or AJA! One problem I have is that the playback settings always default back to 29.97 fps every time I load FCPX when I want to use 50i fps. Does this happen with the BMD?
What are the main bugs you experience?
I am thinking the AJA is a bit pricey for me so will probably end up with BMD, but would be interested to hear more about specific bugs.
Thanks
-
Hello Alex,
Which I/O did you finally go with. Am in the same boat trying to decide between IO XT and Ultrastudio 3D. All the extra connection options of the BM might win it for me as the IO XT has only SDI input, no analog or AES/EBU audio inputs.Kannan Raghavan
The Big Toad Films Pte. Ltd. -
In the end I couldn’t justify the cost of either of those, so I purchase the Intesity Extreme. So far, I have found it to be a very good, stable product. If I ever do 3D work, I would probably use the Ultrastudio 3D.
I also wanted to have the option of analog inputs as you also said, which the AJA doesn’t have. Also I wanted to use Divinci Resolve, which only works with BMD products.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up