Kona 3 vs IOhd

[Chris Borjis]

If you don’t need portability or macbook use and you have a macpro, I can’t think of any reason to get the IO HD.

If you need portability, the ability to edit from a notebook, or capture in ProRes HD on a G5 system, then its ideally suited.

I’ll be getting one later this year, because I need all of that capability.

[Dave Martin]

Thanks for the reply Chris

I should also mention that I do have an AJA IO standard def to connect beta sp and other gear…

Martin

– MacPro – Quad Core – 4 gig Ram

-MacBook Pro – 2.16GHz Intel Core Duo – 2 gig Ram

-FCP Studio 5.1.4 – QT 7 – OSX 10 – Firmtek Sata Raid- G-raid dv drive

[Jerry Hofmann]

The Kona 3 has more capability than the Io, however the Io is more or less future proof because it doesn’t rely on a specific sort of card slot. Doesn’t capture uncompressed HD formats, but transcodes them to ProRes instead. It also will lift the CPU in your Mac from having to decode the ProRes for monitoring and layback to tape… but again doesn’t capture to an uncompressed HD format. Ya never know when Apple may make the current Kona 3 not work in their future Mac Pro’s… but if you keep your computer for a while, the Kona would amortize out most likely…. tough call unless you MUST have uncompressed HD files.

Jerry

[Dave Martin]

Thanks very much for the replies…

From what I understand, not too many people actually go uncompressed anymore and especially now with ProRes. If I get the Kona 3 and use my IO standard def, I’ll save $1000 which I can put into a better monitor…

Thanks guys!

Martin

– MacPro – Quad Core – 4 gig Ram

-MacBook Pro – 2.16GHz Intel Core Duo – 2 gig Ram

-FCP Studio 5.1.4 – QT 7 – OSX 10 – Firmtek Sata Raid- G-raid dv drive

[Tom Meegan]

Dave,

Unless you need the extra functionality of the Kona 3, consider the Kona LHe.

Here is the comparison page:

https://www.aja.com/html/products_macintosh_kona.html

Tom

[Christopher Wright]

Very interesting! I didn’t know the LH and LHe were capable of doing Prores!