Another factor in the 702 vs 722 equation is that with version 2.0x of firm=
ware, the 702 can record to an outboard Firewire device mirroring (or inste=
ad of) its recording to its internal CompactFlash slot.
The Firewire device can be hard drive, CF or SDHC or other format card writ=
er/reader, or even DVD-RAM.
So if the internal CF meets most of your needs, but you occasionally need m=
irroring or larger capacity, version 2 makes that as possible with the 702 =
as with the 722 and 744.
With the increasing capacity and decreasing cost of CF/SDHC media, it's mor=
e possible than before to handle even large needs with chips. And oryoki's =
posts to this list of info on possible future write-once flash media make i=
t seem like in the future we'll be able to use those media as our original =
archivable masters too.
As a 722 user, I've recorded in some quiet places where the whirr of the ha=
rd drive was noticeable. Recording just to CF solved that issue. The hard d=
rive also contributes to heat buildup in the 722, and higher power consumpt=
ion than the CF. It even contributes a bit to the weight of the unit. (For=
722/744 owners, the newly-available 2.5" form-factor 32GB flash drives off=
er another potential solution to these issues.)
While I can understand the potential annoyance of having empty space where =
the hard drive is omitted in the 702, I think Sound Devices did a great ser=
vice by maintaining their form factor from the 722. It would be hard to dow=
nsize the deck further without losing some of the connectivity and controls=
on the front and side panels.
The one hope I had for the 702 that Sound Devices didn't comply with, was t=
hat I wish they had put two CF slots on it--even if one was only an interna=
l one--when they removed the hard drive! But as I said at the top, version =
2 gives most of that flexibility.
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free fro=
m AOL at AOL.com.
|