Andrew Dean
July 13th, 2008, 02:46 AM
Ok, so i need a small 7-8 inch LCD monitor for the advantajib. I was jotting down my options/thoughts and thought it might be useful to share. Got anything to add? Bring it on!
The options seem to be:
1. crappy dvd player with video input and 360x248 rez (eg. every chinese noname model, sony 810fx, etc.)
2. less crappy dvd player with video input 800x480 rez (eg. sony 820fx, some select models from philips, coby, etc.)
3. "car monitor" (generally brighter than #2) with crappy 360x248 rez and DIY battery solution (lilliput, xenarc)
4. decent "car monitor" 800x480 rez and DIY battery solution (lilliput, xenarc etc.)
5. crappy "professional video monitor" with 360x248 rez but component/digital vid inputs ( models by ikan, tote vision, marshall, delvcam, sony and panasonic etc.)
6. decent "professional video monitor" with 800x480 rez with component/digital inputs and usually a battery option (models by ikan, tote vision, marshall, delvcam... sony and panasonic etc.)
7. serious professional video monitor with rez from 1024x768 to actual 1080p (astro, sony, panasonic, etc.)
As a framing monitor, #1 is probably fine, although the cheap displays are often very very dim and extremely fuzzy. You spend over $100 to get one with a moderate backlight, and then you are close to the price of #2, which could be helpful with focusing. On the plus side they have batteries, on the downside, its almost always proprietary.
If you work NTSC, then the $170 sony 820fx is so cheap it would be tempting to stop there and use it as a stop gap until good quality HD monitors are cheap.
Since i work in PAL, and the equivalent sony is over $400US here, that seems like a crappy option. I have considered a phillips or coby dvd player, but coby is... coby. A philips cheapy dvd player with pal input might still be something to consider, but doesn't seem like the best use of funds.
#7 is out for me because the price of these "pro" lcds is really inflated. There are new 1080 lcd panels being made, so the price will drop in the next year as it has the last 12 months going from 320x248 to 800x480. $5,000 for a monitor that should/probably will depreciate 80% in the next 24 months just seems like a bad investment. Plus, for $5k, i can hire a lot of set monkeys to carry around big heavy CRTs for me. hehe.
#5 is out because the image really doesnt look any better than #1. Brighter perhaps, but so is #3 at way less cost. Who cares if it has component "HD" inputs if they are scaled down to icon resolution.
#3 and #1... i'm eliminating those, because we now have viable 800x480 monitors for not much more, so i dont see the point in paying real money for a fuzzy image. 800x480 can have other uses on set. 360x248, not so much.
So that whittles things down to 2,4, and 6.
2. less crappy dvd player with 800x480 rez
4. decent "car monitor" 800x480 rez and custom battery solution
6. decent "professional video monitor" with 800x480 rez with component/digital inputs (and usually a battery option)
#2 varies around $150-250
#4 varies from $250 to $700 (plus battery)
#6 varies from $600 to $3,000
Now the next consideration is brightness.
#2 is usually rated (IF rated) from 80 to 150 nits of brightness. (silly sounding measurement, but its actually candelas per square meter... whatever that means). That puts these units as nicely viewable in total darkness and pretty much invisible in any strong ambient light.
#4 varies from 300 to 1000 nits. 300 is good for indoor sets, even lit ones. 1,000 allows you to see the screen even in direct sunlight with no hood. How well does it look in direct sunlight? I have no idea, but its considered "readable" where 500 requires a sun hood and can still be hard to see on bright days.
#6 also varies from 300 to 1000 nits, but with most units under $2k being closer to 300. Most of these units concentrate on the variety of inputs and assume you'll be in a dark room or at least inside.
After being on several outdoor shoots where we took turns huddled under a towel trying to see the pro sony CRT, it seems that I should be aiming to the high end for nits, especially for jib shots, which are often outside.
So if nits are a priority, then #2 is out. That leaves #4 and #6.
The problem is that on the high end monitors, they dont bother listing nits. The specs sure dont imply they are meant to be daylight readable, say nothing of sunlight readable. I found 1 unit that touted sunlight readibility, but it was $8,000 (and still 800x480).
That all leads me to thinking that #4 might be the ideal solution for a jib monitor. Most companies dont bother with daylight viewable screens, but for around $500 you can get a xenarc 702tsv. This monitor is 7", 16:9 but with a 4:3 inset mode. It has VGA and composite video input and 1,000 nits. it comes with a touch screen for if you hook it up vga, but you can take the unit apart and remove the touch screen to reduce glare. Reports are that you can read the screen even when it is in direct sunlight. Try that with most lcds. In a pinch it could be a battery powered second monitor for a laptop (albeit small) and in theory one of the HD scalers like a mayfly would let you scale down from HD component to vga, if that really is better than the camera scaling down to PAL/ntsc.
Alternately, you can buy a xenarc unit with 380-450 nits for closer to $350, but I'm thinking the "sunlight viewable" might come in handy fairly often on set. For an extra $150 to not have to drape a towel, even at noon, rocks.
You'll need power and a mounting solution for a xenarc. I've looked around at a few. The Tekkeon allpower is a fairly small lithium ion battery solution that could probably be velcroed to the back of the monitor. Also, places like batteryspace have combo packs of chargers and li-ion batteries for $130 or so that are pretty small and neatly contained in a pack with an on/off switch. At a draw of around 8w, a 5000mah li-ion battery pack should go a pretty long time on one charge.
On the cheap side, the 12v 7Amphour (7000mah) lead acid batteries you use in alarm systems should last ages as well, and cost you closer to $15. The lead acid batteries are fairly big, but this is a jib. If i can devise a clean way to hang the battery off the back, then its just more counterweight which i'd be lugging around anyways. For a "directors monitor" i'd either mount the monitor in a hard case w/ the battery or just spring for the tekkeon for such occasions.
I know I've made a few leaps in logic and I'm hoping that anyone with firsthand experience will jump in and confirm/deny them. Any other thoughts/input are welcome too. If i'm being dumb, please tell me.
My assumptions/leaps that I can think of: (in no particular order)
1. I'm assuming that composite video from the camera, scaled to fit 800x480 wont be substantially worse looking than component/digital HD footage scaled to the same size. I mean, in the end, 800x480 is 800x480, right?
2. I'm assuming that the pro features like histogram or blue-only arent worth the additional thousands to get them. (this is more opinion than assumption, really. But thinking about it I can always whip out onlocation for color setups and stuff, then use the lcd for focus/framing.)
3. I'm assuming a 1,000 nit display will be decent to look at. I know it'll be bright, and sunlight readable, but... I can read a lot of stuff that doesn't look very good.
4. I'm assuming that the 702tsv can be dimmed to the point where you can look at while on set indoors without going blind.
5. I'm assuming the colors on a xenarc monitor wont be substantially worse than on other pro monitors.
6. Many 8" lcds have 1/4-20 screw mounts at the bottom. I'm assuming the xenarc does too, or comes with some adaptery thingy to convert from the 1/4-20 to the t-mount track.
7. I'm actually assuming that the 800x480 is significantly better than 320x248. seems like it'd have to be, but until i see something in person, its still an assumption.
8. I guess really, I'm assuming (hoping?) that any two 800x480 screens are going to look somewhat similar, and that a vga touch screen with video scaling circuitry will render good lookin footage. Primary is framing/focus for the jib, secondary is lighting/color of the shot. Not looking for perfection, but how bad is it really?
So thats my thoughts/ramblings/assumptions so far. See anything worth responding to? Major lapses in logic/process?
I'd be curious for any feedback you guys might have.
thanks!
The options seem to be:
1. crappy dvd player with video input and 360x248 rez (eg. every chinese noname model, sony 810fx, etc.)
2. less crappy dvd player with video input 800x480 rez (eg. sony 820fx, some select models from philips, coby, etc.)
3. "car monitor" (generally brighter than #2) with crappy 360x248 rez and DIY battery solution (lilliput, xenarc)
4. decent "car monitor" 800x480 rez and DIY battery solution (lilliput, xenarc etc.)
5. crappy "professional video monitor" with 360x248 rez but component/digital vid inputs ( models by ikan, tote vision, marshall, delvcam, sony and panasonic etc.)
6. decent "professional video monitor" with 800x480 rez with component/digital inputs and usually a battery option (models by ikan, tote vision, marshall, delvcam... sony and panasonic etc.)
7. serious professional video monitor with rez from 1024x768 to actual 1080p (astro, sony, panasonic, etc.)
As a framing monitor, #1 is probably fine, although the cheap displays are often very very dim and extremely fuzzy. You spend over $100 to get one with a moderate backlight, and then you are close to the price of #2, which could be helpful with focusing. On the plus side they have batteries, on the downside, its almost always proprietary.
If you work NTSC, then the $170 sony 820fx is so cheap it would be tempting to stop there and use it as a stop gap until good quality HD monitors are cheap.
Since i work in PAL, and the equivalent sony is over $400US here, that seems like a crappy option. I have considered a phillips or coby dvd player, but coby is... coby. A philips cheapy dvd player with pal input might still be something to consider, but doesn't seem like the best use of funds.
#7 is out for me because the price of these "pro" lcds is really inflated. There are new 1080 lcd panels being made, so the price will drop in the next year as it has the last 12 months going from 320x248 to 800x480. $5,000 for a monitor that should/probably will depreciate 80% in the next 24 months just seems like a bad investment. Plus, for $5k, i can hire a lot of set monkeys to carry around big heavy CRTs for me. hehe.
#5 is out because the image really doesnt look any better than #1. Brighter perhaps, but so is #3 at way less cost. Who cares if it has component "HD" inputs if they are scaled down to icon resolution.
#3 and #1... i'm eliminating those, because we now have viable 800x480 monitors for not much more, so i dont see the point in paying real money for a fuzzy image. 800x480 can have other uses on set. 360x248, not so much.
So that whittles things down to 2,4, and 6.
2. less crappy dvd player with 800x480 rez
4. decent "car monitor" 800x480 rez and custom battery solution
6. decent "professional video monitor" with 800x480 rez with component/digital inputs (and usually a battery option)
#2 varies around $150-250
#4 varies from $250 to $700 (plus battery)
#6 varies from $600 to $3,000
Now the next consideration is brightness.
#2 is usually rated (IF rated) from 80 to 150 nits of brightness. (silly sounding measurement, but its actually candelas per square meter... whatever that means). That puts these units as nicely viewable in total darkness and pretty much invisible in any strong ambient light.
#4 varies from 300 to 1000 nits. 300 is good for indoor sets, even lit ones. 1,000 allows you to see the screen even in direct sunlight with no hood. How well does it look in direct sunlight? I have no idea, but its considered "readable" where 500 requires a sun hood and can still be hard to see on bright days.
#6 also varies from 300 to 1000 nits, but with most units under $2k being closer to 300. Most of these units concentrate on the variety of inputs and assume you'll be in a dark room or at least inside.
After being on several outdoor shoots where we took turns huddled under a towel trying to see the pro sony CRT, it seems that I should be aiming to the high end for nits, especially for jib shots, which are often outside.
So if nits are a priority, then #2 is out. That leaves #4 and #6.
The problem is that on the high end monitors, they dont bother listing nits. The specs sure dont imply they are meant to be daylight readable, say nothing of sunlight readable. I found 1 unit that touted sunlight readibility, but it was $8,000 (and still 800x480).
That all leads me to thinking that #4 might be the ideal solution for a jib monitor. Most companies dont bother with daylight viewable screens, but for around $500 you can get a xenarc 702tsv. This monitor is 7", 16:9 but with a 4:3 inset mode. It has VGA and composite video input and 1,000 nits. it comes with a touch screen for if you hook it up vga, but you can take the unit apart and remove the touch screen to reduce glare. Reports are that you can read the screen even when it is in direct sunlight. Try that with most lcds. In a pinch it could be a battery powered second monitor for a laptop (albeit small) and in theory one of the HD scalers like a mayfly would let you scale down from HD component to vga, if that really is better than the camera scaling down to PAL/ntsc.
Alternately, you can buy a xenarc unit with 380-450 nits for closer to $350, but I'm thinking the "sunlight viewable" might come in handy fairly often on set. For an extra $150 to not have to drape a towel, even at noon, rocks.
You'll need power and a mounting solution for a xenarc. I've looked around at a few. The Tekkeon allpower is a fairly small lithium ion battery solution that could probably be velcroed to the back of the monitor. Also, places like batteryspace have combo packs of chargers and li-ion batteries for $130 or so that are pretty small and neatly contained in a pack with an on/off switch. At a draw of around 8w, a 5000mah li-ion battery pack should go a pretty long time on one charge.
On the cheap side, the 12v 7Amphour (7000mah) lead acid batteries you use in alarm systems should last ages as well, and cost you closer to $15. The lead acid batteries are fairly big, but this is a jib. If i can devise a clean way to hang the battery off the back, then its just more counterweight which i'd be lugging around anyways. For a "directors monitor" i'd either mount the monitor in a hard case w/ the battery or just spring for the tekkeon for such occasions.
I know I've made a few leaps in logic and I'm hoping that anyone with firsthand experience will jump in and confirm/deny them. Any other thoughts/input are welcome too. If i'm being dumb, please tell me.
My assumptions/leaps that I can think of: (in no particular order)
1. I'm assuming that composite video from the camera, scaled to fit 800x480 wont be substantially worse looking than component/digital HD footage scaled to the same size. I mean, in the end, 800x480 is 800x480, right?
2. I'm assuming that the pro features like histogram or blue-only arent worth the additional thousands to get them. (this is more opinion than assumption, really. But thinking about it I can always whip out onlocation for color setups and stuff, then use the lcd for focus/framing.)
3. I'm assuming a 1,000 nit display will be decent to look at. I know it'll be bright, and sunlight readable, but... I can read a lot of stuff that doesn't look very good.
4. I'm assuming that the 702tsv can be dimmed to the point where you can look at while on set indoors without going blind.
5. I'm assuming the colors on a xenarc monitor wont be substantially worse than on other pro monitors.
6. Many 8" lcds have 1/4-20 screw mounts at the bottom. I'm assuming the xenarc does too, or comes with some adaptery thingy to convert from the 1/4-20 to the t-mount track.
7. I'm actually assuming that the 800x480 is significantly better than 320x248. seems like it'd have to be, but until i see something in person, its still an assumption.
8. I guess really, I'm assuming (hoping?) that any two 800x480 screens are going to look somewhat similar, and that a vga touch screen with video scaling circuitry will render good lookin footage. Primary is framing/focus for the jib, secondary is lighting/color of the shot. Not looking for perfection, but how bad is it really?
So thats my thoughts/ramblings/assumptions so far. See anything worth responding to? Major lapses in logic/process?
I'd be curious for any feedback you guys might have.
thanks!