I follow a lot of threads and have wondered if there has been an A-B analysis of HD SDI (or HDMI) display from a camera vs HD Component.

My camera (A Sony PMW-EX1) has HD SDI and also Component out. When looking for a field monitor there was and are some very expensive choices in monitors with an SDI input. It was obvious that those monitors or TVs or portable DVD players with composite only input were a joke so I didn't look at those. However, then there were those with Component input (RGB). I ended up buying one and have been using it ever since. It appears to be easy to focus with it and I am not getting exposure problem when I have it calibrated properly.

So I follow all these threads and see videographers spending rather large sums of money on various monitors just to have SDI input (or HDMI if their camera has such an output).

I spent 1 little over $100 for mine (I got a good deal) yet most here seem to be justifying anywhere from $600 to several thousand dollars for SDI or HDMI inputs.

My question then is:

Has anyone done an A-B comparison on any monitors that have both Component and either SDI or HDMI inputs? Are there qualitative analysis to support the merits of the huge difference in the price? Or even subjective anaylsis?

Thanks for the input.

John

Monitors that cost $600 have dramatically higher quality panels than the one in your $100 monitor, hence much better quality overall. That has nothing to do with the inputs on the monitor. The $500 price difference isn't just for having HDMI or HD-SDI as opposed to Component.

Technically, there shouldn't be a difference in the actual video signal between HDMI / HD-SDI and Component. Their advantages lie elsewhere - the ability to carry lossless audio, a single connector as opposed to 3 seperate ones, timecode support for HD-SDI, etc.

I have done a A-B comparison on a SmallHD monitor using an EX1r as a source. Flipping back and forth between HDMI and component I can tell no difference at all between them.

Yeah, I was a bit hesitant to state how much I paid for my monitor for fear of derailing my question. You did sort of answer it though in your second part though. I did ask if anyone with a monitor with both inputs has tested each to see if there was a difference. You seem to suggest that there isn't, but I recall discussions (that I can't find) in which there were those explicitly looking for HDMI or SDI monitor inputs claiming that those were superior to Component.

Thanks for the response. I do appreciate it.

John

I have done a A-B comparison on a SmallHD monitor using an EX1r as a source. Flipping back and forth between HDMI and component I can tell no difference at all between them.

Thanks. That seems to confirm my suspicion.

John

If it's composite/component only, do you get the false color and peaking features in the monitor? A quick look at Marshall looks like those monitor features are only on the models that have SDI and HDMI.

I spent 1 little over $100 for mine (I got a good deal) yet most here seem to be justifying anywhere from $600 to several thousand dollars for SDI or HDMI inputs.


The quality difference would be significant, no matter how you feed it a signal, between anything that costs $100 and any of the name brand field monitors in the $600 and up price range. Image quality, the ability to calibrate the display, peaking, format guides and more, would be amongst the reasons for the higher price. And once you worked with those features you'd quickly realize their value.

The quality difference would be significant, no matter how you feed it a signal, between anything that costs $100 and any of the name brand field monitors in the $600 and up price range.
=======================

See post #4
http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/view-video-display-hardware-software/494296-cost-effectiveness-hdi-hdmi-over-component.html#post1636801

John

I wonder if anybody has checked this out with scopes. I'm hoping to make my next purchase a field monitor with vector scope and waveform monitor. But I would bet you'd see a difference in inputs if you put them on scopes. On a lower quality monitor you may not see the difference but I wonder on a higher quality production monitor if you would see it.

-Garrett

I wonder if anybody has checked this out with scopes. I'm hoping to make my next purchase a field monitor with vector scope and waveform monitor. But I would bet you'd see a difference in inputs if you put them on scopes. On a lower quality monitor you may not see the difference but I wonder on a higher quality production monitor if you would see it.

-Garrett

But would it matter if you are using it primarily as a field monitor?

John

But would it matter if you are using it primarily as a field monitor?

John

It really depends on the monitor.and what you're using it for. That's why I was wondering if anyone had tested it with a monitor that has scopes. If you're using it for focus I'm sure it wouldn't make a difference. But if you're using it to set exposure and color it could make a difference because you're having to go through the camera's D/A converter to get the component signal, then use the monitors A/D circuit to get it to display. I'm sure there is a measurable difference but the question is whether it would be enough to make a difference. The answer to the is most likely no as Chris has already stated.

-Garrett