For Mike B: Thanks for the info on Olympus glasses. It's nice to know someone has actually tried them; I can't find any where I live. Have you seen Daeyang's Cy-Visor DH 4400? I can't get past their web page--emails for info. keep bouncing back. Looks like you live where they're made! I think they use batteries, are less expensive than the FMD 700. I'm seriously looking to buy so could use any help you can offer. Thanks again.

Camcorderlady,
I don't think that the Daeyang's are being sold in the US yet. I found the Olympus glasses at J&R

(http://www.jandr.com/JRProductPage.process?RestartFlow=t&Merchant_Id=1&Section_Id=1&Product_Id=1991283&showcase=t)

Interesting idea but I see a couple of problems. First, I really don't think that these are truly a better alternative to a b&w head for your XL1. Certainly, they're less expensive but in terms of resolution, I dunno. Second, wouldn't there be a bit of a safety issue when using them while walking or (God forbid) running? Looking at them in a store is one thing, but...

I don't remember whether or not you ever noted what problem you (or youer partner) is having with the XL1's LCD viewfinder. Is it a matter of focusing?

Two inconveniences have presented themselves with the viewfinder: we do off-shoulder shooting in the sun and have trouble seeing/shading a monitor, plus my partner says he has trouble with monacular viewing (he thinks it's physical; I say it's in his head!).

I found and tried on the Olympus FMD 250 tonight and was pretty impressed with the [clarity] and the see-around room. I don't think safety would be an issue unless we were shooting near a cliff. What I don't like (see M. Beeber's comment on xl1 page) is the fact that it runs on AC only, among other critical obstacles.

I think the idea happens to be ahead of the technology. One of these days we'll see glasses like these made specifically for dv. Not one to give up, though, I'd still like to hear about Daeyang's Cy-Visor.

Trust Varizoom to fashion a nifty sun hood for their monitor. How I didn't see it is beyond me. I must be the one with the eye problem!

But those glasses are still a cool idea -- some of us will be using them someday.

I have neve heard of the Daeyang's Cy-Visor before. Do you have a web site for them? I will see if I can find them over here.

I see that you tried the FMD-250 glasses. There good arn't they.
If they were only DC operated like the FMD 700 I would have a pair today. If you want more info on the Eye-Trek glasses go to the olympus homepage and select Europe instead of US. There is much more information there.

I don't think the LCD hood will help you much with the LCD out side in the sun light unless you LCD is much brighter than the one I have. I got mine locally so its not a varizoom LCD. It works great inside, in very dark shadows or at night but if you take it out side in normal light during the day you can't see the display. I tried making a hood six inches deep to shade the display but it didn't work well either. It was like looking into a mirror. All I could see was my refrection in the LCD display.

I still think the glasses are the best idea. I shoot alot of video of flying helicopters shooting their weapons during night and day. I usually dont have to move around much but I have to pan and zoom a bunch in all directions. After three or four hours of leaning over a tripod squinting into the EVF I can hardly streighten up or walk.

Info about the Daeyang glassses:

http://www.personaldisplay.com/english/m_tech_2.htm

PDF of tech specs: http://www.cgsd.com/DaeyangHMD/CGSDCyvisorTechSpec.PDF

Mike,

After reading the nature of your work (sounds a bit dangerous!) I can understand your frustration. I hope I have an easier time with my stuff--am ordering from Varizoom today.

Good luck finding those Cy-Visor's; please let me know if you do, okay?

(Thanks for the help, Ken.)

Gotta say I found the varizoom great for framing but lacking when focus is critical- had a tough time judging focus accurately even with the nifty foldable hood. Better check it out carefully, see if it fits your needs.
'Course the next better option is double the cost- a 16x9 lcd or portable crt- Think I'll be getting a Sony 8" field monitor for anything serious.

Hmmm, your comments came in the nick of time. Maybe I'll do a little more research. Thanks.

I agree with Morbius. I really can't rely on either my Varizoom or my Marshall LCD's to help me snap crisp focus. Their resolutions are just too coarse. I think the best solution is to bite the bullet and get a b&w head for your XL1. The 2nd best solution is to use a professional NTSC field monitor like a Sony or JVC.

Okay, I think we're talking a little different needs now. Where we specialize in shooting starry-eyed musicians we mainly go for the film look and aren't quite as worried about sharp focus. As far as weddings go, I haven't found a bride yet who wants every blemish in focus. Our clients want us to make them look great--not real-life! That's why I bought the XL1s.

All that to say, maybe we'll be all right with aforementioned products. Looks like I'm a little out of my league talking with you guys, so I sure appreciate the input and will keep it in mind should our specialties change.

I certainly understand your point camcorderlady. Honestly, I think with some practice with the XL1 you'll be able to pull good focus with the color vf.

Just a suggestion, however. Focus is not something you can fix in post, nor can you use mushy focus as a softening technique. You may already know that a black pro mist filter does wonders to improve a bride's impression of your work <g>.

Good luck to you and have fun!!

Ah, add one black pro mist filter to my list of things to buy! I read about them, then forgot. Thank you so much, and, we are having a blast over here in frozen Idaho--makes the editing suite a really nice place to be.

Happy New Year!!

Hi Mike!

You found the glasses, eh? Can you tell me where exactly? Was it at Yongsan Chunja Land (the big white building with the round end)? If so, what floor? Also, do you remember what the price was in Won?

Dear all,

I have followed this and previous threads about the use of head mounted displays (HMDs) as a viewfinder replacement with great interest.

I have found a distributor who is willing to send me a variety of models for testing. It isn't clear how many different models I'll get, but it will surely be the Olympus FMD-700 and the DaeYang Cy-Visor DH4400VP (2D). I am planning to do comprehensive comparisons and write the whole thing up. Maybe Chris will want to post it on the site when it's all done...

I just wanted to inform you that this is cooking, but don't expect any results before mid-February at the earliest. I don't even know yet when I'll be getting the demo units.

However, I'd like to solicit your input regarding the test procedure. What particular features would you like to see compared? I already have a good idea of what I want to do, but maybe some of the more experienced video folks could provide me with good input. Particularly, reliable testing procedures for focussing would be highly appreciated (since this is the main incentive for using HMDs, IMO).

Regards,

Ron

Hi John;

I looked at them at Yongsan Chunja Land (the big white building with the round end)? It was on the flood with all the photo equipment, about half way down on the right side facing the Han river. Don't remember the shop name but you will see the glasses on display as you walk by. I don't remember what the price was in Won but talk to me before you by them.

Below is a copy of my reply on the XL1/XL1s Watchdog

"I got to try on a pair of the FMD-250 glasses at the electronic mart the other day. The resolution was very good. They were hooked up to a DVD player and then to a Sony DV camera (RCA jacks). The picture was the same on both. I tried zooming and paning with the camera and the picture looked great. The glasses allowed enough room to easily see to the sides and downward so that I didn't get vertigo or seasick. You can see downward enough to visually work the camera or move around carefully ( no running). The only problem I can see with the FMD 250 is that it is AC powered. I want to use the glasses out side in the sun where an LCD display is nearly useless. The FMD 700 will run off Sony DV camera battries or AC power. Unfortunately they didn't have the FMD 700s for me to try. The FMD-700s are advertised as the professional version with OSR (Optical Super Resolution). They are also nearly twice the price :-( If anyone gets to actually try shooting with the glasses I would like to hear how the worked"

Ron Pfister sounds like he is getting geared up to test some of the glasses. I can't wait to see what he thinks!!!!

A word of warning, I have heard that after wearing these type of glasses for long periods, you may start to feel the effects of motion sickness and vision can be affected slightly for a short while when you take them off. Its like watching the equivalant of a 52-inch TV in front of your face, and they make you look a bit like Lawnmowerman, other than that I see there uses.


All the best

Ed Smith

Don't wish to nag, Ron P., but any word on the hmd's? The suspense is killing me over here! Thanks.

Camlady:

I did the review. I was only able to get ahold of the Olympus FMD-700 and the Daeyang 4400. It was very interesting to compare the models, as they are quite different.

I have all the results and all the image material needed, and just have to write it up now. Unfortunately, I have been very busy lately, and this won't change for a while. Thus I can't promise when I'll have the review ready. But I'll do my best to get it finished ASAP.

Thanks for your inquiry!

Regards,

Ron

I am also very interested in your glasses test results.

Others on this post have mentioned getting a 8" sony field
monitor. I have used one of those and also a 14" MU2U
on outdoor shoots. Though this seems like the best answer,
I have found that you need about a 3' long hood to keep ambient
sunlight from corrupting your perception. That 3' long tube is
a pain to work with.

Without it, you'll have the tendency to over expose your shots, and
I have still found that it is necessary to be able to look into the viewfinder and see the zebra pattern to set things right.

It seems like the best thing would be some kind of hood or helmet
that has a hi res LCD screen inside of it. Glasses alone may not block out
enough sunlight to give an accurate image. If glasses could, that would
be the best of all worlds.

If I may make a suggestion to those who plan to make their own hoods to shield their monitors of any size:

Making a simple squared-off tube will, as was mentioned earlier in this thread, simply serve to eliminate ambient light but the screen will tend to act like a mirror and reflect back the viewer and whatever sky etc. might be behind them. The best hoods angle up from the screen, which causes the screen to only reflect the black inside of the hood itself and create perfect visibility. They are a bit larger and more complicated to make if that is your plan, but perform far better than the first kind of hood. Check out http://www.hoodmanusa.com. for pictures of both kinds (you'll see that the larger hoods made for "pro" applications, including the 8 and 14" monitors Jacques mentions, all use the slanted type of hood).

Hey check this out: http://www.eyetop.net/home/default.asp
I bought them and it works great. You can go outside in bright sun and still see - you might want to wear a hat to block the sun over the top. The glasses are very light because most of the electronics are in a belt pack. They're sunglasses as well though the quality is a bit poor and has some lens distortion. You look into the eyepiece which is off to the side and use your peripheral vision to see where you're going as you walk around. I don't notice pixels - very similar to the color XL1 viewfinder - but there is a slight flicker probably due to a low refresh rate. All in all, not bad for $309. I bought them on ebay, but the place (Sobephoto.com) has more I'm sure. I bought it so I can use my Magiqcam outside.

@ Dave Stewart: Is the res on this product high enough to make a difference compared to the EVF? The Eyetop-specs say 320 x 240, and that's almost the same as the EVF, IIRC.

In my view, the main problem with the EVF is that you can't judge focus well due to the limited res, and the Eyetop might not solve this problem. What is your experience in this regard?

Cheers,

Ron

Your right, the resolution is about as good as the color viewfinder. However, I'm mainly using this on a glidecam for outside shots. You can't see a monitor mounted on the sled as the sun is too bright and the angle is pointing up at you where a shade box doesn't work either. Under those circumstances I would be using autofocus anyway. The glasses work well as the sun doesn't affect your ability to see, frame the shot and even focus if desired using some varizoom type device. Also, you can still see ahead and not trip over things and people. I suppose you can also hold the camera by the top handle and do low glidecam shots and still see what your're shooting. I've done this with the viewfinder and it's impossible to do if the sun is out.