video glasses with XL1s

Ron Pfister · January 24th, 2002, 03:56 AM

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

Mike Bebber · January 24th, 2002, 07:41 AM

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!!!!

Ed Smith · January 24th, 2002, 02:02 PM

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

Lorinda Norton · March 9th, 2002, 01:24 AM

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

Ron Pfister · March 9th, 2002, 02:19 AM

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

Jacques Mersereau · October 16th, 2002, 11:53 AM

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.

Charles Papert · December 21st, 2002, 06:45 PM

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).

Dave Stewart · November 20th, 2003, 04:50 PM

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.

Ron Pfister · November 21st, 2003, 01:57 AM

@ 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

Dave Stewart · November 21st, 2003, 10:48 AM

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.

January 24th, 2002, 03:56 AM	#16
Ron Pfister Major Player Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Basel area, Switzerland Posts: 285	Comprehensive HMD Comparison Coming... 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 __________________ Ronald P. Pfister halimedia - digital solutions and services www.halimedia.com

March 9th, 2002, 01:24 AM	#19
Lorinda Norton Wrangler Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Southwest Idaho, USA Posts: 3,066	Don't wish to nag, Ron P., but any word on the hmd's? The suspense is killing me over here! Thanks. __________________ Lorinda

March 9th, 2002, 02:19 AM	#20
Ron Pfister Major Player Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Basel area, Switzerland Posts: 285	It's coming... 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 __________________ Ronald P. Pfister halimedia - digital solutions and services www.halimedia.com

October 16th, 2002, 11:53 AM	#21
Jacques Mersereau Trustee Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 1,334	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. __________________ Jacques Mersereau University of Michigan-Video Studio Manager

December 21st, 2002, 06:45 PM	#22
Charles Papert Wrangler Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 6,810	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). __________________ Charles Papert www.charlespapert.com

January 24th, 2002, 07:41 AM	#17
Mike Bebber New Boot Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Ujiongbu, South Korea Posts: 14	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!!!!

January 24th, 2002, 02:02 PM	#18
Ed Smith Wrangler Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Hampshire, England Posts: 1,545	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

November 20th, 2003, 04:50 PM	#23
Dave Stewart Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 109	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.

November 21st, 2003, 01:57 AM	#24
Ron Pfister Major Player Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Basel area, Switzerland Posts: 285	Res High Enough? @ 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 __________________ Ronald P. Pfister halimedia - digital solutions and services www.halimedia.com

November 21st, 2003, 10:48 AM	#25
Dave Stewart Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 109	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.