Varizoom Swit vs. Marshall HDA
 

I'm almost sold on the Marshall HD field monitor (V-R70O-HDA). Now Varizoom has released a new TFT HD monitor "SWIT" (VZS1080BC), and you can order one that will use existing camcorder batteries (a plus over the Marshall which I understand can be modified).

Has anyone tried the new Varizoom Swit? Is it good enough for focus and color work?

focus and color work?
 

Both are good for focus- neither of them really reliable for color. The Marshall may be slightly better but you just can't trust these small monitors for any real color/brightness/contrast work.

Thanks. Have you used or seen both in action? I can forgo the color, in favor of good focus. Marshall has larger models at two times or more the cost. Anything larger and I'm looking at an edit size studio monitor. Not very portable.

These so called HD monitors only have a res of 800X400, which is similar to the lilliput I have at 800X400. However, the lilliput only has RCA in, so when I connect it to the BNC out of the XHA1 in High Def, I am seeing an HD down res, and it's FAR to soft to focus... do you think the component input of the swit would be any better?

Going SD composite won't do, and having 250 Hz lines (I have few) on the standard LCDs is too soft as well. The marshall touts pixel mapping and features to mimic CRT phosphors. A few posts on the redrock M2 forum suggests that the 400 line HD mashalls are good for focus via component. I'm not entirely sold on that. Maybe it would show focus, but not the tact sharp.

Marshall does have a 768 line model, with SDI, and that would suggest better focus and color production. At $3000 or more, the focus issue is an expensive fix. For that kind of money, I'd like to have portability and color correction. However, at 7-10" for HD edits?

Anyway, it's a risky purchase and I'd like to hear from folks on DVinfo whom may have already tried these models, or suggest alternatives. I wouldn't mind spending $3K, so long as it's a worthy purchase. Good insurance against a ruined shot, which can be just as costly.

monitor res=focus
 

Yea- the Marshall ans Varizoom are 480X800- but I've found it quite sufficient for most focus pulling situations. The hardest moments are day exterior on a long lens- be sure to have a good monitor hood and stick your face right up into it. And yes you don't up the res until you get into the $3000+ arena. The ERG and Astro monitors seem to be the best priced in this realm. There's an ERG model super bright that I've successfully used as a day exterior HD steadicam monitor for a Panasonic Varicam and it worked great- it runs somewhere around $3800

Does anyone know if the Varizoom rotates the image for 35mm adapters? I know some of there older SD LCD monitors did and I was wondering if the HD ones did as well.

Has anyone tried the Varizoom SWIT yet? I have an Canon XH-A1 and would love to read some feedback.

I have just bought the 7 inch marshall HDA monitor with component inputs to use with my JVC HD101 - I was dubious about the benefits of an LCD screen but I must say that I have been very impressed. One test I carried out was to take a page of a script I was working on (which was written in standard 12 point courier on an A4 sheet - slightly larger than the american paper equivalent) and frame it up on camera so that it filled about 1/3 of the monitor screen. I could still read every word on the page! For me thats ample proof of resolution, and more than sufficient for focus.
p.s. the choice was easier for me as I already use IDX batteries with my camera, and on another test I ran the monitor continuously for about 2 1/2 - 3 hours on one battery

Varizoom SWIT initial feedback....
 

OK, just received a Varizoom SWIT S-1090BP LCD 8" "High Resolution" field monitor (800x480 pixels).

I don't yet have the proper hookups, so I was only able to view via my Canon XH-A1 via composite out. As far as that goes, my initial impression is that the monitor is bright with a nice picture for composite out.

This is from the manual:

Rear Panel as (1) Video in Composite; (2) Video out Composite; (3) Video in S-video; (4) Component video in YUV (Y Pb/Cb Pr/Cr) (5) Audio in (6) Tally Lamp (7) Power in and (8) MiniDV Battery mount (I have the Canon version).

The manual reads, "This monitor is compatible with the following input resolutions: NTSC 480p/480i, 720p/720i, 1080i and PAL 576p/576i, 720p/720i and 1080i"

The screen is 8" widescreen that is switchable between widescreen 16:9, widescreen with 4:3 markers, or just plain-old 4:3 (leaving black video on right and left frame).

Brightness 400 cd/m2; Contrast 400:1; Color System NTSC/PAL.
Adujstable brightness, contrast, saturation, hue, sharpness and volume.

I bought the Marshall HDA
 

The canon component output cable is a custom unit and only has RCA jacks. The Marshall only accepts BNC. However, I've already confirmed sufficient focus with the marshall using BNC composite out of video2 on the G1. I will know more after I rig/modify the RCAconnectors on the canon's cable to BNC.

I was hoping to get by without having to purchase the $3000 model with HDSDI input. For those jobs that require HDSDI, I'll have a workstation and larger monitor on the set.

I've now hooked up the varizoom SWIT with the Canon XH-A1's included COMPONENT Cables to the Varizoom monitor described above using the BNC YUV in on the back of the monitor. I just used a BNC converter. Looks a lot sharper than the composite in I tried at first. Any way, there is plenty of detail for focus. I could read a 12pt font just fine from a quite a few feet away.

My two cents worth. I like the monitor. Plus, it comes in a nice hard plastic case with nicely cut foam for the monitor, plugs and the included hard plastic sun shade (which I think is really cool).

Hope this helps.

Was able to connect the Canon G1 to the Marshall HVA via component, and boy what difference. Razor sharp focus is doable. Fine pitch text looks crisp. So it's enough to judge that all important 'sweet spot' when focusing.

The only issue is this thing, being an all metal case and rack mountable, is on the heavy side (though it's marketed as an on-camera device), and the included Noga arm is needed to hold it firmly. I had to crank down pretty hard, tighter than I am comfortable with. I'm thinking about another visit to the machine shop one floor above me... : )

noga snap
 

Don't overtighten the ends of a Noga... the metric threads are soft aluminum on at least one ball end and will snap easily. Mine are now 8.8 grade aircraft hardware as I don't like surprises. The good news is that the ball ends are machined from higher grade material.

Also on the plus side, I've never had any issues cranking up the friction on the main knob as it's connected to high-grade internal parts.

Noga makes lots of other industrial-strength articulated arms other than the monitor mount that are worth checking out. Mostly larger units, similar to the Bogen/Manfrotto Magic Arms. Add superclamps, so handy for quick setups.

I agree, the Marshall is too heavy to be used on top of the camera, it creates wobble, and the noga arm finds it difficult to support. However I've arranged my setup so that the noga is fixed to the tripod head (via a spare hole in the quick release plate - I use the JVC HD100 with the optional quick release plate) this takes the weight off the camera and makes it more stable, it pans and tilts with the camera and it's also quicker if you want to go handheld as you don't have to dismantle the whole system, just disconnect a few wires.

Jay, thanks for the tip, when I get back I should see about swapping the threaded stud.

Paul, I made the made decision of moving the arm and bolt it to the underside of the mattebox plate mount. I had the displeasure of panning the camera upwards and having the Mashall swingback and greet me in the nose, (yeah, they feel heavy alright : )

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=82348

More screen grabs etc. in that thread regarding the Marshall. Can any of you SWIT owners post up similar shots? The SWIT looks like good at $1K.

Dennis:

I have the HD SWIT and would be happy to post a few similar images, but am still waiting for my A1 to be returned from Canon repair (my mode wheel broke). Where do I order or download a resolution chart like you use in your examples?

P.S. looking forward to my Brevis35 :)

It comes down to a $300 difference in price. I think the varizoom comes with a hard case and adaptor installed to work with your existing camcorder batteries. That should make up for it, as the Marshall is just the monitor and A/C power supply in a cardboard box, the batteries are seperate, (I ordered a canon battery adaptor).

The big question is will the Swit render noise free resolution for critical focus?
Second on the list does it render colors sufficient for field/hotel room editing? The marshall is actually a production, rack mountable monitor that's small enough to earn the "on camera" title. I'd never mount this on anything smaller than the Canon A1/G1, and you'd need component to realize it's benefit.

So yeah, does someone have screen grabs to compare both? I may need a second monitor for two cam shoots and might forego another Marshall in favor of the Swit.

Random thought on LCD's
 

I just had a random thought while memorizing the controls on the left side of the A1 and wondering why Canon didn't option a 4x6" folding LCD that would cover the left side of the camera when closed? Integrate a touchscreen too.

I suppose it would be possible to remove the supplied lcd and use the pivot point for an aftermarket unit and feed it component, even half rez would be fine.

There's obviously room for improvement over the existing LCD/viewfinder combination.

Two fractional res devices? Give me a decent display, please!

Devon, have you gotten your camera back yet? I'd be interested in more comparisons between the SWIT and the Marshall. How is the VZ on color? Would you say it is reliable for exposure and color?

From what I've read nobody who’s used the SWIT has seemed very excited about the color and picture value of the monitor. They say it is sharp enough and has comes with a lot of gear, but never rave about how good it looks (as opposed to the Marshall which almost everyone loves).

I personally would like to use one of these LCD’s to occasionally replace my large 24" LCD on quicker shoots or in more remote locations. Therefore it needs to be exposure and color accurate. Perhaps the SWIT could be calibrated to be so? What are your thoughts, Devon?

My darn camera is in Irvine, CA undergoing repairs (*sigh*). The monitor arrived about the same time the camera went out, so other than a quick test, I can't say too much. The monitor was clearly good for focus and for framing. I need to spend some time with it before I can speak to the color with much assurance.

Promise to post pics as soon as camera is back in the pocket.

Is there any place to download a resolution chart?

Also, what is the best method to test color accuracy, especially in relation to posting still pics?

I downloaded a res chart a while ago by googling it and eventually finding one. Of course you'll have to have a good printout on photo paper for it to mean anything.

For color accuracy... I'd say it's 2/3 checking it against monitors or TVs you know to be accurate and 1/3 gut feeling (does it "feel" right; can you get a good sense of what the end viewer will be seeing; is the gamma pleasing and in accordance to what you know your camera produces).

But I could be way off and there's probably some test you can do. When I get my monitor I'll compare the live images to what I'm getting from the camera LCD and my 24" LCD and/or CRT TV's to see if they're telling the same story.

One thing you probably could tell right away is how well it handled the contrast and highlights. I have a cheap 5.6" LCD that tells utter lies when it comes to exposure because it clips all the highlight detail and buries the blacks. It also is about 1000K off in the white balance. Needless to say these are all pretty big problems and they're evident right away. So did you see any red flags at all like highlights blending into white when they shouldn't?

Ok. Camera (A1) back in the office from repair. More than happy to snap some pictures of the monitor hooked up to the camera.

So I only have to do this once, what is the best approach? Should I put something like a rubiks cube (colorful), with something with lots of text and/or small detail? I don't have a resolution chart.

I can snap the pics with my Canon Rebel XTi and post the stills. Should have some time later this afternoon do conduct a basic test based on recommendations and upload.

Ok. I don't have a lot of time for this sort of thing, but I gave it a try.

The HD (800x600) monitor described above hooked up to my A1 and pointed at some stuff. I printed some resolution chart I grabbed off the internet, it was like 3,000 x 2000 pixels and printed it on photo paper . Added a few other things. Now, the weakness in this test is that I am not a very good still photographer and this was just set up quickly in my office. Sorry, but that's the story. Now, the shots I snapped look a tad softer than the monitor looked with my own eyes.

Take it for what it's worth. I like the monitor. I can see hair and pores on someones face when I Zoom in a bit, so it works for framing and focus. Colors seem reasonably close.

Oh, the A1 was set to factory and zoomed in to 40 and the aperature was somewhere in the 4.0 range. 30F 1/60 fps.

How well does the varizoom work for framing and checking the lighting? I shoot with hd100. Anyone feel it's too small?

I used the Varizoom for a shoot yesterday and the framing is spot-on. Lighting seemed acruate to the A1's little screen and then what I saw on my editing monitor later. Overall I am pleased with my purchase.

That being said, I have not used the monitor outdoors yet.

Varizoom Swit
 

Devon, Thanks for doing the test! I think the pictures could be a little bit bigger though to get a better sense of the resolution. And it’s important to note that the colors look flat because of the color temperature of the monitor right?

In the days since my last post there's been some mix up with an order I placed and then canceled in December. It turns out they sent me the Varizoom Swit that was at the time not in stock... even though I canceled the order. It's going to go back but only because in the meantime I found a Marshall HDA used.

But it allows me to make my professional assessment of the device... I think it's a pretty decent monitor overall. I also haven't used it outside, but inside at the right viewing angle it's very sharp and clear and even quite pretty. The colors seem as you say close enough (MUCH better than the 5.6” LCD I mentioned) and you get good feedback on framing focus and exposure.

The two main things I don't like about it is that I know it won't be bright enough outside without a serious hood. The one it comes with is just for glare it's not going to do much. You would want to get one of these (which I just found today): http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...ughType=search
Looks great for the price. Two hoods in one! Petrol is a great company.

I also like the handle mount and couldn't find anything like it to go with my Marshall. Let me know if anyone knows of something (handle clamp with a ball mount). And the case it comes in is a bonus as well.

The second thing I think that's not so great is the noise of the monitor. I was using it with my FX1 with S-video (don't have the BNC adapters yet) and the FX1 is pretty well known for being a quiet cam at 0db or even 6db, but the lower mid tones and shadows were crawling with noise for some reason. It doesn't handle darks well at all - quite a bit of banding –nothing you can’t get over if you know about it though.

I'll try it again with component cables when the adapters come (if they come before it has to go back), but I like the monitor overall and would have stuck with it had the Marshall opportunity not come along. I'll have to see how much better it really is.

Brian, I'm going to be working with the HD100 as well and I would recommend not getting this monitor if it's going to be the only one on the shoot (depending on your shoot size). It's best to get something that would show true HD 720p like a Dell24" monitor or an HDTV to get a true sense of what your image is like. These smaller monitors are more for camera operators who want a better image and more picture information than the on-camera LCD or viewfinder. At least that's my take on it. I don't think you'd want the director, DP, scripty and everyone else crowding around one 7-8" monitor.

So my advice to anyone in the market for a monitor of this size that can’t afford the Marshall would be to go with the SWIT. (I may revise that once I’ve actually seen the Marshall). But it gets the job done and will save you $500 once you get the case, mount possible battery option. It’s also at least twice the product as any lower res monitor.

Excellent write up Chad. I think you will find a minor improvement when and if you are able to test with BNC adaptors for the component connection.
My main use is so I don't have to look at the tiny Canon flip out lcd and also a framing/focus monitor like this is critical for me in use with my jib.

When I can, I use my Dell HD monitor I think it is twenty some odd inches (i forget exactly), but that is mainly for indoors controlled situations.

SWIT problems in YUV mode
 

Well I got the BNC adapters today and I think that either they are really bad quality or something is wrong with my SWIT. The sharpness is lost entirely when using the component hookups. It is smoother that S-Video and has less aliasing for sure, but it's too smooth. I was pretty shocked to see the perceived resolution go down.

I uploaded some pics to compare.

What is also very strange is that you don't have the Sharpness control option on component and you do with S-video. You can crank it up (which helps in focusing) or turn it back down to a reasonable level. But no adjustment can be made in YUV mode. I found it very difficult to focus with it in component.

Finally, when sending a 480p signal over component there is an obvious defect as seen in the on-screen text of the photo. I tried multiple cables and even swapped out all 6 BNC adapters that I got, but it was always the same - at two parts on screen there are what looks like field doubling or some such thing. It's not present in 720p.

The adapters I got were these: http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/showd...number=090-400

Does anyone know if they could be the problem? If not, then I would hope that my SWIT unit is defective because it's performing pretty poorly at this point. Also, sorry that the frames between the two cameras aren't quite the same. You can still see the difference in the camera-generated text.

Devon, do you have an S-video source you could try? Any difference? Just trying to get to the bottom of this.

Chad,

How odd. I must say there must be something wrong with your component inputs. My screen detail is increased when viewed through component. Your picture does look horribly soft in component. I would not put up with that type of screen resolution. Ouch. So, not really sure what's going on there.

That's good to hear. So other than having a defective unit, it's a great little monitor. I'll let you know if I think the Marshall is as good as they say when I get it next week.

Chad, I think you'll like the Marshal, (assuming it's the HD version). My only beef is the weight. However, I expect some very rugged use. I've already banged it a few times with the noga arm not being tight enough and it let go.

I've used it a few shoots, and though I've had a 17" production monitor along with, I'm certainly comfortable to have this along for run and gun. (I've also been able to confirm the realiability of peaking on the camera's own LCD).

Another issue is the external battery adding more weight and bulk to the unit. It's seems to have 'tipped the scales' (so to speak) on the noga arm. So, I've ordered a 12v belt pack to power the thing.

Getting back you're issue, I'm curious to know how both the Swit and Marshal monitors compare.

I have the money for an XH-A1 right now, but not the wherewithal to buy a $1600 Marshall right now (not a believer in overextending credit cards on items more than a grand). I have a 7" Nebtek 70-LI with noga arm ("Israeli arm"), this is the modified Panasonic that was the best LCD for SD use back in its day.

Basically, what I'm asking is, how comparable is the on-camera LCD of the XH-A1 to the Nebtek 70-Li? I know you have to use peaking and magnifying and such to focus reliably with the on-camera LCD, and this would work for most situations until you upgrade to the 7" Marshall or whatever. However, what I'm hoping is that buy buying the Canon LANC remote for the A1 ($400 so not cheap), I'll be able to use my Nebtek occasionally for jib use...i.e. the Canon remote has magnifying and peak options.

With that said, as a fiction writing grad student, I can qualify for the academic pricing on the HDV Rack 2.0 for just $160, so that means if I sell my current laptop and upgrade to a slightly faster one, that would work for me too.

Thanks for any info. Basically, just hoping I can get a little more life out of my Nebtek 70-Li until I can put the $1600 cash together for the Marshall.

P.S. Anyway, I ask this because I remember a long time ago at EVS, during the FX1's hey day, before there was a Marhsall or Swit alternative for run and gun situtations, the salesman told me that a lot of people were using the Nebtek without problems on their FX1 while shooting high-def. He set-up the camera to it, for me to check out the focusing, and said that the Nebtek's LCD was better than the FX1's on board LCD. I believe he then used peaking or whatever, to show me; actually, I don't really remember the details as truthfully, though I didn't say it aloud, I wasn't really convinced with the focusing demonstration I saw. But who knows, we're talking a few seconds in time here. So maybe it really would be adequate for occasional outdoor field use with a jib or whatever, for indoors I'll just upgrade my laptop/HDV rack it anyway.

Eugene, I don't know about the particular monitor that you have, but you have to understand two things:

1) No 250 horizontal line anything will show effective focus for an HD/HDV camera. Even so, a 480 horizontal line monitor is marginal, and the 1:1 pixel mapping is the crutch needed. When you get into 680 lines it's a good match. The price doubles for each step up.

2)The other equation is whether your viewing component vs. composite. Many of the sub $1000 units will only accept a composite input and that's simply too soft. Even for the Marshall HDA, there is an obvious difference between viewing component vs. composite. Sure, with composite you can get a sense for focus -with some hunting to find it, but not tack sharp and immediate.

The only 'budget' level monitors currently for HD are the swit and marshall. When you consider the risk of blowing a paycheck and your time because of poor focus... it's a no brainer.

True, true. Didn't figure it had a chance in heck, but oh well. I've been too busy with school, and got injured, so haven't kept in the loop for awhile now. I really don't forsee needing HD for awhile, as I'll not be working full-time, but only looking for the occasional gig that fits my schedule this upcoming semester. I.e. In other words, hard for me to justify charging for something like a Marshall right now. I think I'll probably wait on the laptop upgrade as well, I'm sure this summer I'll get way more bang for the buck...technology...sheesh, I hate it when you're not keeping up with the times.

Are any of these monitors even worth it?

Depends on who you are and what you want to do with it. If you can't see a way they'd be worth the cost to you, they probably aren't.

If I only had a 250line monitor, I'd still use it, and in some cases, get away with it. So it's not a desperate matter if you can't afford to upgrade to 480 lines or higher. You can get a sense of focus, and learn to ride the IAF button, and in combination with peaking enabled on the smaller built in LCD, you can train yourself to know where your at. The IAF is very quick and useful. The trick is to use manual focus and only hit or ride the instant focus button as needed to avoid the constant wandering you get in full auto.

Thanks for the info.