Why buy a BT-LH80W Monitor?

Aside from the featyures of the LH80 (focus in red, and the waveform monitor both of which are priceless) it comes down to accuracy. Put three consumer plasmas or lcd's side by side and they will all look different and be most likely impossible to nail calibration or make them look the same. Now a broadcast monitor like the LH80 I can do this with. Its a reference. I always know that its colors and levels are accurate. This makes my life so much easier when shooting and lighting and I dont have to fiddle around with it. A client I used to shoot alot of interviews for has their own consumer monitors (insignias I think). They're cheap 15" LCD's. Fine for watching TV or something. When shooting for them they use it as their monitor and I use the LH80 for mine. They are constantly coming over to mine to see what it actually looks like even though its the same signal.

Now for editing I use two monitors - a large consumer model most of the time just so I can see it and to gauge the actual editing. I go back to the LH80 for any color correction/grading though. It will always look different on the consumer TV. And that different is different than other consumer TV's. So the broadcast monitor always brings you back to a reference point that is absolute and not "a little dark" or "a little red". And find me a consumer TV that can stand up to a production environment. Unless its permanently mounted in the studio I wouldnt bother with it. In the edit suite I dont see too much of a problem though.

All that said, it doesnt mean you HAVE to have a broadcast monitor like the LH80 though. Of course once you use one I guarantee you wont go back :) Professional tools are just nice to use.
 
Indyreel said:
I could buy an HD screen with a beautiful picture at BestBuy for $400"
Click to expand...

I thought the same thing. So, in the last year, I went through 3 different consumer LCD's in the 300 - 600 price range. On the lowest end, they aren't even 16x9 (think Polaroid brand), so that's a big issue. One step up from there they ARE 16x9 (Samsung, Sony, etc). but the color is not accurate at all. Or, more importantly, it changes throughout the day. The colors are way too contrasty and the image becomes progressively more magenta the longer you use it. After only 3-4 hours of use, the picture looks VERY magenta tinted. Even producers notice.

One more thing, consumer LCD's are hard to power "out in the field" as they are AC power only. You will lose a TON of power going from 12v DC batteries, through an inverter, out to 120v AC, to a consumer monitor. In other words, a 17" broadcast monitor will operate on a 1lb battery for over 2 hours. But, a consumer monitor will drain a 15lb battery in under two hours.

That's a big difference!!!

Worse still, because consumer models use TN LCD panels (vs higher end IPS panel) they have terrible off axis viewing. You literally have to be looking straight at them to see what you're shooting. The high end Panasonic's (BT-LH1760) solve this issue.

Indyreel said:
So why would I spend that much money for the BT-LH80W? I know I must be missing something, so I'm ready to be schooled.
Click to expand...

In addition to other benefits, some broadcast LCD's accept video, audio, and timecode on a single cable called an HD-SDI. This is HUGE. The monitors can read the time code on the video cable and display it using a menu setting on the monitor. Great for tape logging in the field. And, for playback on the monitor, again, it's just one cable and you get video and audio. Plus, the menu settings on broadcast monitors are actual buttons, not cheesy touchscreen or touch sensitive like consumer LCD's. If consumer is all you can afford, then it's better than nothing. But, once you experience the luxury of top notch gear, it's hard to go back.
 
Last edited:
i used to think like Dan, and hes not totally off the mark - you CAN get pretty decent ballpark accuracy on a good consumer LCD. it gets better once you get used to it and know what it does well and what it does less well. but like jeff says, there is just SOOO much more confidence when using pro gear on the level of the BT. ive side by sided the BT and various levels of cheaper HD LCDs and the BT is the hands-down winner every time. and the shoot goes better because of it.

it also comes down to how savvy/picky your client is. i have one client where i always used a cheapy consumer LCD for a comfort monitor and they were fine with it. then they hired an experienced producer and he asked if my monitor was correct - i said no, its just for focus /framing. and now the client demands the BT every time and they understand the additional cost

just a matter of what you want, what you need and what your pockets can justify. its been said before that a good shooter can get great results from a VHS camera a shoplight and no monitor. that logic applies here as well
 
Last edited:
No, VHS cameras sucked then too. This isnt about new technology, this is about professional tools. VHS camera = consumer, BetaCamSP = Pro. May be a bit off on that analogy as I'm not that familiar with the older technology, but you get the point.
 
well "back then" there was a MUCH greater divide between PRO and CONSUMER. now that field is much blurrier. but no. thats not true. there were plenty of folks making money with the higher end VHS, 8mm, and hi-8 formats.

man, i must be the oldest guy in this room ; (
 
For weddings. Numerically, it never made it into the consumer market in numbers to surpass VHS. Also, it didn't successfully bridge from U-Matic 3/4" to BetaSP in broadcast. I guess King is subjective, but I've been in the business since 1988 and I never shot S-VHS for anything you saw on television.

Just because someone made a camera with the S-VHS Reporter badge, didn't make it so.

e
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top