AF100 LCD screen

Noel Evans said:
Can I ask - to those with this green cast issue

1/ If you use 3200K tungsten lights like an Arri fresnel / or a professional grade fluorescent lamp such as a kino @ 3200K do you see it?
2/ Does there happen to be consumer fluorescent light around when you see it? Say shop lighting or any consumer fluoro lamp in your house?
Click to expand...

Noel,

I use an Arri fresnel on charts and see the issue with both of our AF100's. If one were to compare it to a Panasonic 1700 without phase adjusted from zero, it would not be evident.
The fact that the EVF does not match the LCD display tells us something is off.
 
If one were to compare it to a Panasonic 1700 without phase adjusted from zero, it would not be evident
Click to expand...
Okay, so -- you're saying that it does look just like the Panasonic broadcast monitor then?

How is this a big deal then? It's an on-camera LCD, it's pretty accurate, it has apparently a barely-noticeable very slight green shift which is the same as what the prevailing defacto standard of all pro monitors has...

No wonder the dozens and dozens of people I've witnessed looking at the AF100 have never said anything!

Sheesh.

I think what we have here may be a case of mismatched expectations. There are people who think that $4700 is a ton of money and that it may be all the money they'll likely be able to spend, and for them, they expect absolute perfection. Then there's guys who spend $4700 on their monitor alone. For guys in the second category, the onboard LCD is a freebie, a "gimme". They would expect it to be reasonably accurate, reasonably useful for framing, etc. -- and it is. They would not expect it to be broadcast-grade -- and it isn't.

Look, I fully understand those who want perfection. But here's the cold hard bottom line -- I don't care how good an on-camera LCD monitor is, I would never, ever, ever, ever base exposure off of looking at the LCD monitor and saying "yep, that looks good." I would use zebras and the WFM to know, for SURE, that it was accurate and right. And I would never use ANY camera's onboard LCD to judge accurate color reproduction. As long as it's reasonably close, that's good enough. If you want accurate, you use a dedicated production monitor. In an idyllic perfect utopia, that on-camera LCD would have perfect spot-on color reproduction. But this is earth, and I've never encountered any on-camera LCD that I would actually trust to display perfect colors.

It's like onboard audio. If you want the very best, you wouldn't use onboard audio, you'd use something like an SD442 mixer feeding into an SD744T (or even better gear, this is just an example, this combo would run you about, what, $8,000?) However, for convenience, it's much more convenient to use the camera's own onboard XLRs recording directly to its own media. You understand, and I understand, that it's not going to be 100% as pristine as the dedicated external recorder. Of course it's not as perfect as the dedicated external recorder. But it's convenient, it's free, it's here, it's pretty good, so we use it.

Well, the LCD is the same way. If you want absolute accuracy, you use a dedicated production monitor that is purpose-built to provide a reference-caliber picture. If you want to use the convenience of the onboard display, you recognize that it's not going to be as 100% accurate as the purpose-built, dedicated external monitor. How could it be? The whole camcorder all together doesn't cost as much as a 26" pro monitor.

Dino's confirming that it matches the coloration of the nearly-ubiquitous Panasonic BT series of pro monitors. This isn't a "problem", and I can pretty much guarantee you that therefore, it isn't going to be "fixed". It's a case of mismatched expectations. And before anybody jumps down my throat please do yourself and all of us a favor and go look at the LCD on an DVX100, HVX200, HPX170, or HMC150. Turn that LCD off-axis, and watch how drastically it changes the picture. Just tilt it a little bit away from you, or a little bit towards you, and you'll see what we've always dealt with! Then, try the same thing with the AF100's -- it's at least seventy million times better. But did that stop about a half million DVX100s, HVXs, HPXs, or HMC150s from being sold? Has anyone come on here and complained about the "LCD problem" of how it looks awful off-axis? Of course not. It's what you expect from an on-camera LCD monitor. It is awful, but nobody complains about that because we expect that. We complained about the resolution of the monitor because it was not adequate for focus, but that's a different story. I don't think in the 8 years I've been on this board I've ever heard anyone complain about the color accuracy of the HVX/HPX/DVX LCD panel. Is it because it's more accurate? I doubt it, it's probably no better than, and probably worse than, the AF100's monitor -- but you would never even think to ask the question in the first place, because it was understood -- it's the onboard LCD. It's what it is, it's useful for what it's for, but it's not more than what it is. The AF100's monitor is dramatically better than any of those other cameras' LCD's. Maybe it's close enough to a production monitor that people are now expecting it to be as good as one, I don't know. But I think that is an unrealistic expectation.

Sure, I'd love a phase control to get even more precision out of it. But here's the honest truth -- the HVX200, HPX170, HMC150, and DVX100 all have some setup controls for their viewfinder and LCD (for brightness, contrast, and color level) and I don't think I've run into any shooters who have ever bothered to even use them. Why would you? It's an on-camera LCD, fer cryin' out loud... "show me my framing and let me get on with the business of shooting," and all that...

I think it's perfectly reasonable to ask Panasonic to consider adding a phase/tint control. But I think it's unreasonable to expect that they're going to "fix" the LCD. It's already performing within the parameters of their broadcast line, which has become the default standard in production and post worldwide, and -- it's an on-camera LCD. As someone (maybe Dino?) said, it's a darn sight better of an LCD than what he has on his HPX2700.
 
Last edited:
Noel Evans said:
Can I ask - to those with this green cast issue

1/ If you use 3200K tungsten lights like an Arri fresnel / or a professional grade fluorescent lamp such as a kino @ 3200K do you see it?
2/ Does there happen to be consumer fluorescent light around when you see it? Say shop lighting or any consumer fluoro lamp in your house?
Click to expand...

I see it with all color temperatures of lighting, but it's at it's most extreme when there is consumer grade CFL's mixed into the lighting.
 
Does anyone have the abilty to test PAL as well as NTSC cam versions? I dont think thats as easy as just flicking the switch!

For the record: mine is PAL...no issues here.
 
Barry_Green said:
Okay, so -- you're saying that it does look just like the Panasonic broadcast monitor then?

How is this a big deal then? It's an on-camera LCD, it's pretty accurate, it has apparently a barely-noticeable very slight green shift which is the same as what the prevailing defacto standard of all pro monitors has...

No wonder the dozens and dozens of people I've witnessed looking at the AF100 have never said anything!

Sheesh.

I think what we have here may be a case of mismatched expectations. There are people who think that $4700 is a ton of money and that it may be all the money they'll likely be able to spend, and for them, they expect absolute perfection. Then there's guys who spend $4700 on their monitor alone. For guys in the second category, the onboard LCD is a freebie, a "gimme". They would expect it to be reasonably accurate, reasonably useful for framing, etc. -- and it is. They would not expect it to be broadcast-grade -- and it isn't.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone's asking for something that's unreasonable. When a $1000 DSLR from the same manufacturer has a color balance control for the LCD, so should the $5000 camera. They both still say Panasonic so I don't care one bit that Panasonic says they are two separate companies. That's a copout and cheap excuse for not giving features that should be there. This is their broadcast division which is supposed to be more accurate and higher quality than their consumer models, yet the consumer DSLR has a more accurate LCD screen? That doesn't make any sense. There's only more programming for the firmware to add that ability. It's not like Panasonic would have to put more or different hardware into the camera to have that ability.

As far as the 1700 being the defacto standard goes... it still has a green push to it, no? Is it not supposed to be accurate? It sounds like everyone's been using an expensive broadcast monitor that's inaccurate for a while, but at least it appears you can fix the green push on it.

All I'm asking for is a color balance control. If Panasonic doesn't want to spend the effort to get their LCD colors correct, at least let me do it myself.
 
Shooter said:
Does anyone have the abilty to test PAL as well as NTSC cam versions? I dont think thats as easy as just flicking the switch!

For the record: mine is PAL...no issues here.
Click to expand...
They're the same hardware. There is no different hardware for PAL versions, you have the same LCD everyone else has.
 
Mike@AF said:
They both still say Panasonic so I don't care one bit that Panasonic says they are two separate companies.
Click to expand...
You don't have to care, but that doesn't change the reality of it.

As far as the 1700 being the defacto standard goes... it still has a green push to it, no?
Click to expand...
It has a very minor bias towards green, yes. Always has had.

Is it not supposed to be accurate? It sounds like everyone's been using an expensive broadcast monitor that's inaccurate for a while, but at least it appears you can fix the green push on it.
Click to expand...
Yes, that's about the summation of it.

All I'm asking for is a color balance control. If Panasonic doesn't want to spend the effort to get their LCD colors correct, at least let me do it myself.
Click to expand...
I think it is reasonable to ask for that, as I've already said. Just recognize that they've never added something like that in a firmware update before, and they've never had a phase adjustment on an LCD before, so don't hold your breath.
 
Barry, I agree, an on-board LCD should not be used to judge critical color, it's not a big deal to me. But I also agree with Mike, just because the 1700 series is plus green, doesn't mean that Panasonic should continue the issue onto new equipment models. The AF100 LCD is amazing for off-axis performance, resolution, lumens, but they would have perfection had it not been for this colorimetry issue.
 
Barry, I agree, an on-board LCD should not be used to judge critical color, it's not a big deal to me. But I also agree with Mike, just because the 1700 series is plus green, doesn't mean that Panasonic should continue the issue onto new equipment models. The AF100 LCD is amazing for off-axis performance, resolution, lumens, but they would have perfection had it not been for this colorimetry issue.
Click to expand...
Not disagreeing with you at all on that. I just don't think it's some big problem. It's a minor inconvenience at most. Perfection would be great, but I don't expect absolute perfection in any camera's onboard audio recording hardware, and I don't expect absolute perfection in the LCD display either. I'll take the 99.7% perfection that they've delivered and I'll be happy with it.

I just don't see it as a "problem." I see it as the minorest of inconveniences. I mean, look at CCD blooming, the massive vertical stripes that would happen on an image when you pointed a CCD camera at a bright light -- THAT was a problem. And one you had to work around, and shoot around, because there was no "fix" possible. Look at the scrolling bars in a CMOS sensor when you shoot under magnetic fluos or HMI's -- that is a serious problem. You have to change your workflow to avoid it. No camera manufacturer ever managed to "fix" either of those. CCDs will always bloom and cause massive vertical stripes in your image. And CMOS sensors, as long as they have rolling shutters, will always cause big scrolling bars to crop up in your footage whenever you shoot under those lights. So you learn about it, you avoid it, and you get to shooting. I classify those as problems, not inconveniences, and I don't expect the manufacturers to fix it, I expect that education will teach the shooters how to avoid those issues.

For the record -- I would love it if the AF100's LCD panel was absolutely perfectly magnificenty color-pure. And I would love it even more if they added a phase control so you could tweak it if it wasn't in perfect alignment. Yes, that would be great. I'd like that a lot, and I have asked them for it. But I certainly don't classify it as a "problem". I hadn't even noticed it, and in regular shooting I don't notice it, and even if I did notice it, it's nothing more than the minorest of annoyances. Now, if the camera was RECORDING everything with a green tint, that would cross the line into being a "problem" that they should absolutely fix. And they had that problem, on the HPX500 -- the 5.6k white-balance preset was green. People screamed, rightly so, and Panasonic fixed it. That was a real issue. I just don't see this LCD thing as anything more than the minorest of pet peeves, certainly not anything significant, and not a "problem".
 
Last edited:
Shooter said:
But I am not looking at NTSC images. (Thankfully)
Click to expand...
Neither are we -- we're looking at HD images. NTSC is analog standard-def... :thumbsup:

But seriously -- you can go into the "other functions" menu, and change the system freq to 59.94Hz, and you'll see exactly the same thing as we're seeing here.
 
But seriously -- you can go into the "other functions" menu, and change the system freq to 59.94Hz, and you'll see exactly the same thing as we're seeing here.
Click to expand...


Oh wow...I see ...Green!





Just Kidding.
 
Shooter mine's PAL of course and I notice a slight colour inaccuracy. Ive never seen an onboard LCD that is accurate anyway so I didnt expect it.

But the reason for my earlier question was office/household consumer CFLs that have a green spike - well the camera can see that, also nothing surprising.
 
It would be helpful to have consensus on whether this issue is something that affects:

- all production models of AF100/101/102 equally

or

- some individual production model cameras with faulty panels (or panels from a different suppliers…)

I've just re-read this entire thread (to make sure), and there are some forum members who state categorically that they are not seeing the "green" cast on their AF100 LCDs.

On the other hand, some members have witnessed multiple cameras with the same issue.

Pretty much everyone has been appalled by the pics that PaPa posted (Acknowledged that they represent the "extremity" of the issue)

If it's confirmed that all the screens on shipping AF100s have a slight cast then fine, that means people can be prepared for that and deal with it - their expectations have been managed.
Likewise about the real possibility - or otherwise - of a firmware upgrade to allow phase adjustment to correct it.

To leave any room for confusion is to invite disappointment.

I take on board all the arguments to and fro here about managing various expectations but some empirical data would go a long way toward achieving that.
If Panasonic has been informed about this thread, perhaps its time they stepped in with an official position on the colour spec.

And by the way, I just retrieved my old DVX100B, and the LCD still looks mighty fine to me.

Especially when I incline my head exactly 42.5 degrees to achieve the desired gamma…
 
Mine is actually pretty close to what Papa's pictures show. I don't think you realize how green it is until you put it side-by-side with a properly calibrated monitor, then it's like "Wow, this LCD screen is way off."
 
Mike@AF said:
Mine is actually pretty close to what Papa's pictures show. I don't think you realize how green it is until you put it side-by-side with a properly calibrated monitor, then it's like "Wow, this LCD screen is way off."
Click to expand...

Anyway you can show us what you see Mike?
 
groveChuck said:
Well, you know what they say- the screen is always greener on the other side of the fence (or world).
Sorry, couldn't resist... back to the previously scheduled thread....
Click to expand...

No you got the quote wrong.


"The green is always greener on the other side of the Barry Green screen"
 
Okay, this is weird. Maybe someone has some insight and can explain. I was going to take pictures of what I'm seeing. When I use the PRST white balance option (3.2, 5.6, or VAR) I get the green push. If I flip it over to A or B and manually white balance (I have a CBL color balance lens) both the AF100 LCD and the TV Logic LCD look virtually identical. No green push. Back to the PRST options and I see a difference. White balance again with A and B and they look the same. No matter the white balance mode (PRST, A, or B) the bars look different on the two LCDs. I don't understand.
 
Mike@AF said:
Okay, this is weird. Maybe someone has some insight and can explain. I was going to take pictures of what I'm seeing. When I use the PRST white balance option (3.2, 5.6, or VAR) I get the green push. If I flip it over to A or B and manually white balance (I have a CBL color balance lens) both the AF100 LCD and the TV Logic LCD look virtually identical. No green push. Back to the PRST options and I see a difference. White balance again with A and B and they look the same. No matter the white balance mode (PRST, A, or B) the bars look different on the two LCDs. I don't understand.
Click to expand...

I've seen this too, and the only thing i can think of is that the closer you get to actual white ( sometimes the light sources aren't perfectly tungsten or daylight ) the less you can see teh difference. It's only once the general image gets saturated more or less towards green/yellow that it becomes more apparent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top