Does Anyone Make a 5-7" Full-HD on-Camera Monitor that Isn't over a grand?

Hi Basspig, Did u purchase ur HD on-camera monitor?? I am also looking for a HD monitor for my EX1 due to my bad eyesight. Specially I am looking for a one for focusing purposes. Please let me know the brand, model number and price(if possible)..Ur help is much appreciated. Thanks.
 
No, I haven't. I simply have not been able to find any 1920x1080 display in a 7-9" range that runs on battery power and has HD-SDI inputs.
I really need three of them, two of which are a dire need, because my other camera ops are consistently giving me out of focus footage, relying on peaking alone. I have a new guy on camera 2 who frequently tends to focus BEYOND the subject, leaving the background musicians in focus while the soloist is slightly out of focus. He needs to have a real HD display, as he just doesn't 'get it' about the peaking function.
 
i haven't read the whole thread, but i was on an Alexa job yesterday and the ACs were using SmallHD monitors and they looked pretty sharp.
 
The SmallHD are decent, but way overpriced for something that's ½HD resolution.
I can't help but to believe it's pure profit-mongering to charge a 30,000% markup for the chipset that decodes HD-SDI. One can buy a fullHD LCD display, about 19", for $270. So why does a ½HD, 7" display cost almost $2,000--just because it has an HD-SDI input? I can't believe it costs $1730 for the SDI input feature.
 
basspig said:
The SmallHD are decent, but way overpriced for something that's ½HD resolution.
I can't help but to believe it's pure profit-mongering to charge a 30,000% markup for the chipset that decodes HD-SDI. One can buy a fullHD LCD display, about 19", for $270. So why does a ½HD, 7" display cost almost $2,000--just because it has an HD-SDI input? I can't believe it costs $1730 for the SDI input feature.
Click to expand...

No offense but it doesn't sound like you've never tried to do R&D for a niche market product before. It's the same argument that's been made for every other film product out there. "Oh, this similar consumer product only costs X dollar, so why does the film version costs 100X?" Well, when you're paying out of your own pocket to develop a prototype, market it, and sell it to a relatively small segment of the market, your profit margin goes way down. Unless you want to go bankrupt the only way to recoup your investment would be to charge more. BTW, I don't think those consumer display you're talking about have features like FalseColor, 1:1, Blue Gun, convenient battery power option etc. Technology is progressing so fast so eventually a monitor like you're talking about will be possible, but today monitors like the SmallHD is actually an incredible bargain for the price. I remember just 3-4 years ago if you want a decent portable monitor solution for under $2000, the only game in town was the Marshall monitor, and that has no SDI, is only 800 x 480, and works only with expensive AB battery packs. People were desperately trying to DIY their own solutions using consumer panels and the results were not even close to what is available today.
 
I understand the point as far as niche market goes, and yes, production of specialized products has tooling/startup costs. But if they were sold at reasonable prices, volume sales would make up the cost rather quickly.

Blue gun and those other features are just about meaningless to an XDCam user these days. I just want something that will enable my camera ops to get proper focus.

And here's the real problem: The monitor is not even full HD. No way am I gonna pay over a grand for a monitor that's not showing me all the pixels my camera is recording.

Look at what Sony did with the XDCam EX line. They could have charged fifty grand for that camera, but they got smart and volume priced it, knowing that, at $6500, it would outsell every other HD camera on the market and make them a hefty profit.

There is sensible business strategy and there is foolish greed. SmallHD is definately playing by the latter category. Lower the prices to something someone with a sub $100K camera can reasonably afford, and units will start to sell in great volumes. Up the resolution to 1920x1080, and sell it for $589 and it will be the hottest item for XDCam owners. Heck, even I will buy three units at that price.
 
basspig said:
There is sensible business strategy and there is foolish greed. SmallHD is definately playing by the latter category.
Click to expand...

Sweet Jebus man, relax. Your comments sound more covetous than critically minded.

SmallHD? Greedy? Let's be real. Sony has the ability to volume price their products because they are so freaking huge. Huge. HUGE. They research, design, and manufacture their own sensors, boards, optics, and media. Who ELSE DOES THAT? They are the Walmart of technology. Apple is Greedy. Digidesign. Sure. Sony, yup. Even Panasonic. Sure. But SmallHD? One of a handful of US owned and operated hardware companies?

Clearly you haven't been a customer of theirs.

I purchased a DP1x upgrade, and when they sent my monitor back, it wasn't taking a 1080 signal properly. They ADVANCED me a DP1X, brand spanking new, no questions asked, and I sent them back my old one that they messed up. I've had lots of gear fail me and get swapped out, but I've never experience customer service like that of SmallHD. Hell, if that's what makes their gear as expensive as it is, then that's fine by me. That professional support is the one of the same reasons cost difference between a GH2 and an AF100.

Greed is an unfair description of their business practices. They price their products competitively while being able to cover their overhead, plus R&D. And anyone that runs their own company, yourself included, should know that it's never a good idea to underprice yourself.

If you want a HD monitor for under $1k, I'd suggest buying one used.
 
Mark, you just disproven your own point. Computer monitors have sales tens of thousands of times bigger than any video monitor. You mentioned 19", but it seems like almost any 1080p monitor I've seen is 20-21". After that going for the smaller pixels becomes exponentially more expensive to produce. That's why most video monitors at any kind of affordable price are 720p. (At least with them you can get within a pixel of focus in any direction.)

That's propably why I see 32" HD-TVs set up in studios on a tripod near the camera as "Director's monitors". They are pixel for pixel displays for $350. Its just not very portable. I've also seen 15" Craig HD-TVs, which are 720p used because they are light weight (some will run on batteries) and only $125, or the ManhattanLCD monitors that are 1280 pix wide. I built a Manhattan kit 3 years ago for $400 and it still works fine even though its an odd aspect ratio because they used a notebook screen. Its actually higher rez than 720p.
 
basspig said:
Lower the prices to something someone with a sub $100K camera can reasonably afford, and units will start to sell in great volumes. Up the resolution to 1920x1080, and sell it for $589 and it will be the hottest item for XDCam owners. Heck, even I will buy three units at that price.
Click to expand...

How do you know that SmallHD is making a killing off without knowing how much it actually cost them to develop and produce these monitors? I hate to say it but if you really think that it's that easy to develop a monitor and sell it for that cheap, you should do it yourself. I would be the first in line to buy one if you can produce them at that price and not go bankrupt.

Btw, all these new monitors (including the SmallHD) have a 1:1 pixel feature which will allow you to see the full 1080p image anyway.
 
Huy, it sounds like you are indeed a specialist in this matter. Could you PLEASE elaborate what the "Movable 1:1 pixel mapping" (this is what you call "1:1 pixel feature", right?) what the heck does it mean?... And other thing:
there are many monitors available at different price. I am not sure you can always visually distinguish $1,700.00 monitor from $150.00, and in most cases the brand works as price generating feature,– but that fact alone should make any of us angry and lead to personal attack, don't you think?..
And again:1:1 pixel mapping will not allow you to see full 1080p ( or full 1080i) image , only mapped portion of it. Which can be done with the push of a button (Expanded focus) on EX1R, on its built–in monitor. Or am I wrong on this one?..
 
I'm no specialist, but I'll try to answer the best I can.

Yes, the movable 1:1 pixel mapping basically extracts a portion of the image out at full 1080p resolution, exactly like the Focus Assist feature on many cameras. The difference here is that on those camera you're zooming in on a crappy 640 x 480 screen (usually less) where as if your monitor is already 720p native then that's going to be a much better. The SmallHD does a small twist by allowing you to move around the area that is extracted so you don't have to reposition your frame to focus. In practice, it's pretty much as good as a 1080p monitor.

And also if you think that a $1700 monitor is going to be hard to distinguish from a $150 monitor then I don't know what to tell you. I've used many monitors for focus and I can tell you that not all panels are created equal, even when the feature list seems to be identical. I was on set a while back when they were using a 17'' 720p consumer HDTV for focus; I pulled out my Manhattan LCD 9'' and immediately the entire crew commented on how much better the picture was on the Mahattan even though it was only 1024 x 768. The color was more attractive, the picture was sharper and it was much better to use. You can't judge a monitor until you've used it because there are subtle things like ease of use, portability, ruggedness, picture quality etc. Based on my experiences with all of these monitors the SmallHD scored high on all of these categories. I've also received excellent services from SmallHD and I would not qualify their price as a rip off in any sense of the word.
 
Huy Vu said:
I'm no specialist, but I'll try to answer the best I can.

Yes, the movable 1:1 pixel mapping basically extracts a portion of the image out at full 1080p resolution, exactly like the Focus Assist feature on many cameras. The difference here is that on those camera you're zooming in on a crappy 640 x 480 screen (usually less) (...)
Click to expand...
That means, Huy, that 1:1 pixel mapping will not allow you to see full 1080p ( or full 1080i) image , only mapped portion of it. And it is exactly what I stated.
 
basspig said:
I understand the point as far as niche market goes, and yes, production of specialized products has tooling/startup costs. But if they were sold at reasonable prices, volume sales would make up the cost rather quickly.

Blue gun and those other features are just about meaningless to an XDCam user these days. I just want something that will enable my camera ops to get proper focus.

And here's the real problem: The monitor is not even full HD. No way am I gonna pay over a grand for a monitor that's not showing me all the pixels my camera is recording.

Look at what Sony did with the XDCam EX line. They could have charged fifty grand for that camera, but they got smart and volume priced it, knowing that, at $6500, it would outsell every other HD camera on the market and make them a hefty profit.

There is sensible business strategy and there is foolish greed. SmallHD is definately playing by the latter category. Lower the prices to something someone with a sub $100K camera can reasonably afford, and units will start to sell in great volumes. Up the resolution to 1920x1080, and sell it for $589 and it will be the hottest item for XDCam owners. Heck, even I will buy three units at that price.
Click to expand...

I have to side with the guys on this one. SmallHD is making a small profit (pun intended) on their monitors. They should and could charge more because they're darn good monitors. BUT, they choose not to.

I need blue gun. Pros need blue gun. Consumer TVs don't have that or HD-SDI. Let's not forget its rugged aluminum frame....I wouldn't trust a plastic framed consumer TV to last long. Black blacks and a non-crappy view angle. All important stuff and something TVs from Best Buy won't get you. Also SmallHD doesn't have the distribution of a Sony or Panasonic...it's a boutique company, if you will. Consumers don't have need for the features pros do on a TV this small. Just like a consumer wouldn't have a need or want for many of the manual controls and color matrix settings on the EX1/3. They just want something that can shoot good video and press as little buttons as possible.

The EX1 and EX3 are bargains. I still have a smile on my face knowing I'm shooting this quality of video for under $10K. And that was before the economy hit the crapper. 1/2" chip, great audio circuits, 1,000 lines of resolution, slow motion, long shooting times on memory cards that were half the price of P2 cards. And HD-SDI with embedded audio for future proof output if you're not a fan of XDCam EX compression! Absolute bargain when it was released and I still think it is. It was a game changer. Much like the RED Camera was for filmmakers.

1080p on a little screen? Unnecessary and it will just add to cost.

As for your camera operator, I think he needs to turn the peak level down from wherever it is set to the low setting, so that just the things in tack sharp focus is peaked.
 
Last edited:
All very interesting points. I know it's hard to make a profit on a niche item, really I do. But it's okay if the camera it's being used with costs more than twenty grand. If a monitor costs more than 10% of the camera cost, it's too much. That's why I don't use matte boxes and other stupidly-overpriced add ons to 'pimp out' my cameras.
The Best Buy TVs don't have HD-SDI, which is why I don't use them.. many places don't have a 110vac outlet to plug it into either, and are too big to use in a balcony of a concert hall without throwing a disturbing amount of light at the audience nearest the camera.
I am not going to spend 2 grand on a monitor that doesn't display all the pixels for a camera that costs six grand. For $150, there is an optic attachment that converts the EX1 LCDs to the EX3-style viewfinder. I think I'll go that route, since the camera ops all seem to like that viewfinder and have given me good footage from that camera.
The EX1 is difficult for some folks to fine tune focus, especially on medium shots. At Z50, there's not a lot of differential focus between the 1st and 2nd Violin sections. Peaking can show red around both sections. Last week, I got footage at an opera, in which the soloist was partly in focus and the violas behind her were fully in focus. It was bad enough that the concert hall didn't have enough lighting on the soloist and that she was dark-skinned, causing her to blend in with the general luminance of the violas, but not having her in focus just makes it worse. These are issues I need to solve, but the money I'm making on these concerts is not enough to justify a $2000 purchase per camera.
 
abereut said:
That means, Huy, that 1:1 pixel mapping will not allow you to see full 1080p ( or full 1080i) image , only mapped portion of it. And it is exactly what I stated.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry but you're being completely nitpicky here. For practical purposes, you will only ever be focused on a single point in the image. Meaning that 99% of the time you do not need to see the entire image, only the point that you're interested in focusing. Even in a situation where you're pulling focus it will basically be a serious of focus marks and most pros don't even look at the monitor. 1:1 allows you to see that particular point at full res, which is almost as good. Would a 1080p native monitor be better? Absolutely. But practically does it make a huge difference? Probably not.
 
basspig said:
All very interesting points. I know it's hard to make a profit on a niche item, really I do. But it's okay if the camera it's being used with costs more than twenty grand. If a monitor costs more than 10% of the camera cost, it's too much. That's why I don't use matte boxes and other stupidly-overpriced add ons to 'pimp out' my cameras.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but basing your entire gear investments around the value of your camera when the camera is the thing that's depreciating in value every single day doesn't make any sense to me. You should be investing more in these support gears as they're the thing that will hold their value over time as you move from camera to camera.
 
Huy Vu said:
(...)For practical purposes, you will only ever be focused on a single point in the image. (...) 1:1 allows you to see that particular point at full res, which is almost as good. Would a 1080p native monitor be better? Absolutely. But practically does it make a huge difference? Probably not.
Click to expand...
I got your point. Really sad you didn't get mine. Anyway, it is nice you have enough funds to be pampered with high–plus end equipment. Most of the folks don't have such a luxury. (We –most of us, at least- have two eyes. For practical purpose, cameraman only needs one, – one is almost enough. Are two eyes better, than one? Absolutely! But practically, does it mean a huge difference? Probably not) .Here "almost" and "probably" are fine expressions, but I still hope that the development of electronics will bring us true 1:1 mapping, humanly priced for these using sub $10K cameras :)
 
A monitor that doesn't show the whole frame is precisely what I don't want. My guys are confused enough already about what is and isn't in the frame. Our old HDV cams didn't display the whole frame in the LCD. The EX cams do. For a long time, I'm grappling with them zooming out too far and getting overheads, wires and mics in picture. It's been an eternal struggle since was raised the mics up higher in December, so they should never ever be in a shot.
Gear that is electronic, any gear, devalues. Especially monitors that are constantly advancing in silicon technology. The only things that really hold their value are sticks and steadicams, certain matte boxes and a few lenses. All electronics goes DOWN in value. Luckily the EX line holds more value over time due to it's ground-breaking features per price.
Still, there's no way I'm going to spend a couple grand on a monitor that is not PERFECT in every respect. For two grand, it had better make coffee and do my laundry too. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top