Monitors

D

DDirector

Veteran
I am considering on getting a monitor for my T2i DSLR camera. (Marshall 7")

Do you use the monitor features: Peaking & False Color?

Is it important or a good idea to have those features in the monitor? I haven't worked on many films, so I cant really say if I need it or not.

I dont know if it's wise to spend extra money to have those features in a monitor, or just go with a cheaper monitor that still has HDMI but does not have the features the Marshall has.

How important or non-important are those features when working with a DSLR?

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Second question.

I am in college, so I will have more equipment to use for my shoots, but they dont have monitors for their cameras. Only with the RED camera. The other cameras don't have any.

If I were to get a monitor, would I need additional in/outputs? Or just HDMI?
- What is it for anyways? ...Maybe if I knew what they were for, I would know if I would be needing them now or in the future.
 
Monitors help you judge..

Composition

Focus

Exposure

---

Peaking helps you judge focus
False colour exposure

You dont need those aids if you acheive these things using other methods

eg getting focus by marking out pre planned shots
or judging exposure using the histogram on the camera

So you dont need them

personally I dont like peaking any way because I dont think its accurate enough for big chip cams, but thats just me

If you are on a budget it is better to buy a cheaper monitor and get a decent shade so you can use it outside, some spare HDMI leads, and lots of spare batteries and a nice solid mounting arm

SMM
 
I find the peaking with a Canon DSLR to be untrustworthy - the aliasing of the image makes the peaking show "just about everything" as in focus. Even objects that are wildly blurry. This with a Marshall HDMI.

False color doesn't seem as useful to me as a histogram, either. But you can pop false color on in the middle of a shot, which is a plus. If you've been lighting long enough, I don't think it's that useful - a histogram gives you a much more precise look at what's going on with exposure levels.
 
Good point..

As with the aliasing, I have honestly never had an issue with it with my camera.
I have only noticed it once or twice in one of my videos. For some reason, a good reason, I have not had many issues with aliasing.

So I guess its not worth spending the extra money to have these features in a monitor. Which monitor, that is a 7" and has HDMI is worth getting then?
:D
 
Don't like false color ether, but having a real focus assistant (not just peaking but focus in red/blue) is IMHO the only reason for an external monitor, since framing can be done on the on-board monitor anyway.

my ct2, Frank
 
Postmaster said:
Don't like false color ether, but having a real focus assistant (not just peaking but focus in red/blue) is IMHO the only reason for an external monitor, since framing can be done on the on-board monitor anyway.

my ct2, Frank
Click to expand...

Guess there's not a crane in your future....
 
DDirector said:
Which monitor, that is a 7" and has HDMI is worth getting then?
:D
Click to expand...


I think either cheapee framing aid .. liliput?

Some decent res and functinoality, SmallHD Dp6

Or a very solid framing aid with good resistance to sunlight, Transvideo SD (coooostly)

S
 
DP6 is still expensive for a monitor. Its fairly close to the Marshall. Not really worth it.

Like you said, I looked at Liliput. It seems it would be good. '7" Liliput HDMI monitor'
http://www.coollcd.com/619AH-7-quot--HDMI-TFT-LCD-On-camera-field-monitor--no-touchscreen-_p634.html

Or the cheaper Marshall, which I dont see any diff. between this and the Liliput but the higher price & less accessories:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...HDMI_01_M_LCD7_HDMI_7_Portable_On_Camera.html

Its the right size, good price... seems to be alright.
It just doesnt have the additional in/outputs, which I dont know if its really needed or not.


*The one thing I would REALLY want the monitor to have is crop marks ~ 16:9, 2.35, etc.
Dont know how I would be able to get them on this monitor without the use of black tape. I dont know if the other monitors have that feature either.
 
Last edited:
The smallhd is higher res but that is irrelevant for your current camera

no I cant see what a marshall brings - sure its btter built than a cheapee

crop marks, live horizon, waveform, thats the sort of stuff in Transvideo monitors - they cost more than a car !

S
 
Unless you really step up to a solid production monitor they are all only good for framing. You have to spend serious money on a monitor to get one that will give you honest color and brightness.
 
Well, I need something more than just for framing.
Colour & Brightness should help a bit.
Pulling focus

And, how would I go about getting crop marks on my monitor? Is there any?


Im not looking to spend a whole lot of money on a monitor as I don't have a lot of money. The Liliput I mentioned before seems to be a good cheap price, but I dont know if it'll be worth it. I could in the future sell it and get something better if needed. But, im currently not working with any RED cameras yet. That's about 2 years from now.
 
Pro monitors have framing line choices, but they don't work properly with DSLRs - since the DSLR is sending a 4x3 image to the monitor that's "already cropped" to 16:9, and the resolution isn't standard, the crops won't align properly.

What does work is getting some sheets of static-cling plastic and marking them with a fine point sharpie. I've got one on my camera LCD for 2.35:1 and have just left it on under the hood. You can use the same material on a field monitor.
 
^Thats what I was thinking too. Buying those plastic overhead sheets and printing crop marks on it. But, I thought there would actually be crop marks on the monitors.


So, would the Liliput monitor be good enough then?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top