How important is to have a personal on camera monitor assist ?

[Ram Nanda]

I'm thinking of buying a personal camera monitor, but real not sure about it. Reason to buy is 

- to relay on it for every shoot and be sure of the end image.

- to keep a library of luts

Is it worth having a personal monitor ? or to rent it when required ?

 

any suggestions for monitors with EL zone ? im looking in blackmagic, atomos and small hd.

 

[Nicolas POISSON]

I am only an enthusiast. Years ago I bought a Ninja V, and it has been one of the best purchase ever made for improving my skills. Compared to the built-in display of my DSLR, an external monitor brings:

• bigger, more precise, brighter image
• measurement tools: waveform, false colours (including EL zone for the Ninja)
• LUTs. I made a series of exposure compensated LUTs so that I can play with ISO like EI.
• calibration (included in the LUT as well - the calibration from Atomos is crap). However image accuracy is secondary in an uncontrolled viewing environment, which is often the case on set.
• clean image: I can switch between measurement / clean image quickly. I really like having an image 100% clean when framing. 

So I'd say: yes, a monitor is a safe investment. Maybe not an Atomos. These are not that cheap, and the software leaves room for improvements. For example, the waveform on the Ninja V is measured post-LUT, which I find useless (it is pre-LUT on the Shinobi). They are a bit noisy too. These were a great option 8 years ago, but nowadays ? Maybe the competition is better in this price range... or not.

You can reproduce EL zone with LUTs as well (I guess this is how Ed Lachman created this tool).

Edited May 6 by Nicolas POISSON

[John-Erling Holmenes Fredriksen]

I would love to have a monitor I love and trust, which I know is color calibrated, and which I "learn" to relate with, you know, the rest of the post process and everything. I've been in the market to buy a personal monitor to bring with me on shoots, but I've not found the product yet. I keep bouncing back and forth between TVLogic and SmallHD on shoots, and always feel like they put too much emphasis on brightness and sharpness and "operator features" or "focus puller features". The cinematographer's monitor, with emphasis on color rendition and pleasing image presentation, has so far only been a dream.

Now, the flip side of the coin is that making a monitor for field work is immensely difficult, because of the lighting conditions it will be used in. Fine, if you're always in a studio, with controlled lighting, but step out in the bright sun, and that 250 NIT screen with the nice color rendition is not so useful anymore 😅

Anyway, as long as it's just the TVLogic and the SmallHD out there, I've not found it worth it to own one myself just to be able to calibrate it on my own. I have my 1st AC calibrate with all the other monitors in our package for each job, trust my light meter, and stay mindful about changing brightness on the monitors to at least roughly match whatever lighting conditions we are working in. IE: On the SmallHD, 0 or 20 brightness indoors or in studios, and then raise it slightly if outdoors in bright sunlight.

If someone ever makes the cinematographer's dream monitor with high emphasis on having the best looking panels and the best looking color rendition and excellent calibration features with whatever is deemed workable brightness, let me know! I'll still be in the market.

[Luanda Gouessan]

I heard from a reputable DP that he uses Flanders Scientific monitors. I believe they're pricey, but apparently the best monitor for the professional cinematographer...

[John-Erling Holmenes Fredriksen]

Flanders apparently is very good, but has been acquired by Atomos, and I guess for now the future of their products is uncertain. If Atomos is able to churn out some really good and accurate monitors in the future, I'd be very happy.