15 Jun 2017

SmallHD’s 1703-P3 on test

  • Written by 
SmallHD;s 1703: "The combination of price, feature set and that very nice software suite is hard to dislike." SmallHD;s 1703: "The combination of price, feature set and that very nice software suite is hard to dislike." RedShark News


RedShark Review: Phil Rhodes finds lots to like with the newest entrant into the range.

SmallHD refers to its monitors as “the world's most rugged,” and that was certainly very clear when we reviewed its 13-inch display, the 1303. The substantial build made the 1303 feel a bit bulky, although it is certainly very hard to hurt, will doubtless last decades, and is overall a very wonderful thing.

By comparison, the design of the 's milled aluminium shell seems less oversized against the larger display panel. The 1703 range (of which there are three) will, therefore, suit productions which don't need to travel absolutely as light as possible, although the battery mount and slide-out carry handle maximise portability as far as possible. The 1703 also retains the fantastic option to clamp a replaceable plastic panel ($60) in front of the display, something that should be a standard feature on all monitors that stand any chance of being used on set.

The specific device under test here is the which provides a full 10-bit signal pathway and will, therefore, find use both on set and in post production. It sells for $3500, and a stand is available ($270) for desktop work. It is a 1920 by 1080 display, and while some would argue for 4K, there's really very little need on a panel of this size. At an effective resolution of 133dpi, 1080p is already denser than is really visible at normal viewing ranges. The display does not support downsampling of 4K material, with component 1080p60 via SDI, or RGB 1080p60 in 12-bit via HDMI being the most demanding format supported.


Two small latches retain the replaceable transparent front panel

The 1703-P3 enjoys a peak brightness of 450 nits, which is healthy for a non-HDR display. For more power, there's the 1703-HDR which is capable of 1100 nits and goes for a dollar less than $4000. The HDR variant's contrast ratio, at 700:1, is actually less than the 1500:1 claimed for the P3 version we're reviewing, which is something of an inevitable compromise of very high output TFT-LCD panels. The 1703 HDR, which supports Rec. 709 colour only, is perhaps most directly intended to give us sunlight readability, although HDR features, in general, will make good use of the high bit depth handling that's available on all three 1703-series displays.

Ten bits per channel would give us a billion colours; twelve would give us a rather alarming 68,719,476,736, though it isn't so much that we actually need to display all those colours. Liquid crystal display panels won't actually do that anyway. It's more that we need extra data to take into account the losses of processing. Taking a (notionally) very low-contrast log signal and turning it into a (notionally) very high contrast HDR picture means that the brightness steps between digital code values get spread out a lot, so there had better be a lot of them to begin with. With intent to distribute HDR at 10-bit, we'd better get used to using more than that during production, so the 12-bit colour, providing 4096 levels per RGB channel, is just what we need.


SmallHD 1703 on the optional desktop stand

The third 1703 variant is a studio version, offering full coverage of the Rec. 709 colour gamut for conventional television production, or where people prefer a straightforward 709 preview. It's a little less powerful, maxing out at 300 nits, but at $3000 it's also the most affordable, and the electronics are identical. The calibration, LUTs and input-output processing are all there, it can load LUTs and save stills to SD card, that indestructible shell is the same and that tidy front panel layout with the rubberised keys is common to all models.

« Prev |

Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes is a Cinematographer, Technologist, Writer and above all Communicator. Never afraid to speak his mind, and always worth listening to, he's a frequent contributor to RedShark.

Twitter Feed