Color LCD EVF instead of color CRT EVF, why?
 

If camera manufacturers can make a black & white CRT EVF monitor for pro or DV cameras, why can't they make color CRT EVF monitors in these cameras? In other words, why is it an LCD when a color EVF is involved? What is so much more involved about making the same CRT EVF color instead of black & white?

Principally power and weight considerations. Also, it's unlikely that there would be strong demand for for a color crt viewfinder in professional cameras.

I know there has to be real good reason, but how does color require more power or weigh more? As far as pro cameras as well as DV, color CRT EVFs would take the guess work out of being properly balanced in varying lighting situations and critical focus should still be the same unlike the sometimes questionable accuracy of LCD.

I've always wondered about this too. I understand expense, but why wouldn't someone want a color CRT viewfinder? It makes everything easier, in my opinion. With black and white, for me, things tend to blend in with each other, whereas, with color, for example: suppose you were shooting in a forest, and you wanted it to look pristine, but there's a piece of red garbage on the ground. In B&W, your eye might just pass right over tha piece of trash, but with a color viewfinder, you SHOULD spot it right away.

Now, of course you can all say "why wouldn't you see it with your naked eye before you started shooting," or "be more careful with your B&W then." But come. . .I'm just sayin'.

That's one thing I like about miniDV cameras, the issue described above, and, of course, instant white balance check.

James: it is well known that a crt tube eats more power than an
LCD/TFT screen. It also weighs more. Ken was looking at this
in comparison with color CRT and LCD / TFT.

So that's the reason why WE have LCD / TFT.

The reasons why pro's don't need / want a color CRT is that they:

1) are usually not responsible for the color. The cinematographer is who can watch on a seperate monitor or have checked it before hand. Focussing is much easier in B&W and this is what the camera operator is doing as well as checking framing. No need for color for that.

2) there is almost always at least 1 color CRT production monitor on the set for other people to watch the recording.

This is mainly it (if I've been correctly reading Charles Papert's posts <g>)

p.s. you can see the power/weight comparison between the XL1's
standard color viewfinder and B&W CRT one in this article:
http://www.dvinfo.net/canon/articles/article83.php

Or to sum it up:

Weight: 308g (color LCD), 1030g (B&W CRT, with power adapter)
Power: 1.2 watts (color LCD), 10+ watts (B&W CRT)

Rob. Thanks, but I'm aware that a CRT, no matter how small, weighs more than an LCD of the same size. I should have been even more specific such as with the PD-150/170 as well as all pro cameras that have a CRT as the primary EVF. I'm not talking about flip out LCD monitors. As far as weight is concerned, I'm sure it's just ounces in difference between CRT & LCD as the primary EVF. If the CRT was color, you wouldn't necessarily need a color field monitor which is not always available and is sometimes impossible for on the run reality. Way back before DV, why not make the CRT EVF in color for pro, full size cameras? That's my question. I think cost would be a factor more than anything else. But, just how much more could it be to add color to the same CRT whether it's in a pro, full size camera or the latest DV camera that still uses a CRT as it's primary EVF?

The color component carries more noise than the luminance portion of the signal. In other words the B & W image is sharper and easier to focus than the color image. B & W monitors (CRT's) typically give more lines of resolution.

Weight of monitors is less of an issue when you compare the weight savings to say the weight of the batteries or various lenses. Every bit of savings help, but the few ounces saved would not be a critical factor.