salim

Brought home a 5" blackmagic video assist from the office over the weekend, pretty bulky of a monitor with clunky controls that I personally wouldn't get myself, but it convinced me that 5" is more than enough to judge focus. 
Still the questions stands, what justifies the 2x price of the 502? IMO the Focus looks better in every aspect except battery slots and SDI.

Focus isn't the cheap brand, it is the cheap model! SmallHD 502 is 2 times the price of Focus, and a little bit more. Professional monitoring is very expensive, on the studio, or on the field (for some similar, and some different reasons).
I have ordered the Focus, because I believe it would be fine for low dSLR/mirrorless jobs for the next couple of years, and the price is right, and seemingly, the size/weight too.
More, and different technologies are coming, and other solutions (and resolutions!) will be the norm a few years from now.
I am already waiting for a kickstarter thingy that turns mobile phones into monitors (it is on hold at the moment, I hope they will deliver February/before Eastern). New mobile phone SoC and operating systems have better imaging and viewing capabilities, with wider gamuts and super extra sharp OLED and IPS screens, and definitely have the processing power to do what modern monitors do, on a fraction of the cost. I can imagine an S9 will be enough to power and process not only monitoring, but also recording, etc etc
If you have access to a shop, go see a couple of those, especially check the size. I always thought that a 7" is a must have, but after I did some very demanding, but with small crew jobs the last couple of years, I am still on the search of a 5" (actually, the perfect for me is 5.5", like my phones!), and Focus is the closest so far.
I was considering this for some year, https://www.amazon.com/dp/B073FDDDPP/ref=sspa_dk_detail_1?psc=1 what stopped me was the FP batteries, I didn't want another kind of batteries on my workflow!

I say try for yourself. For me a 7" monitor for a dSLR/mirrorless rig is overkill. Even on a smaller C100/FS5/JVC LS300 setup 7" is overkill.
If you have a bigger camera/production, then a Feelworld monitor is silly. Imagine Feelworld quality when I did that documentary, when the camera and lenses were more than 100.000euros.
I was the one linked the F550/F570 monitors, but just if anyone needs absolutely the minimum, on the other hand, it is just a good (or bad) old Feelworld, on a better chassis.
One way or another, cheap monitors will disappoint you. Ask the people here how many Freeworld/Lilliput/Whatnot have on their closets. I am waiting for my Focus, and because, that too, is a cheap monitor will disappoint me in the end, I just believe it will be alright for a couple of years.
Monitors are like tripods. In the end, you will pay for them!
 

That certainly is not the kind of "low light" scenario where a GH5/G80/etc would be unacceptable. 

Check out the Feelworld F570 (or F550)

5" is ok ish for pulling focus, but bigger is better. 

This is why 7" or large is ideal for a 1st AC. 

While 5" ish or less is ideal for a cam op. 

@Mark Romero 2 - to my eyes...the XT-2 was a better camera. Especially in the highlights. The center building is all clipping on every camera, except the Xt-2.  At the same time the midtowns on Xt-2 seem lower by 1/2 to 1 stop. So maybe the ISOs are not the same between these cameras. But purely on highlights, I would pick the XT-2

@Mark Romero 2 - to my eyes...the XT-2 was a better camera. Especially in the highlights. The center building is all clipping on every camera, except the Xt-2.  At the same time the midtowns on Xt-2 seem lower by 1/2 to 1 stop. So maybe the ISOs are not the same between these cameras. But purely on highlights, I would pick the XT-2

Well... for me personally, it was the low light ability, dynamic range, the 4K image resolution, and the quality / usability as a stills camera (since the VAST majority of my work is stills).
I mentioned that Max had suggested the G85 is a better camera for most people, and certainly I would agree with it. But he also posted a head to head video a year ago (which is when I bought my a6300)
 
And in that head to head video, the a6300 really appealed to me.
Also, Brandon Li uses Sony and his work is beautiful.

I too am looking for external monitors to replace the external LCD on my camera. I've tried a 7" before which looked great, but it's a bit too clunky. I suppose a 5" will be plenty to judge focus?
Also I'm a bit confused about the price difference between the FOCUS and the SmallHD 502, could anyone clarify what the 502 offers, besides ports & battery slots, that the Focus doesn't?

Is it really that important? Unless you get a resolution boost (like with the a7S mk1) or a bit depth boost (such as GH4 or F3), then I don't see the point. Not a compromise I'd lean towards. 

And this why I struggle to see why people would prefer Sony over a Panasonic G80/G85. 
(ditto it kinda applies to the next tier up too, GH5 vs a7S/A7R series)
 
Exactly!

As an a6500 / a6300 / a600 user, a few things to think about:
If you get an a6500 / a6300, then I would suggest that you strongly think about getting an a6000 as well as a B camera / 1080p camera. The 1080p out of the a6000 is better than that of the 1080p our of the a6300 / a6500 (I am working on a comparison video on this).
Unfortunately the a6000 only does 1080p at 60fps, so in case you need 120fps, you would have to use the 1080p of the a6300 / a6500 (or a different camera).
The 4K of the a6300 / a6500 is really gorgeous.  the problems are the screen dims so you have to be good at shooting blind, it tends to overheat (a6500 is better at refraining from overheating), and the rolling shutter.
I prefer the colors of EOSHD Pro Color profile (I just have the original version... was there a version 2? I know I don't have version 3).
But I actually might like Dom Blond's profiles as well (uses Cine 1 and Cine 4 Gammas). I encourage you to look them up on youtube.
The AF of the a6300 / a6500 is much better than that of the a6000, espescially with adapted lenses. The Sigma 19, 30, and 60 f/2.8 primes are sharp but they don't take advantage of the full autofocus functions of the a6300 / a6500.
I think there is a subtle improvement in stabilization when using my a6500 with IBIS on the crane compared to using the a6300 (or a6000) with no IBIS (only lens-based OSS) on the crane when walking. If I am using my crane and PANNING, I prefer to turn stabilization off... at least, that is how I feel about it today. Tomorrow I might find that having stabilization on when panning using the crane is better. We shall see.
And if you think that you are going to be using some cheap manual focus primes than the a6500 is the way to go because of the IBIS. The other route might be an MC-11 adapter and a couple of Canon EF lenses or Sigma for canon lenses (people love the 18-35 f/1.8 on an a6500). 
The a6300 and a6500 are really excellent stills cameras, by the way. The a6000 is no slouch at stills, either, to be honest. I prefer the a6500 the most but, of course, it is the most expensive. The IBIS is not bad (for stills). I was able to shoot some clean stills with my 85mm lens on my a6500 around 1/20th of a second (holding my breath, very GENTLY pressing the shutter button, while leaning against a wall for stability). Since 85mm on crop sensor is around 130 on full frame, that is around three stops of IBIS functionality for stills in the real world (if you are very careful).
I have a D750 and since I NEVER used the viewfinder (neither on my Nikon bodies nor on my Sony bodies), the LiveView AF of the D750 can't keep up with that of the a6500 / a6300 (or even a6000).
Having said all that, the a6500 is not for everyone. Be sure to re-read the negatives I listed above.
As Max Yurev said in one of his videos, for MOST people the Panasonic G85 is going to be a better camera than the a6500. 
Hope this helps.

No waveforms.
No SDI. 

Kinda lacking in the "pro features department" :-/
Very rough rule of thumb to consider:
AC => use 7 inch (or bigger)
Op => use 5 inch (or smaller)

Edit: 

Hmmm... been looking into this out of curiosity, and the 5.7" HDMI monitor which is the Feelworld F570 is very tempting.  Yes, it is very bare bones, and lacks features I wish it had, but at only US$190 with free shipping, it looks like quite the steal!

If you go for cheap. There is also a F570. A monitor is a must, even more so with the dimming Sony cameras, but in general, 3" is too small for accurate monitoring and focusing.

How does NX1 AF compares to A6500 or Canon's PDAF? 
I was very excited about the this new panasonic as I'm about to invest into a new video system until I saw the rumors out of Fuji. With IBIS, etc. 
I'm only waiting for Nikon to leak their upcoming mirrorless wonder, to make my decision even more confusing since I own many nikon lenses. 

Oscar SoundTech Lavs is the usual low budget recommendation.
 

It is a non-issue. And as you can see the reviewer in the end goes with Sony, as they're the way of the Future. (G3 really needs to be updated to a G4 I reckon)

@IronFilm why do you want a receiver that it only has antenna diversity when 2ch are connected, and true diversity only when one is? I wouldn't trust anything with antenna diversity in this time of age.
What I said about the Deity is that it not only tried to mimic what the 416 does (for me, and other people at JWS, especially the experienced Pet Verrando, it obviously is a lesser option), but also tried to mimic the shape and design of it! What was the need to copy exactly the shape and design of another product? Rode didn't copy the Sennheiser design. My opinion is that the NTG3 is a more reliable, and better acoustically mic than the Deity too, but you will let us know of its longevity, as I do not own one, but the 416s and NTG3s are still going strong, after so many years. Anyway, I criticized the lack of originality, it is a completely different mic inside, but outside is the same, go figure. I am not sure if I could have any use of it, I really doubt if it is much better than the MKE600 to be honest, and that mic can be more versatile in specific situations (especially with the battery, when you want to save on phantom power).  Here, the basic version (without the Rycote and the windjammer) is almost 500euros, if it was a similar price to the MKE600, including the extras, then maybe I would have consider it, but now, the NTG3 and the 416 are very close to that price (the NTG3 obviously closer).
The battery compartment on the Sonys can fail after heavy use. We already have a few that sprang out (if this is a word!) on their own, actually I had more instances of having issues with the little plastic things jump around on set than interferences (which is great). Obviously is a better design that to have to open a whole door to change batteries, but unfortunately it ain't a bulletproof design. Lectrosonics is more accurate with their battery compartments!
I got the impression that @salim ain't a sound man, for a lot of cameramen, doing a bit of sound (especially sit down interviews, or static stuff), a very affordable Rode set can be enough, and better than the Saramonic's and Bayou's (or whatever they called. Someone brought me some on a set for me to use. I almost freaked out, but I just laughed!) of this world. Rode here is 40% of the price of Sony's by the way.
 

That is why the Focus is a brilliant option. It is meant to be used by single shooters. Not only that, but from its own battery, you can power your camera (there are dedicated bundles officially, by SmallHD for most cameras. I have ordered the GH5 one, even though I do not have one, everyone around me seems to getting, or have one, so there are plenty of cases that this may help somehow, and it is only 100$ more).
Blackmagic Video assist 5"  is 143x90x30.5 and 362and the Focus is 133x83x19mm and 106gr, do you get the point here?
As about the focusing, people were focusing without Canon Dual Pixel for 100 years, and they did fine. I am a big fun of Canon, and nothing is even close right now, but you can do great things manual, that not even Canon can. Recently I was doing focus pulling on a feature documentary, Canon C300mkII and Zeiss/Arri lenses, most of the times I was doing everything by the eye looking through a TV Logic 7" on the camera rig, which is worst in daylight than the Focus (and cost a few times more). The problem here, is most people using photographic lenses, which are not right for our job. That is another issue though.

Been talking to Salim a bit on PM about the Atomos I have.  The more I think about it, the more I believe he has adequate equipment for his shoot.  An external monitor may help with getting shallow focus, but it will  will create a host of other problems.  
First, shallow focus: I'm sure others have more experience than me here.  I find it difficult enough in photography.  In video?  Unless the person is very still, shallow focus is almost impossible to track.   When I see it attempted on TV there's always a second or two when the subject gets out of focus (and that's after they've picked the best clip from a bunch of footage).  What I find difficult about shallow focus in a moving object is determining the direction of someone moving from a 2-dimensional screen.  Having stereoscopic vision allows us to make the determination, somewhat. A monitor is like looking at the scene with one eye. So, though I can see when the focus pixels fire on the screen, getting them back once the subject moves, that's a challenge unless I know the marks they subject is going for.  Generally I don't.  So I can't quickly figure out which direction the subject is moving. Camera autofocus doesn't have some magic in this AFAIK.  That's why Canon came out with new STM lenses for the dual pixel (which have special, quiet, focusing micro motors).  I believe the camera essentially focus hunts back and forth, but so quickly that you don't notice it.   This is the same reason Nikon struggles in video focus.  The autofocus system is designed to find focus as quickly as possible, for the photo, not keep in focus once it's there.
So the question, often posed here on EOSHD, is, can you manually focus as well with a Nikon say, as Canon's computer can with its DPAF, or even the new Sony cameras?  My 2-cents is, not any more.  I either use DPAF or I zone focus.  
All that means an external monitor, to me, has marginal benefits over either the focus peaking on the camera, a magnifier on the back LCD.  Salim might be better putting in time practicing with what he has with talent that is given marks to hit.  The A6000 has very good autofocus with the 35/1.8.  
The reason I stopped using the Atomos is mounting it puts you between a rock and a hard place.  You with use a small swivel, which due to the leverage of the screen, always threatens to come lose and the monitor crashing down onto the camera, or you use a cage where now you have a big rig that will CERTAINLY draw attention in the tube, or any place where cameras are not welcome.  The cable to the camera adds huge mental stress to me, at any rate.  Then there are the batteries.   Like light rays, every additional wire or battery you add to your rig exponentially raises the risk of some failure if not your anxiety.  That why such setups need a crew.  You need to delegate those worries.
Some proof to what I'm saying is I never see youTube videos with a single shooter using an external monitor.  It's always a crew of some sort.  Once you get into that, then you really have to balance your investment in the monitor with everything else.  And if you have a crew, my guess is the talent will want to put time into learning their marks so as not to get cold looks at the evening post party
 
 
 
 

I sold the GH5 because of AF, it does not compare to A6500. 
My point of view is that Canon DPAF is the golden standard, it just works and is reliable enough for pro use. 
Then you have Sony A9 level. It is very good, just one step under DPAF but it works well and is enough for gimbal work. 

GH5 is not enough for gimbal work from my use. To many shots were it would hunt or just loose focus for 2-3seconds, and even when it is spot on you have some micro hunting happening in the bokeh. This is due to contrast af technology. 
I guess Panasonic did a great job for CAF type, they just used the wrong technology. 
 

his GH5 videos have less camera shake with the GH5 IBIS than his Sony/Canon, so they look better to the average viewer even if the AF isn't as good.
I agree Panasonic have to fix the AF quickly, even if it means releasing a PDAF GH6 next year. 
Much as I like the GH5, I need AF for gimbal work so have to use NX1 or A6500.

Casey switched from Canon and Sony to using the Panasonic GH5 almost 90% of the time. He still has other cameras but it's the GH5 that really turned things around.
Canon failed to give YouTubers like him what they need... 4K, small file sizes, articulated screen, all in the same camera... so the 5D Mk IV for all it's Dual Pixel AF goodness languishes in the corner as do the 1080p Canons - Big up-swing in noticeable quality when Casey switched to the GH5's 10bit 4K.
Hopefully though, the number of out of focus shots in Casey's video where the camera selects the background instead of the subject will whip Panasonic into action to sort out some form of Dual Pixel AF competitor technology. Or maybe Casey doesn't mind... vlogging is a raw style, doesn't need to be formal and correct all the time. I do think AF in video mode is the next thing for Panasonic to get right though. It's a priority in my mind.

interesting, but I meant this one https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1261643-REG/ikan_dh5e_5_signal_support.html the one above seems like a 7" one.
Honestly, I was looking for something at the 500$ segment most which could be very small and light, so a 5"  and the difference in brightness is huge vs the Focus. You should check the Ikan thought, if it enough for you, that 299$ price is excellent; in Europe it is still around 500euros (so, it is a no brainer to go for the Focus). I can get an Ikan for 300euros slightly used (maybe used once or twice) and I am still thinking about it, but it seems to me the Focus is a better option.
(I hate those Secced tripods by the way, I have seen a lot failing terribly through the years, and the sound man needs an indoors mic!)

I am buying a SmallHD Focus myself. I want a 5" small and light, but other monitors ain't very bright on sunny days (and we got a lot of those here!), so I assume this one for a very good company will be sufficient. Another good, cheaper one, is the Ikan 5" 1080p (Focus is 720p), that accepts 4K and has touch screen functionalities too, and is like 299$ in US, but it seems flimsy.
I have mixed feelings about monitors/recorders. I would take the monitor for monitoring, but I am not very experienced with those. The Blackmagic 5" seems a worst option than the Focus, so I would get the SmallHD.

For a real true diversity 2 to 1 receiver you have to spend 2-4.000$, only for the receiver. 

Bro. I have found the best profile! I've shared it with so many people because they all want it it's so good.  it's got a very "Canon" look to it and it grades so nicely. It really adds a ton of depth to the image that lacks in the normal Sony profiles. It's all about that "color depth". 
THE SONY PROFILE
Black Level: 0 (it's disabled in s-log2 anyway)
Gamma: S-log2
Black Gamma: Range- Narrow, Level -7
Knee: auto
Color Mode: sgamut3.cine
Saturation: +32
Color Phase: -2 (this is for a7sII and a6300, for original a7s use -5)
Color Depth: +6 (all of them)
Detail: -6
Expose 1.5 to 2 stops over.
You may need to dial the green tint out in the white balance shift. Let me know how you like it. I found this profile somewhere on dvxuser and have fallen in love with it. Now all my friends shoot on it 

Saw your post on jwsoundgroup, and Mike gave a good tip:

 
 
http://jwsoundgroup.net/index.php?/topic/30739-wireless-in-europe/&do=findComment&comment=341495