The Mars X is designed to be a more cost-effective entry-level wireless video system than the companies Mars 400 and Mars 400S

• Transmit up to a 1080p60 HDMI signal 328′ to three iOS/Android devices with only 70ms latency
• Audio/video synchronization
• Built-in 1-hour 1300 mAh battery, rechargeable via a USB Type-C port with support for 5-12V wide voltage charging
• Built-in foldable antennas
• Rounded aluminum corners
• OLED display
• Eight frequency channels
• Channel scan feature for finding a channel with the least interference
• Companion iOS/Android HollyView app with monitoring features such as zebra, waveform, and false color
• 1/4″-20 mounting thread on the bottom and on the rear

The whole concept behind the Mars X is to provide an affordable, easy to use wireless monitoring solution that doesn’t require an RX unit or a monitor.

Unlike the existing Mars range, the Mars X is just an HDMI video transmitter that is designed to be used with iOS and Android devices.

It allows you to use up to three iOS or Android devices simultaneously to monitor images coming from any camera that can output a signal over HDMI.

Being able to view an image on a tablet or smartphone is a great alternative to using a TX and RX unit and an additional monitor. It is a very quick, affordable, and easy way to give a client, a producer or director, gaffer, or even a hair and makeup person a way of viewing what the camera is capturing.

Whenever I do corporate shoots I tend to use the Teradek Serv Pro (as my primary camera doesn’t have HDMI out). That way multiple people can see what you are doing on their own devices. There is a certain level of comfort and familiarity that a client has with being able to view images on a tablet or phone.

Sending a wireless video signal that multiple people can view at once on a dedicated app is hardly new. Teradek has been doing this for years, and most recently we have seen very cost-effective systems from companies such as Vaxis and Zhiyun.

For an affordable wireless TX unit, the Mars X is reasonably well made, especially for a product that comes in at under $200 USD.

It isn’t made out of plastic. Instead, the casing is made out of aluminum.

I don’t have any concerns about the build quality and I think Hollyland has done a good job on the Mars X.

The Mars X weighs in at 112 g (3.95 oz). It has physical dimensions of 1.97 x 1.97 x 0.71″ / 5 x 5 x 1.8 cm with the antennas folded in.

This small size and weight does mean it is well suited to be used on smaller mirrorless and DSLR cameras.

The Mars X is pretty basic. It has a very small OLED screen and there is just a single button for powering on/off the TX. That same button allows you to change channels.　

The OLED display screen shows the battery status, frequency channel, video format, and Wi-Fi password.

If we are just looking at the app-based latency, we need to look at how other wireless systems that can stream to an app perform. Even a device like the Teradek SERV Pro has a very noticeable delay. I did a quick test and found that I was seeing a latency delay of around 200ms. This same delay was there regardless of what camera I used or whether I was feeding an SDI or HDMI signal.

As a more realistic comparison, let’s look at the latency from the Accsoon CineEye Wireless Video Transmitter. The average latency when I did a test with the CineEye was 203ms. The latency on the Mars X was a lot less than competing systems.

How does the Mars X actually perform in the real world? Well, let’s find out.

I wanted to test the range and performance of the system. To test the range of the system I remained in line of sight of the TX and started walking away with a tablet that was receiving the signal from the Mars X. I found that I could get 110 m (360.9′) and still have a stable signal.

Now, Hollyland claims a maximum operating range of 328′ (99.97m) line-of-site, but this is usually only going to be achievable on flat, open terrain where there is little wireless interference. I wasn’t expecting the Mars X to reach its claimed operating distance, but it actually it exceeded it by about 10m.

As a comparison, I did a distance test with the Accsoon CineEye system. I found I could get around 160m before the signal dropped out.

Whenever I review wireless video transmitters I do the test in the exact same place under the same operating conditions. This way I get a good idea of how various competing systems compare.

A wireless video transmission system needs to have rock-solid reliability. It also has to not get in your way and be easy to set up and use. Look, I get it, this is a budget wireless system, it is not supposed to perform like a dedicated professional wireless system. In saying that, it still needs to be reliable and easy to use.

The image delay is something you need to be aware of depending on the type of camera you are using. My tests showed that image latency can vary dramatically. With the Kinefinity MAVO LF the latency was pretty good for an affordable wireless system, but when used with the Panasonic S1H is was pretty bad. If you are watching the signal and are not near the camera and can’t see what is going on, then image latency isn’t necessarily a big deal.

You need to clearly know that this system is not going to provide you with latency-free images. The results you are going to get will depend greatly on the camera you are using.