Live view in a digital SLR?

[kwajo.com]

I don't think I would ever use the LCD to frame my shots, especially considering I manual focus almost all my photos, you just can't beat a nice, bright pentaprism (not pentamirror) to focus and frame your photo. not to mention all the issues suggested above about camera shake from holding it away from your face.

the E-330 looks intriguing, but I don't like how the Live-view system makes the viewfinder a bit more dull than it should be because of how it 'syphons' light off to the sensor. I can see it being a big hit with some, but if I was going to switch to Olympus I'd wait for the replacement to the E-1

 

[bousozoku]

Well said revenuee.

The other aspect of the E-330's introduction is that many consumers buying a DSLR after using a digital P&S are looking to that live view. Everyday at work I have a customer that will hold the DSLR away from them looking for that live view.

The question will be, are consumers going to pay the price for this new feature?

Well, that's the thing. The body is potentially more expensive than anything else from Olympus at the moment at $1000 vs. $599 for an E-500 and $799 for an E-1. Then again, if you're going to pay $1200 for an underwater enclosure, what's the big deal?

I don't think I would ever use the LCD to frame my shots, especially considering I manual focus almost all my photos, you just can't beat a nice, bright pentaprism (not pentamirror) to focus and frame your photo. not to mention all the issues suggested above about camera shake from holding it away from your face.

the E-330 looks intriguing, but I don't like how the Live-view system makes the viewfinder a bit more dull than it should be because of how it 'syphons' light off to the sensor. I can see it being a big hit with some, but if I was going to switch to Olympus I'd wait for the replacement to the E-1

I don't know that I would use it either unless I had something at floor level that I was trying to capture.

I'm still waiting for the E-1N or whatever it'll be called. Hopefully, it will arrive this summer.

 

[Clix Pix]

Everyday at work I have a customer that will hold the DSLR away from them looking for that live view.

Hee, hee..... I have to admit that after years of shooting with Coolpixes as my only introduction to digital cameras, the day that I decided that it was time for a D70, while I had done some reading online I had not actually seen or handled a D70 or any other DSLR. Off I went to the store, the sales associate handed me the camera, I hefted it for a moment and commented on its weight and then turned it on. It immediately felt good, though, like an old friend, as it reminded me of my N90 35mm film camera. I reflexively looked at the LCD. Huh? It wasn't on? I looked for the button to switch from viewfinder to LCD, which is what my Coolpix had, a feature which I used often, since I preferred using the viewfinder in many situations. The sales associate cleared his throat gently and said, "on a DSLR the only time the LCD is on is AFTER you've made the shot." Uh.... Oh. I took a quick shot and sure enough, lo and behold the LCD screen showed what I had just shot. Thus was my introduction to DSLR cameras....

I have known of people who have balked at buying or using a DSLR because they were so accustomed to the live preview in a prosumer digicam; one woman finally did succumb eventually, and now she can't imagine why she ever thought using a viewfinder would be a hassle.

As to whether consumers will jump to embrace the new Oly DSLR with the live preview, that remains to be seen. It could be that some first-time DSLR buyers coming off a prosumer digicam will, and of course they'd also have to invest in a couple lenses. The other target audience would be those who already have Oly lenses from another body or those who have specific purposes for which this would be ideally suited, such as we've discussed in other posts in this thread.

It will be interesting to see how this new camera fares....

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

Well, that's the thing. The body is potentially more expensive than anything else from Olympus at the moment at $1000 vs. $599 for an E-500 and $799 for an E-1. Then again, if you're going to pay $1200 for an underwater enclosure, what's the big deal?

That is my concern about the concept. If the consumer does not buy this new camera, I think the concept will die.

I wish for two things out of the E-330; a price difference of $100 over a non-live view camera, and video recording capabilities.

As to whether consumers will jump to embrace the new Oly DSLR with the live preview, that remains to be seen. It could be that some first-time DSLR buyers coming off a prosumer digicam will, and of course they'd also have to invest in a couple lenses. The other target audience would be those who already have Oly lenses from another body or those who have specific purposes for which this would be ideally suited, such as we've discussed in other posts in this thread.

It will be interesting to see how this new camera fares....

Right you are.

Evidently live-view is somewhat in demand. In Europe there is a device that attaches to a DLSR eyepiece allowing for live-view. In fact there are two models. The newest allows for time release for compatible DSLRS.

Don't remember the name, but one of UK members may chime in.

 

[JDar]

LCD composition utility works for me

I'm one who appreciates the moveable, twistable lcd viewing screens on the Nikon 990 and 8800 so much that I can't seem to move on.

There is great utility for me to be able to hold the camera overhead, waist level, or arms' length out, or otherwise stabilize it on a rock or half hidden behind a tree and still see the composition and data. I want Nikon to produce a better unit than the 995, the S4, and not as humongous as the 8800. However, this line seems to be EOL.

Composing through a viewfinder now seems restricting and old fashioned compared to using the lcd screen. I don't need a professional level camera with interchangeable lenses and all that goes with it. Been there, done that. Just build me a high quality unit that fits into a CamelBak pack like the old 990--I still love it and know better than to chase megapixels in trying to improve quality and specific utility for me.

 

[Clix Pix]

I'm one who appreciates the moveable, twistable lcd viewing screens on the Nikon 990 and 8800 so much that I can't seem to move on.

There is great utility for me to be able to hold the camera overhead, waist level, or arms' length out, or otherwise stabilize it on a rock or half hidden behind a tree and still see the composition and data. I want Nikon to produce a better unit than the 995, the S4, and not as humongous as the 8800. However, this line seems to be EOL.

I loved my CP 990 and CP995. Totally adored them. Then I moved on to the 8700 which had a form factor more similar to an SLR, and that raised my expectations that it would perform like an SLR. Well, that camera had a few flaws, one being that there was no filter thread on the lens, and it was very slow. Along came the 8800, which I snapped up eagerly, again anticipating that THIS would be "the one," that it would be a lightweight all-in-one substitute for a DSLR. Wrong. I soon became very disenchanted with the 8800. Only a few months later did I give up on it and head for a DSLR.

The differences between the 8800 and the D70 were day and night. FINALLY, a fast, responsive camera! More responsive in terms of lenses and definitely more responsive in terms of uploading to the memory card and buffering. A tradeoff which I was more than willing to make. That lens on the 8800 is a beauty, though, and for doing macro or shots where subject movement is not an issue and where speed isn't a priority, it truly excels. There are those who think that the lens developed for the 8800 was a sort of "test lens" in anticipation of the separate 18-200mm VR which Nikon now has available for users of DSLRs. But, yes, getting back on-point here, that swivel LCD screen is a really neat feature to have on any camera as it really does make getting those difficult shots a lot easier. And, yes, in some ways it is easier to compose by looking at the LCD screen as a "frame" around your prospective image. I do miss having that on my DSLRs.

 

[JDar]

Clix Pix, I really appreciate your thoughts on the 8800. I've used a friend's 8800 extensively and unlike every other Nikon product I've used, the 8800 doesn't fit in my hand well or satisfactorily or however it should to feel "right." Loved the camera otherwise, though, especially the capability (but not the appearance) of that lens. The remote triggering function was sort of weird, too, I recall. Still, it's a lot of capability for the money.

 

[Clix Pix]

Clix Pix, I really appreciate your thoughts on the 8800. I've used a friend's 8800 extensively and unlike every other Nikon product I've used, the 8800 doesn't fit in my hand well or satisfactorily or however it should to feel "right." Loved the camera otherwise, though, especially the capability (but not the appearance) of that lens. The remote triggering function was sort of weird, too, I recall. Still, it's a lot of capability for the money.

Yes, the 8800 really had such promise when it first came out: lots of zoom range, lots of megapixels, great macro capabilities (for which Nikon Coolpixes have always been prized) and of course it was lighter weight than any of the DSLRs available at that time. I really wanted to love that camera, but time after time I'd take it out to shoot and later, when reviewing the images in the computer, would be disappointed. Also I became frustrated when trying to shoot and totally missing out on potential images because the darned thing was still trying to upload to the memory card. Even when fiddling with it by tweaking settings there were problems. Trying to use it in manual focus was a joke, with a very cumbersome approach through the menu system instead of simply being able to flick a switch. When I got my D70 I was enthralled at how much easier I could control certain basic functions, manual focus being one of them. Sure, most of the time I rely on autofocus but there are times when you do need to set the camera/lens on manual focus.

I've still got my 8800 but I haven't used it since I got my D70 and later the D200 and probably won't. I probably should try to sell it....

 

[G4scott]

I think live view in DSLRs was bound to happen sometime, and like all first generation technologies, it's going to have it's downsides. On the bright side, it opens the door for a new type of SLR, and if demand is high enough, other companies will probably soon follow suit.

The problem remains, though, that a DSLR is still best viewed through the viewfinder for more accurate composition and focusing abilities.

I'll be interested to see if Canon or Nikon come out with their own live view DSLRs.

 

[bousozoku]

Number 2 has been announced by Panasonic: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0602/06022609panasonicdmcl1.asp

It's a lot different, though, with Leica lenses that include aperture rings.

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

Number 2 has been announced by Panasonic: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0602/06022609panasonicdmcl1.asp

It's a lot different, though, with Leica lenses that include aperture rings.

Just caught up on the news from PMA, this sounds pretty exciting....

 

[bousozoku]

Just caught up on the news from PMA, this sounds pretty exciting....

Especially since it's a Leica-Panasonic-Olympus design. I had my doubts at first but it seems so much more now that I've read the details.

 

[pamcremer]

live view on any camera

That is my concern about the concept. If the consumer does not buy this new camera, I think the concept will die.

I wish for two things out of the E-330; a price difference of $100 over a non-live view camera, and video recording capabilities.



Right you are.

Evidently live-view is somewhat in demand. In Europe there is a device that attaches to a DLSR eyepiece allowing for live-view. In fact there are two models. The newest allows for time release for compatible DSLRS.

Don't remember the name, but one of UK members may chime in.

check out this website:
http://www.adi-digital.com/Zigview/page1/Zigview_page1.htm

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

No.

The SLR camera is designed to be used as a viewfinder camera. The resolution (ultimately infinite) is much higher than any LCD can display, especially if it's limited to the size of the camera's back. Also, adding this function (so i hear) impedes normal operation with the reflex mirror.

I will always use the viewfinder of an SLR, even if the option of a live view LCD was there.

That is your own personal POV. There are many customers that I see each day that want the live view from their P&S's in their new DSLR purchase.

IMO, Olympus could have won with the E-330 if they had a pivoting LCD screen; as well as being able to do video clips.

 

[bousozoku]

check out this website:
http://www.adi-digital.com/Zigview/page1/Zigview_page1.htm

That's nice but generic add-ons tend to be too generic and generally, do not work well. It's a solution looking for a market, I would say.

I'm betting the Olympus/Leica/Panasonic option has already made quite a few underwater friends.

 

[rt_brained]

Getting back to the original question—I don't use my DSLR's LCD for anything else but reviewing shots, however I wouldn't mind having a live feed to my laptop to help assist my clients see what's being framed. I do like the fact that I can feed shots from my 20D to my Powerbook as they're shot. It takes a few seconds, but it's helpful for clients to see everything on a larger screen.

To take the live feed step even farther...Just like transferring a comp to clear acetate and on top of the ground glass of a 4x5 or 8x10, I'd love to have the ability of live feed to a Photoshop window someday, utilizing the comp on a layer above it as an overlay to help compose the shot.

 

[jelloshotsrule]

there are times when using the lcd could be handy. not likely for the most professional/artistic photos... but sometimes you need to reach up over someone or put the camera away from your body to get a shot of something and it could be helpful. i say it can't hurt to have an option to use it, though of course the optical viewfinder would be preferable in 99.999% of the cases.

Getting back to the original question—I don't use my DSLR's LCD for anything else but reviewing shots, however I wouldn't mind having a live feed to my laptop to help assist my clients see what's being framed. I do like the fact that I can feed shots from my 20D to my Powerbook as they're shot. It takes a few seconds, but it's helpful for clients to see everything on a larger screen.

To take the live feed step even farther...Just like transferring a comp to clear acetate and on top of the ground glass of a 4x5 or 8x10, I'd love to have the ability of live feed to a Photoshop window someday, utilizing the comp on a layer above it as an overlay to help compose the shot.

that last part sounds awesome!

how do you feed shots to your computer as it is now? just have the camera hooked up while you shoot? or something more fancy?

 

[Mr. G4]

Since I saw information about the Olympus E-330, I've been wondering if people would actually view the LCD in order to get a photo.

I've seen plenty of consumers holding their point and shoot cameras a bit away from their faces in order to get a shot. I've tried it a bit with my mobile phone to get the feel of it.

Do any of you think that this will become popular with SLRs?

With the E-330 you can disable the live previeuw.

I used to have the Nikon Coolpix 950 with the swivel len, it's very useful in some situation.

Here is the teaser that Olympus put out before the announcement of the e-330

As you can see ... in some situation the live preview is very handy to have.

 

[jared_kipe]

No.

The SLR camera is designed to be used as a viewfinder camera. The resolution (ultimately infinite) is much higher than any LCD can display, especially if it's limited to the size of the camera's back. Also, adding this function (so i hear) impedes normal operation with the reflex mirror.

I will always use the viewfinder of an SLR, even if the option of a live view LCD was there.

Resolution is NOT infinite. Absolute resolution is limited by wavelength, you can't resolve something smaller than the wavelength of light you're using.

But in reality, resolution is dependent on the design of the lens. But people with good eyesight will see better through a viewfinder than a rear LCD.

 

[Silentwave]

Resolution is NOT infinite. Absolute resolution is limited by wavelength, you can't resolve something smaller than the wavelength of light you're using.

But in reality, resolution is dependent on the design of the lens. But people with good eyesight will see better through a viewfinder than a rear LCD.

Quite. I use the plain VF on my cameras and love it- with my current prescription I have 20/15 vision. If I wanted I could even get a 2x or higher magnifier for macro.

 

[ChrisA]

Having used camera with ground glass focusing screens, I find there is an advantage over a view finder. Not for action photos bt for anything that does not move looking at the small image helps make the composition. You can see what the photo will look like when printed and then maybe move the tripod slightly and recompose. You waste a lot less film with a ground glass screen. Now with an LCD you would see what the camera sees ncluding if there is any detail in the highlights or shadows.

ANy time you are hand holding the camera I'd want to use the reflex view finder but once you put the camera on tripod I would prefer the LCD or the ground glass. So for bildings, plants and landscapes the LCD might be best.

You I know you can't check critial focus in an LCD but the camera will have either autofocus or a litle green light that come on to tell you the manual focus setting is right.

 

[Abstract]

Especially since it's a Leica-Panasonic-Olympus design. I had my doubts at first but it seems so much more now that I've read the details.

Do Olympus lenses fit this Panasonic? Sorry, I skimmed through the DP Review.....um......review, and didn't read anything about this. I'm guessing Olympus built the camera and such, Panasonic supplied the MOS transistor/sensor, while Leica supplied the lenses, so I was just curious if there was more to this relationship than just Olympus helping with the camera design, and Panasonic making the sensors.

Anyway, the actual camera is beautiful, but it looks a bit thin and it may have a hand-grip that's too small, like the Rebel/350D. Oh, and it may feel a bit lopsided in terms of weight distribution. Either way, it's beautiful. Really. I can't wait to see it in person.

 

[Abstract]

But in reality, resolution is dependent on the design of the lens.

You've made good points, but realistically, the sensors nowadays aren't dense enough for the lens to matter unless you're getting into the 16MP Canons. The lenses intrinsic resolution is still better than my sensor can pick up, as with pretty much all DSLRs on the market.

 

[Mr. G4]

Do Olympus lenses fit this Panasonic? Sorry, I skimmed through the DP Review.....um......review, and didn't read anything about this. I'm guessing Olympus built the camera and such, Panasonic supplied the MOS transistor/sensor, while Leica supplied the lenses, so I was just curious if there was more to this relationship than just Olympus helping with the camera design, and Panasonic making the sensors.

Anyway, the actual camera is beautiful, but it looks a bit thin and it may have a hand-grip that's too small, like the Rebel/350D. Oh, and it may feel a bit lopsided in terms of weight distribution. Either way, it's beautiful. Really. I can't wait to see it in person.

Theorically, Yes. Since 4/3rd is a standard you can take any 4/3 lens and stick to nay 4/3 camer it should work. However, in order to use all the whistle of the Leica lens (which is designed for the Panasonic) you have to use the Panasonic body. I think the autofocus will work for any 4/3 body....not sure about the stabilizer.

 

[Abstract]

So the mounts aren't different? That's basically what I want to know, because it would make Panasonic very competitive if their mounts were the same. Olympus may sell more glass, but may lose camera sales to Panasonic.