View Poll Results: If DSLR can use LCD as viewfinder, will u use it to shoot?

Voters
63. You may not vote on this poll
  • No, i will still use the traditional viewfinder.

    30 47.62%
  • LCD viewfinder is too un-professional!

    9 14.29%
  • Yes, I will use the LCD viewfinder

    32 50.79%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 34 of 34

Thread: If DSLR can use LCD as viewfinder, will u use it to shoot?

  1. #21

    Default

    Get a EOS 20Da to try out that function and you will know the result of using EVF for DSLR.....

    http://www.dpreview.com/news/0502/05...noneos20da.asp

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Singapore/Thailand
    Posts
    4,642

    Default

    yes i would - to take shots at all those weird angles... haha
    Budget wedding photographer :)

  3. #23
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Tampines & Sydney
    Posts
    256

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by espn
    Siao...

    1) The sensor needs to be continously powered (ie: shorter sensor life, battery life)

    2) Dust is even more easy to rest on sensor (ie: No shutter no mirror to protect sensor)

    3) The sensor need to 'freeze' the motion & AF when half-press (ie: like DCs, thus slower AF, slower tracking)


    WTH would anybody want to use LCD on a SLR. Defeats the purpose.
    Relax lah bro,
    here is not asking if it is possible, it asking that if it can be done, will you use it?
    For me it has it use, so i would say yes in certain suituation.
    Cheers=

  4. #24
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    CCK
    Posts
    1,051

    Default

    Definitely. Better peripheral vision for tracking sports and fast moving wildlife.

  5. #25
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Habourfront
    Posts
    869

    Default

    well...sometimes maybe. For macro photography and sports is definately useful. But somehow due the the huge size and weight of a DSLR i find using the optical viewfinder somewhat press your face onto the camera. This aids the hands in holding stably so its better

  6. #26

    Default

    Should add one option :

    " Yes when shooting low/difficult angle "

  7. #27
    Senior Member Hommie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    925

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CLQ
    Relax lah bro,
    here is not asking if it is possible, it asking that if it can be done, will you use it?
    For me it has it use, so i would say yes in certain suituation.
    Cheers=
    On the contrary, I think that's the way the future gonna go. SLR's reason for it because there are simply no other way to see exactly what you are shooting except using a mirror. Just like to turn base board game RISK, but now the technology have improved and changed the strategy game into a real time (Warcaft, Red Alert etc) game like the real world, the enemy don't wait for your turn.

    Avid turn base gamer will complain that the real time game happens so fast that you don't really have time to plan your strategy, it trains reaction instead. Think about it, the real world doesn't wait for your turn. The technology will improve to a point where the lag of the LCD will be as fast or so close to the real time that you can't tell the difference anymore. Example is the LCD of a videocamera, it is already very close to real time to me.

  8. #28
    Senior Member Hommie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    925

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dkw
    Definitely. Better peripheral vision for tracking sports and fast moving wildlife.
    Agree, definitely better.

  9. #29

    Default

    Sure its possible - can still keep the mirror but catch the light currently going to viewfinder using ccd/cmos for display on an LCD (pentaprism?). only thing is that you will get a preview, and miss the actual shot (especially with flash).

    Only a matter of time/technology.

  10. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by espn
    1 - If half press then LCD preview become active, then use what to focus? Manual? Half-press = focus, geddit?

    2 - Then I'll counter quote you in the sense that, won't DSLR become idiotic to not have a shutter/mirror, might as well just get the Minolta 7hi that can do manual focus?

    3 - focusing unit is on the glass, the half-press will need to drive the focusing, don't forget the sensor is electronic, it needs to update itself continously before feeding back to the LCD, that's why on DCs, there's the focus lag because of the feedback from the sensor to the LCD. Unlike SLRs, the image preview thru VF is optically done and not electronically!
    Actually, what I'm stating have been used in a form or another in camera technology for quite some time already... only waiting for the manufacturers to consider if economically feasible to implement.


    1... can implement something like the metering or IS or VR system activation mah.. initial half press will start all these system... then a simple time-out (user defined) to switch off loh.

    2... pls refer to this Pellicle Mirror cuz this is what I'm refering to. More specifically, the 3rd para under pellicle mirror heading. I quote "because the mirror dosen't move....". THis implies that both the flim and the viewfinder receives the light simultaniously.

    3... focusing unit of an SLR is independent unit as you see here . Again, can be implemented like the 1N RS. Thus the LCD should not affect the AF performance.
    Last edited by CYRN; 1st April 2005 at 10:30 PM.
    Gallery | Facebook Page Spreading the Good photography.

  11. #31
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Redhill
    Posts
    108

    Default

    i think it is technically possible, but it need two pieces of ccd or cmos only. one cheapo ccd use for viewfinder and focusing (so your viewfinder will be replaced by a piece of ccd, and u see on lcd), another high resolution one use for actual capturing.

    the slr concept is still the same. only different is "what the cheapo ccd see is what your pro ccd/cmos see"

    althought i still feel viewfinder is better, but no harm having extra function (provided the extra cost is low), haha...

  12. #32
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Tampines
    Posts
    602

    Default

    Instead of converting the DSLR to a digicam, i would rather DSLR have an option to use the LCD as a viewfinder. No need to be state of the art EVF, but just gd enough to get to difficult angles and waist level shots. But that won't be useful for macro photography, where inch perfect manual focussing is required.

  13. #33
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    waiaung.deviantart.com
    Posts
    535

    Default

    Yah.. the option will be good.
    And it will be even better if we can flip the LCD like some Compact cameras (eg. Canon G5)

    The DSLR cameras' view finder give me a great disabilty when shooting from very low angles like Shooting Grass, or some very small flowers.

    But I wont need to use it for 100%...
    Only for some time.
    My Gallery at DeviantART http://waiaung.deviantart.com

  14. #34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by espn
    3 - focusing unit is on the glass, the half-press will need to drive the focusing, don't forget the sensor is electronic, it needs to update itself continously before feeding back to the LCD, that's why on DCs, there's the focus lag because of the feedback from the sensor to the LCD. Unlike SLRs, the image preview thru VF is optically done and not electronically!
    The 'DC' focus lag is nothing to do with the 'preview' LCD. They tend to work completely differently from an SLR auto-focus.
    The 'average' digicam uses readout data from the main sensor - the same data that's generating the live LCD view. They are also often looking at multiple parts of the image before deciding which one to do the focus caculations on.
    We are talking a lot of data here, to be processed by a small low power/speed CPU.

    The (D)SLRs split their image onto a DEDICATED focusing receptor chip and a dedicated bit of hardware behind it does the focus.
    Even if they wanted to use the main sensor a DSLR sensor is hidden behind the mirror at this point. Also the sensors in DSLRs don't usually have 'video readout' modes. One of the reasons they have superior image quality is that they don't have the added complexity of the live video out mode on the imaging chip...

    The DC one is more flexable, as the focus point can be anywhere on the entire frame, but suffers from lag and accuracy issues. The SLR one is fast and precise but limited is limited to the number of points built into the focus sensor, more points being more expensive to manufacture.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •