Quality of Olympus LCD screen

[bernards]

Hi fellow Olympus owners, seeking some opinions. I tested the e510 about 2 months back and decided not to purchase it due to the LCD screen. I will describe it as murky colours (more dull and gray than washout) and images look soft.

Today, I went out to buy the E3 and was shocked by the same LCD. After some RTM and poking around. I finally settled at +5 for the LCD brightness. But I am far from satisfied.

Side by side with my L1. I would only give the E3 LCD 5 points out of 10. I was using Nikon cameras previously and none of them was this bad. Having checked out a couple of D200 recently, the screens were top notch. Sharp pictures showed up sharp and punchy colours were brilliant. Unfortunately, for the E3, I have to guess what the end result would be.

Example. I took a shot with the 70-300 as a test. It looked so-so and rather dull on the camera. When I looked at the same pic on my computer. Wow. It was all sharp and punchy wide open. Shocking. I check the same pic on the camera again. It looked so-so as I remembered.

Is there a secret I am missing out here? Is it one of those things you need to learn to live with if you want to own an Olympus camera? Am I being too sensitive? Hmmm.

[drakon09]

Well, first and foremost, I only use the LCD to check three things: burnt highlights, composition and focus accuracy.

I don't use that itsy bitsy LCD to display my images.

[schon]

you're not alone - when i first got my e510, i felt the same way too. however, i've sort of gotten used to it. and i actually kinda like it this way as other cameras tend to oversaturate the colours on the lcd as compared to the 'actual' output.

[Hitman]

Same observation. Images on the 2.5" LCD are poor, but on the monitor, it's crisp and nice.

I've learned not to use the 2.5" LCD to check for sharpness of the pic.

[VSonic06]

You're not getting a camera solely to view images on its internal LCD right?

[Oly5050]

Originally Posted by bernards Example. I took a shot with the 70-300 as a test. It looked so-so and rather dull on the camera. When I looked at the same pic on my computer. Wow. It was all sharp and punchy wide open. Shocking. I check the same pic on the camera again. It looked so-so as I remembered.

I am sure you prefer this way versus the contrary??? ie. look great on LCD but crap on computer screen. Ideally, of course, is actual representationn, but E3 is not the perfect camera for everyone. BTW, the E3 already improve liao...better representation than the E510. A lot of people who dun know, judge the camera from the picture shown on the LCD. In the case of Olympus, u should not judge it by its cover ... in this case, the LCD image.

[bernards]

I don't think it Olympus will sell any cameras if they tried to market it solely for that purpose. I can imagine myself sitting down at the end of a day and run thru some of the pics I captured. Nothing strange or shocking about that.

Out of the three things drakon09 mentioned. I find that at least two of them will benefit well from a better LCD screen.

I would understand if old skool film shooters would have developed little to no habit of reviewing the shots. Those born of the digital age will rely a whole more on the LCD. It is a very useful tool. Anyway, this thread is not about why you use the LCD. It's more about the quality of the LCDs Olympus fits on the cameras.

Oly5050, oh yeah. That reminds me of my old Sony P&S. Great on the cam. But once it's big on the PC. Phew.

[drakon09]

For burnt highlights use the flashing highlights setting.

As for focusing accuracy, zoom in to x5, and if it's sharp there, then it's sharp.

There, that's your two things.

In any case, try not to be too reliant on the LCD - shots are missed from too much chimping.

[dorts]

Originally Posted by drakon09 For burnt highlights use the flashing highlights setting. As for focusing accuracy, zoom in to x5, and if it's sharp there, then it's sharp. There, that's your two things. In any case, try not to be too reliant on the LCD - shots are missed from too much chimping.

That's what I do as well.

I'm actually quite satisfied with the LCD, maybe because I've not use the better ones. But I rather get an articulating screen than a higher resolution/bigger screen. When you gain some, you lose some. But if got both, of course better.

[spidey89]

i agree with drakon,i check pictures on LCD for sharpness,zoomed to x3 on E-510,and framing

[OlyFlyer]

I prefer a crappy LCD before a crappy camera. In my opinion, if you really want to enjoy the image quality, you'll need at least a 20" LCD. I don't want to carry a camera of that size. Once you learned how to use the camera, you learn how to judge image from the LCD. I believe, even the super duper D3 LCD is crap compared to a half decent computer monitor.

BTW, since you seem to have been 'born with digital' and are not an old guy like me, which digital camera are you 'born' with? to me you sound quite inexperienced. Digital cameras have been around for quite a while now, but in dSLR world, the optical view finder is still THE most important way of regarding an image before it is taken. Chimping too much and you miss 80% of the shots.

Anyway, if you buy a dSLR for the LCD you have to get the Nikon D3. It costs a lot of money, not to mention any decent lens, and it also weights a half ton, but it has the worlds best LCD. Regardless of which, it won't make you a better photographer, it will make your looking like a body builder, since you have to carry all that weight.

[microcosm]

I find this thread a little weird... because no LCD can show me how my photo will eventually look like... since I develop the RAW image later and do wonders with it in Photoshop... if there is a camera that can show me how my image will turn out eventually from the LCD alone, I promise you I will dismantle the E-3 and eat it for New Year Day dinner and buy THAT camera!

The LCD's main purpose for me is for Live View composition, or if there was a bad metering setting problem (shadow/highlights/wrong EV setting, etc). Never to look at how it will turn out because in my case, it will NEVER be able to show that... 50% shooting skill, 50% post gives me that final picture.
Learn your digital workflow... Don't rely on your LCD to check on how punchy are your colours... that is weird and not to mention... wrong...

Sorry for being so direct.

[ongsw]

Originally Posted by OlyFlyer I prefer a crappy LCD before a crappy camera. In my opinion, if you really want to enjoy the image quality, you'll need at least a 20" LCD. I don't want to carry a camera of that size. Once you learned how to use the camera, you learn how to judge image from the LCD. I believe, even the super duper D3 LCD is crap compared to a half decent computer monitor. BTW, since you seem to have been 'born with digital' and are not an old guy like me, which digital camera are you 'born' with? to me you sound quite inexperienced. Digital cameras have been around for quite a while now, but in dSLR world, the optical view finder is still THE most important way of regarding an image before it is taken. Chimping too much and you miss 80% of the shots. Anyway, if you buy a dSLR for the LCD you have to get the Nikon D3. It costs a lot of money, not to mention any decent lens, and it also weights a half ton, but it has the worlds best LCD. Regardless of which, it won't make you a better photographer, it will make your looking like a body builder, since you have to carry all that weight.

I noticed the word 'Chimping' being used here. What does it mean? Thanks.

[microcosm]

Originally Posted by ongsw I noticed the word 'Chimping' being used here. What does it mean? Thanks.

Chimping (verb) - an action developed by DSLR users who regularly look at their LCD after taking a shot and kicking themselves afterwards for missing the action.

[drakon09]

Originally Posted by microcosm Chimping (verb) - an action developed by DSLR users who regularly look at their LCD after taking a shot and kicking themselves afterwards for missing the action.

LOL!

[microcosm]

Bro, the "verb"really did come from Chimpanzee...!

Watch a Nat Geo docu on Chimps and you will realise why the word "Chimping"... ha ha ha... I had a good laugh when an old man from Nat Geo talked to me about this... we were choking on our beers!

[tomcat]

Originally Posted by bernards Hi fellow Olympus owners, seeking some opinions. I tested the e510 about 2 months back and decided not to purchase it due to the LCD screen. I will describe it as murky colours (more dull and gray than washout) and images look soft. Today, I went out to buy the E3 and was shocked by the same LCD. After some RTM and poking around. I finally settled at +5 for the LCD brightness. But I am far from satisfied. Side by side with my L1. I would only give the E3 LCD 5 points out of 10. I was using Nikon cameras previously and none of them was this bad. Having checked out a couple of D200 recently, the screens were top notch. Sharp pictures showed up sharp and punchy colours were brilliant. Unfortunately, for the E3, I have to guess what the end result would be. Example. I took a shot with the 70-300 as a test. It looked so-so and rather dull on the camera. When I looked at the same pic on my computer. Wow. It was all sharp and punchy wide open. Shocking. I check the same pic on the camera again. It looked so-so as I remembered. Is there a secret I am missing out here? Is it one of those things you need to learn to live with if you want to own an Olympus camera? Am I being too sensitive? Hmmm.

I have the E-510, L1 and E-3. While I would agree with you that the LCD of the E-510 is the worst of the three, I would beg to differ that the LCD of the L1 is better than that of the E-3. The jpeg colours as produced by the L1 tend to look more intense and saturated and therefore look better on the LCD as they are displayed. The jpeg colours of the E-3 are natural as the camera prefer to leave it to the user to fine-tune them to their liking during post-processing.

That aside, have you actually compared them side by side during normal usage before you come up with your assessment?

Did you try using both cameras outdoors in bright sunlight? The LCD of the E-3 is still useable while that of the L1 can't even be read. Did you try tilting the LCD up and down (not left and right). The viewing angle of the L1 is very limited when the camera is handled this way and the colours quickly fade away. This is very trying not to mention irritating during normal usage especially outdoors or in brighter environments when it already difficult to read even at the proper viewing angle. What's more, I can't 'chimp' what I can't review properly, so 'chimping' is out until I get back indoors. The LCD of the E-3 is hell of a lot better as far as I'm concerned as it has a very wide viewing angle.

[aryanto]

You should be able to adjust how much colour saturation, sharpness and contrast, but it is deep in the setup menu, so you can probably tune you E-3 to be more like E-1.

[NMSS_2]

it tends to get a little demoralising especially when comparing images on the camera LCD screen with other brand users. but of course that images on the camera LCD are not the true representative of how good they are.

[drakon09]

Originally Posted by NMSS_2 it tends to get a little demoralising especially when comparing images on the camera LCD screen with other brand users. but of course that images on the camera LCD are not the true representative of how good they are.

You can't tell how big it is just by the size of the bump...