Any solution to EOS-40D's bad LCD display?

[dRebelXT]

Read about the poor display during photo review because LCD displays a low quality JPEG.
Are there any firmware upgrade? Or any hack?

And I feel the color saturation is very deep comparing to laptop displays, and nearly abnormal.

[TangKF]

Ｈｉ，

Ｔｏ　ｍｏｓｔ　ｏｆ　ｔｈｅ　ｐｅｏｐｌｅ，ｔｈｅ　ＬＣＤ　ｏｆ　ｄＳＬＲ　ａｒｅ　ｏｎｌｙ　ｆｏｒ ：
１．　Ｃｈｅｃｋｉｎｇ　ｉｆ　ｔｈｅ　ｏｂｊｅｃｔ／ｓｕｂｊｅｃｔ　ｉｓ　ｉｎ　ｆｏｃｕｓ　ｏｒ　ｎ ｏｔ．
２．　ｇａｕｇｉｎｇ　ｔｈｅ　ｐｉｃｔｕｒｅ　ｃｏｍｐｏｓｉｔｉｏｎ
３．　ｇａｕｇｉｎｇ　ｔｈｅ　ｅｘｐｏｓｕｒｅ，　ｅｔｃ．

Ｉ　ｈａｖｅ　ｎｏ　ｐｒｏｂｌｅｍ　ｉｎ　ｕｓｉｎｇ　３００Ｄ　ＬＣＤ．　Ａｎｄ　４０Ｄ　ＬＣＤ　ｉ ｓ　ｍｕｃｈ　ｂｅｔｔｅｒ　ｉｎ　ｍｙ　ｏｐｉｎｉｏｎ．Ｉ　ｆｏｕｎｄ　ｉｔ　ｓｔｒａｎｇｅ　ｐｅｏ ｐｌｅ　ａｒｅ　ｄｅｐｅｎｄｉｎｇ　ｏｎ　ｔｈｅ　ＬＣＤ　ａｌｏｎｅ　ｉｎｓｔｅａｄ　ｏｆ　ｔｈｅ　 ｐｉｃｔｕｒｅ　ｑｕａｌｉｔｙ　（ｏｕｔｐｕｔ）ｏｆ　ｔｈｅ　ｃａｍｅｒａ．

Ｉ　ｃａｎ　ｏｎｌｙ　ｔｈｉｎｋ　ｏｆ　２　＇ｓｏｌｕｔｉｏｎｓ＇ｆｏｒ　ｔｈｉｓ　＇ｐｒｏｂｌｅｍ ＇：

ａ．　Ｂｕｙ　ａｎｏｔｈｅｒ　ｃａｍｅｒａ　ｔｈａｔ　ｏｆｆｅｒｓ　＇ｓａｔｉｓｆａｃｔｏｒｙ＇ＬＣ Ｄ　ｑｕａｌｉｔｙ　（ａｃｔｕａｌｌｙ　Ｄ３００　ｍａｙ　ｂｅ　ｙｏｕｒ　ｓｏｌｕｔｉｏ ｎ）
ｂ．　Ｐｌｕｇ　ｔｈｅ　ｃａｍｅｒａ　ｉｎｔｏ　ｙｏｕｒ　ｌａｐｔｏｐ　ｗｈｉｌｅ　ｓｈｏｏｔｉｎｇ 　ａｎｄ　ｃｈｅｃｋ　ｏｎ　ｔｈｅｒｅ．

ＤＩＳＣＬＡＩＭＥＲ：Ｊｕｓｔ　ｍｙ　２　ｃｅｎｔｓ

Ｃｈｅｅｒｓ！

Ｅｄｉｔ　ｔｏ　ａｄｄ：　ＰＳ：　ａｃｔｕａｌｌｙ　ｙｏｕ　ｍａｙ　ｗａｎｔ　ｔｏ　ｈａｖｅ　ａ　ｌ ｏｏｋ　ａｔ　ｔｈｅ　ｒｅａｌ　ｔｈｉｎｇ　ｂｅｆｏｒｅ　ｐａｓｓ　ｊｕｄｇｅｍｅｎｔ　ａｓ　＇ｇｏ ｏｄ＇ｏｒ　＇ＢＡＤ＇ｃａｎ　ｂｅ　ｖｅｒｙ　ｐｅｒｓｏｎａｌ

[babykailan]

i definitely did not get the 40d for its lcd.

[coldfish]

I was surpised how small the lcd on the 20D was when switching back to it one day after gotten used to the 40D even more surprised how i could put up with it for so long. The 3" screen is so big that all other shortcomings were forgiven.

In case your camera is still running on version 1.0.5. Upgrade it to 1.0.8. The upgrade appeared to reduce the heavy blue everyone is complaining about.

[dRebelXT]

Originally Posted by TangKF Ｈｉ， Ｔｏ　ｍｏｓｔ　ｏｆ　ｔｈｅ　ｐｅｏｐｌｅ，ｔｈｅ　ＬＣＤ　ｏｆ　ｄＳＬＲ　ａｒｅ　ｏｎｌｙ　ｆｏｒ ： １．　Ｃｈｅｃｋｉｎｇ　ｉｆ　ｔｈｅ　ｏｂｊｅｃｔ／ｓｕｂｊｅｃｔ　ｉｓ　ｉｎ　ｆｏｃｕｓ　ｏｒ　ｎ ｏｔ． ２．　ｇａｕｇｉｎｇ　ｔｈｅ　ｐｉｃｔｕｒｅ　ｃｏｍｐｏｓｉｔｉｏｎ ３．　ｇａｕｇｉｎｇ　ｔｈｅ　ｅｘｐｏｓｕｒｅ，　ｅｔｃ． Ｉ　ｈａｖｅ　ｎｏ　ｐｒｏｂｌｅｍ　ｉｎ　ｕｓｉｎｇ　３００Ｄ　ＬＣＤ．　Ａｎｄ　４０Ｄ　ＬＣＤ　ｉ ｓ　ｍｕｃｈ　ｂｅｔｔｅｒ　ｉｎ　ｍｙ　ｏｐｉｎｉｏｎ．Ｉ　ｆｏｕｎｄ　ｉｔ　ｓｔｒａｎｇｅ　ｐｅｏ ｐｌｅ　ａｒｅ　ｄｅｐｅｎｄｉｎｇ　ｏｎ　ｔｈｅ　ＬＣＤ　ａｌｏｎｅ　ｉｎｓｔｅａｄ　ｏｆ　ｔｈｅ　 ｐｉｃｔｕｒｅ　ｑｕａｌｉｔｙ　（ｏｕｔｐｕｔ）ｏｆ　ｔｈｅ　ｃａｍｅｒａ． Ｉ　ｃａｎ　ｏｎｌｙ　ｔｈｉｎｋ　ｏｆ　２　＇ｓｏｌｕｔｉｏｎｓ＇ｆｏｒ　ｔｈｉｓ　＇ｐｒｏｂｌｅｍ ＇： ａ．　Ｂｕｙ　ａｎｏｔｈｅｒ　ｃａｍｅｒａ　ｔｈａｔ　ｏｆｆｅｒｓ　＇ｓａｔｉｓｆａｃｔｏｒｙ＇ＬＣ Ｄ　ｑｕａｌｉｔｙ　（ａｃｔｕａｌｌｙ　Ｄ３００　ｍａｙ　ｂｅ　ｙｏｕｒ　ｓｏｌｕｔｉｏ ｎ） ｂ．　Ｐｌｕｇ　ｔｈｅ　ｃａｍｅｒａ　ｉｎｔｏ　ｙｏｕｒ　ｌａｐｔｏｐ　ｗｈｉｌｅ　ｓｈｏｏｔｉｎｇ 　ａｎｄ　ｃｈｅｃｋ　ｏｎ　ｔｈｅｒｅ． ＤＩＳＣＬＡＩＭＥＲ：Ｊｕｓｔ　ｍｙ　２　ｃｅｎｔｓ Ｃｈｅｅｒｓ！ Ｅｄｉｔ　ｔｏ　ａｄｄ：　ＰＳ：　ａｃｔｕａｌｌｙ　ｙｏｕ　ｍａｙ　ｗａｎｔ　ｔｏ　ｈａｖｅ　ａ　ｌ ｏｏｋ　ａｔ　ｔｈｅ　ｒｅａｌ　ｔｈｉｎｇ　ｂｅｆｏｒｅ　ｐａｓｓ　ｊｕｄｇｅｍｅｎｔ　ａｓ　＇ｇｏ ｏｄ＇ｏｒ　＇ＢＡＤ＇ｃａｎ　ｂｅ　ｖｅｒｙ　ｐｅｒｓｏｎａｌ

I understand.. but i forgot the potential flame issue..

Anyway, having upgraded from 350D to 40D, the big and bright but less sharp LCD is evident, but i am greedier than others. And i was aware that's a small JPEG it displays.

If there could be any hack/firmware upgrade to sacrifice the quick preview for a larger JPEG display on the LCD and decrease saturation, I would risk and install.

[dRebelXT]

Originally Posted by babykailan i definitely did not get the 40d for its lcd.

true but expecting better services..

[calebk]

Originally Posted by TangKF Ｈｉ， Ｔｏ　ｍｏｓｔ　ｏｆ　ｔｈｅ　ｐｅｏｐｌｅ，ｔｈｅ　ＬＣＤ　ｏｆ　ｄＳＬＲ　ａｒｅ　ｏｎｌｙ　ｆｏｒ ： １．　Ｃｈｅｃｋｉｎｇ　ｉｆ　ｔｈｅ　ｏｂｊｅｃｔ／ｓｕｂｊｅｃｔ　ｉｓ　ｉｎ　ｆｏｃｕｓ　ｏｒ　ｎ ｏｔ． ２．　ｇａｕｇｉｎｇ　ｔｈｅ　ｐｉｃｔｕｒｅ　ｃｏｍｐｏｓｉｔｉｏｎ ３．　ｇａｕｇｉｎｇ　ｔｈｅ　ｅｘｐｏｓｕｒｅ，　ｅｔｃ． Ｉ　ｈａｖｅ　ｎｏ　ｐｒｏｂｌｅｍ　ｉｎ　ｕｓｉｎｇ　３００Ｄ　ＬＣＤ．　Ａｎｄ　４０Ｄ　ＬＣＤ　ｉ ｓ　ｍｕｃｈ　ｂｅｔｔｅｒ　ｉｎ　ｍｙ　ｏｐｉｎｉｏｎ．Ｉ　ｆｏｕｎｄ　ｉｔ　ｓｔｒａｎｇｅ　ｐｅｏ ｐｌｅ　ａｒｅ　ｄｅｐｅｎｄｉｎｇ　ｏｎ　ｔｈｅ　ＬＣＤ　ａｌｏｎｅ　ｉｎｓｔｅａｄ　ｏｆ　ｔｈｅ　 ｐｉｃｔｕｒｅ　ｑｕａｌｉｔｙ　（ｏｕｔｐｕｔ）ｏｆ　ｔｈｅ　ｃａｍｅｒａ． Ｉ　ｃａｎ　ｏｎｌｙ　ｔｈｉｎｋ　ｏｆ　２　＇ｓｏｌｕｔｉｏｎｓ＇ｆｏｒ　ｔｈｉｓ　＇ｐｒｏｂｌｅｍ ＇： ａ．　Ｂｕｙ　ａｎｏｔｈｅｒ　ｃａｍｅｒａ　ｔｈａｔ　ｏｆｆｅｒｓ　＇ｓａｔｉｓｆａｃｔｏｒｙ＇ＬＣ Ｄ　ｑｕａｌｉｔｙ　（ａｃｔｕａｌｌｙ　Ｄ３００　ｍａｙ　ｂｅ　ｙｏｕｒ　ｓｏｌｕｔｉｏ ｎ） ｂ．　Ｐｌｕｇ　ｔｈｅ　ｃａｍｅｒａ　ｉｎｔｏ　ｙｏｕｒ　ｌａｐｔｏｐ　ｗｈｉｌｅ　ｓｈｏｏｔｉｎｇ 　ａｎｄ　ｃｈｅｃｋ　ｏｎ　ｔｈｅｒｅ． ＤＩＳＣＬＡＩＭＥＲ：Ｊｕｓｔ　ｍｙ　２　ｃｅｎｔｓ Ｃｈｅｅｒｓ！ Ｅｄｉｔ　ｔｏ　ａｄｄ：　ＰＳ：　ａｃｔｕａｌｌｙ　ｙｏｕ　ｍａｙ　ｗａｎｔ　ｔｏ　ｈａｖｅ　ａ　ｌ ｏｏｋ　ａｔ　ｔｈｅ　ｒｅａｌ　ｔｈｉｎｇ　ｂｅｆｏｒｅ　ｐａｓｓ　ｊｕｄｇｅｍｅｎｔ　ａｓ　＇ｇｏ ｏｄ＇ｏｒ　＇ＢＡＤ＇ｃａｎ　ｂｅ　ｖｅｒｙ　ｐｅｒｓｏｎａｌ

Eh bro, why's your text coming out like that? It's really a bit of a torture to read. Hehe.

[alternatve]

Just have to "compensate" when you are looking at the LCD. Compare your photos on the laptop to your LCD screen.

Samuel

[m3lv1nh0]

I actually like the way the photos in the LCD sucks compared to viewing it in my PC. Everytime I check the photos. I goes.. Eee.. why like that one... than once I go home and download it to the PC.. I goes.. woah.. not bad leh.. than I feel much better inside.

[TangKF]

Originally Posted by calebk Eh bro, why's your text coming out like that? It's really a bit of a torture to read. Hehe.

heh i hope now it's okie liao.

The stupid Microsoft Pinyin input. My stupidity of installing it and now I dont know how to remove....

hee sorry

[Kit]

Originally Posted by dRebelXT Read about the poor display during photo review because LCD displays a low quality JPEG. Are there any firmware upgrade? Or any hack? And I feel the color saturation is very deep comparing to laptop displays, and nearly abnormal.

You are not supposed to use the LCD to gauge the photos to begin with.

[dRebelXT]

Originally Posted by alternatve Just have to "compensate" when you are looking at the LCD. Compare your photos on the laptop to your LCD screen. Samuel

yeah, must compare LCD and laptop and see a few times to train myself what kind of sharpness is good enough..
hope the .8 firmware can help with the unnatural colors..

[calebk]

Hummm while I don't want to raise the issue of comparing to film days, one must realise how dependent we have become on the LCD screen. For me, going from a 30D (2.5" screen) to a 1DII (2" screen) at first seemed like a big loss of screen size, but I learnt that just using the colour and exposure histograms, one can actually judge WB and exposure, without having to have true colours on the screen. (Of course, it helps if you do have true colours, but my 1DII's screen has oversaturated reds, something to look out for.)

[namespace]

If you shoot in RAW and if I remember correctly, the LCD on the DSLR will only display the embedded thumbnail image in the RAW file. As such, the quality is not so good when zoom in.

[calebk]

Originally Posted by namespace If you shoot in RAW and if I remember correctly, the LCD on the DSLR will only display the embedded thumbnail image in the RAW file. As such, the quality is not so good when zoom in.

Regardless of whether you shoot RAW or JPG, the LCD output on the 40D is really nothing to go by. Learning how to read the histogram for exposure (and if possible, WB) is crucial in this case.

[danielskl]

haha.. wait till you try the 5D's LCD.. you likely to think you have gotta the best LCD on the Canon's system..

[TangKF]

Originally Posted by dRebelXT I understand.. but i forgot the potential flame issue.. Anyway, having upgraded from 350D to 40D, the big and bright but less sharp LCD is evident, but i am greedier than others. And i was aware that's a small JPEG it displays. If there could be any hack/firmware upgrade to sacrifice the quick preview for a larger JPEG display on the LCD and decrease saturation, I would risk and install.

heh by the way, no flaming intended in my previous post.

[coldfish]

After gotten used to the 40D screen, I was in a rude shock when digging out the 20D again. I just couldn't believe how I put up with the puny screen (and underexposed with default setting) for so long.
So I do really appreciate the big screen despite having tried out a Sony Alpha 700.
Maybe exactly because I'm used to smallish screens that's why I appreciate the huge difference in screen size. Besides, once I've gotten used to the slight difference to the results, I would know straight away if the image is a keeper or not. So no, the low resolution does not bother me at all.

Important to note that the screen gave a bluish tint when first bought it but it went away after upgrading the firmware to 1.0.8.

[mervinb]

If I'm not mistaken, the 40D's LCD display is dependent on the shot setting. Assuming that you're shooting RAW (surely that's why you buy a 40D...), you can still adjust the preview image on LCD and on viewers like Faststone by picture setting -- set sharpness +5 for pretty good sharpness; saturation -1 if 0 is oversaturated.

Since setting the sharpness of my 40D to +5, I've had no real issue with the LCD image quality. It seems that 1.0.8 firmware helps too, but this is not verified carefully.

Even when using RAW, these settings are significant... When viewing 450D images vs. 40D, I was shocked by how poor my 450D images looked (although on the 450D LCD they seemed ok). It turned out the lo-res preview jpeg on the 450D was with sharpness=0, and on the 40D=+5. Obviously this was not apples vs. apples. When both were set to sharpness=4, the image qualities were comparable. If using multiple EOS bodies, for preview purposes, the picture styles need to be set the same .

[Dream Merchant]

Besides checking composition/distortion etc, I generally use the image part of the LCD to cross-refer to the histogram, but one important part I need to check is focus, and that is where the 40D LCD is a (let me be brutally honest) total and absolute let-down. Even shots which are IN FOCUS look OOF on the 40D LCD. So the only solution is to get to know it as intimately as possible, spray and pray, or use a seperate mini LCD display plugged into the camera while shooting, or if that's not possible, shoot, take out CF card, load into mini display and review.

So much for Canon caring about what their consumers need!