LCD or no LCD on future Digital RF ?

LCD or no LCD on future Digital RF ?

  • Yes,

    Votes: 35 40.2%

  • Yes, but like on the RD1

    Votes: 30 34.5%

  • No LCD

    Votes: 22 25.3%
  • Total voters
    87
Y

yanidel

Well-known
Local time
2:34 PM
Joined
Jan 15, 2008
Messages
1,102
Location
Paris
View My Gallery
I was surprised to see on another thread that there seems to be some supporters of not having LCD on future digital RFF. So is it the fact of a few nostalgics of film camera and what is the thought process for not willing one ?
I personally am 100% for a LCD, a foldable one would be my preference
 
Of course you want one, not only would it be foolish not to stick one on there because of the high value brought to many photographic situations, but because not putting one on a digital camera would be like tying someones hand behind their back. Sure film cameras dont have them, but come on, look how many pros, rather then nostalgic peeps use them in real life photo situations. The ability to see your results at once where the difference can be getting the photo and making sure or not really knowing until you get home. That can be the difference of keeping your job and loosing it these days. Not only that but I have been in many situations in far off villages and areas where you have to let people accept you where you are and what you are doing, being able to show the locals what you are doing when you are doing it has unlocked so many new photo opportunities for me when people around you see what you are doing for themselves, often I have been shown to areas and places you just would not see otherwise.

Even though a lot of my work is still film based, I think the LCD screen on the back of the camera is one of the most important tools in my digital photographic kit.
 
Last edited:
leicasniper said:
As I posted in the other thread, just turn the LCD off and don't use it. If you are psychologically unable to do that, it's time to think deeply about why. 😉
Click to expand...

I'll second this. It's true that the 'you don't have to use it' argument has brought us far too many overweight, overcomplicated SLRs (both film and digital) with a ridiculous number of buttons, switches, dials, levers, modes and options but dropping the LCD from the M8 wouldn't reduce the size, weight or complication that much, or simplify the camera greatly, and you'd lose the 'Polaroid' facility.

Sometimes I use the screen (record shots, when there's plenty of time; portraits; set up shots generally); sometimes I don't (street, performance, action). I'd hate to be forced into never having the choice.

Edit: as Keith points out below, the 'exposure meter' aspect of the screen can be invaluable too. I have Polaroid backs for the majority of my cameras, including Nikon F (!), but the screen-plus-histogram is better and a lot cheaper to run.

Cheers,

R.
 
Last edited:
If I'm photographing indoors or in a poor light situation where it's fairly constant I'm always going to want to meter a scene then check a couple of test shots. I keep the review function turned off on my M8 but I still use it regularly during the course of shooting. Personally I wouldn't want a camera without it.
 
On my Olympus E-3, and likewise on the Epson R-d1, you can turn the screen around and have it like a film camera. On the e-3 the mechanism is a lot more rugged but I quite like it. It MUST be a solid mechanism though - I hate flimsy crappy swivel screens on cameras.
 
I've posted "no LCD" comments in a number of threads here over the past 6 months or so. My thoughts are founded in two ideas, I think:

1) A lot of us would like to see a low-cost (Bessa range) M-mount, APS-C sensor camera offered. Removing the LCD removes cost (considerable?).

2) Personally I sooooooo much more enjoy the photographic experience I have with my film cameras than with digital gear! I think it this has to do with a number of things. Not knowing if I got the exposure right makes me slow down a bit and think about what I'm doing. Not having images to scroll through frees up my mind to look at the world... not the LCD. And of course, the joy of anticipation, waiting for my negatives to arrive... kind of like Christmas morning. 🙂

I'm not a professional photographer. I can understand why a professional would like the LCD... their living depends on getting the shots right before leaving the assignment. But for me... give me the simplicity of a D-R3a. 🙂
 
Jamie Pillers said:
I've posted "no LCD" comments in a number of threads here over the past 6 months or so. My thoughts are founded in two ideas, I think:

1) A lot of us would like to see a low-cost (Bessa range) M-mount, APS-C sensor camera offered. Removing the LCD removes cost (considerable?).

2) Personally I sooooooo much more enjoy the photographic experience I have with my film cameras than with digital gear! I think it this has to do with a number of things. Not knowing if I got the exposure right makes me slow down a bit and think about what I'm doing. Not having images to scroll through frees up my mind to look at the world... not the LCD. And of course, the joy of anticipation, waiting for my negatives to arrive... kind of like Christmas morning. 🙂

I'm not a professional photographer. I can understand why a professional would like the LCD... their living depends on getting the shots right before leaving the assignment. But for me... give me the simplicity of a D-R3a. 🙂
Click to expand...



1: LCD's are actually really cheap. The cost goes into making what the camera sees show up on them, though now there are plenty of off the shelf systems that work just fine, if they could figure out how to send signal to screen with the old nintendo entertainment system, they can do it on a modern digital camera.


2: Sounds like what you need is a film camera.
 
Pixel peeping mucks up the experience a bit... at least for me. When I compare how I feel when (a) I'm just walking and looking at the world through the viewfinder, to (b) walking, looking at the world through the viewfinder, and then checking the LCD screen, checking the histogram, etc., ... (a) is fun and relaxing, (b) is less fun and less relaxing and more like work. But, again, I'm not a professional that MUST get the shot right. I actually enjoy getting many of the shots 'wrong'... they lead me in new directions, photographically.
 
What LCD?

What LCD?

Best of both worlds.
2253445606_8fc49c9310.jpg
 
I might go for a small LCD that shows only the histogram and serves to make camera settings. But otherwise I'm in the "no LCD" camp, using my M8 with the screen turned off, and indeed it doesn't occur to me to look at it after a shot. I'm in film camera mode when shooting... 🙂
 
I voted for an LCD like the R-D1s.

[Frameline Accuracy] - I'm still having this problem with my R-D1s. The frameline is not very accurate. Sometimes it takes the second shot to get right, and that's with the help of being able to see how wrong the first one is....

[Digital for Work] - I bought the R-D1s to use my Leica M lenses for work. I'm not experienced enough to make sure that I'm getting every shot I want, so I need an LCD to check and make sure.

If it's not for work, I'd be more than happy to just carry my R2A; if it's for work, I want a digital Leica M mount RF with an LCD.
 
I do think that it is commercial suicide if you don't have an LCD on a DRF. Yes, it is technically possible not to have a screen on it, but... why not? The market expects it, and it IS useful.

We could always go to the extreme and just have a whiz-bang large format sensor in a wooden box with a pinhole in it. 🙂
 
Only if it is small. I have a 3" screen on my canon that is always turned off, except when setting up menus. Being the clean freak that I am it really annoys me putting my face up against the screen and getting finger prints all over it.

I think digital people are spoiled enough with workflow. It wouldnt be all that painful to have a laptop to review your images instead of a screen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom