4" LCDs in compact cameras - SLRs behind once again

[echelon2004]

which is pretty bad for quite a few of us who shoots DSLRs. They
also generate heat which might add noise.

So why can P&S use a huge LCD without problems? I shot two 1000
shot weddings with a 5D on the battery grip. I changed them out
with a full meter showing. I couldn't stand not to.

You don't get 1000 sots out of any P&S...

Count on getting about 250-300 shots maximum if you use a P&S the same way you use your 5D.

I think anything between 1,5-2,5 inches is large enough to check
historgrams and settings, for anything else I'd say everything
below 12 inches is too small.

If small was good enough they wouldn't be slow-leaking bigger LCDs.

Marketing?

--
Anders

Some of my pictures can be seen at;
http://teamexcalibur.se/US/usindex.html

event photography and photo journalism

 

[echelon2004]

If newer LCDs use so much power, then why can my new mobile be used
about as long as the old one, in spite of the screen being 2"
420x360 instead of 1.5" 176x208 now, even with a battery that is
slightly weaker.

other battery technology perhaps?

You can always compensate for some of the larger power consumption with better designs, but only to a certain limit.

Seems to me that the new generation of screens, the ones we'll not
see in a DSLR for a while, are more effective.

I don't know what the specs are on the DSLRs LCD monitors.

--
Anders

Some of my pictures can be seen at;
http://teamexcalibur.se/US/usindex.html

event photography and photo journalism

 

[Barry Fitzgerald]

While reviewers and users of digital SLRs still rave about the
"new" 2.5" LCDs with a still meager resolution (the 2" screen of my
latest mobile phone has about twice of that), the first compact
cameras with 4" LCDs are appearing.
I guess we will get those in SLRs within a few years, to be
announced for the 1DsMk4 =).

I wish SLRs would be ahead of compacts in this respect too, and not
(sometimes years) behind. It also took Canon forever to enable the
storage of one single settings profile while many manually
controllable compacts have had multiple presets for a long time
(and why not, very simple firmware feature). SLR users AND
reviewers are not critical enough, we should demand to get the same
screen technology and firmware quality that fixed lens cameras have.

I dunno I really cant see it as a big issue, the screen is there to make settings and review images...you just wont get a 4" one in an SLR an have enough buttons.

You could bring up some point that press things a lot more than that trivial area....such as why digi compacts have poor DR mostly...why 35mm ones dump all over them for IQ, and why too many pixels are stuffed on small sensors in some hyper marketing ploy to convince the masses that they need that 10mp cam over the 6mp one..even if the shots are not any better..

Or why most dont bother with an OVF...to save on costs....

Or the high ISO modes that are mostly pants, and of no practical use..but hey talk about lcd's if you want...just a pretty minor point if there ever was one.
--

 

[mgates]

which is pretty bad for quite a few of us who shoots DSLRs. They
also generate heat which might add noise.

So why can P&S use a huge LCD without problems? I shot two 1000
shot weddings with a 5D on the battery grip. I changed them out
with a full meter showing. I couldn't stand not to.

You don't get 1000 sots out of any P&S...

With a couple of AAs it wouldn't.

Count on getting about 250-300 shots maximum if you use a P&S the
same way you use your 5D.

Without a live viewfinder P&Ss would go longer too. My point is that LCD use doesn't seem to be a big draw. Add that some dSLRs have ten times the battery life we really neeed.

I think anything between 1,5-2,5 inches is large enough to check
historgrams and settings, for anything else I'd say everything
below 12 inches is too small.

If small was good enough they wouldn't be slow-leaking bigger LCDs.

Marketing?

I don't think so. I need auto-rotate but don't use it because the 5D's LCD is too small.

 

[GodSpeaks]

who simply does not understand why dSLR's even exist. To him they are a stupid waste of space and all he can think of is why they are not like his favorite digicam.

Suggestion: be happy with your digicam and go take some nice photos, but don't fret about all those dSLR's, all you'll do is give yourself a headache.
--

The greatest of mankind's criminals are those who delude themselves into thinking they have done 'the right thing.'

• Rayna Butler

 

[GiorgioPM]

While reviewers and users of digital SLRs still rave about the
"new" 2.5" LCDs with a still meager resolution (the 2" screen of my
latest mobile phone has about twice of that), the first compact
cameras with 4" LCDs are appearing.
I guess we will get those in SLRs within a few years, to be
announced for the 1DsMk4 =).

I wish SLRs would be ahead of compacts in this respect too, and not
(sometimes years) behind. It also took Canon forever to enable the
storage of one single settings profile while many manually
controllable compacts have had multiple presets for a long time
(and why not, very simple firmware feature). SLR users AND
reviewers are not critical enough, we should demand to get the same
screen technology and firmware quality that fixed lens cameras have.

LCD is power hungry: and then? It seems the goodness of a camera depends from the shot number per battery.
I am sure that OVF fans do need a 70-200 f/2.8

Sony A100 body weight 545g
Sigma Zoom 24-70mm f/2.8 (D) EX DG Macro DF 715 g
Sigma Zoom 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG 1200g

BATTERY 98g ($50)

The battery weight is about the 4% of the minimum equipment of a A100, for a serius DSLR OVF user.
Do you mind to carry another or 2 more 4%?

Another nonsense:
LCDs are too slow to follow a life image ... and LCD TVs?

Someone forgets that the "refresh rate" of human eyes is about 25 images per second.

A big LCD heats so much and rises the noise: the LCD is not supposed to stay attached to the image processing electronics. Give a look:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/konicaminoltaa2/page2.asp

--
GiorgioPM

 

[echelon2004]

which is pretty bad for quite a few of us who shoots DSLRs. They
also generate heat which might add noise.

So why can P&S use a huge LCD without problems? I shot two 1000
shot weddings with a 5D on the battery grip. I changed them out
with a full meter showing. I couldn't stand not to.

You don't get 1000 sots out of any P&S...

With a couple of AAs it wouldn't.

???

Count on getting about 250-300 shots maximum if you use a P&S the
same way you use your 5D.

Without a live viewfinder P&Ss would go longer too. My point is
that LCD use doesn't seem to be a big draw. Add that some dSLRs
have ten times the battery life we really neeed.

They do? Which ones?

And yes, without the live view a P&S would get better battery life, just because the LCD uses so much batteries, which you also claims they don't?

I think anything between 1,5-2,5 inches is large enough to check
historgrams and settings, for anything else I'd say everything
below 12 inches is too small.

If small was good enough they wouldn't be slow-leaking bigger LCDs.

Marketing?

I don't think so. I need auto-rotate but don't use it because the
5D's LCD is too small.

You keep your images in the 5D all the time? :-D

Have you ever manually sorted a few thousands of shots in portrait and landscape? Auto rotate is very usefull and saves a lot of time wasted.

--
Anders

Some of my pictures can be seen at;
http://teamexcalibur.se/US/usindex.html

event photography and photo journalism

 

[Chato]

Or the high ISO modes that are mostly pants, and of no practical
use..but hey talk about lcd's if you want...just a pretty minor
point if there ever was one.
--

I vision some marketing guy thinking the same thing as Bionet, and the next time I buy a new camera, the various controls will be gone, compacted into one tiny area where I hit the wrong buttons on a continious basis...

The variant of Moores law, where if something can be done by technology, do it, no matter what the consequences are...

After all. the secret here is selling cameras not taking pictures.

"Now introducing the Nikon D4x, with a 4 inch LCD, 640 x 480 VGA resolution, comes with a built in DVD Player to view movies while you compose that tough shot. Never be bored again by the stupid task of acquiring an image. No more silly buttons and levers, the all new Nikon comes complete with Auto Everything. Enjoy the future, while the future takes your picture!"

Sounds good to me!

Dave

 

[Jay Turberville]

You don't get 1000 sots out of any P&S...

Really? DPReview says they got 595 shots out of a C8080 with no grip. The battery grip holds two of those batteries, so it seems like 1000 shots is easily possible. I'd think the same would go for the C7070 which uses the same two batteries in its grip.

Cnet measured 792 shots with the Coolpix 8400 on one standard lithium battery. With a grip using 6 AA NiMh batteries I'd expect far more.

In general though, I find it more convenient to just carry a spare battery when I need 1000 shots in a day.

Count on getting about 250-300 shots maximum if you use a P&S the
same way you use your 5D.

It just depends on the camera.

Marketing?

Yep. Showing the photos you have taken more clearly is a marketing gimmick.

--
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com

 

[Chunsum J Choi]

it's mentality like this that we are getting the Slim button and face recognition "features"

--
Chunsum.

'See with your eyes and shoot with your heart.'
~ Georges Noblet, UK 2005.

http://www.chunsum.com
http://www.pbase.com/chunsum
http://www.pbase.com/sigmadslr/chunsum_choi

 

[echelon2004]

You don't get 1000 sots out of any P&S...

Really? DPReview says they got 595 shots out of a C8080 with no
grip. The battery grip holds two of those batteries, so it seems
like 1000 shots is easily possible.

I can tell you from my own experience that those numbers are wrong.
At least they are if shooting raw. About 350 shots is good for the c8080.

I'd think the same would go
for the C7070 which uses the same two batteries in its grip.

I haven't used the c7070 so I don't know.
I doubt it though.

Cnet measured 792 shots with the Coolpix 8400 on one standard
lithium battery. With a grip using 6 AA NiMh batteries I'd expect
far more.

In general though, I find it more convenient to just carry a spare
battery when I need 1000 shots in a day.

Count on getting about 250-300 shots maximum if you use a P&S the
same way you use your 5D.

It just depends on the camera.

Yes. And the batteries. And how you use the equipment.

Marketing?

Yep. Showing the photos you have taken more clearly is a marketing
gimmick.

I said marketing. Why would it have to be a gimmick?

yes, you'll see the images larger. Yes, it will use more power.

--
Anders

Some of my pictures can be seen at;
http://teamexcalibur.se/US/usindex.html

event photography and photo journalism

 

[CharlieDIY]

If newer LCDs use so much power, then why can my new mobile be used
about as long as the old one, in spite of the screen being 2"
420x360 instead of 1.5" 176x208 now, even with a battery that is
slightly weaker.

other battery technology perhaps?

You can always compensate for some of the larger power consumption
with better designs, but only to a certain limit.

Seems to me that the new generation of screens, the ones we'll not
see in a DSLR for a while, are more effective.

I don't know what the specs are on the DSLRs LCD monitors.

--

Nor does bionet: note that he states it "seems to me".

--
Charlie Self
http://www.charlieselfonline.com

 

[CharlieDIY]

which is pretty bad for quite a few of us who shoots DSLRs. They
also generate heat which might add noise.

So why can P&S use a huge LCD without problems? I shot two 1000
shot weddings with a 5D on the battery grip. I changed them out
with a full meter showing. I couldn't stand not to.

You don't get 1000 sots out of any P&S...

With a couple of AAs it wouldn't.

Count on getting about 250-300 shots maximum if you use a P&S the
same way you use your 5D.

Without a live viewfinder P&Ss would go longer too. My point is
that LCD use doesn't seem to be a big draw. Add that some dSLRs
have ten times the battery life we really neeed.

Not true. Why is it that when some people find they don't need some feature in a camera, they write "we"?

--
Charlie Self
http://www.charlieselfonline.com

 

[CharlieDIY]

You don't get 1000 sots out of any P&S...

Really? DPReview says they got 595 shots out of a C8080 with no
grip. The battery grip holds two of those batteries, so it seems
like 1000 shots is easily possible. I'd think the same would go
for the C7070 which uses the same two batteries in its grip.

Cnet measured 792 shots with the Coolpix 8400 on one standard
lithium battery. With a grip using 6 AA NiMh batteries I'd expect
far more.

In general though, I find it more convenient to just carry a spare
battery when I need 1000 shots in a day.

Count on getting about 250-300 shots maximum if you use a P&S the
same way you use your 5D.

It just depends on the camera.

And the use. I used to be happy getting 75-100 shots with my Minolta D7i, but I was using the flash unit to fire studio flash units, so every shot ate a lot of power.

Without a grip, my Pentax *istD gets approximately 750 to 850 shots with rechargeables; with Energizer lithium AAs, I find it fairly common to get as many as 1400 shots. I still carry spare batteries, because some days extend into three or four days, and there is no real reason to not be reasonably well prepared for whatever contingicies might pop up.

--
Charlie Self
http://www.charlieselfonline.com

 

[richardkra]

If you push the wrong buton, the lens comes loose. I'm taking mine back for a more solid P&S.

--
Rick

 

[Jay Turberville]

I can tell you from my own experience that those numbers are wrong.
At least they are if shooting raw. About 350 shots is good for the
c8080.

It's Phil's test. I doubt it is wrong by much. They do pretty careful testing.

Marketing?

Yep. Showing the photos you have taken more clearly is a marketing
gimmick.

I said marketing. Why would it have to be a gimmick?

You responded to this post ...

If small was good enough they wouldn't be slow-leaking bigger LCDs.

with , "Marketing?"

When you offer up "marketing" as an alternate explanation to functionality, how else should that interpretted other than "gimmick"?

gimmick n. an ingenious or novel device or strategem. esp. one used to draw attention or increase appeal.

--
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com

 

[Chato]

go over to the question of power.

Which, much as I dislike the concept of a huge LCD, seems to me to be a non-issue, or rather, it you have a power issues, adding a larger LCD is not going to change things much.

In my mind the issue is one of ergonomics. PERIOD. While other people who shoot in a studio, or shoot landscapes can set up their shots, many of us cannot. Sometimes it's either you get the shot, or the shot is history. A few seconds lead time perhaps, and that's it.

When I'm out in the field shooting, a constant refrain in the back of my mind is the ease and quickness with which I can change settings. I've never had a camera as good as the Dx series (no doubt Canon owners can say the same) for this, and each time I go out (and I've taken 30,000 images this year) I APPRECIATE this. Bionet does not. And those who post on this question, either don't shoot under these kinds of conditions or don't even appreciate these conditions. Bionet cannot even visualise them. I don't mean to be offensive to him, but his posts make this abundantly clear.

There is a limited benefit for having a larger LCD, but losing the ergonomics is a nightmare for me to even contemplate.

Dave

I can tell you from my own experience that those numbers are wrong.
At least they are if shooting raw. About 350 shots is good for the
c8080.

It's Phil's test. I doubt it is wrong by much. They do pretty
careful testing.

Marketing?

Yep. Showing the photos you have taken more clearly is a marketing
gimmick.

I said marketing. Why would it have to be a gimmick?

You responded to this post ...

If small was good enough they wouldn't be slow-leaking bigger LCDs.

with , "Marketing?"

When you offer up "marketing" as an alternate explanation to
functionality, how else should that interpretted other than
"gimmick"?

gimmick n. an ingenious or novel device or strategem. esp. one
used to draw attention or increase appeal.

--
Jay Turberville
http://www.jayandwanda.com

 

[bionet]

..who still compares DSLRs to 1990s AF film SLRs and doesn't mind that camera bodies could be much more advanced in usability.

You're exactly what manufacturers like. Customers who will defend their cost cutting measures.

Besides, you completely missed your mark. I own 1970 SLRs and a DSLR, but no digicam.

 

[bionet]

other battery technology perhaps?

Note that I said "with a weaker battery". The old one's was 1350 mAh and this one's is 1150 if I remember right. It's certainly not stronger.

What's also interesting is that this screen is at the limit of the size needed for people to be able to see individual pixels (requires getting as near as 20cm). Thus 640x480 will likely be the highest resolution we will get on normal handheld cameras, because anything larger would require a screen above 4" or an EVF that fills our vision at a virtual distance.

 

[bionet]

Is that the one you referenced in your original post? That's an
image storage/viewing device, not a camera.

Oops, yeah I totally forgot that. The original train of thought was that we will most likely very soon see them in cameras too. I then somehow mixed it up and wrote they already appeared. Sorry.