Reading mode: Light Dark

Why are 3 inch screens still a thing in cameras? Cont...

Go to last post
justmeMN said:
7pilot said:
Most photographers that are expanding their photography horizons from the P&S aspect of the smart phone want quicker and more precise control over their cameras.
Click to expand...
Controls don't disappear, just because they are accessed by a touch screen, rather than knobs. :-)
Click to expand...
Of course controls don't disappear. In fact it's more the opposite. With a screen size the OP pines for. It would be necessary to replace the real estate taken by buttons and re-purpose it for the screen. Which means the screen would have to be covered with menu/control icons. The controls on a DSLR actually do disappear.
justmeMN said:
As a practical matter, it's a safe bet that most first time interchangeable-lens camera buyers spend most/all of their time in [Auto] mode. They still end up with a sensor that's much better than the one in their smartphone.
Click to expand...
There's the rub. How much R&D does a dedicated camera company put forth to make a cell camera user feel comfortable. Should there be infinite baby step upgrades. Or just ask the camera companies to reissue the P&S's that the cell phones managed to nearly kill off in the first place.

I think the direction that Canon, Nikon Et all should take. Is doing far more to have a reliable and easily setup WiFi link so that shots can be downloaded at lower resolution to their social media accounts seamlessly in the background.

My D500 has WiFi and BT but it was an after thought just so Nikon could put it in the brochure rather than set it up so one could actually use it with any ease.

justmeMN said:
justmeMN said:
But cameras like the M100 look more like a $600-$700 ILC point & shoot.
Click to expand...
Actually, the Canon M100 goes for US$550, compared to US$680 for Canon PowerShot G7 X Mark II.
Click to expand...
Point taken.
 
Lee Jay said:
Verland said:
Lee Jay said:
So, according to you, the Moto Z True Zoom should be selling like crazy.

https://www.motorola.com/us/products/moto-mods/hasselblad-true-zoom
Click to expand...
That camera has a tiny 1/2.3-inch sensor. You missed the topic, it's about large sensor + large screen.
Click to expand...
Doesn't say that in the OP.
Click to expand...
Yes, it does: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/60698781
Lee Jay said:
I want to see a camera with aps-c or ff sensor and 5 inch touchscreen
Click to expand...
 
Verland said:
Lee Jay said:
Verland said:
Lee Jay said:
So, according to you, the Moto Z True Zoom should be selling like crazy.

https://www.motorola.com/us/products/moto-mods/hasselblad-true-zoom
Click to expand...
That camera has a tiny 1/2.3-inch sensor. You missed the topic, it's about large sensor + large screen.
Click to expand...
Doesn't say that in the OP.
Click to expand...
Yes, it does: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/60698781
Click to expand...
Even in the other thread, that wasn't the point of the OP, and all the discussions centered around the size of the screen.
 
Lee Jay said:
Do you really see a 5" screen as a big difference from a 3" screen?
Click to expand...
Yes, it is more than 2x the area of the 3" screen. And it was just a tip. Not exact value. I would value every fraction of inch to get the screen bigger.
Lee Jay said:
I find the 5.1" screen on my phone to be minuscule and I find using an LCD, be it 5" or 3" to be the least useful way to compose, by far. I also noticed that the fad of shooting pictures with some stupid 7"-11" tablet has faded (I haven't seen anyone do that in years) so apparently a larger screen isn't that important to most people.
Click to expand...
 
Verland said:
Lee Jay said:
crashpc said:
The catch is, that it is not for everybody.

Like, the M, M10 and M100 cameras are like that now anyway. So it's not like distatnt future whizz. Those cameras obviously sell quite well. The only difference for some would be just the damn 1"-2" larger screen. How can manufacturers not see that and not innovate?
Click to expand...
Do you really see a 5" screen as a big difference from a 3" screen? The screen on my 17" laptop was too small so I used an external 24" screen, which I recently upgraded to a 40" screen.

I find the 5.1" screen on my phone to be minuscule and I find using an LCD, be it 5" or 3" to be the least useful way to compose, by far. I also noticed that the fad of shooting pictures with some stupid 7"-11" tablet has faded (I haven't seen anyone do that in years) so apparently a larger screen isn't that important to most people.
Click to expand...
The difference between 3 and 5 inch is huge! Have a look:

5.5 inch vs 3.5 inch
5.5 inch vs 3.5 inch

If it wasn't a big difference, smartphones would still have the size that the first iPhone had. So yes, it's important to people.
Click to expand...


And the 5.5" still looks just as cluttered as the smaller 3.5" one. For a dedicated camera such clutter would be terrible and render the camera much more difficult to use. Because where would the camera controls go other than on the EVF and not have the overall camera grow beyond the current DSLR size?
 
Verland said:
Verland said:
Where is the cut off point of increasing the size of the screen, but then making the camera too much bigger?
Click to expand...
We don't know that unfortunately, since camera manufacturers didn't really go beyond 3 inch yet. The sweet spot for smartphones is 5-6 inch, as can be seen here:

082128abc52241db8dccfeca4fa61c7a.jpg.png

There are smartphones that are bigger or smaller, but they don't sell that good. Since different sizes are available, it's easy to make conclusions here.
Click to expand...
+1

Maybe 3" will end up being the preferred, maybe 5"?

I guess the change for the cellphone is its use.

When you started being able to get your email on it, browse the Internet and watch movies, bigger screens made sense.

Maybe if you can do all of that on your camera, everyone would want to have a bigger screen on there as well?

It may sound like I am joking . . . but I am not.

If I could run Lightroom or Photoshop on my camera, that would make me want to have a bigger screen on my camera.

If not, I seem to be happy with 3" screens.

Actually . . . I came up with an idea for a cell phone that I'd want.

A small little cellphone that had a minimal display so I could use it to send / receive calls and txt messages and email, and maybe a cut down version of social media. And this could have enough battery power to run 2-3 days. (Hopefully more. I miss the days I could charge up my phone and it could last 3-4 days between charges.)

And then . . . when I wanted a bigger screen, I just take this small cellphone and plug it into a bigger screen.

Small when I want small. Big when I want big.

Take care & Happy Shooting!
:)

--
My Personal Flickr Favs . . .
www.flickr.com

My Favs

Some of my personal favourites from over the years . . .
www.flickr.com www.flickr.com

[FL][RP][LS]
 
7pilot said:
justmeMN said:
7pilot said:
Most photographers that are expanding their photography horizons from the P&S aspect of the smart phone want quicker and more precise control over their cameras.
Click to expand...
Controls don't disappear, just because they are accessed by a touch screen, rather than knobs. :-)
Click to expand...
Of course controls don't disappear. In fact it's more the opposite. With a screen size the OP pines for. It would be necessary to replace the real estate taken by buttons and re-purpose it for the screen. Which means the screen would have to be covered with menu/control icons. The controls on a DSLR actually do disappear.
Click to expand...
The control buttons don't need to be on the screen all the time. I don't see the issue here.
7pilot said:
7pilot said:
As a practical matter, it's a safe bet that most first time interchangeable-lens camera buyers spend most/all of their time in [Auto] mode. They still end up with a sensor that's much better than the one in their smartphone.
Click to expand...
There's the rub. How much R&D does a dedicated camera company put forth to make a cell camera user feel comfortable.
Click to expand...
Not enough in my opinion.
7pilot said:
Should there be infinite baby step upgrades. Or just ask the camera companies to reissue the P&S's that the cell phones managed to nearly kill off in the first place.
Click to expand...
Who wants that?
7pilot said:
I think the direction that Canon, Nikon Et all should take. Is doing far more to have a reliable and easily setup WiFi link so that shots can be downloaded at lower resolution to their social media accounts seamlessly in the background.
Click to expand...
Agree that connectivity needs to be improved, Sony is also really bad with that.
 
crashpc said:
Lee Jay said:
Do you really see a 5" screen as a big difference from a 3" screen?
Click to expand...
Yes, it is more than 2x the area of the 3" screen. And it was just a tip. Not exact value. I would value every fraction of inch to get the screen bigger.
crashpc said:
I find the 5.1" screen on my phone to be minuscule and I find using an LCD, be it 5" or 3" to be the least useful way to compose, by far. I also noticed that the fad of shooting pictures with some stupid 7"-11" tablet has faded (I haven't seen anyone do that in years) so apparently a larger screen isn't that important to most people.

--
Lee Jay
Click to expand...
I see from previous posts that there are many people not liking to compose via LCD. No need to repeat. There are people who do like to compose via LCD. I do too. Why is it so hard to understand?

I guess tablet photography is not a problem of the screen alone.

Electronic viewfinders are smaller than 3" screens. Does it mean it´s less usable? I don´t follow any of this logic.
Click to expand...
I think that what you aren't seeing is thus. When you have the nice big screen of your smartphone as a camera viewfinder. It's is very nice. But because the smartphone only needs one or two small icons. It's still usable.

But if you increase the screen size in a dedicated camera to smart phone size at the expense of the buttons to keep the overall size the same. It would be very necessary to clutter the screen with menus/controls. Which makes it far harder to use. Imagine having to use your smartphones home screen with all the apps on it as your viewfinder. Do you now see the issue?
 
Last edited:
7pilot said:
crashpc said:
The catch is, that it is not for everybody.

Like, the M, M10 and M100 cameras are like that now anyway. So it's not like distatnt future whizz. Those cameras obviously sell quite well. The only difference for some would be just the damn 1"-2" larger screen. How can manufacturers not see that and not innovate?
Click to expand...
Your example of the M100 shows the problem.
Click to expand...
Part of the problem is that larger screen would fit in!
7pilot said:
A 3" screen that has icon bars encroaching on three sides. That camera then has a screen that has part of the area used for photographs blocked by icons. Which in effect turns it into a much smaller screen. But it's even
Click to expand...
7pilot said:
worse than that as the icons are blocking areas that are used for composition.
Click to expand...
True. If you see it like that, you better go with hardware controls. This bothers me least on my M cameras, and I can even disable these menus and stuff. Yet, the M cameras sell well, so it´s not huge problem for people either. If it was major problem, It wouldn´t sell obviously.
7pilot said:
Then there is the lens mount issue. That's a big one. All manufacturers want their customers to move up to their more feature laden products. But if one has to change their (rather expensive) lens collection to do so. That can be an impediment to going to a DSLR from an M100 style camera. It's also an issue for the manufacturer as well. As it becomes far more expensive to do R&D on differing lens types.
Click to expand...
I see, but it doesn´t have much to do with very specific screen size issue. As I mentioned before, there is good space for increasing screen size without altering the camera ergonomics.
7pilot said:
I might ask you then. Why not a 3" screen? It may very well change in the future.
Click to expand...
Because I would enjoy larger screen. Many people do.
7pilot said:
But for now. Most photographers that are expanding their photography horizons from the P&S aspect of the smart phone want quicker and more precise control over their cameras.
Click to expand...
That is still doable with touch screen camera UI. Phones are reeeeally terrible at this.
7pilot said:
But cameras like the M100 look more like a $600-$700 ILC point & shoot.
Click to expand...
 
7pilot said:
Verland said:
If it wasn't a big difference, smartphones would still have the size that the first iPhone had. So yes, it's important to people.
Click to expand...
And the 5.5" still looks just as cluttered as the smaller 3.5" one. For a dedicated camera such clutter would be terrible and render the camera much more difficult to use. Because where would the camera controls go other than on the EVF and not have the overall camera grow beyond the current DSLR size?
Click to expand...
The interface for the camera doesn't have to look like this. I'm not a UX designer, so I will not describe exactly how it should look like. But there are experts for this topic that can create a very swift and intuitive touch UI that is optimized for the task.

By the way, I find it interesting to see how camera apps improve their UI over time. The one from my phone looks very clean and organized, no clutter at all.
 
7pilot said:
I think that what you aren't seeing is thus. When you have the nice big screen of your smartphone as a camera viewfinder. It's is very nice. But because the smartphone only needs one or two small icons. It's still usable.

But if you increase the screen size in a dedicated camera to smart phone size at the expense of the buttons to keep the overall size the same. It would be very necessary to clutter the screen with menus/controls. Which makes it far harder to use. Imagine having to use your smartphones home screen with all the apps on it as your viewfinder. Do you now see the issue?
Click to expand...
That´s not what´s happening at all.

I wasn´t even suggesting to get "only screen" controls at this point for general camera model. I fought for bigger screen where it is possible for the "screen area" available to particular cameras.

This layout is no problem for Canon M users:



ec1515e1bb7e4ab48eb3267a56fe8364.jpg



The newer M cameras obviously have more space around for larger screens:



da525e21d64a4ed6af811386b68b655b.jpg



...So it cannot really be big problem to make it bigger.

What I see here is everybody picking irrelevant self-constructed ideas and possibilities, and argues against these as if I was the guy who claimed all these. Without any flame or emotion, it is ridiculous discussion.
 
7pilot said:
crashpc said:
Lee Jay said:
Do you really see a 5" screen as a big difference from a 3" screen?
Click to expand...
Yes, it is more than 2x the area of the 3" screen. And it was just a tip. Not exact value. I would value every fraction of inch to get the screen bigger.
7pilot said:
I find the 5.1" screen on my phone to be minuscule and I find using an LCD, be it 5" or 3" to be the least useful way to compose, by far. I also noticed that the fad of shooting pictures with some stupid 7"-11" tablet has faded (I haven't seen anyone do that in years) so apparently a larger screen isn't that important to most people.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Here is what I mean:

66adcd70fcd04e8790bbe24ede91b857.jpg

Is this some camera ruining issue? Does it put any of the controls from the camera? Does it do harm like restriction in ones view or handling? I can´t understand the problem of "small screen" guys. :-)

You have to see that controls on the M cameras is already crippled, but on top of that, the LCD is tiny, which makes the user experience worse than necessary...
 
Last edited:
crashpc said:
Here is what I mean:

66adcd70fcd04e8790bbe24ede91b857.jpg

Is this some camera ruining issue? Does it put any of the controls from the camera? Does it do harm like restriction in ones view or handling? I can´t understand the problem of "small screen" guys. :-)
Click to expand...
You don't have to convince me, I'm with you. ;)

Anyway, thanks for you support!
 
Lee Jay said:
Verland said:
Lee Jay said:
Verland said:
Lee Jay said:
So, according to you, the Moto Z True Zoom should be selling like crazy.

https://www.motorola.com/us/products/moto-mods/hasselblad-true-zoom
Click to expand...
That camera has a tiny 1/2.3-inch sensor. You missed the topic, it's about large sensor + large screen.
Click to expand...
Doesn't say that in the OP.
Click to expand...
Yes, it does: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/60698781
Lee Jay said:
Verland wrote:
I want to see a camera with aps-c or ff sensor and 5 inch touchscreen
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Even in the other thread, that wasn't the point of the OP, and all the discussions centered around the size of the screen.
Click to expand...
Yes, it was my point. It's in the first post that started the whole discussion. I quoted and linked it, so there can be hardly a doubt about it. I also reiterated this point in other posts.
 
if I'm to understand what's being said, it's why don't cameras have larger screens so that there can be more controls available without having to dive into menus...? I would say that the answer is pretty simple in that a larger LCD would mean less room for physical controls and no matter how high tech things are or how used to touch screens we all get, physical controls are actually easier to manipulate and give tactile feedback that's both useful and for a whole lot of us more pleasing than swiping at a screen. Not to mention the fact that if everything is on a touch screen, the device is going to burn up batteries much quicker (especially too with a bigger LCD) and that's an important factor as well...


Maybe there will be some cameras introduced with very large LCD screens that show more controls at any one given time... and have less physical control to make that happen. I'd be willing to bet though that such designs would be controversial and would only appeal to a pretty small subset of the photography community...

--
my flickr:
www.flickr.com/photos/128435329@N08/
 
Last edited:
Aaron801 said:
if I'm to understand what's being said, it's why don't cameras have larger screens so that there can be more controls available without having to dive into menus...?
Click to expand...
Partially.
Aaron801 said:
I would say that the answer is pretty simple in that a larger LCD would mean less room for physical controls
Click to expand...
I already proved this is not always the case. It is mostly NOT the case actually.

Go back few posts to see my mashup of M3s back screen.
Aaron801 said:
and no matter how high tech things are or how used to touch screens we all get, physical controls are actually easier to manipulate and give tactile feedback that's both useful and for a whole lot of us more pleasing than swiping at a screen.
Click to expand...
That´s not full story though. The screen is fighting with the controls for certain advantages. Larger screen is good for more resolution and better composition or focusing and more.

Once you don´t care for speediest settings changes, the screen gets more priority.

And even then, as I posted before. Pros in audio often replaced their mixing consoles for iPads and touch UI. And while they often have $100 000 apparatus under their fingers, one would say it is too huge thing to miss the button or unintentionaly pushing a slider full blast UP just because of "bad touch by accident" happens. Yet, the transition happened in spite of hardware controls advantage. That´s rather weird.
Aaron801 said:
Not to mention the fact that if everything is on a touch screen, the device is going to burn up batteries much quicker (especially too with a bigger LCD) and that's an important factor as well...
Click to expand...
That´s actually only issue I see for customers liking touch UI oriented device.

But there are ways to offset this. My phone can do up to 20 hours of Screen On time. So 2-3 hours for a camere shouldn´t be a big problem, right?
Aaron801 said:
Maybe there will be some cameras introduced with very large LCD screens that show more controls at any one given time... and have less physical control to make that happen. I'd be willing to bet though that such designs would be controversial and would only appeal to a pretty small subset of the photography community...
Click to expand...
I had such camera in my hands. Benq branded. Not a good camera, but interesting approach. I´m not sure if it is good way. I suggested slightly different approach.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top