Why I love the flip and rotate screen vs the simply flip

Started 4 months ago | Discussions thread
MOD Tom Caldwell Forum Pro • Posts: 35,639
Re: Why I love the flip and rotate screen vs the simply flip

BagCarryingDad wrote:

Albert Valentino wrote:

Mark Thornton wrote:

Most tilt screens will tilt up 90 degrees, which would seem sufficient for that use case.

That is what I was thinking,

there is nothing about getting this shot, exif states 17mm lens, that could not have been done with w regular titly LCD or, since it was a wide lens, done wiithout any LCD.

Personally, I strongly prefer the titly screen and hate FAS - one of the two reasons why went for the mark I EM1 instead of the mark II. The other reason was price 😉

Depends entirely what you use it for! Shooting wildlife from ground-level in strong light, an articulated screen can be turned to avoid glare as much as possible. Both have their uses.

Without reducing this thread to FAS versus tilt wars I can agree that the FAS is slightly more versatile than a tilt lcd but that is well overcome (in my personal opinion) by the annoying awkwardness of the FAS where a simple tilt is more than good enough.

The title of the thread is confrontational (with respect) because in my opinion there is nothing in the example shown that could not have been done with a simple tilt mechanism (or a larger stepladder).    But Ab’s assertion in general is good.

I would agree that some tilt function of any pedigree makes a camera more versatile and that the example shot would have been much the harder with a fixed lcd screen.  Not withstanding that remark I have no problems framing with a fixed lcd at 45 degree angle plane of sight and sometimes more.  This means that a tilt is versatile beyond the technical range of its tilt capacity.  It is not always necessary to check the lcd only at close to square on view.  Others might disagree of course and are welcome to do so. This need more or less mirrors the school of thought that prefers big bright evf units and is slowly morphing into “slr” shape cameras with large clear evf + FAS versus “RF” style shape with more compact evf and tilt lcd articulation.

Furthermore the divide between tilt and FAS in actual use is that tilters are probably using evf more often and tilt is only used when the evf/fixed lcd settng cannot be used effectively.

FAS users most likely use the evf less often and using the tilt is just a “way of life” otherwise they are shackled to what is effectively a fixed lcd or one that is face inwards and cannot be seen except by yet another swivel and shift.  Otherwise it is just an awkward device to put up with just in case it coms in handy one day.

Tilt is passive and FAS is an active device - no matter what their respective advantages are the real question is more a personality thing.  Long may both types of screen articulation live so that everyne can continue to have a choice.

The “tilt is no use for portrait mode” argument is equivalent to an “Australian Furphy” (an incorrect widely believed assertion passed off as fact”. It is as much as saying no person should use a camera with an evf unless it has a battery grip so that portrait mode shots can be made more easily.  Those that do a lot of portrait mode shots using their lcd screen have probably already bought FAS screens - luckily they are made to suit that very purpose

-- hide signature --

Tom Caldwell

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow