Articulated screens

[Angela Nicholson]

One of the great things about live view technology is that, provided the screen shows enough detail, it allows the photographer to focus manually with much greater precision than when focusing through a viewfinder. It’s especially valuable for landscape, still life and macro photography. Helpfully, the live view image also usually provides a 100% view of the scene and takes the exposure and white balance settings into account.

Now that live view technology is de rigueur in DSLRs, what does everyone think of articulated screens? Do they help you expand your creativity by making it easier to see and shoot the world from a different angle, or do they add a worrisome hinge to the edge of the LCD?

Perhaps you never use live view anyway?


Angela

[Sue Allen]

Live view is probably good for macro stuff. For anything else evf/rear screen is a poor substitute for ovf. I can remember using the articulated screen of the old Olympus E330 couple of times for its novelty value I seem to remember. Have'nt used live view in any of the cameras I've had with it - either with articulated screen or without. Another of those 'must have' features we did'nt know we were missing until we were told.....

[OldBoy]

Quite agree with Sue. Not very fond of live view as I prefer the viewfinder as the colours look more lifelike.

[silversnapper1]

Another vote for viewfinder over live view here. Very rarely use it and neither does my son who has the articulated screen version.

Steve.

[michaelb104]

I’ve got to disagree with the other posters, I use my articulated screen for quite a few of my shots, in fact there are some shots that I wouldn’t have got if I didn’t have it (an example is last weekend’s PR comp). I must admit though that it’s only used for composition because the colour rendition is a bit poor.

If I ever upgrade my camera it will have to have an articulated screen – that’s a must.

[amk1977]

The only time I use live view is for macro shots, so that I can zoom in and fine tune the focus. Apart from that, I never use it. The articulated screens really don't interest me personally. I'm of the school of thought that, if it can move, its more likely to get broken.

[ianpinion]

I regularly use the articulated screen on my camera (Olympus E620) when composing a landscape shot and in particularly to check the histogram before taking a shot, something I'm unable to do through the viewfinder. For some shots though I prefer to use the viewfinder, but it all depends on the scenario as to which I use. I find it a useful tool at times.

[chris-p]

I'm with Mike and Onion ( )

The articulated screen is a great idea, if you use the screen. It's been around on compacts for ages and we've seen some half-arsed attempts at it on SLRs but the one on the EOS 60D is very good, it's well screwed in and extremely useful for shooting at awkward angles when you can't use the viewfinder.

Also, given the quality of the viewfinders in some of the cheaper cameras, which are often very small and very dark, a decent hi-res LCD is almost essential. Articulate it well and it's nigh on indispensible.

I've never understood the aversion to technology in some respects. It's the same as with the HD video modes. The number of "Oh, I don't want it - why can't they just take it off" posts you see is daft. If you don't want it, don't use it. It's never (at least, until the Sony SLTs, which lose 1/3 of a stop of light thanks to the pellicle mirror) interfered with the stills photography part of the camera.

[Eyeayen]

I've never had an articulated screen but I know there would have been times when it would have come in handy. Also if your screen gets broken as in cracked or something I'm sure it would be easier to replace it on an articulated screen model than a fixed in place one. I'd have to try one for a completely honest feed back but they make sense to me. I've held the Nikon D5000 and it seemed chunky with it, I've not held the 60D though.

So I'd go with it.

[HinFrance]

If you live somewhere sunny the chances that an LCD screen will be much more use than a chocolate tea pot are remote. I still have an old monochrome display 'phone because none of the colour displays are visible in sunlight. It was hilarious last summer watching one of our visitors trying to take pictures with her compact when the screen was utterly useless, and she had no viewfinder. It must have been like trying to nail mercury.

I started back in photography with a Fuji S9500, a super bridge at the time, which had an articulated screen. I used it from time to time. However, the 'live view' on a bridge is rather more immediate and accurate than the implementation I have seen in DSLRs. Since having a DSLR with live view I have used it once. On a compact, bridge, or a Sony with it's much better system, then I might use it - but only occasionally. I won't even buy a compact camera that doesn't have a viewfinder - makes my next one a Canon G somethingorother I reckon.

In short, in poor light I can see that both live view and an articulated screen can be very useful. Although the viewing angle on my old DSLR's screen is large enough that I can't see the point of it articulating.

I'm sort of with Chris on the 'if you don't want it, don't use it' idea. But if I don't want it, I don't want to have to pay for it either And that definitely goes for video of any description.