[Reinier]

Hello All,

 

Last week I had a discussion with a friend of mine. He is a professional photographer and I ask him would it be nice to have an articulated LCD on your camera. He said: "YES, of course" and so do a lot of photographers.

 

So, why does my Canon G2 from 12 years old have one, but the Canon EOS 5D II, III, 1Ds, Nikon D4, D800, etc, doesn't?

 

Someone opted it would be to fragile, but if you don't use it, you can just leave 'folded' in the camera.

 

Or is it that the companies save features for the future, so they can still come up with something new? So, just a marketing thing?

 

Kind regards,


Reinier

 

[popo]

I wonder if it might be more common in the future now that live view AF is getting better. Up to now, higher level DSLRs are mainly used through the viewfinder, or maybe tethered.

 

I also think if someone needs it enough, they could get a body dedicated to it. The 70D is an "almost" 7D in most respects, with a new few toys. Myself, I have a 600D since I didn't want to spend the extra cost.

 

I wouldn't say no if the 7D mk2 got this, and rumours are it isn't far away so we'll find out in the upcoming months. It would be interesting to see if that tips a clue to the future direction too.

[JJ_SO]

Reinier, even Canon gave up the concept with the latest G... models. I'm not happy about that. It does cost more and needs more space. Fragility is not the big problem, maybe the Professionals use either the finder or tethered shooting.

 

LiveView on Nikon D800 is a pretty poor quality, it's extremely slow from focusing until the shutter finally opens again for shooting - so, no action at all, only very immobile subjects.

 

PhaseOne backs on the expensive side also don't have a tiltyflippyscreen, but they do have excellent WiFi connection to tablets. Nikon Pro cameras do need for each connection bit expensive and bulky and another-thing-to-carry-around accessories. For the next generation D4s and D800s (or whatever they'll name it) there's no WiFi onboard. Not to mention something else than a fixed screen. It's a shame.

 

All I'd want is  a holder, tilt and swift and an independant screen device I can switch in WiFi for maybe 1/4 hour until it needs to get recharged by the camera's battery.

[Mahadragon]

Don't understand the question. To me, it's not a question of articulated LCD's on DSLR's. I want to know why they don't have touch screens. Touch screen are so much more intuitive. 51 point autofocus on the D800?? Who wants to deal with a bunch of points? Just touch the screen where you want it to focus, it's not rocket science. Micro 43 cameras have sophisticated touch screens that work just like the iPhone. There's no excuse why Canon and Nikon can't put it on their cameras.

 

I've been saying this for awhile now. If Apple got serious into the photography market they would destroy Canon and Nikon in short order. They already took the budget point and shoot market without even trying. iPhone's not only have intuitive touch screens that allow you to make a picture quickly and easily, they are feature packed. They come with HDR, Panorama feature, slow motion, and iOS8 will come with an easy to use time lapse feature. These are features that might come with high end DSLR's but they aren't as easy to implement as the iPhone. Granted, the IQ is not the same, but the gap is closing every year. Canon and Nikon have been sitting on their collective behinds for decades. They have it coming to them.

[Brightcolours]

There are a number of Canon cameras (like a 650D, 700D, 70D, EOS M/M2) which have an excellent touch screen interface.

 

An iPhone is nice for a phone. Not for a serious camera. Phones never will close the gap to big sensor cameras. If one is content with a phone camera, one never needed a DSLR in the 1st place. Not every driver needs a race car, not every snapshooter needs a serious camera.

 

As for swivel screens, they can break off, and serious weather sealing will be an extra challenge.  It is all about priorities and compromise.

[JJ_SO]

Only one current Nikon has an articulated touchscreen, the 1V3. Which is a lot of things but not a professional camera. Canon is pretty advanced (not only) in that aspect. I don't know if professionals are so afraid of trying new things or manufacturers are the cowards in that business. Or they don't want to go the Sony way? Or they just can't make those displays themselves and would have to pay higher prices than phone manufacturers who buy hundred thousands in one go? Only the flagship 4/3 Olympus had at it's time an articulated screen. And that beast is weather sealed.


But when it comes to cameras beyond 3000$ touchscreens become rare. After app. 20.000$ again, one can find them again in PhaeOne MF backs which appear to be weather and scratch resistant enough for pros who can afford such a device.


Nikon would have to make a lot efforts to get to the same level of LiveView and video experience Canon users can already enjoy. In the lower price regions...

[Mahadragon]

There are a number of Canon cameras (like a 650D, 700D, 70D, EOS M/M2) which have an excellent touch screen interface.

 

An iPhone is nice for a phone. Not for a serious camera. Phones never will close the gap to big sensor cameras. If one is content with a phone camera, one never needed a DSLR in the 1st place. Not every driver needs a race car, not every snapshooter needs a serious camera.

 

As for swivel screens, they can break off, and serious weather sealing will be an extra challenge.  It is all about priorities and compromise.

You're taking my comment out of context. I never said an iPhone was a serious camera. Go back and read my comment. I said if Apple ever got seriously into the photography business they would destroy Canon and Nikon in a short time. If Apple released a full frame DSLR they would destroy the competition.

[JJ_SO]

No, they wouldn't, Mahadragon, that's only wishful threatening of you  ^_^

 

1. They once made designed a digicam, but didn't carry on on that path.
   
    
   
2. And why on earth they should make a DSLR? People buying these kind of stuff do want to buy into a system - no way, Apple would come out with a complete system, not worth the effort for an already saturated and more than conservative market. An excellent camera, easy to use, doesn't have to be a DSLR and honestly, there's no camera on par with "easy to use" to the iPhone. And that's because they kept things simple and elegant instead of loading tons of functions into it.
   
    
   
3. After Steve passed away, innovation did so, too - they are only evolving already existing concepts or making them worse. I'm considering going back to iTunes 10 because 11 turned out to be less useful, I'm remaining on a system 3 (!) generations under their newest attempt to make OS a stupid part of the cloud. I tried OS 10.8, 10.9 - and went always back to 10.6 because that has all I need and want to see and no dull grey interface.
   
    
   
4. Apple has lost it's major magic to me and a couple of others. Maybe they had the money, but no longer the genius mastermind behind all the great inventions of the past. Jony Ives made a design for Leica, a prototype. Beautiful (in my eyes), but hardly revolutionary, and what happens now with that? Went on sale for charity - could've been worse. Sony was and still  is great in designing interesting concepts, unfortunately they're jumping from one horseback to the next. While galopping away from good glass 
   

[popo]

You have to wonder, if Apple, Google, Samsung or Sony (as examples) might come up with a novel way to remake high quality imaging in a smartphone compatible form factor. In particular, using data from multiple small sensors to provide more information to make an image. How that is best split will have to be determined, using stereoscopic effects, different focal lengths, colour sensitivities or whatever.

 

I would, for example, love to see optical interferometry implemented on a small scale. Currently only used on telescope arrays, given advanced in electronics you have to wonder when the day will arrive that a smartphone size unit could handle it without breaking a sweat. You could then have the effective resolution of a lens of aperture the same diameter as the usable phone width. Note this only applies to resolution, not light sensitivity.

[Rover]

I sure could use the articulated display on my 1D Mark IV. Live View partially makes up for its absence - I find myself shooting from odd angles quite a bit more now than when I was using my old 1D Mark II N, but when the angle gets very awkward, it's almost useless again. Guess I'll need a small HDMI monitor for these cases but I can imagine it'll be quite clumsy in the field (actually I thought of it a few days back when I was shooting in a theatre and needed to make a lot of overhead / floor level shots). But I guess there will never be an articulated screen in a 1D series body - probably for reliability / ruggedness issues. 70D is as close as it gets in Canon land.