# Flip out displays -- why the resentment?



## JerryBruck (Jan 29, 2012)

Bought a 60D as my first dslr, in part because of what Canon calls the "Vari-angle" monitor, aka "articulating display" or flip-screen. This was high on my fierce little list as a Must and has proven even more useful and important to me than imagined. Video, I admit, is my eventual destination but it's been all still photography for six months and here also flipper is essential.

Let me count the ways: for angles all the way down to ground level, or eighteen inches above your eyes, this allows you to frame without stretching out flat on the street or in the mud, or climbing a tree or a drainpipe -- landscape afficianados take note! A minority of circumstances perhaps but a disproportionate source of winners. Essential for reportage, especially the high shots. Easier for journalists to conceal what they're up to -- the sneaks can face away from a subject.

Very very useful for portraiture out of the studio and even more for self-portraits or any kind of cheap wireless remote shooting.

Two considerations that hadn't occurred: swiveling the monitor away leaves a nice recess for the nose when using the OVF. Leaving the monitor screen turned inwards in the closed position protects it completely from scratching. (I leave it in this position most of the time when shooting too -- I find less and less need to check it when conditions are familiar. When I do use the screen, it's opened out to the left; there are no greasy smears on it.)

In video where pulling focus matters, a good loupe becomes an attractive alternative to a heavy and expensive external monitor, to name just one advantage.

So what's the beef? Why do so many dedicated Canoneers seem to choke on their lens caps over this? I've seen the argument that flip screens preclude weather-proofing, yet for years and years cheap flip-screen video-cams have been guaranteed waterproof to at least ten feet! And they work -- I've used them. The arrangement increases fragility? The opposite is true. It hogs valuable real-estate at the expense or more buttons? There's still plenty of empty space on the 60D my right thumb could reach. 

The argument from stills-only shooters that they must now pay for all these unwanted "video" features seems misconceived too, since even if this was only about movies, the mass entry of videographers into this market, just now getting underway, should help keep prices down for everyone. 

Sorry to have gone on so long! It looks like Canon is leaving Vari-angle out of the high end once again. What am I overlooking?


----------



## Eye_Broccoli (Jan 30, 2012)

I will admit my initial downplaying of having an articulated LCD on anything but a P&S or a video camera. My first camera was an XSi and having the live view with magnification was nice for manual focus/macro, but I never the feature besides that.

When the 60D came out it seemed like the xxD line was going downhill (40D ISO performance versus the 50D's anyone?) but I still wanted an upgrade with a larger body and better controls. Unable to justify the extra cost of a 7D for my needs, I bought it and now having used it for a year I can say that I've been able to pull off shots with 10x the confidence and haven't wished the screen was fixed at any time. It's protected when closed up, lets me shoot over railings without guessing the focus, and lets me make sure everyone is framed right when the occasional family photo comes up. Candid street shots are easier too.

To me it seems the biggest worry for other people (other than the stigma around it) is that it will break with constant use. Whether that has any truth behind it isn't for me to say, but personally it's something that can either be used if needed, or ignored completely without any obvious downsides.

Now just give me Servo AF Sensitivity control and I'll be good.


----------



## JerryBruck (Jan 30, 2012)

Thanks Eye-Broccoli, you've given me a better understanding of the unhappiness. "Stigma" is a word that hadn't occurred to me in connection with the "Vari-angle".

For readers not accustomed to reaching high or low I attach some examples of what I've been talking about -- I see I'll have to do this in installments.


----------



## JerryBruck (Jan 30, 2012)

Attachments, #2 of 2


----------



## boateggs (Jan 30, 2012)

I've been wondering this too. In several 5d3/7d2 threads, there seems to be many who would rather switch to Nikon than have an articulating screen on the new models and I can't figure out why all hate for them. Then again I am relatively new to the DSLR world. I hope that the 7d2 will have one or the 70d will get AFMA back


----------



## dr croubie (Jan 30, 2012)

I'll certainly put my name down as one who didn't initially like the vari-angle display. When I bought my 7D, it was that, or 50D, or 550D, they weren't on the market then, but I'd still buy the 7D again even with added choices of 600D and 60D.

But there's times I wish I had one, taking photos of baby birds in a nest yesterday, with an MF lens on an extension tube and live view, I could barely reach my hand high enough and could only just see the screen. Taking very (very) low-angle shots to try out the new tripod too, it was hovering 1cm above the floor pointing straight up, I just had to guess roughly where I was pointing (up a spiral staircase) and stick the remote-control on.
No cheek/nose marks on the screen would be nice too, but i'm always reviewing shots so it would get tiresome flipping back and forward too often.

I'll certainly believe Canon if they come up with a way to make a flip-screen 7D2 with the same waterproofing as the current 7D model. But can they sell it for the same price?

The main reason I wouldn't buy one (on a camera that gets as much abuse as my 7D, if i were a 'normal' consumer I might consider a flip-screen more seriously), is the fragility. I've worked at the company that repairs almost every mobile phone in The Netherlands that breaks, and I've seen way too many clam-shell phones go through there that got sat on or walked on, even just fell shell-open-side-down onto the floor and bent too far backwards. If they can make on that can take a 'pro' level of abuse, I'd certainly consider it (even if i'm not a pro, sometimes i treat my equipment a bit like it).

An external LCD-screen with HDMI-plug, and hot-shoe mounted/powered (or battery powered) would be very nice and probably better for my occasional needs. I'm pretty sure they exist, but I don't need it often enough to justify more expense...


----------



## distant.star (Jan 30, 2012)

I think it has a lot of potential use in many situations. My hope is that it's available on my next body -- waiting for release of something in the 5D3 range to decide. I like the "flipper" designation.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 30, 2012)

You won't find it on high end cameras because it's a cheap, gimmicky consumer crutch. _Real_ photographers don't want it. _Real_ photographers don't need it. _Real_ photographers can compose shots perfectly with their eyes closed. If you want a lazy crutch, get a cheap point and shoot. Or stop whining and be a _real_ photographer - take that wide Canon-branded strap off your high-end camera, tie it around your eyes, and just shoot away.


----------



## bigblue1ca (Jan 30, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> _Real_ photographers can compose shots perfectly with their eyes closed.



Lol.

_Real_ photographers like lying on their stomachs in the dirt and muck to compose images from ground level. 

_Real_ photographers prefer to spray and pray when forced to shoot around a corner (long story) instead of using the LCD at 90 degrees to compose the image.


----------



## Eye_Broccoli (Jan 30, 2012)

This might by slightly OT, but with a feature like the Vari-Angle screen on a camera that makes live-view something that could get used more often, has anyone run into issues of increased grain while shooting with the screen for any period of time? Not specifically the 60D though, but any camera with LV.

I haven't been able to nail down if it's all in my head and generally viewing prints on-screen, but it seems that if I'm doing a bunch of shots with the sensor running with LV I'll get hit with more noise than usual. It makes sense from a technical perspective along the lines of why SLR's have a time/thermal limit for video capture, but an end to that argument would be good.


----------



## distant.star (Jan 30, 2012)

If your pictures all come out upside down because you got tangled up in that neckstrap...

you might be a real photographer!


----------



## Harley (Jan 30, 2012)

It's an interesting question.

I'm one of those who has absolutely no interest in owning a camera with an articulated screen. I saved up for a 7D rather than buy a 60D mostly because of that articulated screen. But why the resentment? I'm not entirely sure...

I get all the arguments for the screen. I understand it's usefulness. I also like the video features that my dSLR has despite my primary use being for stills. 

Fragility is definitely an issue for me -- I go places where my camera gets abused and I don't want the extra risk of that articulated screen. Maybe it's because it seems rather gimmicky to me, too -- it's not a camcorder, it's a dSLR. Maybe I just haven't used one and I would change my mind if I did but I just don't want one on my camera. I don't like using live view anyway and I cannot see myself ever buying an SLR with articulated LCD. 

However, for those that do want one, well, to each their own and long live the 60D!


----------



## kdsand (Jan 30, 2012)

Cotton picken darn it all don't have the thing shoot *movies* because then that ain't a real camera!

What the heck? *SD card*..... hmmm there must be some reason to insist on CF cards. That's right with my bad eye sight I can find them ity bity SD cards.


The 60D Having a rotating screen isnt a necessity for me but I do like it and has come in very handy on many occasions. Just yesterday I was shooting on the ground under an arched tree branch moss and mushrooms growing along a second fallen tree. I must add this was on the bank of a ravine with melt swollen stream two feet away. The swivel screen made the task easy er and a tad bit more accurate.

I flip it closed out of habit to prevent scratches.

So far I say give me everything --- as long as I'm not sacrificing core functionality and durability.


----------



## gene_can_sing (Jan 30, 2012)

Resentment of Flip Screens is because many Photogs are of the "it's always been that way" train of thought. Photography and cinematography is an every changing artform, and evolving with techniques and technology is a major part of the equation.

I have been working on a music video with the 60D. For B-Roll, we've been doing a lot of Time Lapses from really strange angles. On several instances, the camera was mounted to a bike and pointed back at my arm (I was the arm double for the lead singer). I had to do this shot on my own on another day after the main shoot. There was ZERO chance that I could have done this without a Flip Screen. No even remotely possible, no chance. With a flip screen, it was a breeze. Without the flip screen, I would have had to guess over and over again.

I usually use a Z-Finder so the flip screen stays locked up most of the time. But it is invaluable for certain shots. The Flip Screen just helps you with your creativity and to get what you want. 

I guess most people on the forum just like very straight forward, traditional photography. If that fine with you, then you probably don't need a flip screen. But for those off-kilter, odd angle shots, you need the Flip.

As for the fragility issue, that pretty much a crock. I've abuse the crap out of my equipment over the years, and have never once broken a flip screen on any point and shoot, DSLR or video camera that I have ever owned. With just a hint of common sense and thought, it can be easily avoided.


----------



## pwp (Jan 30, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> You won't find it on high end cameras because it's a cheap, gimmicky consumer crutch. _Real_ photographers don't want it. _Real_ photographers don't need it. _Real_ photographers can compose shots perfectly with their eyes closed. If you want a lazy crutch, get a cheap point and shoot. Or stop whining and be a _real_ photographer - take that wide Canon-branded strap off your high-end camera, tie it around your eyes, and just shoot away.



Far from triggering any feelings any resentfulness, this thread has made me genuinely consider getting a 60D body as an occasional use spare third body precisely because it does have the articulating screen. 

To suggest real photographers don't want or need an articulating screen is a little bit of a stretch. The 60D just provides us with more choice and creative options. As a 25+ years very busy professional I think I'd probably qualify as real. Most work is done on 1-Series bodies, and a 60D certainly wouldn't cut it as a primary body in my situation, but I think we're all fortunate to have the choice of an inexpensive articulating screen body that will shoot RAW and take our good Canon glass.

In any real photographers life there will be times when an articulating screen may provide a highly viable solution to a creative conundrum. And of course there is also the never to be underestimated fun factor. 

Paul Wright


----------



## Rocky (Jan 30, 2012)

Most of the people that resent it has never use one. The flip screen is a useful tool that let you shoot at all kind of odd angles and let you see exactly what you will get. If you are talking about "tradition", waist level finders has been around since 1930's. The flip screen is effectively a waist level finder and then some. The flip screen can be durable if it is done correctly. We had a G1 for more than 7 years and never have any problem. If Canon can make the screen of 7D weather proof, it can also make the flip screen weather proof. Flip screen is a good tool to have.


----------



## sparda79 (Jan 30, 2012)

WFT said:


> I have been at an "event" where I had arrived early to gain a good "vantage point" (higher) only to have others arrive later and proceed to shove there vari-angle screen cameras above there heads and into my shot  yer they got "that shot", but not very considerate to everyone else.



LOL... A friend of my complaints about this too...


----------



## Narcolepsy (Jan 30, 2012)

gene_can_sing said:


> As for the fragility issue, that pretty much a crock. I've abuse the crap out of my equipment over the years, and have never once broken a flip screen on any point and shoot, DSLR or video camera that I have ever owned. With just a hint of common sense and thought, it can be easily avoided.


I broke the flip screen on a Fuji s9600 twice - normal use, no trauma - just stopped working...


----------



## Canon-F1 (Jan 30, 2012)

Narcolepsy said:


> I broke the flip screen on a Fuji s9600 twice - normal use, no trauma - just stopped working...



same here.

i had 4 cameras with a flip/swivel screen and in the end they all are defective because of the screen. so my guess is the flip screens are somewhat problematic.


----------



## NormanBates (Jan 30, 2012)

RE: external HDMI screen
this is suboptimal:
* relatively expensive (zacuto EVF, without the loupe: $675)
* no matter how much you spend, it can't be trusted for accurate color reproduction (i.e. nothing is more accurate than the built-in screen) (Shane Hurlbut dixit)

RE: frailty
two solutions:
* for high-end models: make the flip-out screen module all-metal
* for mid-end and low-end models: make sure the hinge is sturdy enough, and make sure the screen has a secure fold-in position (i.e. if you're about to abuse the camera, just keep the screen folded, and it should be secure)


----------



## AvTvM (Jan 30, 2012)

@JerryBruck: excellent "sample" pics ... really like them ... a lot! 

I would prefer a flip screen on my camera too, even though I went from 40D to 7D rather than 60D because of better 7D AF + features and weather sealing. I valued those higher than the flip screen. I never do video, only still photography. I would find a flip screen especially useful for candid/street pics.

But I also bought a Powershot S95 rather than a Powershot G - because I valued compact size even higher than a flip screen ...


----------



## JerryBruck (Jan 30, 2012)

@AvTvM: Thanks a lot! If only I had a "karma" button I'd be banging on it now.


----------



## briansquibb (Jan 30, 2012)

Live View AF is useless that is why we dont use them


----------



## 7enderbender (Jan 30, 2012)

It would be another step into a direction that I personally don't like. More plastic, more moving parts, more "features" that have nothing to do with photography. It would be another reminder that what I really want is a digital version of the F-1. And that I can't afford Leica gear. I don't do video (at least not with my DSLR) and I don't use live-view. I'd rather have no screen at all instead of a swivel screen.


----------



## eos650 (Jan 30, 2012)

I love the LCD on my 60D. Most of the time it's flipped against the back, facing outward and is used to review shots or settings. I don't normally take pictures in live view, but when I need to get that quick off angle shot it takes me seconds to flip it out, enter live view and make the shot.

I've been shooting a lot of basketball (tis the season) and like to throw in some low, wide angle shots from the foul line. The vari-angle LCD has been extremely handy. I do have a right angle finder, but never take it with me. The right angle finder means an extra item in my bag. It takes me close to a minute to get it out and put it on and then I still have to get down on the ground. By the time I've done all this, I've missed the shot. I then have to take it off, so I can resume shooting normally.

Like it or not, the LCD was one of the reasons that I didn't spring for the difference and buy the 7D.


----------



## RC (Jan 30, 2012)

Interesting topic and responses. I don't resent or criticize flip out/swivel displays however, I'm not really interested in them. Although there are some good comments for practical uses, I don't ever recall "I wish I had a swivel screen." I'm OK for laying in the dirt trying to get the low perspective shot. Maybe if I had it, I'd discover some good uses.

Aside from briefly checking focus for landscapes/moon shots with Live View, I never use it, I don't like it, I want to look through the view finder, I feel I can compose much better and more naturally. Would I give up LV? No, I want it, but just as a tool for what I mentioned. As for video on my 7D, I forget it exists.

I was thinking about all the hours I've spent behind a video camera (nothing fancy, just family stuff), and I almost never used the swivel screen. Probably less than 1%.

On the flip side (pun not intended) for point-and-shoot cameras, I almost never used the viewfinder on my S80--probably because it was not a real FOV. Now with my new S100 that doesn't even have a viewfinder, I care less. I'm happy with that big bright 3" screen.

It is what it is, probably some old school, and probably just old habits.


----------



## Maui5150 (Jan 30, 2012)

I think the swivel screen is great for taking shots where the camera is at an awkward angle...

As an example, for the chester type pervs, with a swivel screen, you can bend down to tie your shoe with the camera in hand and shoot up a skirt and make sure you not only captured the image, but have the proper exposure...

Some may argue that the swivel screen is for sports or crowds and when the camera is being held above your head... but really... The example above was the clear intended purpose...


----------



## kentandersen (Jan 30, 2012)

I really don't see the problem either.

I was also considering between 7D and 60D, and ended up with 60D becouse of the screen. Afther 30 000 klicks, I have only thought a handful of time that a bether AF or more focuspoint would have been great. But the flip out screen has been used in 10% of my shots, and in all videos. A self portrait, low angle, high angle, macro where I don't want to scare the creature, shooting children unoticed... there is several ocations where this feature has helped me.

What I appreciate alot, is that I can turn the screen with the glas pointing towards the camera. That makes it even bether protected than with the normal screen.

A 5d with 7D AF and a flip out screen would be the perfect camera for me.


----------



## Steb (Jan 30, 2012)

I upgraded from 550D to 60D and my main concern was the articulating screen. If I had the choice I would have bought it with a fixed one. Now after about a year with that camera I consider it a great improvement and I would like to have it on my next camera too. I have not used it that often but from time to time it makes shots much easier or even possible. I regulary make use of the possibility to flip the screen inside for protection.


----------



## EYEONE (Jan 30, 2012)

I don't really resent them, rather I just don't really care. Mainly, I am considered about the physical construction a little bit. There is also the issue of having to bypass the AF system to use it.

But what it boils down to is that there is about 300 other issues I'd rather see addressed in my next camera before I start thinking seriously about flippy screens.

Only rarely, very very rarely, have I been shooting and thought: Dang, I need a flip screen...


----------



## Meh (Jan 30, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Live View AF is useless that is why we dont use them



Add to Neuro's comment above: _Real_ photographers don't use Live View AF


----------



## JerryBruck (Jan 30, 2012)

@Eye-Broccoli, @dr croubie, @Harley, @Narcolepsy, @Canon-F-1, @7enderbender:
Perhaps some traditionalists don't realize that the Vari-angle screen can remain flush against the body without ever even once being swung out. Canon has recessed it into the camera's back, surrounded by a slightly raised, rounded frame. There's no way I can think of, that it can be accidentally dislodged from this position, even rolling round loose in a sack: only a somewhat forceful action of fingertip/nail can pry it open. To this extent it doesn't resemble the clam-shell design of many small camcorders. In appearance _it's very little different from Canon's fixed-screen models_. It is more vulnerable once swung out, obviously and of course. One must take care. The hinge seems to be very solid. 

@WFT: Those vari-shooters are only blocking your view because the fixed-screeners in front of _them_ don't dare stop and sit down, shooting blind as they are.


----------



## sb (Jan 30, 2012)

Meh said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > Live View AF is useless that is why we dont use them
> ...





Meh said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > Live View AF is useless that is why we dont use them
> ...



Yup - basically buyers of pro bodies don't want to see consumer features in it - as simple as that. The advocates don't quite understand because it seems like "it doesn't hurt to have it there", however for me, it's kind of like getting a race car and realizing that it comes with "parking assist", "backup cam", "facebook connectivity" and automatic transmission


----------



## dstppy (Jan 30, 2012)

I'll throw in my greatly-overpriced two cents:
I prefer the articulating screen at this point because there are no greasy nose-prints on my screen from shooting  I'm a guy, I'm not supposed to have to exfoliate . . . apply soap, scrub, rinse I'm done. 

I'm going with +1 on pretension for a lot of it. I consider it a boon to be able to protect the screen and leave on auto-preview without having to use it . . . to that ends, I miss the non-automatic pop-up flash of my SX10 IS. Mechanical way of togging a feature on/off.

While you're bringing that up, you might as well talk about how 'flimsy' the 60D is too ;D Yeah, that plastic body was really bugging me . . . now that I've got a 5DmkII, I don't have to worry about being attacked and not being able to club someone ???


----------



## 7enderbender (Jan 30, 2012)

JerryBruck said:


> @Eye-Broccoli, @dr croubie, @Harley, @Narcolepsy, @Canon-F-1, @7enderbender:
> Perhaps some traditionalists don't realize that the Vari-angle screen can remain flush against the body without ever even once being swung out. Canon has recessed it into the camera's back, surrounded by a slightly raised, rounded frame. There's no way I can think of, that it can be accidentally dislodged from this position, even rolling round loose in a sack: only a somewhat forceful action of fingertip/nail can pry it open. To this extent it doesn't resemble the clam-shell design of many small camcorders. In appearance _it's very little different from Canon's fixed-screen models_. It is more vulnerable once swung out, obviously and of course. One must take care. The hinge seems to be very solid.
> 
> @WFT: Those vari-shooters are only blocking your view because the fixed-screeners in front of _them_ don't dare stop and sit down, shooting blind as they are.





Admittedly, this is a good argument. But forgive me, as a traditionalist (which I am on a lot of things, not all) I don't really want to put up with a feature just because it can be done and because it may be useful to a minority. Is a fixed screen the be-all-end-all? No, of course not. But it's another thing that takes away from the experience of owning a rock-solid camera which to me is part of the fun and justification of shelling out thousands of dollars for camera gear (or similar items). Neither makes me a better photographer (cyclist, guitar player, golfer, skier, you name it...). But to me there is something to be said about solid workman ship that makes the experience of going out and shooting half-way decent photographs more enjoyable. A BMW, Audi or Lexus doesn't make me a better driver or even gets me any faster to work than a Corolla (or the Commuter Rail...) - but hell, I do like stick shifts and good acceleration when I drive.

But even in that somewhat lame comparison I could now (the traditionalist that I am) complain that the Germans and Japanese in the last few decades started to put way too much useless stuff into their vehicles. So even with money to burn I'd probably still take the train and rental cars for the necessary stuff and otherwise have a nice classic sports car in the garage.

So in as much as I "get" the fully utilitarian approach with turning everything into the equivalent of a Swiss Army knife (I do like Swiss Army knives though) I'm missing the emotional component. That's why people like me whine when they realize that their $1000+ new lens is made from plastic and is build in way that makes it unlikely that my kids will enjoy them later on like I still use some of my dad's old lenses. And it's a bit like the difference between a nice mechanical watch and a Chinese quartz movement. The latter will be more precise.

Maybe I'm interpreting too much into a silly old screen here but it's another one of those obvious changes that significantly change the experience independent of results.


----------



## Lyra Video Productions (Jan 30, 2012)

Anyone who says you can't be a real photographer AND use a swivel screen (at all) is just being a luddite as far as I can tell (even if you're not being entirely serious  ). And if you're making the argument that a swivel screen is more prone to break then just don't use it. Keep it in one position against the body and don't worry about swiveling.

Here's the thing--I own a 60D for photography and video, but I (almost) never use the swivel screen. Honestly, fragility of the screen was a concern when I decided to buy the 60D, but it just seems to be a non-issue.

Though I usually don't use it, there have been times when the swivel screen has been a huge help. I'll find myself down on the dirt getting a low angle shot (out of habit) when suddenly I realize I don't have to be. Sure, live view is horrible for most photography situations but it works fine for some things (and video, of course).

Is a top-of-the-line camera a place for a swivel screen? I don't know--there is definitely a stigma that's hard to shake--even though I've found mine useful in the past. But at the very least don't knock it till you try it in real shooting situations, and don't look down on people who find it useful.


----------



## Orangutan (Jan 30, 2012)

*(OT Protecting the screen) Re: Flip out displays -- why the resentment?*

Since we're on the topic of the 60D flip-screen, has anyone used "InvisibleShield" on their flip screen? Does it interfere with turning the screen face-in? I've been thinking of doing this on mine.


----------



## Canon-F1 (Jan 30, 2012)

JerryBruck said:


> @Eye-Broccoli, @dr croubie, @Harley, @Narcolepsy, @Canon-F-1, @7enderbender:
> Perhaps some traditionalists don't realize that the Vari-angle screen can remain flush against the body without ever even once being swung out.



dosn´t change a thing that i have 4 cameras with a flip screen that are defect *because* of the LCD.


----------



## Meh (Jan 30, 2012)

Lyra Video Productions said:


> Anyone who says you can't be a real photographer AND use a swivel screen (at all) is just being a luddite as far as I can tell (even if you're not being entirely serious  ). And if you're making the argument that a swivel screen is more prone to break then just don't use it. Keep it in one position against the body and don't worry about swiveling.



Of course you can't be a real photographer and use a swivel screen and I'm being entirely serious  just ask @briansquibb who noted that Live View AF is useless (it isn't useless by the way). Oh and you when you said...



Lyra Video Productions said:


> Sure, live view is horrible for most photography situations but it works fine for some things (and video, of course).



What do you mean by "horrible" and what do you mean by "most"? That's the trouble with making such bold statements, they just tend to not really be the case. Did you just look down on those who find it useful and use it for a lot of photography situations?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 30, 2012)

sb said:


> ...basically buyers of pro bodies don't want to see consumer features in it - as simple as that. ... it's kind of like getting a race car and realizing that it comes with ... "facebook connectivity"



So THAT'S why they put a GigE port on the 1D X - faster Facebook uploads. I _knew_ there had to be a good reason...


----------



## lbloom (Jan 30, 2012)

I just sold my 60D and got a 5DII late last year and I really miss the articulating screen. It could lay flat facing out or lay flat facing in and be protected while in transport. It was much cleaner, clear, and it I didn't have to stand in front of a mirror to take a self portrait! 

I found it most useful for candid shots. People would think I was looking down at my phone (because of course a camera has to be at your eye for you to be taking shots), and I would go unnoticed until the 60D shutter roared...

Now that I have the 5DII, I feel limited in that aspect compared to the options I had with the articulating display. They should incorporate it into pro bodies since it is a very useful feature.


----------



## Harley (Jan 30, 2012)

JerryBruck said:


> @Eye-Broccoli, @dr croubie, @Harley, @Narcolepsy, @Canon-F-1, @7enderbender:
> Perhaps some traditionalists don't realize that the Vari-angle screen can remain flush against the body without ever even once being swung out. Canon has recessed it into the camera's back, surrounded by a slightly raised, rounded frame. There's no way I can think of, that it can be accidentally dislodged from this position, even rolling round loose in a sack: only a somewhat forceful action of fingertip/nail can pry it open. To this extent it doesn't resemble the clam-shell design of many small camcorders. In appearance _it's very little different from Canon's fixed-screen models_. It is more vulnerable once swung out, obviously and of course. One must take care. The hinge seems to be very solid.



Yeah, I'm perfectly aware how it works and that it can remain flush. I'm not a traditionalist, I just _actually want _ a fixed screen on my camera. Simplicity is important. For me personally, an articulated screen is going the wrong direction and I'm not going to buy a dSLR with one. 
No animosity towards anyone who finds them useful. No judgment about who is a real photographer and who isn't -- your photos should indicate that well enough and there are certainly plenty of you here who can outshoot me any day of the week regardless of your hardware. Courses for horses, as they say.


----------



## thepancakeman (Jan 30, 2012)

Harley said:


> Simplicity is important. For me personally, an articulated screen is going the wrong direction and I'm not going to buy a dSLR with one.



So you would prefer no LCD? It would be simpler... ???


----------



## keithfullermusic (Jan 30, 2012)

If there was one that was as sturdy and no more bulky than a built in screen I think it would be amazing. Still, you will have people here who are against them for no other reason that they think they are only for "consumers."


----------



## 7enderbender (Jan 30, 2012)

thepancakeman said:


> Harley said:
> 
> 
> > Simplicity is important. For me personally, an articulated screen is going the wrong direction and I'm not going to buy a dSLR with one.
> ...



Perhaps even that. Any time I'm now using my film camera I find myself staring at the back of the body. Kind of makes you realize how much of a habit this has become - and how often this is really just a major distraction. The time "reviewing" the shot and histograms after the shot might be better spend thinking before the shot. It's very tempting to just snap away because of the instant result. Not to speak of the insane number of actuations that digital cameras allow for without penalty (other than early demise of the camera and the stacks of hard drives accumulating).


----------



## Tijn (Jan 30, 2012)

Canon-F1 said:


> JerryBruck said:
> 
> 
> > @Eye-Broccoli, @dr croubie, @Harley, @Narcolepsy, @Canon-F-1, @7enderbender:
> ...


You went through 4 DSLR's in less than 1½ years? And they all had flipscreens? 
Did you use them to cut down trees by any chance? :-\


----------



## unfocused (Jan 30, 2012)

I don't resent flip screens. In fact, if they can be made durable enough, I don't object at all. 

But, I'm also not willing to give up anything to get one. 

My first digital SLR didn't have live view. When live view came out, I was really jealous and thought this was something I'd really like to have. Well, I got a 7D over two years ago and guess what? I've used live view maybe two or three times. 

My point is that the marketing often makes these features sound a lot more useful than they are. To me, a flip screen might come in handy on occasion, but it's simply a non-factor in choosing a body for me. (On the other hand, if it increases the risk of damage it would definitely be a negative).


----------



## danski0224 (Jan 30, 2012)

I wouldn't mind having a flip screen.

Have one on my G2, and it has been useful.


----------



## eos650 (Jan 30, 2012)

*Re: (OT Protecting the screen) Re: Flip out displays -- why the resentment?*



Orangutan said:


> Since we're on the topic of the 60D flip-screen, has anyone used "InvisibleShield" on their flip screen? Does it interfere with turning the screen face-in? I've been thinking of doing this on mine.



First off, I believe that most if not all Canon DSLR's have a plastic screen protector, over the LCD. My daughter broke hers on her t2i (picture below) and I was able to buy a replacement from Canon for about $25. It took me less than 15 minutes to replace. There was no damage to the LCD itself.

I do have an additional thin glass protector on my 60D, which based on my statement above is redundant. I picked up this protector on EBay for about $10. The glass is easier to clean and doesn't scratch as easy. It's also easier to replace and less expensive, should something happen to it.

Now to answer your question. If I close the LCD on my 60D, the thin glass protector does prevent the LCD from snapping completely shut. I don't consider this an issue however, as it's much more convenient for me to leave it facing outward. My only concern, would be if it were to take some sort of hard impact (like my daughters did). Of course those that have a fixed LCD run this risk all of the time since they don't have the option to turn the LCD around.


----------



## unruled (Jan 30, 2012)

Cracked screen? Wow. My 40d screen doesn't even have a scratch and I don't use a camera bag. 

I never did get those unsightly screen protectors on nikons. Just unnecessary. (Or should be)


----------



## katwil (Jan 30, 2012)

The camera should fit what one plans to use it for. I had a T2i for about a week until I realized that life with this camera would be much easier with an articulating screen. That’s because video is a significant part of what I plan to use the little Rebel for. While my 5D mk ii has video capabilities, I bought it to take really good photos. After using the mk ii for video (once), I’ve determined that it does work, and video is what I have a T3i for.


----------



## Rocky (Jan 31, 2012)

sb said:


> Yup - basically buyers of pro bodies don't want to see consumer features in it - as simple as that. The advocates don't quite understand because it seems like "it doesn't hurt to have it there", however for me, it's kind of like getting a race car and realizing that it comes with "parking assist", "backup cam", "facebook connectivity" and automatic transmission




What is "consumer feature"??? Who is there to define it??? If you go by "tradition", a pro body should be all mechanical, no electronics, no power winder, no auto focus, no auto exposure, no built in meter, etc.


----------



## Bruce Photography (Jan 31, 2012)

I've got no illusions. My opinion is just another one. But so far I've seen many people talking about supposed short-comings of tilt screens or the possibility that they might be more fragile. The people that actually own and use the 60D already know how useful this feature is. I use it for landscape 10x focusing using manual focus tilt-shift lens and I like having it at 45 degrees because it is more comfortable at lower angles. If you want to know how useful it is, buy or rent a 60D and use it for a month or two and call me the morning after. Then we can talk. p.s. I still use my 5DMK2 for most landscapes and I always miss the really nice and bright 60D screen. It is a honey.


----------



## briansquibb (Jan 31, 2012)

Meh said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > Live View AF is useless that is why we dont use them
> ...



Perhaps you would like to demonstrate shooting a bird in flight, handheld with a 400 f/2.8 using LiveView? Or any shot with even a lightweight 300 f/2.8 with arms at full length.

OK perhaps that is too much for you - try a portrait with a 85 [email protected] f/1.2

There are times when I use LiveView - landscapes when the camera is on a tripod shooting tethered and I have time to compose - but then I dont need the articulated screen.


----------



## kdsand (Jan 31, 2012)

• I'd say soon we'll have wireless tethering supported by Canon
But then again why don't we already have built in GPS, remote flash, Bluetooth and Wi-Fi? Its been added to various inexpensive cameras already so its not a matter of price. Hopefully these features have not been ommited because people are frightened. :-\

If you can link to a tablet or smart phone wireless ly then you could keep all your core features in the camera separate.
Just the other night I had a manic giggle when tethered to my tablet out in the snow _a beautiful thing!_

Point is I think tech could head back toward a basic combination sensor, glass and Wi-Fi. Then a nice flip out screen won't matter.
Those who don't like options don't have to use them. 
There's always the option of finding a nice cave and some charcoal if true purity if ones goal.

O yeah I truely have no idea but --------
How many people have had trouble with their 60D tilt screens?
I haven't had trouble and I move/use it daily now for the past year. *darn now I gotta go find some wood to knock on*


----------



## briansquibb (Jan 31, 2012)

kdsand said:


> • I'd say soon we'll have wireless tethering supported by Canon



... in the meanwhile this is available ( and others I know - but this is easily portable)

http://www.eos-magazine.com/EOS%20Collection/shop/r678.html


----------



## briansquibb (Jan 31, 2012)

scrappydog said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > Perhaps you would like to demonstrate shooting a bird in flight, handheld with a 400 f/2.8 using LiveView? Or any shot with even a lightweight 300 f/2.8 with arms at full length.
> ...



and neither have the users of the viewfinder said they dont use LiveView


----------



## Astro (Jan 31, 2012)

don´t know if i would like a swivel display... i can only say i did not missed it yet on my DSLR.


----------



## Meh (Jan 31, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Meh said:
> 
> 
> > briansquibb said:
> ...



Why so defensive Brian? You made the statement that "Live view AF is useless that's why we don't use it" and I merely pointed out the arrogance of your bold statement with some humour. This thread was started by and commented on by many who like and use the swivel screen and you said it's useless and *we* don't use it? Who is the "we"... certainly not the folks who said they use it. So the "we" in your mind must have been you and those like you... _real_ photographers perhaps?

Why make a personal attack Brian and say to me "perhaps that is too much for you"?

Not I nor no one else ever suggested using a screen to shoot a bird in flight or any other thing that would be difficult or impossible using Live View and the associated contrast detect AF so why use that example which is nonsense in the context of this thread.


----------



## Meh (Jan 31, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> scrappydog said:
> 
> 
> > briansquibb said:
> ...



Yes, in fact you did. Let me quote you again:



briansquibb said:


> Live View AF is useless that is why we dont use them


----------



## Heidi (Jan 31, 2012)

I hope I'm not too late to the party.
I've been visiting Canon Rumors as long as the site has existed, but finally felt compelled to contribute my 2¢.

One of my first cameras, the Nikon F inherited from my grandfather, came with the standard and waist level finder. Nikon F series had interchangeable viewfinders (yes, the prism at the top came off with the viewfinder). I loved the waist level finder especially when taking portraits because I could maintain face to face connection with the subject without having the camera get in the way. It made the subject feel more at ease.
Also, one could literally 'shoot from the hip' while being able to see what one was framing.

My first foray into digital camera was the Canon G2 which has the articulating screen, and it was almost natural for me to use the screen in the position that mimicked waist level finder. It could also be used like a standard LCD on many of today's high-end DSLRs or flipped to protect the screen when not in use. When swiveled 180, it helped compose and take self portraits or let the subject see what I saw through the viewfinder.

I understand that today's DSLR is much more complex internally than Nikon F and switching the viewfinder in a similar fashion is technically near-impossible. Hence, I would love to see an articulating screen appear on serious hobbyist cameras such as 7D and 5D. That being said, the G2 gave up its ghost due to articulating screen failing - first, when flipped 180, the picture never rotated so I had to deal with upside down images. Then the LCD died. It is a weak link due to its being a complex moving part.

If the durability issue can be resolved, I'm all up for the articulating screen - it's too bad it carries a 'non-serious photographer' stigma in the DSLR community, but recalling the days of film cameras, it is the closest thing to interchangeable viewfinders serious SLRs such as Nikon F series had to offer.


----------



## briansquibb (Jan 31, 2012)

Meh said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > scrappydog said:
> ...



     Sorry - was a grumpy old man this morning


----------



## Lyra Video Productions (Jan 31, 2012)

Meh said:


> Lyra Video Productions said:
> 
> 
> > Anyone who says you can't be a real photographer AND use a swivel screen (at all) is just being a luddite as far as I can tell (even if you're not being entirely serious  ). And if you're making the argument that a swivel screen is more prone to break then just don't use it. Keep it in one position against the body and don't worry about swiveling.
> ...



No, of course I'm not "looking down" on people who use LV--like I said, I use it sometimes (and have to use it for video). By horrible, I only meant that it's obvious that focusing is currently FAR less helpful for most shooting situations. However, shooting things like landscape, etc. it works just fine. Sorry, I thought it was widely accepted that LV just doesn't work as well (fast, accurate, etc) for many shooting situations compared to using the viewfinder. If you want to shoot solely on LV, go right ahead, but you're going to have more trouble shooting some types of things.


----------



## awinphoto (Jan 31, 2012)

Joining the conversation late, but for what it's worth, when shooting product photography for clients and doing focus critical shots, i use LV 90% of the time, especially when i'm focus stacking... But when i'm out on location hand-holding and such, I hardly ever use LV. It's too cumbersome for me in that situation. As far as articulating screens... It would have to be done right and be solid like a rock, like the rest of the body. There are times, even in the studio, I try to get some obscure angle and Without a ladder or some other method to get me physically higher than the camera, it's hard for me to focus using the VF or LV... so it COULD come in handy in those situations... As for as using it hand-holding shooting out in the wild, I doubt I'd ever use the flip screen. I have come from an upbringing of using MF and LF cameras and looking down into the camera like the old kowas and bronica's, but I dont really relish those memories very much. Not to say i'm right or wrong, it just is how i would use such a camera. And if it makes the camera weaker, instable, or more vulnerable when it comes to weather sealing issues then i'm not interested.


----------



## Meh (Jan 31, 2012)

@LyraVideo: Live View uses contrast detect AF which is slower and can't track focus but it can be more accurate than phase detect and doesn't require calibration. So there are pros and cons. Live View AF isn't horrible, in fact it's quite good in some cases and is ok in many other cases. For fast moving subjects, not so much.

@briansquibb: Ok


Perhaps I was too critical yesterday on choice of words in a few posts.


----------



## nikkito (Jan 31, 2012)

I once used a 60d and my hate towards flip out screens almost dissapeared. I do like to take pictures from unusual angles and I don't have a problem with lying on the ground to achieve a shot, but this screen made it easier.

All that said, I still don't need one on my 5dII. I guess that's just one thing you may find totally cool at the beginning but then you just forget it. 

My camera has already 107.000 shots, I guess I might have shot 500 with live view. So maybe its just that i dislike live view, making this flip screen unnecessary.


----------



## thepancakeman (Jan 31, 2012)

briansquibb said:


> Sorry - was a grumpy old man this morning





Meh said:


> Perhaps I was too critical yesterday on choice of words in a few posts.



What??? Okay, where am I and what did you guys do with the real internet?? Everyone knows that people don't actually apologize and try to be civil on the internet! ;D


----------



## briansquibb (Jan 31, 2012)

thepancakeman said:


> briansquibb said:
> 
> 
> > Sorry - was a grumpy old man this morning
> ...



It must be unusual to see grown ups on the internet ;D ;D ;D ;D


----------



## Lyra Video Productions (Jan 31, 2012)

Meh said:


> @LyraVideo: Live View uses contrast detect AF which is slower and can't track focus but it can be more accurate than phase detect and doesn't require calibration. So there are pros and cons. Live View AF isn't horrible, in fact it's quite good in some cases and is ok in many other cases. For fast moving subjects, not so much.



Thanks for the info, Meh. I didn't realize LV could be more accurate. Good to know.


----------



## bigblue1ca (Feb 1, 2012)

I have a 60D and I've used the flip out LCD and Live View on maybe ten occasions in the past year. While some may say it's a gimmick, on the times that I've used it I've found it very handy and it has made framing the shots I used it for considerably easier. 

Related to that... I'm planning on buying the 1DX* whenever it's finally available to the average Joe. When I was still deciding and looking at the specs for the 1DX, I thought wow it's an amazing camera that will do what I need it to do, but at the same time I had a brief thought of it's too bad I wouldn't have access to a flip out LCD on it (for obvious reasons, weather seal/toughness).  

I view my flip out LCD like the 4x4 on my SUV, I maybe only use it a few times a winter, but it sure is nice to have when I need it.

*Unless the 5DIII or mythical 3D come out and meet my requirements.


----------



## Ryusui (Feb 1, 2012)

I've been doing an increasing number of self-shots lately for a personal project and having a flip-out screen for each of them would have been *immensely* helpful. Especially last night when I was holding five pounds of camera gear straight up in the air. After a half hour of trying to get the shot I was after, it got a little tiring.

If a flip-out screen could be done well on a 5D without any sacrafice, I'd welcome it.


----------



## unruled (Feb 4, 2012)

I use LV when I do tripod work, ESP. at night. or sometimes if I'm sneaking a shot (street photography).
so while its only a few times per year, I'm glad I can do it.


----------



## archangelrichard (Feb 4, 2012)

Jerry

to put it simply - you are using the flip out for FRAMING and letting the camera AUTO-FOCUS while most still photographers will tell you that isn't photography, you need to get more involved in focusing / aperture preview / etc.

Most photo classes start with all manual cameras to force students to understand the issues involved in "available light" photography, the triad of ISO / Aperture / Shutter speed and that photography is the art of light and shadow

The Artists see you as a "point and shoot"er, a "snapshot" photographer - you are using an expensive camera like an "instamatic" or Brownie non-focusing camera and not controlling the shot

Video works that way, you watch many movies and they aren't that sharp a focus, often because people MOVE and get out of focus so you have to autofocus, cross your fingers and pray it is fast enough

It's not you, personally; but rather what you are doing that still photographers are sneering at (in my head I can hear Pete Seeger's "Little Boxes" - "Little boxes, on the hillside; little boxes made of tacky tacky; little boxes, little boxes, little boxes, all the same" referring to the houses / townhouses in a housing tract and this is the same idea the little boxes being snapshots rather than photographs

See the difference is quality


----------



## JerryBruck (Feb 6, 2012)

@archangelrichard

Actually I've been focusing manually for some time, and lately trying to do it for even for street with my one long prime. Boy that can be frustrating, but rewarding too, and a pleasure to be free of Canon "servo" or whatever its called. Live view comes in very handy for manual when there's more time and for razor-thin DOF more often than that, and for different reasons an articulating screen can be a big help here too. My plan - my hope, actually, the cost considered -- is to switch to manual-only matched primes since pretty good ones can come cheap in the no-autofocus category and because video by its nature is manual focus only. My 60D has been set to M since it came out of the box and I experiment some against the limits of that unholy trinity you refer to, which I've struggled with off and on across more than fifty years, though I've never darkened the doorway of a photo academy. Available light -- alas I've always thought that was the only authentic kind, and now in my old age realize the importance of flash, no easy thing to get control of!

As to the movies -- there are movies and there are movies. Whether or not Artists lurk on canonrumors is not something I'm privy to. I've really enjoyed the varied and open responses to this thread, it's been very educational for me, and the people seem nice, I haven't sensed any animosity to me personally, perhaps I'm just obtuse. I really do appreciate the effort you made to explain things to me though. Obviously there's a lot of emotion loose on this subject, and it's occasioned by more than just "getting the shot".


----------

