If I must chimp, I want the LCD screen on top!

Okay, I hate chimping, i.e. viewing the LCD screen with camera held

out in front like it was a book. (1) I think it looks dumb. (2) It's

an unstable position that increases camera shake. (3) For anyone even

slightly camera shy, it is about the most in-your-face stance a

photographer can assume, and this becomes doubly unpleasant because

it seems to take chimpers a long time to actually snap the picture.

Which suggests (4): It's slow.

 

I would now be the proud owner of a Panasonic LX1 (Leica D-Lux 2) if

it wasn't for the necessity to chimp (no viewfinder).

 

Compositionally, I admit a big LCD screen offers an advantage in

precise framing, as well as histogram viewing. I am also aware that

inexperienced photographers often struggle to visualize a viewfinder

image and find visualization much easier on a screen, which is sort

of like a virtual print.

 

So, question: why can't the screen be on the top, like the viewing

screens on bygone twin-lens-reflex cameras? Then the camera can be

held in an extremely stable position. Also, because the photographer

is looking down, it becomes probably the LEAST in-your-face stance

from the point of view of subjects. Perhaps a clever designer can

configure a screen that easily moves from the back to the top. (I'd

prefer something more stable and centered than those outboard, twisty

configurations.)

 

I checked out 6 pages LCD screen accessories at B&H. Lots of shades,

caps, and protectors...even a few magnifying viewers. But not one

reflex viewer that points upward. Seems like a natural to me.

"Chimping" (a really grating term anyway) usually refers to viewing the image on the screen after you've taken it, not while you're taking it.

 

Why the screen can't be on top is fairly obvious: it would make the camera huge. However, I believe there are cameras with swivel lcd screens that would allow what you're talking about.

The new 10Mp Sony R1 has a rotatable LCD screen that can placed on the top of the camera like a waist level finder

.

 

I prefer direct view of my photographic subject all the time, so a DIRECT viewfinder of some kind is required. Otherwise, I'd use a tripod and a viewfinderless camera like a large format or those new compacts that have no viewfinder and require the photographer to NOT look at their photographic subject, but instead to look at their camera ﾖ two totally different focusing distances for my eyes!

 

So, for me, the challenge is constantly changing my viewing focus distance between the subject "out there' and the camera in my hand "right here" -- argh! My ageing eyes can't take the focusing strain of near, far, near, far, near, far, -- HEADACHE!

 

I like my TTL EVF camera (through the lens electronic viewfinder) because I can (a) review any image just shot without removing my eye from the eye-level viewfinder, and (b) adjust everything with control information directly viewable at infinity right in my viewfinder also without removing my eye from the eye-level viewfinder. I've yet to use the LCD on the back of the camera. Even for close-ups, I use the TTL EVF since my EVF is anglable (is that a word?) for direct view up to 90 degrees up ﾖ the Minolta DiMage 5-7-A-series, of course! I think Sony and others may have EVFs that can be re-angled somewhat from the lens/sensor perspective, also.

 

A DSLR does NOT permit either. A viewfinderless compact digital camera also limits my awareness of my photographic subject.

 

However, by previewing the image on the LCD, I CAN get an immediate experience of the framing and composition as a totally separate experience than viewing the scene directly, and in some ways, the captured image is more well-considered AS A FRAMED IMAGE.

 

There is something to be said for "chimping" and there is something to be said for direct view. Although I hate "chimping" as I find it an awkward, unusable resource, it is rather akin to viewing the ground glass on large format cameras, eh? SURPRISE! ;-)

 

So, how is everyone else growing in their use, or not, of new technologies, and new/old techniques for previsualization and control of image capture? I'm curious ﾖ how are we all growing with these new tools?

 

 

 

Click!

 

Love and hugs,

 

Peter Blaise peterblaise@yahoo.com http://www.peterblaisephotography.com/

As OC pointed out, chimping is reviewing the photo on the LCD after it has been taken, not composing with the LCD.

 

Also, there are a number of point and shoot digital cameras that have rotating or angled LCD screens. The Canon A610/A620 offer some of the best freedom in this regard.

 

I hold my digital point and shoot out in front of me all the time. I brace my elbows at my side and can take camera shake-free photos at shutter speeds down to 1/10th. It's no different (to those being photographed) than holding a camera up to your face and I have no idea what you mean by "slow" unless you're using a camera with a poor LCD that has a slow refresh rate.

Primary value is to see if you have any image at all, and to look at a histogram to see if it has empty or blocked over data pattern. As the screens get better, and the magnification gets better it will be a stronger feature. As the man said, I do not job without some Polaroids. In this case, a Polaroid type feedback. On top, hmm, hard to visualize,sir. I use it with caution, the back LCD. It could be tethered to a computer or PDA device for that matter. Think of the Video screens uused in film making. Think future tense. (And chimp if kind of childish and funny will gain a more respectable tone once the simian heroic movie King Kong is released next week on my birthday if that funny coincidence registers:-).) Really. Chimp away.Or better say I do an "on site evaluation of the graphic values in a shot." How is that latter gabblydook?

Like others said, chimping happens AFTER you take the image, not during composition.

 

That said, I see nothing wrong with chimping. I equate it to "instant feedback," and isn't that one of the benefits of shooting digital?

 

To me, the biggest downside of chimping is that it gobbles up your battery power.

 

KL

Thanks for the responses, so far. I am learning. Didn't realize that chimping was strictly post-exposure. Perhaps we need a term for the pre-exposure operation.

 

I will take a look at some of the cameras mentioned that allow for placing the screen on top. As I said, I'd prefer a centred configuration that allows for the very stable TLR stance with both hands on camera and perhaps neck strap around neck. Makes for accurate framing and minimal shake.

 

A few responses imply on-tripod portrait photography, which wasn't what I was thinking. I was thinking about composing well in a more fluid situation. For me it's always been a good RF or SLR viewfinder. However, if many digicams insist on limiting us to LCD screens, then I'd like the option of the classic TLR screen-on-top arrangement, which has proven itself over a long time, especially with people as the subject.

 

Rob, I'm going to disagree with you, respectfully. I've never felt so tortured as a subject as I have when someone else is trying to take a few candids while viewing their camera's LCD screen. With arms extended, it is an incredibly unstable position. People are slow because they are trying to steady their framing. If they wear glasses for reading, they are also slow because they've got their neck extended awkwardly backwards while trying to peer through the bottom of their glasses. For glasses wearers, viewing at the classic TLR position is much preferable.

 

As electronic viewfinders improve, perhaps I'll find something that really works for me.

"Chimping" is a term best used (if at all) to describe showing images on the LCD to other people as they cluster around. The LCD is a valuable tool to the photographer, and only a fool would eschew its use when appropriate, or disparage others for doing so.

 

If you want the LCD to face upward, point the lens down.

Dear Waldo,

 

There are any number of cameras that have swivel LCDs that permit waist level viewing. I use this feature alot with my Olympus C8080. Also the new Sony R1, if I am not mistaken, has the LCD mounted on the top of the camera, where it can be swiveled into a number of positions.

 

 

Eric

Now that I have that out of my system, let me be more helpful. Many of the Nikon CoolPix cameras have twisty configurations, with the lens on one half and the LCD on the other. Since they are P&S cameras, the LCD is useful as a viewfinder. They also have a conventional, though inadequate, optical finder. Other cameras have LCDs that flip out and rotate, including several Nikon Coolpix 5xxx models.

 

Someone has "posted" on Photo.Net a couple of times to advertise an auxillary LCD finder that clips to the eyepiece of a DSLR.

 

Using a waist-level finder is OK for scenery, or if your subject is seated or far away, or if you want to be sneaky about taking pictures of other people. Most of the time, though, you get a very unflattering view of nostrils from such a low position.

Edward, I think camera designers can do better than the Nikon Coolpix configurations, which to me seem awkward to hold. (I said I wasn't interested in outboard, twisty configurations.) Others have suggested some other digicams, which I intend to check out.

 

As for photographing people up their nostrils, give me a break! Millions of portraits have been done by professionals using waist level finders on twins-lens-reflexes and medium format SLRs. True, top viewing isn't perfect for EVERY situation, but it's not as limiting as you suggest....I'm not trying to suggest what you should do. I'm just suggesting an option that interests me. Surely, the digicam might evolve some more, or have we already reached perfection? If it were up to me, I'd insist on brilliantly conceived and executed optical zoom viewfinders, as well as LCD screens, but I know that's unlikely to happen. Improvements in electronic viewfinders may be the answer.

.

 

"Chimping" really means looking at the chip rather than the subject at any time, either before or after image capture.

 

The challenge here is two parts, and neither is NEW to digital:

 

1 ﾖ DIRECT VIEWING VERSUS INDIRECT VIEWING: directly looking at the subject VERSUS indirectly looking at the subject by looking at an image of the subject formed on the camera (LCD or ground glass).

 

2 ﾖ LOOKING FORWARD VERSUS LOOKING DOWN: looking at the LCD or ground glass forward *toward* the subject OR looking down at a "waist level" or ground level image.

 

APPROPRIATENESS is all.

 

Neither is right or wrong.

 

We all have different habits and predilections; some of us have a variety of approaches depending on the gear and the subject.

 

Good for us.

 

I almost NEVER use the LCD, but that's just my way. I prefer to keep both my eyes focused on infinity with BOTH eyes open, and I prefer seeing the direct view, preview AND review of my subject and images through the same viewfinder, in my case, a TTL EVF, AND I prefer seeing ALL my camera's adjustments and controls also at the very same infinity focus on the very same eye-level display right there inside the very same viewfinder -- WORKS FOR ME!

 

Your mileage may vary!

 

As stated, I can adjust my EVF or my LCD to view the scene from above with the camera aimed forward, and I have used these settings only for ground level macro shots on rare occasion where an angle finder used to work for me on my 35mm film SLRs. Since my EVF angles up, I don't need the LCD to angle up, so I don't use the LCD. Others, much younger than I probably don't mind the LCD, but I can't focus far, near, far, near, far, near, - HEADACHE!

 

However, although I do not need some camera features, I appreciate that the cameras are built as all purpose as possible to maximize sales, so I do not mind getting a camera with a plethora of features and benefits that I will never use ﾖ except, of course, I WILL use those features and benefits on the day of resale to get the most out of the value of my camera to the next buyer! So long as I get the features and benefits I prefer at the price I prefer, I don't care much about over kill. Hey, I've NEVER used the AM radio in my car AM/FM/ Cassette player ﾖ but why complain that's it's there?!?

 

Cary on sharing your experiences and what matters to you, but PELASE let's not denigrate other's experiences when they differ from our own.

 

Click!

 

Love and hugs,

 

Peter Blaise peterblaise@yahoo.com http://www.peterblaisephotography.com/

Peter, I really appreciate your perspective...If I could go back to my original posting, I referenced the Panasonic LX1 (Leica D-Lux 2) as a camera that interested me. Setting aside DSLRs (another topic entirely), the LX1 is the first digicam that really interested me. For me, the specs couldn't be better: excellent, fairly fast lens with a sweet 28-112mm (equivalent) zoom range, black color, small size, raw file capability, image stabilization, bias in favor of on-camera controls over menus, 8+ megapixel chip, etc. But the only viewing option is a rear LCD screen. Personally, I find this crippling. Everything else about this camera says take me out into the street like a film rangefinder camera...except you have to "chimp" each shot. What a bummer. My preference is for a great optical, zoom viewfinder. But if I have to "chimp," I'd like to do it TLR-style. It's just one man's opinion.

<< "Chimping" really means looking at the chip rather than the subject at any time, either before or after image capture >>

 

No, it doesn't. Chimping originated as a joke referring to the "Oooh Oooh" noise a photographer would make /after/ taking a photo and seeing a particularly good shot immediately on the LCD.

Waldo, I appreciate your insight, but perhaps I'm not as green as you think. My Rollei E2 has a top-mounted viewfinder, as does my Hasselblad. For years, professional Nikon SLRs have had interchangeable viewfinders, with a waist-level finder as one of the not-so-popular options. Where are they now (hint - discontinued, or nearly so)? If you don't think WLF's are limiting, you are standing in the short line.

 

I agree many good portraits have been taken using a WLF (for that matter, full-plate cameras with flash powder) - but with the camera at an height appropriate to the subject. The camera should be at mid-chest level even for a standing subject. Besides, one shouldn't peer through the viewfinder when taking a portrait, rather face the subject to maintain rapport. Perhaps you confuse headshots, street sniping and "candids" with portraits. Whatever. Good luck in your search for perfection.

" ..With arms extended, it is an incredibly unstable position. People are slow because they are trying to steady their framing. If they wear glasses for reading, they are also slow because they've got their neck extended awkwardly..." and nothing screams casual amateur snapshooter than the use of the LCD as a composing and focusing device. Gosh,how I love the bright image in the viewfinder of my E-1 with all the data I need underneath it and not overlapping the real aerial image of the subject. But different strokes for different courses, to mix a few metaphors,lads and ladies. Be well and keep up your gym workouts during the holidays so the arm strain won't get to you in chimping .LOL.

And where did I see it, was it a new Epson model,where you can actually buy and seat an accessory optical viewfinder on top because they provided none with the camera. Does this sound like Leica and Rollei deja view. We are getting esoteric. If one can operate it fast and get the shot, dudes (and dudesses),so go even with a ground glass viewong huh, (Some here in Lf go with Sinars and do just that,then slide their Leaf Back on for the 3 pass CCD capture). Understand this. No slight isintended to anyone who has registered a personal and well established preference. That is what makes sane and intelligent dialogue about our favorite cameras. I got mine,girl... Aloha, from the beach of Waikiki sand and steel guitas, where I never go until Xmas is pau. Gerry

You do not need a big LCD to accurately frame up a shot, just an LCD which shows 98% or better, and a pair of spectacles.

 

Holding a camera out at bent arm length is not always an unsteady procedure, just simply becuase most photog have not worked that way.

Unsteadiness comes from how you press the trigger, and with OIS not too great a problem. Actually when done properly the arms act as a form of stabilisation.

 

Some photogs are so one-eyed about how they use their SLR/DSLRs they do not appreciate that you do not HAVE to look through a viewfinder.

I frequently do not when the need arises .. and that ignores the LF studio situation ... and have been doing it for decades.

 

Since the EVF usually has the same number of pixels as the LCD why not combine the old with the new and get yourself a right-angle finder as we used for the SLR .... thankfully I have mine before the s/h price skyrockets as a result of this suggestion :-)

Yes, folloing is even more not responsive to Waldo's "lament" if I may be given libertyh to describe it so. Ricoh has responded to those who want to see a real optical reverse Galilean image, and have fast lens too, and have their LCD cake to chimp,save. and eat it. Notice the concession,some may say anomaly, of the finder add on. Some here will buy one I am ready to bet on it. Ricoh had made a very enviable film camera the GR-1 and has loyalists. Now we need a comprable auto Hexar.Lovely finder,shame to wast that design.. If I only had a rich forebear instead of proletarians,ah well. Someone WILL buy this baby as a handy dandy point and shoot with finesse,and qaality for the

African Safari. When the rhinos charge, fellow hunters, noone chimps,you hear that... It is out of our mad money league here, but so what. Link:http://www.dpreview.com/news/0509/05091301ricoh_gr.asp

Eric mentioned the Olympus C-8080 is a camera that allows placement of the LCD screen for "waist level" viewing. I checked it out and find it clever. I like the positioning behind the camera because it helps to shade the screen.

 

BTW, I never said looking down on the LCD screen was my first preference. Rather I said I preferred the "waist level" position if camera manufacturers insist on giving us ONLY the LCD screen for viewing, but my preference is a quality optical viewfinder or--as they improve--a quality electronic viewfinder. Call me one-eyed if you want. I own and use many formats of cameras, including view cameras. To my mind, small cameras are suited to fluid situations, and the most responsive viewing for these situations is done one-eyed.

 

As for my search for perfection, I am not alone in this. There has never been a time when there have been so many viewing configurations for small cameras. Clearly, camera manufacturers are struggling to get it right. There are some pretty good solutions and lots of terrible ones. Surely, one of the strangest is the auxiliary viewfinder on the Ricoh GR Digital; the viewfinder should have been an integral part of that body....To my mind, good viewing is critical to good photography. I'm confident the industry will produce a high quality, COMPACT digicam with good viewing; I just haven't found it yet. If it's out there, I'd like to know.

 

I will never concede that holding a camera out in front of ones face to view the LCD screen is stable. I'd invite a kinesiolgist or engineer or some other suitable expert to comment. The classic methods of handholding, either with camera planted against one's eye socket or anchored by a neck strap in waist level position are more stable.

"showing images on the LCD to other people as they cluster around."

 

Yeah I hate that. It's one of the worst features of digital cameras. It's like trying to write an essay with people looking over your shoulder, wanting to read each sentence as you write it. Not to mention giving the inevitable self critiques on how they look.. That's why I'm more and more frequently going back to bringing a film camera to social functions.

 

Preview, and review are nice assets of digital despite the above exception. I particularly like the KM-A2 for that, allowing 100% framing and exposure preview on either the EVF or LCD. It's nice to have multiple viewing options as neither waist-level or eye-level viewing will work as well for everything.

 

OTOH, a benefit of revisiting film cameras is the re-emphasis on previsualization required, and reliance on the mind and imagination. A proactive thought process, less reactive. And I've found it tempting to get glued to the LCD or EVF, YMMV, forgetting at times that the picture is out there, while checking the image on the camera. It's not difficult to get disconnected..like watching TV.

 

I've also noticed a kind of psychological latency with the digital capture process. With the film camera once the shutter is fired the event is over, there's nothing to review, you're done and you move on. Because of the review ability, the digital makes it possible to hang on to the last moment, and there's a tendency to want to do that which creates a kind of lag before the next event. Obviously I'm speaking for myself, but I don't doubt this applies to others. Can easily be overcome with some self-discipline and I think this situation accounts for the somewhat deragatory tone of the word "chimping" as it applies to reviewing each DSLR shot as it is taken.

<< I will never concede that holding a camera out in front of ones face to view the LCD screen is stable. I'd invite a kinesiolgist or engineer or some other suitable expert to comment. The classic methods of handholding, either with camera planted against one's eye socket or anchored by a neck strap in waist level position are more stable. >>

 

Lots of people bang their heads against walls in a futile manner. You don't have any experience using a camera this way but you're already making judgements...

 

You'll figure out how wrong you are soon enough.

<a href=http://www.photo.net/equipment/portable_lcd/>ULTIMATE CHIMPING DEVICE</a>

"You don't have any experience using a camera this way but you're already making judgements..." Rob, amazing comment. Actually, I do have experience viewing my digital cameras' (plural) LCD screens held out in front of me, which I resort to when doing macro. I also have experience with (and own and use professionally) view cameras, medium format SLRs, medium format RFs, 35mm SLRs, and 35mm RFs. I'm not an expert, but I have a basis for comparison regarding camera viewing. If you love viewing your LCD screen held it in front of you, fine. I don't care for it. Personal preference.

 

The camera industry has a long history of simultaneously innovating technology and also finding cheaper ways to make its products in order to increase profit. Innovation sometimes achieves both without any downside for the customer. Sometimes the products just get crappier. Right now, I think the industry is trying to see whether we will accept compact digicams with rear LCD screen viewing only; it lowers production cost. If people like it or put up with it, that's what we'll get. I don't care for it and feel it cripples cameras I'd otherwise buy. We're all entitled to have our own preferences.