Are all LCD viewfinders terrible?

I bought a Canon SD800is for a Grand Canyon hiking and rafting trip.
To save the battery, I primarily used the viewfinder, not the LCD.
Now that I'm back home with easy access to electricity, I have started
using the LCD.

It is bad Bad BAD! Very long lag time. It's nearly impossible to
capture moving subjects. I see why people buy DSLRs despite their
weight, size, and probable obsolescence of partial(35mm)frame lenses.

Are most P&S digicam LCD viewfinders as bad as mine? Is it possible
to find specifications that measure lag-time in the LCD image?

Canon has replaced the SD800is with a model lacking optical viewfinder.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Bill Tuthill wrote:
I bought a Canon SD800is for a Grand Canyon hiking and rafting trip.
To save the battery, I primarily used the viewfinder, not the LCD.
Now that I'm back home with easy access to electricity, I have started
using the LCD.

LCDs on cameras never are good - they're simply for framing an image.

It is bad Bad BAD! Very long lag time.

Cheap processors make for big lag!

It's nearly impossible to
capture moving subjects.

Which is why people buy dSLRs with considerably more bulk and grip.

I see why people buy DSLRs despite their
weight, size, and probable obsolescence of partial(35mm)frame lenses.

O-o I think I'll be in a home before they stop selling 35mm lenses!

Are most P&S digicam LCD viewfinders as bad as mine?

Probably!

Is it possible
to find specifications that measure lag-time in the LCD image?

Unlikely for a P&S camera.

Canon has replaced the SD800is with a model lacking optical viewfinder.

Sadly, many other camera manufacturers are also following this suit. My
old Pentax 33L didn't have an optical viewfinder either.

People just don't understand the benefit of a secure camera position in
cameras and manufacturers are always happy to reduce cost! I was shocked
when a friend called my Nikon D50 rubbish because he couldn't see a live
preview of the image on the LCD instead of the prism.

- --
Brendan Gillatt
brendan {at} brendangillatt {dot} co {dot} uk
http://www.brendangillatt.co.uk
PGP Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?...rch=0xBACD7433
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (MingW32)

iD8DBQFHDqLckA9dCbrNdDMRAlj9AKDbTVUMWbKjqREtoXcUIm 3Vp4dEhQCeOLaK
4/NjQIWrrjzR7jIyzoz7fTU=
=O0MT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Brendan Gillatt k wrote:

I see why people buy DSLRs despite their
weight, size, and probable obsolescence of partial(35mm)frame lenses.

O-o I think I'll be in a home before they stop selling 35mm lenses!

Do you think you'll be in a home when most people stop using
their partial-frame DSLR lenses? I'm talking Canon EFS, Nikon DX,
Pentax DA, Sony/Minolta DT, Tamron Di II, etc.

On 11 Oct 2007 10:36:30 -0700, Bill Tuthill wrote:

I bought a Canon SD800is for a Grand Canyon hiking and rafting trip.
To save the battery, I primarily used the viewfinder, not the LCD.
Now that I'm back home with easy access to electricity, I have started
using the LCD.

It is bad Bad BAD! Very long lag time. It's nearly impossible to
capture moving subjects. I see why people buy DSLRs despite their
weight, size, and probable obsolescence of partial(35mm)frame lenses.

Are most P&S digicam LCD viewfinders as bad as mine? Is it possible
to find specifications that measure lag-time in the LCD image?

Canon has replaced the SD800is with a model lacking optical viewfinder.

Another obvious TROLL if I've ever read one. None of my cameras with LCD
experience the behavior that you report. Just go up to any camera-store counter
and wave your hand in front of the lens of any make and model with an LCD. The
only "lag" that any of them have, if you want to stupidly call it "lag", is
their ability to accurately reflect the true shutter speed. A true WYSIWYG
preview. Set the shutter speed to 1 second and you'll see a 1 second amount of
motion blur in the LCD. Set the shutter speed to 1/100th second and you won't
see any lag. Get a clue you dolt, or at least learn how to use a camera
properly.

I'll never understand why trolls insist on continually displaying their
ignorance and stupidity with comments that are so easily disproved by anyone
with half a brain and an ounce of experience.

Bill Tuthill wrote:

I bought a Canon SD800is for a Grand Canyon hiking and rafting trip.
To save the battery, I primarily used the viewfinder, not the LCD.
Now that I'm back home with easy access to electricity, I have started
using the LCD.

It is bad Bad BAD! Very long lag time. It's nearly impossible to
capture moving subjects. I see why people buy DSLRs despite their
weight, size, and probable obsolescence of partial(35mm)frame lenses.

Are most P&S digicam LCD viewfinders as bad as mine? Is it possible
to find specifications that measure lag-time in the LCD image?

Some P&S (non-DSLR) cameras have an option to set a faster LCD refresh
rate, e.g. my Fuji S9500 has 30 or 60 fps options. I find the 60 fps
adequate for most medium speed shots, e.g. dogs & kids running.

I still prefer the optical viewfinder of my Olympus SP-350 though, even
though the framing accuracy isn't so good.

"Bill Tuthill" wrote in message
...
Brendan Gillatt k wrote:

I see why people buy DSLRs despite their
weight, size, and probable obsolescence of partial(35mm)frame lenses.

O-o I think I'll be in a home before they stop selling 35mm lenses!

Do you think you'll be in a home when most people stop using
their partial-frame DSLR lenses? I'm talking Canon EFS, Nikon DX,
Pentax DA, Sony/Minolta DT, Tamron Di II, etc.

As FF gets lower in price (and it will), the smaller SLR sensors will be
that much cheaper still, getting dSLR bodies back in line with the price of
film bodies. Perhaps an entry level dSLR could be had for under $200 like
film bodies could. They will get you hooked with the body and make money on
the lenses.

"Bill Tuthill" wrote in message
...
Are most P&S digicam LCD viewfinders as bad as mine? Is it possible
to find specifications that measure lag-time in the LCD image?

Canon has replaced the SD800is with a model lacking optical viewfinder.

I bought the Canon A710 IS and the LCD is unusable in direct sunlight. I
will never buy a camera without an optical viewfinder.

Bruce.

Paul T wrote:

Another obvious TROLL if I've ever read one.

Thank you! Despite years of attempting, this is the first time
somebody has actually called me a TROLL on Usenet.

None of my cameras with LCD experience the behavior that you report.

OK...

All I can say for sure is, it's much worse than using my old film P&S.

On Oct 12, 3:33 am, Paul T wrote:
On 11 Oct 2007 10:36:30 -0700, Bill Tuthill wrote:

I bought a Canon SD800is for a Grand Canyon hiking and rafting trip.
To save the battery, I primarily used the viewfinder, not the LCD.
Now that I'm back home with easy access to electricity, I have started
using the LCD.

It is bad Bad BAD! Very long lag time. It's nearly impossible to
capture moving subjects. I see why people buy DSLRs despite their
weight, size, and probable obsolescence of partial(35mm)frame lenses.

Are most P&S digicam LCD viewfinders as bad as mine? Is it possible
to find specifications that measure lag-time in the LCD image?

Canon has replaced the SD800is with a model lacking optical viewfinder.

Another obvious TROLL if I've ever read one. None of my cameras with LCD
experience the behavior that you report. Just go up to any camera-store counter
and wave your hand in front of the lens of any make and model with an LCD. The
only "lag" that any of them have, if you want to stupidly call it "lag", is
their ability to accurately reflect the true shutter speed. A true WYSIWYG
preview. Set the shutter speed to 1 second and you'll see a 1 second amount of
motion blur in the LCD. Set the shutter speed to 1/100th second and you won't
see any lag. Get a clue you dolt, or at least learn how to use a camera
properly.

I'll never understand why trolls insist on continually displaying their
ignorance and stupidity with comments that are so easily disproved by anyone
with half a brain and an ounce of experience.

You are so very, very wrong. Even the shutter lag on the original
Rebel was noticeable. P&S are worse. You can't shoot sports with
most (any) P&S. Much photography is in increments of 1/10,000 of a
second. That's the time to get the right catch or the header or
whatever. There's a very slim margin. P&S cameras just don't respond
quick enough. For a picture of Jr. at his birthday or a landscape
they are fine, but when things start moving quickly they just don't
handle it -- esp. without LCD preview.

You are so very, very wrong. Even the shutter lag on the original
Rebel was noticeable. P&S are worse. You can't shoot sports with
most (any) P&S. Much photography is in increments of 1/10,000 of a
second. That's the time to get the right catch or the header or
whatever. There's a very slim margin. P&S cameras just don't respond
quick enough. For a picture of Jr. at his birthday or a landscape
they are fine, but when things start moving quickly they just don't
handle it -- esp. without LCD preview.


Just look up the specs of most pre-digi film cameras. 1/10,000 of a second?
, dream on...