[Laurentiu Cristofor]

My statements may also apply to others who often shoot at low shutter speeds and are concerned about carmera stability,

1/10:

who are concerned with not distrubing others in crowded environments,

And an SLR fits better in a crowd?

who value seeing the framing at a large size,

Larger than on the LCD screen?

or who have trouble focusing on objects closer than arms' length.

Focusing their eyes or their cameras?

Except that a garter snake is hardly dangerous wild life, except to perhaps mice and bugs.

Still, I wouldn't want my face that close next to its mouth.

[Lowell Goudge]

I have a question here, and please don't mistake this as a hijack attempt.

Coming from film, I have 30 years of automatic response to put my eye to the viewfinder. Somewhat in the same way as when you aim a rifle, you put your eye to the sights, especially with a scope

In fact taking a good stable image is much the same as shooting at a target. your stance is similar, you brace your body much the same way and you press the trigger / shutter when you exhale.

Now, let's change the rifle to a pistol. Horribly unstable, not big enough to grip properly and to be blunt, only an expert can hit something more than 15 meters away, much the same as a P&S camera.

So, after a long preamble, the question is, what is the real purpose of live view? does it exist because it can? certainly, unless i am tripod bound and not needing instant response, I don't use it. lets imagine my K300/4 plus 1.7x AF TC (i know at 1 kilo this is light compared to some other 500mm options) Just hold that stable and point it at anything when at arms length. Live view is NOT an effective way to shoot. this and video in my mind are things introduced into SLRs because we can, not because we should

[Lowell Goudge]

1/10:


Still, I wouldn't want my face that close next to its mouth.

just remember a snake can only strike ouot, when coiled, to 2/3 of its lenth. Garter snakes are typically only 2 feet long so being within 16 inches of the nose, is just about the MFD of a 50 mm lens. I would look at this differently, with perhaps a 200

[rparmar]

just remember a snake can only strike ouot, when coiled, to 2/3 of its lenth.

Not to mention that any old human is much faster than a snake.

(Though not necessarily faster than the venom spit out of one.)

[Blue]

1/10:





And an SLR fits better in a crowd?



Larger than on the LCD screen?



Focusing their eyes or their cameras?





Still, I wouldn't want my face that close next to its mouth.

Regarding dangerous subjects:
I would likely have gotten swarmed if I had used the K-01 to take this with the DA 35 LTD instead of the K20d due to the mechanics of focusing, DOF, framing and movement of the camera.



I also find that pit viper snakes like Cotton Mouths (a.k.a. moccasin's) react different to motions involving noticeable hand movements compared to compact body movements. Remember, they have IR sensors.

Regarding Crowds:

As far as crowds go, a lot of people extend there arms when shooting with an LCD, so in crowds that is more problematic. I will take a K-5 in a crowd over my GF2 anytime.

Regarding Live View and Macro:

Plus, I find with my K20d that live view heats up the sensor. Some of the head may actually come form the LCD being next to the cmos.

Not to mention that any old human is much faster than a snake.

(Though not necessarily faster than the venom spit out of one.)

Having encountered an eastern green mamba in the wild, humans aren't even close. Just the common black racer around here in the summer is ridiculously quick. Overall speed is one thing, quickness is another.

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

just remember a snake can only strike ouot, when coiled, to 2/3 of its lenth. Garter snakes are typically only 2 feet long so being within 16 inches of the nose, is just about the MFD of a 50 mm lens

Except the Volna 9 is a 1:2 macro lens. It focuses down to about 24 cm, not 40cm. I would have also had to lie on the ground to get this perspective and would thus be unable to react to whatever the snake would be doing. That being said, if you can produce a similar image of a garter snake that is taken with an SLR and a MF lens....

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

I have a question here, and please don't mistake this as a hijack attempt.

Hijack? It seems to be the very subject of this thread.

So, after a long preamble, the question is, what is the real purpose of live view? does it exist because it can?

Here are a number of reasons:

- it is more comfortable/convenient for some shots - low/high angle perspectives, for example. Also, you can't really use a VF underwater.
- it provides a larger view of the scene than you can see on a viewfinder
- it can be more discrete - keeping a camera over your face tends to attract the attention of people - not so much if you fiddle with it at waist level

Then there are advantages over an OVF that are shared with EVFs - they matter in the OP scenario where the choice was between LCD and OVF:

- you can see DOF effects better
- you can see exposure effects better, including over/underexposed areas
- you can have various manual focusing aids available - zooming in, focus peaking, embossing (Ricoh has that)
- you can get more overlays displayed - histogram, for example

certainly, unless i am tripod bound and not needing instant response, I don't use it. lets imagine my K300/4 plus 1.7x AF TC (i know at 1 kilo this is light compared to some other 500mm options) Just hold that stable and point it at anything when at arms length.

That is true, but it is also a corner case. Few people own and even fewer use on a regular basis a 300mm lens. Even those that use one with a camera with a VF have a hard time getting sharp shots without a tripod. So it's not like a VF solves the problem, but I agree that it helps and it's the main reason that at one point I'll invest in an EVF or in a camera with a built in one - so I can use my long lenses more easily.

Live view is NOT an effective way to shoot.

And what is the argument for that? The only one that you brought up was a corner case. If that is all you had, then we generalize from a special case. This is a "hasty generalization" type of fallacy.

[Jodokast96]

And an SLR fits better in a crowd?

At least the crowds I shoot in. What do you think all the people behind me at shows would rather see? The back of my head (which they are seeing anyway), or the back of my head with my hands up holding a 3 inch LCD? Now multiply that by the total number of people in the crowd taking pictures and you've got one major freaking annoyance.

[Lowell Goudge]

That is true, but it is also a corner case. Few people own and even fewer use on a regular basis a 300mm lens. Even those that use one with a camera with a VF have a hard time getting sharp shots without a tripod.

Not so. There are a lot of forum members who shoot 500 mm hand held

See this thread. The shots I posted are all 500mm hand held, with the heron shot at 1/40th hand held.
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/lens-sample-photo-archive/164135-pentax-k...4-samples.html
Just try that with the camera and lens sticking out at the end of your arms

[selar]

what is the real purpose of live view?

The real purpose of Liveview is to provide a crutch to the people coming from P&S land to dSLR cameras for the first time. Digital cameras have been around for a whole generation now, there are a lot of people out there that haven't used anything but a digital compact all their lives. The absence of the familiar liveview screen is intimidating to them. I have a feeling the optical viewfinder is going to go the way of the Dodo.

[monochrome]

The real purpose of Liveview is to provide a crutch to the people coming from P&S land to dSLR cameras for the first time. Digital cameras have been around for a whole generation now, there are a lot of people out there that haven't used anything but a digital compact all their lives. The absence of the familiar liveview screen is intimidating to them. I have a feeling the optical viewfinder is going to go the way of the Dodo.

Let's establish that different people have different needs and different tools are best suited to different tasks.

Other than an LX with FB1/FC1 I can't use an optical viewfinder comfortably at all any more. Other than when using a tripod I use live view with focus peaking nearly exclusively now. I use a dSLR nearly exclusively on a tripod. I can hand hold a K-01 with a K200/2.5 mounted using the classic SLR grip successfully. It took practice and relearning. I have rarely used a digital PnS so I'm coming from film cameras and a K10D (which I also hold using the classic grip). I never hold any camera at arms length.

Marc, you are absolutely right. Lauren, Marc is absolutely right.

And so am I..

[keyofnight]

Let's establish that different people have different needs and different tools are best suited to different tasks.

Exactly.

I'm not sure why so many people here want to show how one option trounces the other. What is really at stake for any of us? It seems clear at this point that there are advantages to both, and Live View is getting better all the time. Also consider future options like the Fuji XPro1's hybrid viewfinder—it looks like it'd give me a headache like Nintendo's Virtualboy. Things are getting better for Live View, and things aren't bad at all right now.

I'm also not sure why we retreat to an unsophisticated relativism at every point ("It's good for you but not for me"). Why can't we just say that both have their advantages, list them, and call it a day? (; Or…share your reasons for using what you're using…call it a day?

[selar]

Why can't we just say that both have their advantages, list them, and call it a day?

If we did that all the time, this forum would become boring!

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

Not so. There are a lot of forum members who shoot 500 mm hand held

I am not sure what you are trying to prove. Are you trying to say that the forum members who shoot 500mm hand held represent the majority of the user market today? Pentax cornered the market already?

[selar]

Well, I shoot the equivalent of 450mm handheld quite frequently, was actually silly enough to attempt a handheld shot with 300mm stacked on a 1.5x and it came out quite good, the momopods, tripods and tripod collar have been gathering dust ever since. Thats the equivalent of 600mm in 35mm isn't it?