Agreed. Nearly 100% of my landscapes are shot using the LCD - 100% of them on a tripod, and even most of them when shot handheld, despite the reduced stability. I find the LCD's view easier to get a feel for composition where looking through the VF feels like seeing only a few parts of the composition at once (for me anyway). I guess the only time I really use the VF is if I'm shooting into the sun and can't see the LCD sufficiently even with full brightness.I have to disagree. What *helps* them take photographs that they'll treasure is always having a camera in their pocket. That's why smartphones are eroding the low end of the ILC market. People are far less likely to have an ILC with them to 'capture the moment'. Case in point – I took a couple of nice images of my daughter skiing last night, they were not technically perfect but they are definitely keepsakes. My thousands of dollars worth of FF cameras and lenses were at home (I actually had my M6 + M11-22 in my bag for group shots at the lodge, but I did not bring it on the lifts with me). My iPhone was in my pocket.
I'm curious, when you put your camera on a tripod and carefully compose a shot, do you use the VF or the LCD? Personally, I use the LCD. It's especially helpful for landscape shots, and architecture with my TS lenses. Being able to pick parts of the frame and check focus by zooming to 10x magnification (especially when using tilt) is far better than using an OVF, for me. Or for macro shooting, where the camera is at or near ground level – I have an Angle Finder C for my 1D X, but an articulating LCD is a far easier solution. So for me, even with efforts at "art" a rear LCD is much more helpful than a decent VF.
Of course, I would not want to track a bird in flight with my 600/4 using the rear LCD.
Upvote
0