What is Liveview?

[Muse]

I've seen this feature discussed a bit, but don't know what it is. This is distinct from the LCD evidently. What exactly is it?

 

[jpeyton]

The ability to use the rear LCD screen to compose your picture.

It's a newer feature on DSLRs, but has always been included with point-and-shoot digicams.

 

[ElFenix]

never say always

 

[Muse]

Well, I'm confused. My Samsung V3 Digimax P&S has an LCD. I usually shut it off to conserve batteries. It uses only a couple of AAs.

The reason for my confusion is that I just was reading some DSLR reviews tonight and the Canon XTi has a 2.5" LCD. The XSi has 3" but has added Liveview. Therefore just having and LCD doesn't mean you have Liveview, evidently, although obviously you can compose your shot on it. A review site I read tonight indicated that Canon's Liveview is quite a bit different from Sony's, so there are different ways to do it. I just don't know what it is. What ever it is, there are different ways in which it can be done.

 

[soydios]

Live View on most DSLRs these days displays the image from the main sensor in real time on the rear LCD. Live View wasn't done before in DSLRs because powering on that main sensor requires a lot of electricity and generates excess heat.

The advantage of Live View using the main sensor is that you can zoom in and preview focus in macro, studio, and astro photography. The disadvantage is that autofocusing is much slower.

Everything Live View is different on the Sony Alpha A300 and A350. Instead of using the large main sensor like everyone else does, Sony replaces your eye behind the viewfinder with a smaller second sensor. This means that you still get the benefit of the fast autofocus and speed. However, this comes at the expense of the regular purist's viewfinder.
The Sony A300 and A350 can be thought of as the fastest and best-image-quality point and shoot cameras on the market. But when competing for old-school viewfinder-using DSLR buyers they fall short.

 

[corkyg]

I would add that Live View is not limited to the rear LCD. It also applies, on some cameras, to what is displayed in the optical view finder. The images and data can also be seen there using much less battery power. This feature is present on the Canon S3/S5 IS, and the Nikon P80.

 

[soydios]

Originally posted by: corkyg
I would add that Live View is not limited to the rear LCD. It also applies, on some cameras, to what is displayed in the optical view finder. The images and data can also be seen there using much less battery power. This feature is present on the Canon S3/S5 IS, and the Nikon P80.

Ah, you're absolutely correct, I forgot that.. Electronic View Finders (EVF) use the same data feed and display roughly the same resolution as Live View, IIRC.

 

[996GT2]

Originally posted by: soydios

Originally posted by: corkyg
I would add that Live View is not limited to the rear LCD. It also applies, on some cameras, to what is displayed in the optical view finder. The images and data can also be seen there using much less battery power. This feature is present on the Canon S3/S5 IS, and the Nikon P80.

Ah, you're absolutely correct, I forgot that.. Electronic View Finders (EVF) use the same data feed and display roughly the same resolution as Live View, IIRC.

Yep, I have both an EVF and a 2.5" LCD on my Panasonic FZ8...one is 188k pixels while the other is 230k ish

Suprsingly though, both the EVF and LCD use the same amount of power according to the user manual.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: soydios
Live View on most DSLRs these days displays the image from the main sensor in real time on the rear LCD. Live View wasn't done before in DSLRs because powering on that main sensor requires a lot of electricity and generates excess heat.

The advantage of Live View using the main sensor is that you can zoom in and preview focus in macro, studio, and astro photography. The disadvantage is that autofocusing is much slower.

Everything Live View is different on the Sony Alpha A300 and A350. Instead of using the large main sensor like everyone else does, Sony replaces your eye behind the viewfinder with a smaller second sensor. This means that you still get the benefit of the fast autofocus and speed. However, this comes at the expense of the regular purist's viewfinder.
The Sony A300 and A350 can be thought of as the fastest and best-image-quality point and shoot cameras on the market. But when competing for old-school viewfinder-using DSLR buyers they fall short.

Olympus' Live View system also uses (or used) a secondary CCD to generate the image for the LCD screen. E-330 live view diagram.

ZV

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Muse
Well, I'm confused. My Samsung V3 Digimax P&S has an LCD. I usually shut it off to conserve batteries. It uses only a couple of AAs.

The reason for my confusion is that I just was reading some DSLR reviews tonight and the Canon XTi has a 2.5" LCD. The XSi has 3" but has added Liveview. Therefore just having and LCD doesn't mean you have Liveview, evidently, although obviously you can compose your shot on it. A review site I read tonight indicated that Canon's Liveview is quite a bit different from Sony's, so there are different ways to do it. I just don't know what it is. What ever it is, there are different ways in which it can be done.

you can't compose on the LCD of the XTi. it does not have live view.


live view is a system whereby an image sensor in the camera picks up the image, then the camera displays it on some electronic LCD. on compacts it works largely the same on each one of them, basically pulling a video feed from the sensor. on SLRs most of them do basically the same, but a few of them have had a separate sensor just for live view.

on the SLRs were live view is off the main sensor, the live view mode is usually a 100% finder, and so can be used where framing needs to be accurate. on the sony SLRs, live view mode is not 100% finder. but with sony you retain the SLR's fast autofocus without a blackout.


anyway, i wouldn't call any live view 'live.' the video lag is the same on SLRs as it is on compacts, so good luck tracking any action with it. for that, i would go with the actual live view provided by the viewfinder. that is, after all, what makes an SLR an SLR.

 

[joutlaw]

I have it on our Rebel XSi... and really don't find it all that useful.

I suppose it would be nice if I had the camera above my head or the viewfinder was in an awkward place.

 

[Muse]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
The ability to use the rear LCD screen to compose your picture.

It's a newer feature on DSLRs, but has always been included with point-and-shoot digicams.

On my P&S Samsung Digimax V3, what I see on the LCD (when I use it) is quite a bit less than I actually get in my photo. I always shoot JPG, although the camera does support RAW data. I always compensate for the narrow vision of the LCD and the viewfinder (90% of the time I do use the viewfinder) by figuring that I'm going to get an extra 10-15% in both horizontal and vertical dimensions. It's just one of the problems I have with my current camera. The very unpredictable shutter lag (the unpredictability probably due largely to AF issues, that I should really research in the manual) and the inevitable 7+ second refresh time between shots. I love it anyway! But I am looking for a better camera.

 

[ghostman]

Originally posted by: Muse

Originally posted by: jpeyton
The ability to use the rear LCD screen to compose your picture.

It's a newer feature on DSLRs, but has always been included with point-and-shoot digicams.

On my P&S Samsung Digimax V3, what I see on the LCD (when I use it) is quite a bit less than I actually get in my photo. I always shoot JPG, although the camera does support RAW data. I always compensate for the narrow vision of the LCD and the viewfinder (90% of the time I do use the viewfinder) by figuring that I'm going to get an extra 10-15% in both horizontal and vertical dimensions. It's just one of the problems I have with my current camera. The very unpredictable shutter lag (the unpredictability probably due largely to AF issues, that I should really research in the manual) and and the inevitable 7+ second refresh time between shots. I love it anyway! But I am looking for a better camera.

Your experience with frame coverage on your P&S may not be eliminated by getting an DSLR. Most consumer DSLR's viewfinder is short of 100% coverage. Check the viewfinder specs (on dpreview) of cameras you're interested in and see how much is covered. The page also lists Live View LCD frame coverage as well.

http://photonotes.org/cgi-bin/...iewfinderframecoverage
Example: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0...canoneos450d.asp#specs

As others have said, having an LCD doesn't mean it'll have Live View. I have a Rebel XTi and I can only compose photos through the viewfinder. The "Live View" features to DSLRs are fairly new and immature. Usually, the light coming through the lens bounces off the internal mirror, into another mirror or prism and out the viewfinder. When you take a picture, that first internal mirror slaps up (the "Reflex" in Single Lens Reflex), allowing the light to pass through to a sensor behind the mirror to record your photo. To accomplish both viewfinder and LCD view, different manufacturers employ different tactics to work around this.

 

[ElFenix]

95% frame coverage on an SLR is way better than the optical tunnel finder that has about 80% coverage and has no parallax correction

 

[Muse]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
95% frame coverage on an SLR is way better than the optical tunnel finder that has about 80% coverage and has no parallax correction

Exactly what I was thinking. Ghostman's link to the XSi review at dpreview.com indicates 95% coverage through the viewfinder, and assuming that's by area and not linear dimension, I have to think that's pretty damn good compared to my P&S digicam, which I'd guesstimate to be in the neighborhood of 70-80%! Plus an SLR has no parallax problem, presumably, since the image is built in some way or another with light coming through the lens itself.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Muse

Originally posted by: ElFenix
95% frame coverage on an SLR is way better than the optical tunnel finder that has about 80% coverage and has no parallax correction

Exactly what I was thinking. Ghostman's link to the XSi review at dpreview.com indicates 95% coverage through the viewfinder, and assuming that's by area and not linear dimension, I have to think that's pretty damn good compared to my P&S digicam, which I'd guesstimate to be in the neighborhood of 70-80%! Plus an SLR has no parallax problem, presumably, since the image is built in some way or another with light coming through the lens itself.

yes, it's by area. there is about 1% along each edge that you miss out on. because most people crop anyway it isn't a big deal. and no parallax issues at all.

magnification isn't quoted by area, so to calculate the size of the finder it's (sensor area) * (coverage) * (magnification)^2


image viewing in an SLR is through the lens (as is metering and auto focus). light comes in the lens, gets bounced off the mirror and onto a ground glass in the top of the mirror chamber, where an image forms that you can view. early SLRs had no prism, but usually had another mirror on a cover above the ground glass so that you could use it at eye level rather than waist level. problem is, the image is backward and upside down.

then the east german branch of zeiss ikon fixed a pentaprism on top of the ground glass, which corrects the orientation of the image.

about 10 years later the nikon F was introduced, PJ's were amazed at how durable they were during the korean war (as well built as a leica M is, dropping it can throw off the rangefinder and mess up focusing) and the rest is history.

 

[rivan]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
never say always

We had a couple of these where I worked in those days. No LiveView for them!

 

[Muse]

Originally posted by: ElFenix


about 10 years later the nikon F was introduced, PJ's were amazed at how durable they were during the korean war (as well built as a leica M is, dropping it can throw off the rangefinder and mess up focusing) and the rest is history.

The only SLR I've ever owned was a Nikon F. I had the standard f1.4 50mm and a couple of Nikkor telephotos too. I used to bulk load B&W in those days and did all my own processing in my homebuilt darkroom.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: rivan

Originally posted by: ElFenix
never say always

We had a couple of these where I worked in those days. No LiveView for them!

i remember that thing!

 

[Muse]

I think I'm realizing (please correct me if I'm wrong) that a DSLR without Live View has no image of your subject whatsoever. IOW, the LCD is strictly for information such as shutter speed, aperature, ISO, flash status, etc. etc. Thus, you have to use the viewfinder to see your subject or else shoot from the hip/overhead, so to speak.

I'm thinking about getting the Sony A300, which has Live View as well as a tilting ("articulating") LCD.

 

[Heidfirst]

Originally posted by: Muse
I think I'm realizing (please correct me if I'm wrong) that a DSLR without Live View has no image of your subject whatsoever. IOW, the LCD is strictly for information such as shutter speed, aperature, ISO, flash status, etc. etc.

Before or in the process of taking the picture that is true, the only image is in the optical viewfinder.
The LCD is usually also used to review the photo(s) that you have just taken.

 

[abaez]

Originally posted by: soydios
The advantage of Live View using the main sensor is that you can zoom in and preview focus in macro, studio, and astro photography. The disadvantage is that autofocusing is much slower.

Everything Live View is different on the Sony Alpha A300 and A350. Instead of using the large main sensor like everyone else does, Sony replaces your eye behind the viewfinder with a smaller second sensor. This means that you still get the benefit of the fast autofocus and speed. However, this comes at the expense of the regular purist's viewfinder.
The Sony A300 and A350 can be thought of as the fastest and best-image-quality point and shoot cameras on the market. But when competing for old-school viewfinder-using DSLR buyers they fall short.

I have to bold this part as I have learned this the hard way - I bought an e420 as my first dslr after using compact digicams for awhile. The live view is one of the features I thought I'd find useful when transitioning to a DSLR, but the autofocus is so ridiculous - sometimes worse than my compact digicam - that I rarely ever use it.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Muse
I think I'm realizing (please correct me if I'm wrong) that a DSLR without Live View has no image of your subject whatsoever. IOW, the LCD is strictly for information such as shutter speed, aperature, ISO, flash status, etc. etc. Thus, you have to use the viewfinder to see your subject or else shoot from the hip/overhead, so to speak.

I'm thinking about getting the Sony A300, which has Live View as well as a tilting ("articulating") LCD.

no SLR and most digicams do not offer an actual live view, which is seeing the frame as the image is taken (and, frankly, the viewfinder on most digicams is so bad you might as well not use it). 'live view' as applied is a misnomer, because you don't know what you captured until you get the review picture afterward.

 

[Heidfirst]

Originally posted by: abaez

I have to bold this part as I have learned this the hard way - I bought an e420 as my first dslr after using compact digicams for awhile. The live view is one of the features I thought I'd find useful when transitioning to a DSLR, but the autofocus is so ridiculous - sometimes worse than my compact digicam - that I rarely ever use it.

as mentioned though Sony's implementation is totally different from your Olympus & continues to use the far faster phase detect AF even when using LiveView.

 

[Muse]

Originally posted by: Heidfirst

Originally posted by: abaez

I have to bold this part as I have learned this the hard way - I bought an e420 as my first dslr after using compact digicams for awhile. The live view is one of the features I thought I'd find useful when transitioning to a DSLR, but the autofocus is so ridiculous - sometimes worse than my compact digicam - that I rarely ever use it.

as mentioned though Sony's implementation is totally different from your Olympus & continues to use the far faster phase detect AF even when using LiveView.

I got my hands on the Sony A200 and A350 yesterday for the first time. The Best Buy sales person declared that the A300 is "discontinued," and I expressed doubt. She didn't even know how to turn on Live View and I found the switch and demonstrated it to her! I wouldn't spring for an A350 but the A300 is available for only about $60 more than the A200 online.

The in body image stabilization and autocleaning of the sensor are very significant attractions to these as well as wireless support. I think that the Pentax K200D also supports these features and is priced not much over the A300. I gather that its kits lens (18-55 instead of the A3xx's 18-70) may be superior and people rave about the build quality and tightness of the body (against water and dust, I believe), so I've got the Pentax on my short list too. It probably has better high ISO JPEG quality. It's a little heavier. The Pentax doesn't have Live View but it uses 4 AA's (I already have at least 8 quality NiMH AA's) and SD cards (my P&S does too), so those are pluses over the Sony's. I'd probably for the most part only use Live View when holding the camera over my head and similar. I don't really use that feature on my P&S, but its implementation isn't articulating. Comments appreciated!