Comments on: Tips For Taking Digital Photography Using Live View

By: Paulo M Vasconcellos

Paulo M Vasconcellos — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 19:00:59 +0000

Hello Bakari, I hope things really change. To work photos out in Photoshop why buying an expensive full frame ? The cheapest point and shoot could also make it. I used to stay 10 years with my analog cameras. Nowadays we are always chasing a camera that can satisfy our needs as “a better WB, DOF, Focus, Lens” etc. Truly saying, we’ll end up shooting with mobile phones and working photos out in Photoshop. Cheers.

By: Bakari

Bakari — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 04:10:09 +0000

Paulo, you’re right. I think digital photography is going to change how we use cameras. Going fully manual is about having more creative control of what you’re shooting. But when you first starting out in photography, shooting in Program mode and working on composition and capturing good subjects should be the key objective.

Thanks for your feedback. Wish I could afford one of those seven thousand dollar cameras.

By: Paulo M Vasconcellos

Paulo M Vasconcellos — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 03:51:39 +0000

I’m not Pro, just an enthusiast. I love cameras and photography. I had Nikons, Olympus, Pentax, Mamiyas, Canons, Ricohs, Minoltas, Leicas and so on. In the good old times we had only apperture and exposure on manual mode and a couple of good lenses (all were pretty fast) and our photos came out nice and beautiful. Nowadays, unfortunately, photographing has turned out a buy and sell market. Seems most amateurs are not satisfied with their toys (for which I fully agree) once, after paying almost 7 grand for a good camera and lens, PHOTOGRAPHING TAKES MUCH LONGER (SETTING OUT OUR CAMERAS), BESIDES, WE STILL MUST MAKE DUE CORRECTIONS IN PHOTOSHOP. Truly saying, in the good old times new models came out yearly (which means was good stuff), nowadays we have new cameras monthly (which I doubt is good stuff – most of them). I hope fully manual (digital) cameras should be a good choice as the discontinued Panasonic DMC-L1. My apologies for my poor english. Paulo from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

By: George Klein

George Klein — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 22:18:39 +0000

My reply was not an attack on anyone, including yourself.
It was a response on behalf of those who looked “dumb” (in your words) using Live view on their DSLR’s.
Your sentence: “AND, using live view on a DSRL makes you look really dumb” was totally inappropiate, and bordered an “ad-hominem attack”.
For short sighted people, who need prescription eyeglasses over the maximum adjustment allowed in Canon’s EOS 5D viewfinder (3.0) looking in the viewfinder they will never see anything perfectly sharp. This caused me problems in the past using my EOS 5D camera, since my eyeglasses are 3.75.
Live view has eliminated this problem. Now I can look on the 3″ screen and clearly see where the sharp areas will be in the photograph. This way I can take the sharpest pictures this camera can offer.

By: Sotiris Z

Sotiris Z — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 20:52:42 +0000

I agree with all the advantages Live view offers but i would like to add a little disadvantage: extreme battery consumption.For an amateur like me -who’s not using a power pack- it’s really important.Thanks for the tip though

By: Haplo

Haplo — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 19:51:16 +0000

I can shoot about 4s without tripod and achieve “decent” pictures, and I’m aware that not everyone can. Also, obviously if you require maximum depth/sharpness, you have to use a tripod.

I never said it was a bad feature, or an undesired one, or an superfluous one. I said you looked dumb with a DSRL in the shooting pose of a point and shoot.

When did I said that Canon were dumb? When did I said that the users of such cameras were dumb? I said we LOOKED dumb shooting like that.

Please, don’t turn this into an ad-hominem atack, because mine certainly wasn’t.

Best regards!

By: Yvonne

Yvonne — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 19:41:24 +0000

the feature for simulated previews of an exposure is really terrific

By: George Klein

George Klein — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 14:15:51 +0000

Who looks really dumb depends on how you take your photographs. Shooting lower “f” is practically impossible without a tripod to achieve desired sharpness. What about achieving maximum depth of field? Live view with manual focus is a great tool for landscape photographers (like myself) to get the desired maximum depth of field.
So, were Canon and many professional photographers dumb to have Live view on EOS 5D mark II camera? I seriously doubt it.

By: Bakari

Bakari — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 00:43:13 +0000

â€œlike all these features, they all have their good points and weaknesses.â€

Oh Stacy, I totally agree with you. The point of having camera is know all its features so that you can make the best use of them for getting the type of photos you want.

â€œAlso, a great disadvantage of live view is that you canâ€™t shoot lower f.â€

Excellent point, Haplo, there definite disadvantages to live view, esp. for 35mm cameras. Who knows, though, the feature might get perfected in future models.

Thanks for all the feedback, my fellow readers.

By: Stacy

Stacy — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 00:03:47 +0000

like all these features, they all have their good points and weaknesses. I am still of the belief that regardless of all these fancy featurse the photographer should not rely on any particular one but be able to choose and use any mode including manual to get the best result