Is live view feature something you wish to have ?

I voted No as currently implemented since i really don't find it useful without a proper screen swivel and there are just too many limitations.
And live view may increase noise significantly; something i'm not really trilled about with the "pushed" APS-C resolution

Voted yes.
I've had a shot of the Nikon D300 with live view and it's not all it's cracked up to be, still prefer looking through the eye piece. On the other hand there are situations where it would be very usefull(macro and low/high angles). The good thing is if you don't like it just turn it off. I wouldn't pay more just to have the feature though. In years to come all DSLRs will have live view.

Edited by craiginscotland - 08 January 2008 at 23:40

I voted No as currently implemented, and agree with Kiklop's reasons, BUT I'd like a reliable live RGB histogram in the optical viewfinder for manual exposure :)

Using a Canon P&S with flip&twist display I found it so much easier and faster to move my arms around to find a composition that worked rather than moving my entire body around with the camera glued to my face. It would be lovely for macro too.

I voted "no as currently implemented".
I'm not sure how much I'd use it, but in the last few days I found myself shooting in ackward (if not impossible) positions around the house (for OnePrime). At least one of them was a long series of trial and error as I couldn't stand behind the camera to look through the VF, so I took a shot, checked on LCD screen, not good, took a shot again from a slightly different angle, checked on LCD, not good, and so on...
LV as currently implemented wouldn't have helped at all, but a tilting LCD screen would have done the job in no-time.

I didn't know LV could increase noise, though. Does that happen only when you actually use it, or is it a permanent quirk for cameras that have LV, regardless of it being used or not?

I personally said no - for the subjects that i generally shoot - Motosport - I just cannot see a use for it - and to me it could be a cause for worry in terms of weathersealing - so no thanks - call me old fashioned but i do think it is a bit of a point and shoot gimic.

I voted "YES" because:

1. I can always choose not to use it and then the camera works exactly the same. I.e. this feature would not have any impact on conventional operation.

2. Because LV uses the main sensor as the signal source, it eliminates all cases of front/backfocus errors.

3. Ability to magnify and amplify the view helps with critical focusing for macro, astrophotography, and other such applications.

4. If an underwater housing is released, LiveView is a boon for underwater photography.

5. LiveView enables live histogram and over / underexposure (solid white / solid black) warning highlight before you take the picture.

6. LiveView could enable autofocus with a 135mm/2.8 STF lens (they'd have to release a variant with AF drive). This otherwise excellent lens is otherwise inherently limited to MF only with conventional (phase shift) sensors due to its apodization filter.

7. LiveView allows completely accurate DOF preview, with lenses of all apertures, and without a darkened view - something an optical viewfinder, even the darker super-spherical acute matte one, does not accurately give you. See Klipatrick's excellent article over at photoclubalpha.


All folks who are at the "I just graduated to my D-SLR from compacts - I do not want a compact cam's feature on my real camera", plus folks who resist any new feature or paradigm shift like autofocus or in-camera meters that needed batteries, or even in-body winders, under the umbrella argument that feature X has no place on a "real" camera, I think, could be best served by taking a step back and examining what the feature actually delivers at face value - not where it came from and its "image".

Alex