Live view versus eye piece shooting question

[marie1128]

Why don't I see professional photographers using the live view (the LCD screen) when they are doing shoots? Obviously, they are using a much better camera than I am (mine is just a Rebel t5i), but do the higher end dslrs' live view modes not take pictures as fast as my Rebel does (when shooting in live view)? Or what is the reason they don't use the live view mode more often?

I personally don't like to use the eye piece, I think because I am left eye dominant, I wear glasses, and I feel a little claustrophobic using the eye piece.

 

[robbins.photo]

Why don't I see professional photographers using the live view (the LCD screen) when they are doing shoots? Obviously, they are using a much better camera than I am (mine is just a Rebel t5i), but do the higher end dslrs' live view modes not take pictures as fast as my Rebel does (when shooting in live view)? Or what is the reason they don't use the live view mode more often?

I personally don't like to use the eye piece, I think because I am left eye dominant, I wear glasses, and I feel a little claustrophobic using the eye piece.

Ok, first a quick disclaimer, I'm an amateur photographer, not a professional - also, offer is not valid in all states, batteries are not included, your mileage may vary - ok, now that all that is out of the way, here goes.

I don't use live view for a few reasons actually. Most of what I photograph is wildlife and most of my shots are handheld. If I use the viewfinder the camera is well within my center of gravity and thus far more stable for my shot. More stable means a much sharper image. Holding it out far enough to see the LCD screen takes it outside my center of gravity, and that means lower quality results - especially in my case since most of my photos are taken with a telephoto lens.

Second live view has a delay factor built in - the delay will vary from camera to camera of course. For shooting portraits/landscapes etc the delay is short enough that it really isn't much of an issue - but if I'm tracking a bird in flight it can make things far more difficult for me to say the least.

Third consideration is battery life - using the viewfinder extends the amount of time I can be out and about taking shots because it takes a lot less juice from the battery than using the LCD screen.

And of course the most important reason for me at least - well, when I started using cameras they didn't have LCD screens. I've been using a viewfinder for so long doing it any other way seems entirely unnatural too me. Now the most important thing to take away from all of this - if you like Live View and it works well for what you do by all means keep using it. That's why they put features like that on a camera in the first place. What works well for you and feels natural for you is what is going to give you your best results. This is one of those deals where there is not "right" or "wrong" answer.

Above terms subject to change without notice, all sales are final, please allow 4-6 weeks for delivery.. lol

 

[gaz87]

As the guy above me already said batterly life and focus time is the main factor. If you are wanting to take quick shots, waiting for the live view to find focus isn't really ideal.
I think it does have its uses however.

In low light situations, it is probably better to use live view as the screen is brightened. It also always shows 100% coverage (some vewfinders can show a few percent less than 100%). It also allows you to zoom in and focus perhaps more accurately.
You could also say that if you want to use liveview, you have to hold the camera in a less stable way which could mean blurry shots as your arms will be longer and could shake about more. If you use the viewfinder, your arms will be bent and therefore more stable.

Those are my thoughts anyway

 

[PJL]

When you're hand-holding an SLR, at least in my experience, using the eye piece and holding the camera close to your face is much more stable than live view. I only use live view when I'm using a tripod, and even then, usually only when I'm shooting from a perspective where using the eye piece would be impractical and the subject is static, as my camera doesn't allow AF in live view.

I also left eye dominant and wear glasses. You just get used to it.

 

[Bulb]

I agree with all of the above.

My main concern in live view is AF speed. Live view AF has always been slow and unreliable for me. I've missed at least one good shot because of it.

Of course, there are some situations where I can only get a shot in live view. The rest of the time I use my viewfinder exclusively.

 

[peter27]

OP, you say that you never see professional photographers using the LCD when shooting, and at the same time you state in your signature that you are at a very early stage in your own photography. Do you mind me asking, what contact have you had with professionals?

 

[Designer]

I personally don't like to use the eye piece, I think because I am left eye dominant, I wear glasses, and I feel a little claustrophobic using the eye piece.

1. Verify which eye is dominant. Use whichever it is to look through the viewfinder.

2. If your prescription is such that you can adjust the viewfinder diopter to see well enough to frame, try shooting without your glasses a time or two.

3. Get used to looking through the viewfinder even when wearing your glasses. I wear glasses, and don't take them off for looking through the viewfinder.

 

[KmH]

A mentioned, using the viewfinder helps to stabilize the camera.

A problem with using the rear LCD outside in the daytime is that sometimes it's hard to see because there is a lot of ambient light falling on it.

 

[tecboy]

I look through the viewfinder a lot. I see better than looking in the live view. It is easy to see the details and get the right composition. Be a man, use a viewfinder. Live view is for sissy!:greenpbl:

 

[marie1128]

OP, you say that you never see professional photographers using the LCD when shooting, and at the same time you state in your signature that you are at a very early stage in your own photography. Do you mind me asking, what contact have you had with professionals?

My sister in law and my husband's cousin are professional and both have taken photos of my family a few different times. They never used their LCD screens and they both have new enough cameras that have the LCD screen.

I rarely use the view finder, and I like the pictures I get, I just feel awkward, and I was wondering why more people don't use the LCD.

 

[robbins.photo]

OP, you say that you never see professional photographers using the LCD when shooting, and at the same time you state in your signature that you are at a very early stage in your own photography. Do you mind me asking, what contact have you had with professionals?

My sister in law and my husband's cousin are professional and both have taken photos of my family a few different times. They never used their LCD screens and they both have new enough cameras that have the LCD screen.

I rarely use the view finder, and I like the pictures I get, I just feel awkward, and I was wondering why more people don't use the LCD.

Well Marie in the final analysis all that really matters are the results. So if using the LCD works for you and your style of photography then by all means use the LCD and don't sweat the rest. For me the LCD just isn't an option, too many of my pictures are tracking moving targets and it just isn't practical. But just because your methodology might not work for some or might not be the same it really doesn't matter a bit, all that really matters is that you get the shot you want and are happy with it.

 

[tecboy]

Imagine if a fast moving subject like a race car, it is hard to aim at that subject quickly at live viewing. That is for the viewfinder comes in handy. The live viewing come in handy when I raise my dslr high to shoot pictures. I also use live view in hard to reach area like the interior of a car or an engine. Either way is fine.

 

[cynicaster]

The only times I’d ever even consider using live view are:

• Still life shot with lots of time to “set it up”. I’ll use live view, zoom in, and manually focus to get as sharp as possible.
• Some kind of shot where it would be impractical, uncomfortable, or impossible to get my eye up to the viewfinder (e.g., a shot with the camera just above a muddy ground, a shot with the camera held high up in the air, etc.)
• Shooting video (duh)

Outside of these situations, live view is nothing but an unnecessary hindrance, IMO.

 

[DougGrigg]

Most photographers I work with in a professional environment usually use firewires straight to a studio computer or screen, the cameras we usually use are usually a lot nicer to use with your eye as you can adjust it etc unlike live view on cameras, and after taking the images around 1-2 seconds later I'd talk to my studio partner to make sure everything looks great on the computer before continuing. In a sentence for studio photography live view is pretty obsolete for studio, not sure how it fairs elsewhere

 

[hamlet]

i abstain from using the viewfinder only in very poor lighting conditions to get the right focus.