I don't vlog so don't need the canon front facing flippy screen I prefer the tilt screen that keeps the line of sight of the subject in the same axis like the sony or nikon mirrorless. The way you need to hold the camera changes with the flippy screen.
When doing astrophotography, the camera needs to be in all kind of funny angles and flippy-screen would help a lot, tilty screen only helps half of the time, the rest you have to crawl around the camera in funny angles.
Funny enough, the point I love the most about flippy screens is that you can make the screen invisible, so you have a rather old style design where you have to look through the viewfinder. I don't shoot vlogs, but it's nice for shooting selfies too.
That is its main purpose on PEN-F here. Just close the screen and have styled rear screen. Anyways it is annoying each time swivel out and rotate to get the screen at any angle for street photography at waist level, that it permanently stays closed. I could have very well pay less for PEN-F without screen, as it doesn't get used because it is FAS. And if I want to hide screen for old look, I can always get a nice textured fake leather and tape it over the screen and it looks great. And selfies is best to take with just lens pointing at you...
@@katumus for selfies it's not always the case that you want to be in the centre of the shot. Also, if there's a group of people taking a selfie together, how do you know that everyone is in the shot? Flippy screens are useful
I've heard from a couple of photojournalists (and I mean hardcore professional photojournalists, not the relaxed hipster street photographers) that they'll never use a camera with a side-flipping screen because the life expectancy of a side-flipping screen in a dense crowd is about 30 seconds. Tilting screen is a must for their job though, and it doesn't cause real problems because the screen is pretty much always protected by your hands and body.
4:55 screen facing towards wrist when you put the camera in an L bracket and want to take a portrait shot and the camera is down low. I wish Sony has this, but the screen only articulates for low shots in landscape mode
No need for an L bracket. Most photographers simply keep their finger on the trigger (or main trigger in case of having a battery grip with secondary trigger button). Then again, a fully articulating screen allows for the exact same angle too.
@@Philafxs The biggest issue with (F)AS for photography is that it's often off from both the horizontal and vertical lens axis. Much like the a6x00 EVFs. This makes cross-tilt screens a much better option for photography.
My roots are in film photography and no flippy screen is an instant deal breaker for me and I’m NOT a vlogger. After going digital in 2001 (with a Canon G1) the flippy screen was 1 of 3 features that opened new possibilities and radically changed my process (the other 2 being in camera white balance and instant reviewing of photos). Refreshing to hear someone acknowledging the advantages of fully articulating screens for PHOTOGRAPHERS as I’m weary of everyone thinking it’s a feature only vloggers care about. Some of the comments have been enlightening as I’ve never understood ANY reason for why most cameras wouldn’t have this in 2019 (seemed like a no brainer 20 years ago) but see that some photographers prefer screens centered and flush with the camera. Can’t personally relate BUT it’s at least a reason. Whoever mentioned it being less discrete for street photography makes an interesting point which I‘d never considered but do agree with (but don’t outweigh the benefits FOR ME). Perhaps I explore shots and shoot differently than most photographers, idk, but I could NEVER go back to shooting without a flippy screen. When I’ve tried it feels like an arm is tied behind my back. Lastly, on an unrelated note y’all commenting about patents are correct that Dave seems to have a totally inaccurate understanding of how intellectual property laws actually work and shake out (like most people) BUT that’s totally irrelevant since his ultimate point was that patents AREN’T the reason for flippy screen scarcity and that is TRUE
presumably, the articulating screens are less resilient. pro bodies tend to prioritise that... cynically i guess it’s also about product differentiation
Most Olympus have flippy screens: E-M1 II. E-M1-III, Pen-F, E-M5 II, E-M5 III. Panasonic and Fujifilm have been tilt-screen advocates for years, but both have put flippy screens in their video-oriented models... Panny going way, way back to the GH1 in 2009. Seems a lack of research here.
There are instances where I'd like to shoot an ornate ceiling, dramatic sky, etc. where the best option is to point the camera straight up, either mounted or laying the camera on the floor. My only camera I can compose my shot properly on in that case is my old 60D. Not to mention low angle floral or insect macros, holding overhead for parades and other events, etc. I hope if/when the pro R comes out, it keeps the R's flippy screen.
The side facing screen is often used in traditional-style interviews in broadcast and news situations where the interviewee is looking slightly off axis of the camera. It's so that the interviewer can be in the correct position sitting across from the interviewee, camera slightly to the side, and you can check focus, lighting and audio levels during interviews.
Probably only vloggers and youtubers who shoot everything himself want a fully articulate screen so bad. For the former, get a DSLR with a flippy screen, for the latter, get an external screen/recorder with your ad revenue. People are fine with the tilt screen, and personally I just felt hilarious that some youtubers out there are complaining about any camera that doesn't have a flippy screen while shooting majority of the content on a 1DXii
the screen facing your wrist is actually useful when it comes to portrait shots. as a photographer mostly shooting reels and tiktoks i find it very handy and pratical for low shots and portraits
Articulate discussion of articulating subject, patently the best post but answers hinge on usability needs. Hip shooters can choose from fold-out that puts cam further away from belt, or fold out to the side that can get in the way of a camera strap. What ever happened to right angle finders that attach to eye piece? We need a highly modular configurable design to please all.
I have an old FZ-200 which has a flippy screen that folds away with the back of the screen facing outwards. This may better protect the screen, but is ergonomically worse than the tilty screen on my A7 which is always and immediately available for viewing. As for a forward facing screen there seems no really good solution. The flip down screen is obscured by a tripod. The flip up screen is obscured by anything on the hot shoe. The left flip out (aka flippy or fully articulating) screen is obscured by any cables connecting to the camera. Furthermore, a fully articulating screen used hand-held gets in the way of holding the camera with the left hand, or working any of the left-hand controls. Especially annoying when you really only flip it out in order to tilt it up or down. Tilty screens don't have that problem. And this, of course, is why there is no right flip out screen. It would get in the way of the right hand when hand-held. A really advanced screen might be capable of being taken off the camera altogether so you can put it where you wish. But isn't that just the same as connecting via a mobile phone? Which, by the way, I view as a brilliant solution to the whole problem.
Well said, all the new cameras have wireless connectivity, so a mobile phone screen in my opinion can be a better solution than a fiddly fully articulating screen.
@@youxanyou I don't know - I don't really want to deal with a mobile phone to use my camera. It's a big reason I got a camera - the mobile phone cameras were fiddly, the software was slow and annoying. But I'm not a pro. I also like just having the screen closed (think ancient flip phones - who ever got screen protectors or "otter boxes" back then, the damn design protected the phone) - it protects the screen, yet I can flip it out and click back in when I actually am using the screen.
That doesn't protect the screen really. The screen protection was needed long time ago (or not so long time ago with Canon and Nikon) until Gorilla Glass was developed and taken in use. Like example a 2012 Olympus E-M5 has armor glass. Never used any protection, always hanging from the belt or strap, rolling around the car front seat and sometimes on the floor (with sand and all other dirt you have in car) and there are barely few marks that you can see when you clean the screen from the crease and look the screen surface against light reflection. Then you can see some markings that it ain't new screen. But you don't see them when screen is turned On, not when you don't really go looking at them. Actually you wouldn't even find them as I have trouble to find them too when I just checked how many there are :D The impact/force that is required to break that screen would be such that it would penetrate the screen rear plate on the E-M1 II that is turned screen inwards. The only real way how to break that screen is that there comes a tiny porcelain piece that hits on that glass and it would shatter to pieces. So against such, that inward screen would be protection. But otherwise, FAS is like a integrated screen as it is as useful and painful to use.
I think everybody is missing the most important element of why we don't see these as typical. BREAKAGE. Nobody wants to have to deal with warranty claims and user complaints that "it broke off too easily." I just heard you touch on it, but my bet is this is a much larger reason than most of us realize. If somebody bumps my EOS R screen backward, it's going to hinge, but if somebody walks forward from behind and accidentally bumps it, it's not going to be so forgiving.
I agree Bobby, but then if my Sony A7 hits the floor backwards while the screen is fully folded back then it could punch itself straight through the back of the camera The only really way to prevent breakage is to have a completely fixed screen, and flip screens expose the connection ribbons while articulating screens hide them
My Sony folding screen feels 100x more fragile than my old canon flip screens. At least with those screens, I could fold it back so the screen wasn't exposed.
Yes I've wondered this before as well. I used to have a Canon SX40 and it's essential to me. At present I've got an old Sony A55 SLT and Nikon D5600. The A55 screen is one that flips down, but it's not as good design as the fully articulating one's.
I prefer regular tilt mechanism! I want to compose behind the lens, not to the side. Also, I like using an L-bracket. An articulating screen sits in the way of that. Best solution: Sony A99 screenhinge!
Weaker hinge -> more broken cameras -> more repairs -> poorer user experience -> loss of a customer -> choosing the safer screen hinges. Also, I hated the side flip out screen on my Olympus and dread the thought that my next camera might have one. They're too clunky and cumbersome to use for the simple tilt that I want/need 97% of the time. For that other 3%, it's never a "need" for my use and it just doesn't add up to being worthwhile if it's inconvenient nearly all the time.
Panasonic had an explanation for why they didn't do the articulating screen on the S1 and S1R: it would get in the way of all the IO ports, which are typically on that side of the camera. Just like the top mounted external mic would obstruct the flip-up screen of the a6400. If oyu are recording or tethering and have an HDMI, a mic and maybe headphones plugged in, you couldn't really use the articulating design very efficiently. So articulating is better for vloggers, flippy is better for studio and other pro work. Which one of these groups complains more on yt? Yes, that's right.
Panasonic's G9 has a flippy screen and it also has the IO ports. I can't tell you how awkward they may be while using the flippy screen because I use my camera mainly for photos and not video, but they have the IO and a flippy screen and I think someone said in a review that I watched last year that the IO are placed better on the G9 than on the GH5 because the screen gets in the way of the IO on the GH5. AGain, I can't confirm this as I don't use any of those IO ports.
I have a flip screen camera and a fully articulating one. A lot of the time the flippy is more convenient, if I want a high or low angle shot just angle the screen straight off, but with the fully articulating you have to flip it out 180 from the camera then rotate it to the right angle, then reverse the whole process when you want to use the camera normally without a fairly delicate screen hanging off the side of it.
Thats one one of the things I love on my Canon 60D and G12 and wish my Sony's had it. Another BIG benefit of the F/A screen is that you can reverse it and put the screen INSIDE when not using it (in your bag) so it doesnt get all scratched up accidentally. Ive read that may dont use these on their "pro/prosumer" line cameras because they feel they are more prone to snap.break off if/when the photographer drops their cameras, making it harder to fix/repair and since pros need their cameras to be MORE durable, not less, they dont want to take that chance, but thats what Ive heard, since the pivot/joint would be the 1st thing to break off for sure as its the weakest point on the camera if you hit it hard. We can only hope but I dont see Sony adding it even thoygh MOST do want it and have been scraming for it for ages esp those of use who use the APSC line (a6000, a6400, a6500, a5300)
Olympus E-M1 Mark II has a side out flippy screen that works just fine but I have used cameras with tilt screens that are definitely preferable in many situations. Although tilt screen advocates forget that flippy screens have an advantage of being able to flip inwards for complete scratch protection .
Imo flippy screens have some major disadvantages for a lot of users, so manufacturers are a little reluctant to adopt them more widely. I think It's a nightmare for stills, thats why it's not used on cameras made primarily for photography. Flippy screen doubles camera's footprint, its awkward to hold, feels cumbersome, and slows you down as its an awkward set of movements to flip it out every time you want to shoot from low or high. Its a pain to use in run and gun situations, travel/street photography, or candid situations where you want to be fast and discreet. The tilt screen you flip it out fast with your small finger as you lift the camera to aim, without too much effort. I think the best solution, at least for shooting stills, it's the type of screen used in xt3 and the new s1 where combines the advantages of both worlds.
@@LordArioh tilt screen offers 90% of the functionality of the flippy screen without the disadvantages, 2axis as on xt3/s1 even better. I shoot mainly street/travel stills, I want to be fast, discreet and not look like an awkward tourist so a fiddly screen sticking out of the side of my camera is a dealbreaker for me. I think it's the same for the majority of pro photographers.
I think don't think flippy screens have that many disadvantages. 95% of the time, it's folded in backwards into the body so the screen is facing in towards the camera to protect the glass as I use the view finder to take pictures. If I need to take pictures in tight areas, I can flip it out and use it. And when I navigate the menus, I have it facing outward. I much prefer a flippy screen to a tilting one. I have a tilting one in my GX85 and I feel restricted (plus I can't turn it in on itself to protect the screen). On my G9, it's flippy and I can do what I want with it.
@@ScottBenedict The disadvantages mentioned by me and others on the comments are quite clear so boils down to personal preference. Travel/Street for me is shooting a lot from waist height or above crowd, usually as discreet as possible. Tilt screen is half a second job, flippy screen for the smallest tilt, I have to flip it out and turn it 180° and then the same to flip it back in again. Besides the serious waste of time, I can miss the shot, cannot hold the camera properly, bring attention and look weird. No need to protect the back screen, I stick a screen protector from day one and all of them, on the four bodies I got, are spotless.
@@youxanyou I think it also boils down to how you're using the camera. It sounds like you're mostly shooting in "live view" mode, whereas the people like me who like the flippy screen use the viewfinder most of the time. I pretty much use the screen to review a photo when I want to. However, I usually just use a big enough SD card and take a lot of photos and review back on my PC, so unless I'm testing something like a flash or lens where I'm not out and about, I don't really use the screen that much so far. So getting it "out of the way" is appealing.
Honestly I don't like the fully articulating screen off the Canon. because it's really annoying if I wanted to just flip up or down. I do not want to put it on the side first and then tilt it up or down
true i do wirh it was a screen that was a combo of the Canon flip out and around 180 deg as well as the Sony flip up and down so best of both worlds so when you want to be stealthy you dont want to flip it OUT then anyone on the street will know you are taking a pix/video of them
A possible reason is to differentiate between various camera bodies that camera companies make: adding an articulated screen or more frames per second gives the manufacturer a slot for a whole new camera body at a slightly higher price point, which brings more business to them by selling more bodies; this approach is most certainly true for Canon, who have a battalion of APSC bodies, and the lower priced ones are denied features for no other reason than because they are cheaper
The side tilt is for low angle portraits. It's way more comfortable than a flip out screen. It's one of the features that I like the most about my camera. Makes my life in studio shoots so much easier
Dave, the major problem with articulating screens is that the ports on the side are not good reachable. At least this is one argument that panasonic uses for their s1. It makes sense for higher end cameras but jeah it would be nice either way.
My Fuji X-H1 has the odd tilty screen which isn't particularly good (though, the EVF is outstanding). I finally broke down and stuck an Andycine 5" (Imperial unit, sorry!) monitor on it and it makes all the difference in the world. Especially as I can flip it back to the back for operating behind the camera and then rotate it forward for being in front of the lens. Yes, it's one more piece of gear to haul but it's worth it.
I miss the articulated screen on my old Canon 600D. One of the biggest benefits I found was the ability to flip the screen in so it didn’t get scratched when I threw it into the backpack.
best solution is the tilt AND flip screen. I am not (yet) a photographer, but I have a feeling that for "normal" photography the tilt is better. but having both is the best. and I think that is not a cost factor. the chassis should not cost that much more than normal flippy or tilt.
This is why I'm struggling to find a camera to upgrade from my nikon d5300. I like being able to have extra space for my nose when moving the screen off to the side when using the viewfinder and I also like having the peace of mind of not having to eorry about scratching the screen when not using the camera as the screen would be flipped inwards.
i like tilt screen more i think tilt up os nice i had a Panasonic xc10 in my hands and the tilt screem feels beautiful make it tilt up and add anice mic solution it will be the perfect vlog camera sonys tilt screen alsi feels really good to me. i played around with an a400 and the tilt up screen feels a little hard to use quickly. i would say a good tilt up screen is superior in most cases as the camera is more compact during the shooting but flippy is faster to your your shoe mount doesn't Block anything and often you can turn it around to protect the screen during transport
the flippy-tilty screen is seriously useful, and also cool feature you can flip it around to prevent from scratching. would disagree with video feature points. If I don't need and never gonna use video, but still want a professional modern camera for stills, I still have to pay ridiculous price for video features.
I bought the iconic 7D Mark ii. And just couldn't stand it with the lack of flip screen. The screen makes such a difference for street photography. I just ordered my first Full Frame. 5D Mark iii. It's got no flip screen either, but is supposed to be a beast, so I'll give it a go. I don't want to buy anymore cameras that lack a flip screen. It just makes shooting so much easier and less frustrating. I have a Sony Camera with a flip screen and it's definitely better having one. Shit, even give us a viewfinder that I can move around, that would be enough for me.
The reason is actually very simple. Most professional users don't care and don't need this, trust me. Only vloggers. In 10 years i've shot like 80 music videos and only 1 time i barely wish i had a flip out screen. I was shooting a clip of a couple taking pictures in a photo booth. It just took me 2 minutes to mount a monitor on the camera, no big deal. Otherwise i never found myself in a situation in which i wish i had a flip out screen. A tilt screen is ok for me. When i see some people say that they won't buy a BMPCC 4K, a 1300€ camera that shoots 4K/60P RAW because it has no flip out screen, i'm like what the hell ? I mean a Red Dragon does not have a flip out screen either, but a tilt one.
Complety untrue. Having the functionality to be able to view screen add almost any angle is a huge benefit. Shooting download from macro work, holding the camera high above your head I've been able to view the screen to be able to see what I'm shooting is extremely useful especially if there was a crowd in front of me. I guarantee if the camera that use now has an articulating screen you would use the function more than you ever think.
Of course you can, it just make using the camera in the field a more user friendly experience. I have solved the problem from the low down angel, by using a Canon angle finder on my 5D. I can tell you now if your camera had a tilt of flip screen you would sorley miss it if you didn't have it.
Tilt screens flip up and down faster, in the same line with the lens and in a more intuitive action (don't have to go to the side first and then tilt up/down). Granted, they don't flip sideways. Some people may not want to "compromise" tilt up and down just to be able to flip forward.
One thing that never gets said is the protection aspect. When the camera is not in use you can flip the screen around and have it protected while in a bag or backpack. That if anything is probably the biggest plus. Yes you can get a screen protector I know this. But having the entire screen protected against the inside of the camera is a major bonus for those opposed to it. One thing my A7iii cannot do. Just a thought
I've been using Lumix cameras with articulated screens for almost 10 years now (G3)... many friends that have told me that they didn't need an articulated screen have often reconsidered that opinion after they tried it. You don't know how useful it is until you actually use it. Especially the way Lumix does it, it doesn't add much extra bulk or weight. I've used it from shooting in ground shots to looking for leaks in walls. You don't always have the screen extended so the chance of breaking it is fairly low ( and I would be more concerned about damaging IBIS with a fall). So to me, I agree that it is often a deal-breaker if the camera doesn't have one... why the latest FF Lumix cameras don't have one is strange. Especially since they were some of the first to really implement nice sized and high resolution screens. Then again they went from touting small lenses to making some of the current largest. Nice video!
For low/high angle shots the tilting screen is easier to work with instead of a flipping screen. These camera's you mention are mainly used for photography.
Patents can be for designs (design patent) or inventions (utility patent) very different things... But as you pointed out likely not the reason. Re. The Tilt/Flip screen Did you mention all of these?? Camera manufacturers are appealing to markets, for a press room photographer and sports photographers a tilting screen protected by the camera body is likely a better option. For a freestyle videographer or macro nature-photographer and for street selfie videographers (roaming blogger) a side flip/tilt is flexible enough to work while holding the camera in many different orientations (though it is more likely to get in the way than a rear tilt screen -which is out of the "line of fire" under most circumstances)... For Studio bloggers and set based feature film makers a monitor with user determined mounting position on a camera system, probably is a better fit.... Who makes a Rear +?- tilt with side flip-out for +/-180 swivel?? best of all worlds at the cost of fragility. Panasonic G series with side flip screens are "channelling" a traditional video camera feature. (don't shoot video in portrait mode, it doesn't fit on a "real" screen, when will phone camera shooters ever learn this -jk.) NB, in "real" videography the camera is either sitting on the camera man's shoulder or a tripod, no need for weird angled shots... (cynical /sarcasm ) (For Clarification: A design patent covers very specific unique design cues or improvements to a prior invention. The "base" utility patent should -ideally- be very broad based -protecting the concept through the medium of an "invention" - with general wording, meaning that any competitors need to basically breach the original patent before they can implement/patent -profit- any "further improvements" either as new inventions or designs -pay the license fee, or wait the 20 years if the owner refuses to license their invention, lack of acceptance of a prospective licensee's offer is not grounds to breach a patent. Generally all patents expire in 20 years unless they lapse earlier (due to lack of payment of fees).)
I don't know why particularly except maybe just not wanting to design one, but I'm also in the camp that just doesn't care. I value a _tilting_ screen, yes, but the only time I ever used a fully articulating one was to show people a picture without having to turn my camera around. I do get why people like their fully articulating screens though, and yeah, it'd be nice to have more of them in more cameras.
Fuji put one on their XT100 so maybe it's something they change over time. And you can use it as a tilt type screen as they have on many other X series cameras, for shooting from the hip. I will say that it is a little less rigid as say my XT20 screen but it's certainly no issue. Also as you say it's better to have it and not need it than need and not have.
Group photographs. Ever take group photos using a tripod and have to be in the picture yourself. You set the timer and have 10 secs to get in the frame and the flip out screen is helpful to ensure that you are in the frame. Faster to set the timer than connect the camera to a smartphone to use an app. The fully articulating flip out screen is a must anytime as a photographer you also have to be in the photo and don't want to mess around with an app which takes a while to connect to the phone.
I may well be your only 75 -year-old subscribed Ninja :) I've got two of the Sony A77-1s and acknowledging they are close to being antiques I find them superb. ;)
I'm almost your age, and the articulating mechanism on the A77 and A99 was near perfect! Everybody got what they wanted. Reason enough for Sony to drop it. :-(
The fold in is best as protects the screen but line of sight probably above what is against putting hot shoe on side and a rotating outwards and inwards top screen?
Te tilting screen is faster on typical situations and it is more natural as the screen is not on the side. One can open it with a single movement of the middle finger under a second if one wants too shoot TLR style. With fully articulating one has to move hand, open it on side, rotate it and then fight way to hold the camera.
As a mostly photo user, I don't like the screen to flip to a side. The Canon-like flippy screen looks like it has to flip aside before tilting upward which is a deal breaker for me. Such setup makes the camera more bulky and less stealthy in action. The Sony-like setup on the other hand, is more convenient to use despite being more limited since one doesn't need to constantly keep the screen open aside in order to operate the camera. I would rather have the Fuji screen setup but with 2-way horizontal tilting screen tho
A tilt screen adds size, weight, complexity, fragility and cost. If the camera is designed for people who doesn't use it, it makes sense not to include it.
Selfies are hard to take without a forward facing screen. I'm not a selfie person at all but on the very rare occasion I tried to take one with my wife and son on my Sony a6000 it was difficult to the point we end up using our phones for selfies. And everytime I'm compelled to use a phone when I have an awesome camera like the a6000 with me I die a little bit on the inside!
Personally I don't like or need the forward facing screen. I think it's ugly and awkward. It shifts my head off camera center if j have to look off the side of the camera when it's flipped out and can't rotate the screen horizontal unless it's flipped out on the other side of the camera. So not for me, I'll stick to Fuji thanks
Ridiculous. You still have the option of severely limiting yourself and facing it outwards and flush with the body if you like? So how can it hurt? It can only help those who need more flexibility.
X-T2 and X-T3 screens are so amazing. So pleasure to use... All FAS as tilt screen users I know have turned to be real fanboys of those screens. There were even few "But I can't do vlogging" and then asked how much they really use it, and they were "not really" because they use smartphone or tablet to remotely control camera on vlogging.
I find that the argument of being able to protect your screen a good one. Personally I think that Sony doesn't want to follow the crowd. That's what got them up there with the big boys (or even in front).
I do agree 100% with the main points in video... Nowadays all new cameras should have a fully articulated flip screen. I think you presented the points very well. In addition, I don't think it is a patent issue at all. However, let me tell you something "crazy", "crazy" I said ;) about US patents. As far as I know the US is the only patent system where "ideas/concepts" can be patented. Yes... believe it or not, in Europe concepts cannot be patented, in the US they can. When I lived the US this issue affected the company I worked at and we had to settle out of court, even if we used different technology and methodology and we had no idea there was a patent for issue. One clear example.... Apple patented double tapping on the top bar of the iPhone or iPad to take you to the top of the document. Believe it or not, it is patented. This is the main reason why we don't see such functionality on Android. This was commented by an Android product manager. These type of patents would never be allowed in Europe, however they are allowed in the US. One of the main problems people have with US patents is how arbitrary the decisions by the US Patent Offices are. Again, I don't think this is the case with the flip screens. Just a funny thing about US Patents... Cheers ;)
Still have my 60D, I would love to get a better lens for this so I can still use it as there is no point selling it as you only get a small sum now. I've heard the sigma range (18-35 f1.8) is good, however it doesn't have image stabilisation ?
Yes the Sigma 18-35 is a highly praised lens for its image quality and the fact it's an f1.8 zoom, however no it doesn't have IS - that isn't as big a deal for stills because you have the faster aperture and it's not a particularly long focal length, however for video shooting it may be an issue
@@DaveMcKeegan Hello Dave, Thank you for your advise. I have been able to acquire an xpro1 with an 18mm and 35mm fixed lens some time ago and since them haven't used the 60D (with battery grip) for some time. This I thought was a shame as it is a nice camara, I am on a limited budget so getting camara lenses are a real treat. Hence the dilemma on what lens to get as it was between a Fuji lens or a lense for the Canon. If you were to chose between the Sigma or a Fuji (16-55) what would you go for (as they are around the same cost). I do like street and landscapes photography so like you say stabilisation isn't a must. Thank you for your help
I have a Lumix G9. It's a great camera. The only thing i don't like about it, is the fully articulating screen. As a photographer only i would prefer a tilting screen. To me it's kind of awkward to have the display next to the camera and not behind and i am always afraid it could brake. A tilting screen is more discrete in street photography. You can hold the camera at your belly and look down to the tilted screen. With a fully articulating screen it is more obvious that you are taking photos. To me a tilting screen seems more professional and cameras with fully articulating screen are more for beginner cameras and vloggers. I don't understand why every (photo)camera nowadays has to be a fully equipped videocamera too. I never used any video functions of my cameras yet.
Just because you don't use video functions doesn't mean that others don't. Also, here's a good example of how fully articulating screens help photographers: being able to take shots & compose easily while either holding the camera up high in the air or very low down to the ground. Or like Dave said, real estate photos, or just shooting in tight spaces in general. They just open up many more options. The only mainstream case I could see that they wouldn't be helpful would be on sorts or wildlife cameras. Last but not least, how about being able to protect your back screen when not using your camera? Those things scratch easy as hell.
Sorry no flippy for me. There are reasons to have the screen in-line with the lens. Screens should however face your wrist when shooting vertical at low angles. This is from a photography biased perspective. Don't take it personally but it's only on UA-cam that you'll find flippy screens being a 'requirement' for all cameras. NO!!
I use 80D 95% for photography, and really glad I have a flip out screen, ability to aim it at any possible angle saved me a lot of times. But it all comes down what you're used to.
I think the reason not all cameras have a side articulating screen is size and heat dissipation. Size because the articulating screen design takes a bit more space due to the hinge. heat dissipation I don't fully understand, but I know the Fujis and S1 have the heatsink just behind the screen. The articulating mechanism is in metal and could help transmit that heat. This is just a guess.
actually F/A screens make it EASIER to allow for heat to dissipate as you can pull the screen ALL the way out to let heat out instead of just partially out (Sony's) and that doesnt fully allow all the heat to get out as fast
I don't want to shoot my stills off-axis so I much prefer the tilt screen on my a7iii. I'm still baffled though that Sony don't do an "A8" which would be a bigger a7iii (same body design) but with a fully articulating screen. It would sell like hotcakes to the vlogger/video shooters.
I mainly shoot landscape and I use my flippy screen all the time. There's been a lot of times that I've had to have the flip out screen to get my shot. If I can't have a fully articulating screen then I at least want it to flip in 3 ways.
I wish my a6000 and a7III had vertical tilt screen. It would come in handy when trying to shoot the milky way when it is vertical. Really sucks when I take a low shot and i’m trying to see the shot without moving my camera. So I have to get on my belly and look at the image that way.
yup as the camera is pointed at a steep angle up for Astro shotsw and hard to put your eye up to see in the EVF to see the shot but with the F/A screen you dont have to strait just turn it/angle the screen to see it easily
I don't vlog but I use the side articulating screen all the time. When I'm shooting portraits I frequently shoot from the waist and the articulating screen is wonderful for that style of portrait photography I hope Sony listens and gives us one soon.
Sony won't do it just as yet because that would then make their cameras perfect. I love the rotating screen on the slt series. They make for getting great angles without having to lay on the floor or blindly aiming for composition. I'm with you 100% on why they wont add a fully articulating screen though. It boggles the mind even more when you remember that Sony also makes smart phones so there really isn't an excuse for why they just cant make it happen. If customers are willing to ditch entire systems for petty reasons such as "low resolution EVFs" then they'll definitely cough the cash if that fully articulating screen becomes a reality.
Maybe it's like old computers. Even consumer laptops came equipped with discs for Photoshop, Word, Corel Draw and all kinds of stuff. Then manufacturers worked out they could sell us the same thing. Then they decided they were rental items we had to pay for forever. Perhaps flip screens are an add-on? Or maybe the electronic-mechanical interfaces are not sufficiently well engineered for cameras that aspire to professional usage, and the company don't want a bunch of warranty claims? I've only ever used one camera with a reversible screen, a friend's ancient Canon Powershot. For a film era photographer like myself it was liberating not to have visual data staring back at me, and somewhere dumb and plastic to stick my thumb.
I would rather see the time and effort to be put on the iOS/Android camera apps instead of making a perfect screen that suits everyone. If done right, everyone gets a detachable screen that is useful on every angle, without the need to fiddle around the screen for the best view. Unfortunately, having recently used Snapbridge on my D850, I am shocked of how bad the app is for a $3000 camera, and it is unlikely they would ever improve it because it is not a selling feature of a camera.
Like a 4 or 5 inch industry got stuck on that 3 inch think i pad is ideal size for pictures and detail also operating when possible also i find easiest with pad
Canon is not the only one. The side articulating screen (not a FAS, but SAS) is used not just by Canon, but as well Panasonic, Olympus etc... Fuji made the best screen ever in X-T2 and X-T3. Everyone should license that (if it is patented, if not, copy it). Or what would be the ultimate solution? A detachable screen. Not engineering challenge really to make it so that you unlock a screen/plate rear of the camera that has few lock pins, couple screws and a electronic contacts surrounded by weather seal gasket. Then you would simply unscrew a empty plate (just a cover, so your camera has no screen if wanted) and you mount the one you bought, and you place it there and screw it in. Now you have a screen you wanted. Be it a FAS, Tilt, Fuji, or even fixed one or without screen! Did you break your screen? Cheap solution, buy a 100€ new replacement screen! Want to change the screen? Buy a new one, sell the old one...
As a stills only shooter, I wouldn't mind that Panasonic screen when i'm shooting in portrait mode from a very low angle. Other than that, I don't need a fully articulating screen. But yeah, it's silly other companies don't include a fully articulating screen.
As a still photographer with no interest in shooting video, I find "flippy screens" about as necessary as a fisheye lens. I might need a very wide angle shot less than 1% of the time, and so it is with the "fully articulating screen." Then the moment passes and I find a work around, so it isn't needed after all.
Possible reason for Nikon pro camera bodies: Space for dedicated buttons on the left side. But then again no flip screen on the new Nikon Z6/Z7, but no buttons on the left side either.... very disappointing :/
It's nothing to do with a patent the Fujifilm hs50 bridge camera had a fully articulating screen back in 2013 it's more to do with weather sealing. I'm glad the canon 7d 2 don't have one, I hope canon will always have a fixed screen on the 7d and 1d cameras.
@ 4:53 I shoot a lot of running sports, middle distance ... Marathon, often in vertical position from the ground with long telefoto lenses. I wish the display of an A9 could be flipped upwards to me, because handling a smartphone with the left hand and operating a camera with heavy lens with the right hand is difficult (moving runners) and painful after a few minutes. I understand your wish for flippy screen, I'm sure you need it. And you don't want to use a supporting smartphone. I understand. If I'm not in a fast sport action, I mount all (incl. smartphone) on a tripod. I don't walk with a 2,5 kg FF Camera facing towards me. I think even the camera companies did not expect this vlogging situation. Is a flippy screen realy making sense on heavy FF cameras? In my car I have a rear mirror, but in trucks? Please let us talk about it.
Probably they are no photografers in the designing team. I love my articulated screen in my Canon 600D and I do not do video and my next camera must have oane as well. It opens a lot of composition possibilities.
I dont want a Canon pig's ear display. It is always out of alignment, if used over the ground or up in the air over head and it needs always an additional movement. But the A77/99 solution was sweet, cause you could have used it as flip only - not out of alignment - or you could have swiveled the display to protect it against dirt in rough environment. But if I had to choose, I'd chose the normal A7 flip all the time, cause the sideways flippin horse's ear annoys very much and looks cheap and unprofessional. Fuji got it even better, cause theirs is similar to the A7 version, but is also flipping even in vertical mode.
For anything else than forward facing, the flip out screen in much worse. And the one where you flip it toward your hand... Try taking a low angle portrait mode image... Now try taking an overhead portrait mode image... Most people will hold the side of the camera with the grip toward themselves... That's why ;o) The the normal tilt is so much less bulky and clunky when you don't need it to be forward facing. Much faster to flip to the right position and doesn't stick out to the side. I actually think the best design, I've seen is probably the one on the X-T100, though that one does not flip toward the hand for portrait mode, which I've really come to appreciate since gtting my X-T2. Also, I don't really understand the problem people have with the top flip screen. I don't really care if it's my screen or my mic that hangs from the side of the camera.
Top flip doesn't bother me either except that we don't really get top flips on cameras with a central viewfinder apart from the ninja-flip from the Sony A77
NIkon and Panasonic ... and even Fuji have some camera with a fully articulated screen. Its just fucking weird that they dont put it on all their camera.
I am not convinced that you know the difference between utility patents, design patents, and copyright. It is easy to get around a design patent, but doing the same with a utility patent is not so easy. Canon might have a utility patent that they licenced out to other companies for a short time for a fee, and that Canon, or these companies decided not to renew this licence afterwards. We don't know. Certainly not from this video. It would be interesting to actually find out what is going on with flippy screens. We should ask Kasey.
I don't vlog so don't need the canon front facing flippy screen I prefer the tilt screen that keeps the line of sight of the subject in the same axis like the sony or nikon mirrorless. The way you need to hold the camera changes with the flippy screen.
When doing astrophotography, the camera needs to be in all kind of funny angles and flippy-screen would help a lot, tilty screen only helps half of the time, the rest you have to crawl around the camera in funny angles.
That is why I hate my moded canon eos 1300 and planing to buy nikon d 8300 and moded. This is not the only reason but a big one.
you always have legacy av-out and hdmi since long time ago.
Funny enough, the point I love the most about flippy screens is that you can make the screen invisible, so you have a rather old style design where you have to look through the viewfinder. I don't shoot vlogs, but it's nice for shooting selfies too.
That is its main purpose on PEN-F here. Just close the screen and have styled rear screen. Anyways it is annoying each time swivel out and rotate to get the screen at any angle for street photography at waist level, that it permanently stays closed.
I could have very well pay less for PEN-F without screen, as it doesn't get used because it is FAS.
And if I want to hide screen for old look, I can always get a nice textured fake leather and tape it over the screen and it looks great.
And selfies is best to take with just lens pointing at you...
@@katumus for selfies it's not always the case that you want to be in the centre of the shot. Also, if there's a group of people taking a selfie together, how do you know that everyone is in the shot? Flippy screens are useful
I've heard from a couple of photojournalists (and I mean hardcore professional photojournalists, not the relaxed hipster street photographers) that they'll never use a camera with a side-flipping screen because the life expectancy of a side-flipping screen in a dense crowd is about 30 seconds. Tilting screen is a must for their job though, and it doesn't cause real problems because the screen is pretty much always protected by your hands and body.
Alex Adrianov how about not open the flip out screen when not needed🤔
4:55 screen facing towards wrist when you put the camera in an L bracket and want to take a portrait shot and the camera is down low. I wish Sony has this, but the screen only articulates for low shots in landscape mode
Ahh, hadn't considered that aspect
No need for an L bracket. Most photographers simply keep their finger on the trigger (or main trigger in case of having a battery grip with secondary trigger button). Then again, a fully articulating screen allows for the exact same angle too.
@@Philafxs The biggest issue with (F)AS for photography is that it's often off from both the horizontal and vertical lens axis. Much like the a6x00 EVFs. This makes cross-tilt screens a much better option for photography.
@4:53 When you want a vertical shot from down low
I miss it a lot when I shoot macro on my Alpha 7.
My roots are in film photography and no flippy screen is an instant deal breaker for me and I’m NOT a vlogger. After going digital in 2001 (with a Canon G1) the flippy screen was 1 of 3 features that opened new possibilities and radically changed my process (the other 2 being in camera white balance and instant reviewing of photos). Refreshing to hear someone acknowledging the advantages of fully articulating screens for PHOTOGRAPHERS as I’m weary of everyone thinking it’s a feature only vloggers care about. Some of the comments have been enlightening as I’ve never understood ANY reason for why most cameras wouldn’t have this in 2019 (seemed like a no brainer 20 years ago) but see that some photographers prefer screens centered and flush with the camera. Can’t personally relate BUT it’s at least a reason. Whoever mentioned it being less discrete for street photography makes an interesting point which I‘d never considered but do agree with (but don’t outweigh the benefits FOR ME). Perhaps I explore shots and shoot differently than most photographers, idk, but I could NEVER go back to shooting without a flippy screen. When I’ve tried it feels like an arm is tied behind my back.
Lastly, on an unrelated note y’all commenting about patents are correct that Dave seems to have a totally inaccurate understanding of how intellectual property laws actually work and shake out (like most people) BUT that’s totally irrelevant since his ultimate point was that patents AREN’T the reason for flippy screen scarcity and that is TRUE
Wrist-sided screen position is used when You want low angle photo in vertical. Very useful and more convenient than breaking Your back :P
Also great for taking photos of children in low angles.
ah... now that makes sense. Though I'm not happy that it makes sense because it's just one of the options possible with fully articulating screens.
presumably, the articulating screens are less resilient. pro bodies tend to prioritise that...
cynically i guess it’s also about product differentiation
Old professional don’t need it. They not shoot what the young people are shooting.
Doesn’t the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mikita have a fully articulating screen just like the Canon?
Most Olympus have flippy screens: E-M1 II. E-M1-III, Pen-F, E-M5 II, E-M5 III. Panasonic and Fujifilm have been tilt-screen advocates for years, but both have put flippy screens in their video-oriented models... Panny going way, way back to the GH1 in 2009. Seems a lack of research here.
There are instances where I'd like to shoot an ornate ceiling, dramatic sky, etc. where the best option is to point the camera straight up, either mounted or laying the camera on the floor. My only camera I can compose my shot properly on in that case is my old 60D. Not to mention low angle floral or insect macros, holding overhead for parades and other events, etc. I hope if/when the pro R comes out, it keeps the R's flippy screen.
A tilt screen can do that
The side facing screen is often used in traditional-style interviews in broadcast and news situations where the interviewee is looking slightly off axis of the camera. It's so that the interviewer can be in the correct position sitting across from the interviewee, camera slightly to the side, and you can check focus, lighting and audio levels during interviews.
all I want is the perfect camera...ok, we're done here...
My X-T3 has the same type of screen tilt design as the Panasonic S1/S1R, and I found that particular one useful for low-angle portrait shots.
How's xt3...I'm gonna purchase. Anything for me..suggestions?
5:04 answer is he doesn't know. Hope I saved you some time! Like this comment so that it gets to the top! 👍
#savedyouaclick. Thanks!
Probably only vloggers and youtubers who shoot everything himself want a fully articulate screen so bad. For the former, get a DSLR with a flippy screen, for the latter, get an external screen/recorder with your ad revenue.
People are fine with the tilt screen, and personally I just felt hilarious that some youtubers out there are complaining about any camera that doesn't have a flippy screen while shooting majority of the content on a 1DXii
the screen facing your wrist is actually useful when it comes to portrait shots. as a photographer mostly shooting reels and tiktoks i find it very handy and pratical for low shots and portraits
you might want a tilt up/down for better composition [d850/A7] but to get to same angles side articulating screen makes the cameras footprint bigger.
Articulate discussion of articulating subject, patently the best post but answers hinge on usability needs. Hip shooters can choose from fold-out that puts cam further away from belt, or fold out to the side that can get in the way of a camera strap. What ever happened to right angle finders that attach to eye piece? We need a highly modular configurable design to please all.
There are way too many puns in this comment 😂😂😂👏👏
I have an old FZ-200 which has a flippy screen that folds away with the back of the screen facing outwards. This may better protect the screen, but is ergonomically worse than the tilty screen on my A7 which is always and immediately available for viewing.
As for a forward facing screen there seems no really good solution. The flip down screen is obscured by a tripod. The flip up screen is obscured by anything on the hot shoe. The left flip out (aka flippy or fully articulating) screen is obscured by any cables connecting to the camera. Furthermore, a fully articulating screen used hand-held gets in the way of holding the camera with the left hand, or working any of the left-hand controls. Especially annoying when you really only flip it out in order to tilt it up or down. Tilty screens don't have that problem. And this, of course, is why there is no right flip out screen. It would get in the way of the right hand when hand-held.
A really advanced screen might be capable of being taken off the camera altogether so you can put it where you wish. But isn't that just the same as connecting via a mobile phone? Which, by the way, I view as a brilliant solution to the whole problem.
Well said, all the new cameras have wireless connectivity, so a mobile phone screen in my opinion can be a better solution than a fiddly fully articulating screen.
@@youxanyou I don't know - I don't really want to deal with a mobile phone to use my camera. It's a big reason I got a camera - the mobile phone cameras were fiddly, the software was slow and annoying. But I'm not a pro. I also like just having the screen closed (think ancient flip phones - who ever got screen protectors or "otter boxes" back then, the damn design protected the phone) - it protects the screen, yet I can flip it out and click back in when I actually am using the screen.
That doesn't protect the screen really. The screen protection was needed long time ago (or not so long time ago with Canon and Nikon) until Gorilla Glass was developed and taken in use. Like example a 2012 Olympus E-M5 has armor glass. Never used any protection, always hanging from the belt or strap, rolling around the car front seat and sometimes on the floor (with sand and all other dirt you have in car) and there are barely few marks that you can see when you clean the screen from the crease and look the screen surface against light reflection. Then you can see some markings that it ain't new screen. But you don't see them when screen is turned On, not when you don't really go looking at them.
Actually you wouldn't even find them as I have trouble to find them too when I just checked how many there are :D
The impact/force that is required to break that screen would be such that it would penetrate the screen rear plate on the E-M1 II that is turned screen inwards. The only real way how to break that screen is that there comes a tiny porcelain piece that hits on that glass and it would shatter to pieces. So against such, that inward screen would be protection.
But otherwise, FAS is like a integrated screen as it is as useful and painful to use.
@@kadmow sorry but those were for smartphones, drop tests and all kinds abused that cameras do not receive. So out of context tests.
@@katumus lol just having fun...
Why not droptest a camera would eliminate the rubbish...
I think everybody is missing the most important element of why we don't see these as typical. BREAKAGE. Nobody wants to have to deal with warranty claims and user complaints that "it broke off too easily." I just heard you touch on it, but my bet is this is a much larger reason than most of us realize. If somebody bumps my EOS R screen backward, it's going to hinge, but if somebody walks forward from behind and accidentally bumps it, it's not going to be so forgiving.
I agree Bobby, but then if my Sony A7 hits the floor backwards while the screen is fully folded back then it could punch itself straight through the back of the camera
The only really way to prevent breakage is to have a completely fixed screen, and flip screens expose the connection ribbons while articulating screens hide them
My Sony folding screen feels 100x more fragile than my old canon flip screens. At least with those screens, I could fold it back so the screen wasn't exposed.
@@DaveMcKeegan Which is likely why (so far) even Canon's high end cameras have always had fixed screens.
Canons high end cameras now come with flip screens like the R5 and R3
@@nickblyth166 You understand that comment was from 2 years ago, right?
Yes I've wondered this before as well. I used to have a Canon SX40 and it's essential to me. At present I've got an old Sony A55 SLT and Nikon D5600. The A55 screen is one that flips down, but it's not as good design as the fully articulating one's.
I prefer regular tilt mechanism! I want to compose behind the lens, not to the side. Also, I like using an L-bracket. An articulating screen sits in the way of that.
Best solution: Sony A99 screenhinge!
This.
Weaker hinge -> more broken cameras -> more repairs -> poorer user experience -> loss of a customer -> choosing the safer screen hinges.
Also, I hated the side flip out screen on my Olympus and dread the thought that my next camera might have one. They're too clunky and cumbersome to use for the simple tilt that I want/need 97% of the time. For that other 3%, it's never a "need" for my use and it just doesn't add up to being worthwhile if it's inconvenient nearly all the time.
Panasonic had an explanation for why they didn't do the articulating screen on the S1 and S1R: it would get in the way of all the IO ports, which are typically on that side of the camera. Just like the top mounted external mic would obstruct the flip-up screen of the a6400. If oyu are recording or tethering and have an HDMI, a mic and maybe headphones plugged in, you couldn't really use the articulating design very efficiently. So articulating is better for vloggers, flippy is better for studio and other pro work. Which one of these groups complains more on yt? Yes, that's right.
Panasonic's G9 has a flippy screen and it also has the IO ports. I can't tell you how awkward they may be while using the flippy screen because I use my camera mainly for photos and not video, but they have the IO and a flippy screen and I think someone said in a review that I watched last year that the IO are placed better on the G9 than on the GH5 because the screen gets in the way of the IO on the GH5. AGain, I can't confirm this as I don't use any of those IO ports.
I have a flip screen camera and a fully articulating one. A lot of the time the flippy is more convenient, if I want a high or low angle shot just angle the screen straight off, but with the fully articulating you have to flip it out 180 from the camera then rotate it to the right angle, then reverse the whole process when you want to use the camera normally without a fairly delicate screen hanging off the side of it.
Well said. Very thorough. Have you done something similar for GPS? I'd love to see you examine that with the same approach!
Thats one one of the things I love on my Canon 60D and G12 and wish my Sony's had it. Another BIG benefit of the F/A screen is that you can reverse it and put the screen INSIDE when not using it (in your bag) so it doesnt get all scratched up accidentally. Ive read that may dont use these on their "pro/prosumer" line cameras because they feel they are more prone to snap.break off if/when the photographer drops their cameras, making it harder to fix/repair and since pros need their cameras to be MORE durable, not less, they dont want to take that chance, but thats what Ive heard, since the pivot/joint would be the 1st thing to break off for sure as its the weakest point on the camera if you hit it hard. We can only hope but I dont see Sony adding it even thoygh MOST do want it and have been scraming for it for ages esp those of use who use the APSC line (a6000, a6400, a6500, a5300)
Olympus E-M1 Mark II has a side out flippy screen that works just fine but I have used cameras with tilt screens that are definitely preferable in many situations. Although tilt screen advocates forget that flippy screens have an advantage of being able to flip inwards for complete scratch protection .
Imo flippy screens have some major disadvantages for a lot of users, so manufacturers are a little reluctant to adopt them more widely. I think It's a nightmare for stills, thats why it's not used on cameras made primarily for photography. Flippy screen doubles camera's footprint, its awkward to hold, feels cumbersome, and slows you down as its an awkward set of movements to flip it out every time you want to shoot from low or high. Its a pain to use in run and gun situations, travel/street photography, or candid situations where you want to be fast and discreet. The tilt screen you flip it out fast with your small finger as you lift the camera to aim, without too much effort. I think the best solution, at least for shooting stills, it's the type of screen used in xt3 and the new s1 where combines the advantages of both worlds.
I use Canon 80D flip out all the time for stills, fast and easy, and have no problems whatsoever. just have to get used to whatever you got.
@@LordArioh tilt screen offers 90% of the functionality of the flippy screen without the disadvantages, 2axis as on xt3/s1 even better. I shoot mainly street/travel stills, I want to be fast, discreet and not look like an awkward tourist so a fiddly screen sticking out of the side of my camera is a dealbreaker for me. I think it's the same for the majority of pro photographers.
I think don't think flippy screens have that many disadvantages. 95% of the time, it's folded in backwards into the body so the screen is facing in towards the camera to protect the glass as I use the view finder to take pictures. If I need to take pictures in tight areas, I can flip it out and use it. And when I navigate the menus, I have it facing outward. I much prefer a flippy screen to a tilting one. I have a tilting one in my GX85 and I feel restricted (plus I can't turn it in on itself to protect the screen). On my G9, it's flippy and I can do what I want with it.
@@ScottBenedict The disadvantages mentioned by me and others on the comments are quite clear so boils down to personal preference. Travel/Street for me is shooting a lot from waist height or above crowd, usually as discreet as possible. Tilt screen is half a second job, flippy screen for the smallest tilt, I have to flip it out and turn it 180° and then the same to flip it back in again. Besides the serious waste of time, I can miss the shot, cannot hold the camera properly, bring attention and look weird. No need to protect the back screen, I stick a screen protector from day one and all of them, on the four bodies I got, are spotless.
@@youxanyou I think it also boils down to how you're using the camera. It sounds like you're mostly shooting in "live view" mode, whereas the people like me who like the flippy screen use the viewfinder most of the time. I pretty much use the screen to review a photo when I want to. However, I usually just use a big enough SD card and take a lot of photos and review back on my PC, so unless I'm testing something like a flash or lens where I'm not out and about, I don't really use the screen that much so far. So getting it "out of the way" is appealing.
Honestly I don't like the fully articulating screen off the Canon. because it's really annoying if I wanted to just flip up or down. I do not want to put it on the side first and then tilt it up or down
true i do wirh it was a screen that was a combo of the Canon flip out and around 180 deg as well as the Sony flip up and down so best of both worlds so when you want to be stealthy you dont want to flip it OUT then anyone on the street will know you are taking a pix/video of them
A possible reason is to differentiate between various camera bodies that camera companies make: adding an articulated screen or more frames per second gives the manufacturer a slot for a whole new camera body at a slightly higher price point, which brings more business to them by selling more bodies; this approach is most certainly true for Canon, who have a battalion of APSC bodies, and the lower priced ones are denied features for no other reason than because they are cheaper
The side tilt is for low angle portraits. It's way more comfortable than a flip out screen. It's one of the features that I like the most about my camera. Makes my life in studio shoots so much easier
Dave, the major problem with articulating screens is that the ports on the side are not good reachable. At least this is one argument that panasonic uses for their s1. It makes sense for higher end cameras but jeah it would be nice either way.
My Fuji X-H1 has the odd tilty screen which isn't particularly good (though, the EVF is outstanding). I finally broke down and stuck an Andycine 5" (Imperial unit, sorry!) monitor on it and it makes all the difference in the world. Especially as I can flip it back to the back for operating behind the camera and then rotate it forward for being in front of the lens. Yes, it's one more piece of gear to haul but it's worth it.
Photographers like me love the fully articulating screens!!!!
Best and most informative photography channel on UA-cam! Thank you!
I miss the articulated screen on my old Canon 600D. One of the biggest benefits I found was the ability to flip the screen in so it didn’t get scratched when I threw it into the backpack.
+100 yup the main reason I love that feature to protect the screen when not in use
What did you switch to?
best solution is the tilt AND flip screen. I am not (yet) a photographer, but I have a feeling that for "normal" photography the tilt is better. but having both is the best. and I think that is not a cost factor. the chassis should not cost that much more than normal flippy or tilt.
This is why I'm struggling to find a camera to upgrade from my nikon d5300. I like being able to have extra space for my nose when moving the screen off to the side when using the viewfinder and I also like having the peace of mind of not having to eorry about scratching the screen when not using the camera as the screen would be flipped inwards.
i like tilt screen more
i think tilt up os nice
i had a Panasonic xc10 in my hands and the tilt screem feels beautiful
make it tilt up and add anice mic solution it will be the perfect vlog camera
sonys tilt screen alsi feels really good to me.
i played around with an a400 and the tilt up screen feels a little hard to use quickly.
i would say a good tilt up screen is superior in most cases as the camera is more compact during the shooting
but flippy is faster to your
your shoe mount doesn't Block anything
and often you can turn it around to protect the screen during transport
the flippy-tilty screen is seriously useful, and also cool feature you can flip it around to prevent from scratching. would disagree with video feature points. If I don't need and never gonna use video, but still want a professional modern camera for stills, I still have to pay ridiculous price for video features.
I bought the iconic 7D Mark ii. And just couldn't stand it with the lack of flip screen.
The screen makes such a difference for street photography.
I just ordered my first Full Frame. 5D Mark iii. It's got no flip screen either, but is supposed to be a beast, so I'll give it a go.
I don't want to buy anymore cameras that lack a flip screen. It just makes shooting so much easier and less frustrating.
I have a Sony Camera with a flip screen and it's definitely better having one.
Shit, even give us a viewfinder that I can move around, that would be enough for me.
The reason is actually very simple. Most professional users don't care and don't need this, trust me. Only vloggers. In 10 years i've shot like 80 music videos and only 1 time i barely wish i had a flip out screen. I was shooting a clip of a couple taking pictures in a photo booth. It just took me 2 minutes to mount a monitor on the camera, no big deal. Otherwise i never found myself in a situation in which i wish i had a flip out screen. A tilt screen is ok for me. When i see some people say that they won't buy a BMPCC 4K, a 1300€ camera that shoots 4K/60P RAW because it has no flip out screen, i'm like what the hell ? I mean a Red Dragon does not have a flip out screen either, but a tilt one.
Complety untrue. Having the functionality to be able to view screen add almost any angle is a huge benefit. Shooting download from macro work, holding the camera high above your head I've been able to view the screen to be able to see what I'm shooting is extremely useful especially if there was a crowd in front of me. I guarantee if the camera that use now has an articulating screen you would use the function more than you ever think.
Gordon Johnston So you mean you can’t shoot from above or from below with a tilt screen ? 🤔
Of course you can, it just make using the camera in the field a more user friendly experience. I have solved the problem from the low down angel, by using a Canon angle finder on my 5D. I can tell you now if your camera had a tilt of flip screen you would sorley miss it if you didn't have it.
Tilt screens flip up and down faster, in the same line with the lens and in a more intuitive action (don't have to go to the side first and then tilt up/down). Granted, they don't flip sideways. Some people may not want to "compromise" tilt up and down just to be able to flip forward.
One thing that never gets said is the protection aspect. When the camera is not in use you can flip the screen around and have it protected while in a bag or backpack. That if anything is probably the biggest plus. Yes you can get a screen protector I know this. But having the entire screen protected against the inside of the camera is a major bonus for those opposed to it. One thing my A7iii cannot do. Just a thought
A simple solution for vloggers: if you need a flippy screen, buy a camera that has one! I like the tilt design including the flip up!
I've been using Lumix cameras with articulated screens for almost 10 years now (G3)... many friends that have told me that they didn't need an articulated screen have often reconsidered that opinion after they tried it. You don't know how useful it is until you actually use it. Especially the way Lumix does it, it doesn't add much extra bulk or weight. I've used it from shooting in ground shots to looking for leaks in walls. You don't always have the screen extended so the chance of breaking it is fairly low ( and I would be more concerned about damaging IBIS with a fall). So to me, I agree that it is often a deal-breaker if the camera doesn't have one... why the latest FF Lumix cameras don't have one is strange. Especially since they were some of the first to really implement nice sized and high resolution screens. Then again they went from touting small lenses to making some of the current largest. Nice video!
For low/high angle shots the tilting screen is easier to work with instead of a flipping screen. These camera's you mention are mainly used for photography.
Patents can be for designs (design patent) or inventions (utility patent) very different things...
But as you pointed out likely not the reason.
Re. The Tilt/Flip screen
Did you mention all of these??
Camera manufacturers are appealing to markets, for a press room photographer and sports photographers a tilting screen protected by the camera body is likely a better option. For a freestyle videographer or macro nature-photographer and for street selfie videographers (roaming blogger) a side flip/tilt is flexible enough to work while holding the camera in many different orientations (though it is more likely to get in the way than a rear tilt screen -which is out of the "line of fire" under most circumstances)... For Studio bloggers and set based feature film makers a monitor with user determined mounting position on a camera system, probably is a better fit....
Who makes a Rear +?- tilt with side flip-out for +/-180 swivel?? best of all worlds at the cost of fragility.
Panasonic G series with side flip screens are "channelling" a traditional video camera feature. (don't shoot video in portrait mode, it doesn't fit on a "real" screen, when will phone camera shooters ever learn this -jk.) NB, in "real" videography the camera is either sitting on the camera man's shoulder or a tripod, no need for weird angled shots... (cynical /sarcasm )
(For Clarification: A design patent covers very specific unique design cues or improvements to a prior invention. The "base" utility patent should -ideally- be very broad based -protecting the concept through the medium of an "invention" - with general wording, meaning that any competitors need to basically breach the original patent before they can implement/patent -profit- any "further improvements" either as new inventions or designs -pay the license fee, or wait the 20 years if the owner refuses to license their invention, lack of acceptance of a prospective licensee's offer is not grounds to breach a patent.
Generally all patents expire in 20 years unless they lapse earlier (due to lack of payment of fees).)
I don't know why particularly except maybe just not wanting to design one, but I'm also in the camp that just doesn't care. I value a _tilting_ screen, yes, but the only time I ever used a fully articulating one was to show people a picture without having to turn my camera around. I do get why people like their fully articulating screens though, and yeah, it'd be nice to have more of them in more cameras.
I don’t know if it’s been mentioned, but could it be an extra space for buttons on the left side?
As always a great video to watch. Thank you.
A few people have suggested that, although some cameras such as the A7's and Z6/7 have a tilt screen put no buttons on the left of the screen.
Fuji put one on their XT100 so maybe it's something they change over time. And you can use it as a tilt type screen as they have on many other X series cameras, for shooting from the hip. I will say that it is a little less rigid as say my XT20 screen but it's certainly no issue. Also as you say it's better to have it and not need it than need and not have.
Group photographs. Ever take group photos using a tripod and have to be in the picture yourself. You set the timer and have 10 secs to get in the frame and the flip out screen is helpful to ensure that you are in the frame. Faster to set the timer than connect the camera to a smartphone to use an app.
The fully articulating flip out screen is a must anytime as a photographer you also have to be in the photo and don't want to mess around with an app which takes a while to connect to the phone.
I may well be your only 75 -year-old subscribed Ninja :) I've got two of the Sony A77-1s and acknowledging they are close to being antiques I find them superb. ;)
I'm almost your age, and the articulating mechanism on the A77 and A99 was near perfect! Everybody got what they wanted. Reason enough for Sony to drop it. :-(
@@j16m02 ha ha' Such is life :)
The fold in is best as protects the screen but line of sight probably above what is against putting hot shoe on side and a rotating outwards and inwards top screen?
Te tilting screen is faster on typical situations and it is more natural as the screen is not on the side. One can open it with a single movement of the middle finger under a second if one wants too shoot TLR style. With fully articulating one has to move hand, open it on side, rotate it and then fight way to hold the camera.
Panasonic G9, Olympus EM1 Mark II also have those articulated screen
As a mostly photo user, I don't like the screen to flip to a side. The Canon-like flippy screen looks like it has to flip aside before tilting upward which is a deal breaker for me. Such setup makes the camera more bulky and less stealthy in action. The Sony-like setup on the other hand, is more convenient to use despite being more limited since one doesn't need to constantly keep the screen open aside in order to operate the camera. I would rather have the Fuji screen setup but with 2-way horizontal tilting screen tho
A tilt screen adds size, weight, complexity, fragility and cost. If the camera is designed for people who doesn't use it, it makes sense not to include it.
Sony and Panasonic does it to their full frame cameras to differentiate it from their cinema cameras.
Selfies are hard to take without a forward facing screen. I'm not a selfie person at all but on the very rare occasion I tried to take one with my wife and son on my Sony a6000 it was difficult to the point we end up using our phones for selfies. And everytime I'm compelled to use a phone when I have an awesome camera like the a6000 with me I die a little bit on the inside!
Personally I don't like or need the forward facing screen. I think it's ugly and awkward. It shifts my head off camera center if j have to look off the side of the camera when it's flipped out and can't rotate the screen horizontal unless it's flipped out on the other side of the camera. So not for me, I'll stick to Fuji thanks
Ridiculous. You still have the option of severely limiting yourself and facing it outwards and flush with the body if you like? So how can it hurt? It can only help those who need more flexibility.
X-T2 and X-T3 screens are so amazing. So pleasure to use... All FAS as tilt screen users I know have turned to be real fanboys of those screens. There were even few "But I can't do vlogging" and then asked how much they really use it, and they were "not really" because they use smartphone or tablet to remotely control camera on vlogging.
I find that the argument of being able to protect your screen a good one. Personally I think that Sony doesn't want to follow the crowd. That's what got them up there with the big boys (or even in front).
Thank you for this video...this is the exact thought i had.
I do agree 100% with the main points in video... Nowadays all new cameras should have a fully articulated flip screen. I think you presented the points very well.
In addition, I don't think it is a patent issue at all. However, let me tell you something "crazy", "crazy" I said ;) about US patents. As far as I know the US is the only patent system where "ideas/concepts" can be patented. Yes... believe it or not, in Europe concepts cannot be patented, in the US they can. When I lived the US this issue affected the company I worked at and we had to settle out of court, even if we used different technology and methodology and we had no idea there was a patent for issue.
One clear example.... Apple patented double tapping on the top bar of the iPhone or iPad to take you to the top of the document. Believe it or not, it is patented. This is the main reason why we don't see such functionality on Android. This was commented by an Android product manager.
These type of patents would never be allowed in Europe, however they are allowed in the US.
One of the main problems people have with US patents is how arbitrary the decisions by the US Patent Offices are.
Again, I don't think this is the case with the flip screens.
Just a funny thing about US Patents...
Cheers ;)
I didn't think I needed a flippy screen until I had one. Come to think of it, that was true of my first digital camera as well.
Still have my 60D, I would love to get a better lens for this so I can still use it as there is no point selling it as you only get a small sum now. I've heard the sigma range (18-35 f1.8) is good, however it doesn't have image stabilisation ?
Yes the Sigma 18-35 is a highly praised lens for its image quality and the fact it's an f1.8 zoom, however no it doesn't have IS - that isn't as big a deal for stills because you have the faster aperture and it's not a particularly long focal length, however for video shooting it may be an issue
@@DaveMcKeegan Hello Dave, Thank you for your advise. I have been able to acquire an xpro1 with an 18mm and 35mm fixed lens some time ago and since them haven't used the 60D (with battery grip) for some time. This I thought was a shame as it is a nice camara, I am on a limited budget so getting camara lenses are a real treat. Hence the dilemma on what lens to get as it was between a Fuji lens or a lense for the Canon. If you were to chose between the Sigma or a Fuji (16-55) what would you go for (as they are around the same cost). I do like street and landscapes photography so like you say stabilisation isn't a must. Thank you for your help
I'd personally be drawn towards the Fuji for the smaller form factor for street photography but it's your personal preference
I have a Lumix G9. It's a great camera. The only thing i don't like about it, is the fully articulating screen. As a photographer only i would prefer a tilting screen. To me it's kind of awkward to have the display next to the camera and not behind and i am always afraid it could brake. A tilting screen is more discrete in street photography. You can hold the camera at your belly and look down to the tilted screen. With a fully articulating screen it is more obvious that you are taking photos. To me a tilting screen seems more professional and cameras with fully articulating screen are more for beginner cameras and vloggers. I don't understand why every (photo)camera nowadays has to be a fully equipped videocamera too. I never used any video functions of my cameras yet.
Just because you don't use video functions doesn't mean that others don't. Also, here's a good example of how fully articulating screens help photographers: being able to take shots & compose easily while either holding the camera up high in the air or very low down to the ground. Or like Dave said, real estate photos, or just shooting in tight spaces in general. They just open up many more options. The only mainstream case I could see that they wouldn't be helpful would be on sorts or wildlife cameras. Last but not least, how about being able to protect your back screen when not using your camera? Those things scratch easy as hell.
Sorry no flippy for me. There are reasons to have the screen in-line with the lens. Screens should however face your wrist when shooting vertical at low angles. This is from a photography biased perspective.
Don't take it personally but it's only on UA-cam that you'll find flippy screens being a 'requirement' for all cameras. NO!!
I use 80D 95% for photography, and really glad I have a flip out screen, ability to aim it at any possible angle saved me a lot of times. But it all comes down what you're used to.
@TheMangoAssassin WTF are you talking about?
I think the reason not all cameras have a side articulating screen is size and heat dissipation.
Size because the articulating screen design takes a bit more space due to the hinge.
heat dissipation I don't fully understand, but I know the Fujis and S1 have the heatsink just behind the screen. The articulating mechanism is in metal and could help transmit that heat. This is just a guess.
actually F/A screens make it EASIER to allow for heat to dissipate as you can pull the screen ALL the way out to let heat out instead of just partially out (Sony's) and that doesnt fully allow all the heat to get out as fast
I don't want to shoot my stills off-axis so I much prefer the tilt screen on my a7iii. I'm still baffled though that Sony don't do an "A8" which would be a bigger a7iii (same body design) but with a fully articulating screen. It would sell like hotcakes to the vlogger/video shooters.
stay tuned for the next A7Siii coming soon....
I mainly shoot landscape and I use my flippy screen all the time. There's been a lot of times that I've had to have the flip out screen to get my shot. If I can't have a fully articulating screen then I at least want it to flip in 3 ways.
Are we only counting the full frame cameras?
I had a lumix fz200, that had it, also the canon sh40 had it too i believe.
Yes I'm talking specifically full frame cameras
I wish my a6000 and a7III had vertical tilt screen. It would come in handy when trying to shoot the milky way when it is vertical. Really sucks when I take a low shot and i’m trying to see the shot without moving my camera. So I have to get on my belly and look at the image that way.
Flippy screen is super important for astrophotography as well!
Most of the time I find a tilt up screen is sufficient for astrophotography.
yup as the camera is pointed at a steep angle up for Astro shotsw and hard to put your eye up to see in the EVF to see the shot but with the F/A screen you dont have to strait just turn it/angle the screen to see it easily
I don't vlog but I use the side articulating screen all the time. When I'm shooting portraits I frequently shoot from the waist and the articulating screen is wonderful for that style of portrait photography I hope Sony listens and gives us one soon.
Sony won't do it just as yet because that would then make their cameras perfect. I love the rotating screen on the slt series. They make for getting great angles without having to lay on the floor or blindly aiming for composition. I'm with you 100% on why they wont add a fully articulating screen though. It boggles the mind even more when you remember that Sony also makes smart phones so there really isn't an excuse for why they just cant make it happen. If customers are willing to ditch entire systems for petty reasons such as "low resolution EVFs" then they'll definitely cough the cash if that fully articulating screen becomes a reality.
Maybe it's like old computers. Even consumer laptops came equipped with discs for Photoshop, Word, Corel Draw and all kinds of stuff. Then manufacturers worked out they could sell us the same thing. Then they decided they were rental items we had to pay for forever. Perhaps flip screens are an add-on? Or maybe the electronic-mechanical interfaces are not sufficiently well engineered for cameras that aspire to professional usage, and the company don't want a bunch of warranty claims?
I've only ever used one camera with a reversible screen, a friend's ancient Canon Powershot. For a film era photographer like myself it was liberating not to have visual data staring back at me, and somewhere dumb and plastic to stick my thumb.
I would rather see the time and effort to be put on the iOS/Android camera apps instead of making a perfect screen that suits everyone. If done right, everyone gets a detachable screen that is useful on every angle, without the need to fiddle around the screen for the best view. Unfortunately, having recently used Snapbridge on my D850, I am shocked of how bad the app is for a $3000 camera, and it is unlikely they would ever improve it because it is not a selling feature of a camera.
Like a 4 or 5 inch industry got stuck on that 3 inch think i pad is ideal size for pictures and detail also operating when possible also i find easiest with pad
Canon is not the only one. The side articulating screen (not a FAS, but SAS) is used not just by Canon, but as well Panasonic, Olympus etc...
Fuji made the best screen ever in X-T2 and X-T3. Everyone should license that (if it is patented, if not, copy it).
Or what would be the ultimate solution? A detachable screen. Not engineering challenge really to make it so that you unlock a screen/plate rear of the camera that has few lock pins, couple screws and a electronic contacts surrounded by weather seal gasket.
Then you would simply unscrew a empty plate (just a cover, so your camera has no screen if wanted) and you mount the one you bought, and you place it there and screw it in. Now you have a screen you wanted. Be it a FAS, Tilt, Fuji, or even fixed one or without screen!
Did you break your screen? Cheap solution, buy a 100€ new replacement screen! Want to change the screen? Buy a new one, sell the old one...
As a stills only shooter, I wouldn't mind that Panasonic screen when i'm shooting in portrait mode from a very low angle. Other than that, I don't need a fully articulating screen. But yeah, it's silly other companies don't include a fully articulating screen.
As a still photographer with no interest in shooting video, I find "flippy screens" about as necessary as a fisheye lens. I might need a very wide angle shot less than 1% of the time, and so it is with the "fully articulating screen." Then the moment passes and I find a work around, so it isn't needed after all.
Thank you for explaining
Possible reason for Nikon pro camera bodies: Space for dedicated buttons on the left side.
But then again no flip screen on the new Nikon Z6/Z7, but no buttons on the left side either.... very disappointing :/
I have often wondered tbi s question myself,..Still no real reason why not !
It's nothing to do with a patent the Fujifilm hs50 bridge camera had a fully articulating screen back in 2013 it's more to do with weather sealing. I'm glad the canon 7d 2 don't have one, I hope canon will always have a fixed screen on the 7d and 1d cameras.
@ 4:53 I shoot a lot of running sports, middle distance ... Marathon, often in vertical position from the ground with long telefoto lenses. I wish the display of an A9 could be flipped upwards to me, because handling a smartphone with the left hand and operating a camera with heavy lens with the right hand is difficult (moving runners) and painful after a few minutes.
I understand your wish for flippy screen, I'm sure you need it.
And you don't want to use a supporting smartphone. I understand.
If I'm not in a fast sport action, I mount all (incl. smartphone) on a tripod. I don't walk with a 2,5 kg FF Camera facing towards me. I think even the camera companies did not expect this vlogging situation.
Is a flippy screen realy making sense on heavy FF cameras? In my car I have a rear mirror, but in trucks?
Please let us talk about it.
Probably they are no photografers in the designing team. I love my articulated screen in my Canon 600D and I do not do video and my next camera must have oane as well. It opens a lot of composition possibilities.
4:57 I'm assuming it's so you can take a photo low to the ground and still have access to most the dials
I wouldn’t mind a side articulating screen as long as it can also flip up without having to pull it to the side
Fujifilm X-T100 has the best screen - tilts up and down, and flips to the side!
It's weird that they proved they can do it with that camera, yet refuse to offer it in any other model.
I dont want a Canon pig's ear display. It is always out of alignment, if used over the ground or up in the air over head and it needs always an additional movement. But the A77/99 solution was sweet, cause you could have used it as flip only - not out of alignment - or you could have swiveled the display to protect it against dirt in rough environment. But if I had to choose, I'd chose the normal A7 flip all the time, cause the sideways flippin horse's ear annoys very much and looks cheap and unprofessional. Fuji got it even better, cause theirs is similar to the A7 version, but is also flipping even in vertical mode.
I just need my headphone jacks and flippy screens. Why don't they dooooo it... It's a conspiracy!
For anything else than forward facing, the flip out screen in much worse. And the one where you flip it toward your hand... Try taking a low angle portrait mode image... Now try taking an overhead portrait mode image... Most people will hold the side of the camera with the grip toward themselves... That's why ;o)
The the normal tilt is so much less bulky and clunky when you don't need it to be forward facing. Much faster to flip to the right position and doesn't stick out to the side.
I actually think the best design, I've seen is probably the one on the X-T100, though that one does not flip toward the hand for portrait mode, which I've really come to appreciate since gtting my X-T2.
Also, I don't really understand the problem people have with the top flip screen. I don't really care if it's my screen or my mic that hangs from the side of the camera.
Top flip doesn't bother me either except that we don't really get top flips on cameras with a central viewfinder apart from the ninja-flip from the Sony A77
I thought canon allows the use of it's patented side flippy screen on any camera except for full frame.
NIkon and Panasonic ... and even Fuji have some camera with a fully articulated screen.
Its just fucking weird that they dont put it on all their camera.
I'd like to see a screen that is also detachable. It would be really useful for mounting on video rigs and cages. I bet Panasonic do this first! lol
I am not convinced that you know the difference between utility patents, design patents, and copyright. It is easy to get around a design patent, but doing the same with a utility patent is not so easy. Canon might have a utility patent that they licenced out to other companies for a short time for a fee, and that Canon, or these companies decided not to renew this licence afterwards. We don't know. Certainly not from this video. It would be interesting to actually find out what is going on with flippy screens. We should ask Kasey.