Does LCD Size Matter To You?

tonylong wrote in post #4268706
I think I stumbled across the wrong thread, sorry!

So you posted anyway?

I came from a P&S with a 2.5 screen. Since I got the 40D, I don't hardly look at the screen. I would like a articulating print button!

It wasn't a reason for me when I upgraded from my 20D to my 5D, but now after having the bigger display on the 5D, I don't think I could go back.

The larger LCD and view finder were the reasons I went from 20D to 5D. I've got old eyes and I can read the menu on the 5D without my glasses, not possible on the 20.

after moving from 2" to 2.5" to 3" in the mkIII, i can say without a doubt that the answer for me is a clear NO. the 3" looks nice on the back of the camera but since the resolution is exactly the same, it offers no real advantage in my eyes. for me, i would LOVE the 3" screen if it can be setup to show only the histogram because i think that judging for critical focus is still not really possible on the LCD screen.

Yes, but more importantly would be more resolution. The 40D LCD is nice and bright but no better for review than the old XTs was. The picture is just not clear enough. Lets see that 640x480 pixel screen in there.

My older eyes appreciate anything bigger.
Most important would be a bigger viewfinder.
But the LCD on the 30D is nice up from the XT I had last.
I'd like to see more resolution in future LCD's so we can really see OOF shots.

tmcman wrote in post #4281448
...
Most important would be a bigger viewfinder.
...

Ahh... you want a 5D then. Nothing like focusing on a drive in movie screen sized viewfinder.