DO you use the LCD or VF on your G6

i use the screen exclusively. i looked though the viewfinder about a week after i bought the camera (g5, two years ago) and haven't used it since. a viewfinder is very inconvient for the type of photography i use my g for.



j.

85% LCD, 15% viewfinder (mostly in very bright sunlight where I already have all my settings)

99% LCD--the only drawbacks for my style of shooting are power consumption, and use in bright light. Since the battery life is excellent, I don't even think about the former.

[Rant mode enabled]
After borrowing a 20D from a friend for a week, I'm torn and ultimately dissatisfied with both LCD's and viewfinders (even DSLR).

Manual focus on a DSLR is stunning. By comparison, using the LCD on my G6 is like looking at the world through glasses smudged with a thick layer of vaseline. With the DSLR, there is no guessing if an image is in focus. I miss that terribly.

Conversely, using the 20D I also missed the LCD preview terribly. There are perspectives that are physically imposible to capture with the 20D without snapping blindly--which may work with a static target, but not for any image where precision and motion are important. A non-live preview, but twist/rotate LCD would help, but I could still get the shot faster on my G.
It's also harder to stabilize the camera--sure I can press it to my face, and imobilize it relative to my head, but my head is teetering 6 feet from the ground, and there's nothing you can do about the brain-stem's handling of balance, which involves unconscious swaying. Bracing the G against my waist eliminates 3 feet of leverage. Better yet, bracing it against any solid object, and rotating the LCD to accomodate is just as good as a tripod. High ISO only goes so far, and I was really annoyed by motion blur in low light, using the 20D. I could pack a tripod, but then I'm carrying 10x the weight of my G, plus setup time, during which time the fox (in this particular shot) would have been long gone.
[Rant mode winding down]
I continue to be amazed at the chasm between these two camps--I'd love to use both, if the VF were TTL. Why hasn't anyone built a DSLR with an option to use either the TTL VF, OR a tilt/rotate, live-preview LCD? I know CMOS can't generate live previews--so allow the user to redirect the split light path from the VF to a cheap 1MP CCD dedicated to the LCD. Basically an option between two different angles for the mirror--that would eliminate concerns over attenuation of the VF intensity. VF fans could use what they love, LCD fans could too--and cross-over folks would use both, depending on the shot. I suspect everyone would end up in the cross-over camp, after seeing the benefits.
[Rant mode off]
Whew. I read this thread last week and thought I'd percolate on it before replying, but I'm not sure that helped

i tend to use lcd about 100% of the time, just because with it i can see how the image looks with the settings i used. i actually dont really use the lcd on the top of my g6 either, which is a shame. i'd love to use the viewfinder if it were more like a dslr though.

I had a G5 and I can honestly say I NEVER used the viewfinder. I also once saw a chap when computers first came out using a mouse the wrong way round. ie wire coming out of the bottom. Now he managed just fine. Shows that it's what you are used to that matters.

I also did a shoot in a nursery and the kids had no idea I was shooting them (particularly when bent 90 degrees). Worked for me.

On balance, it is probably better to stick to one technique and master it than chop and change (but some may master both of course).

Graham

I am afraid I nearly always use the viewfinder. I have always been taught to hold a camera firm, with your elbows tucked into your side. A human two legged tripod of sorts. I feel that I do not have a good grip of the camera using the LCD. I see people taking pictures with digital cameras at arms length, using the LCD and I always think that they must get camera shake. You can get much sharper images if you hold the camera firmly.

I use my LCD most of the time but in times when I need my camera steady I use my VF....so I agree with Gnasher on that point.

I wish my G6 VF was going thru the lens...

if you set your camera for 1/60 shutter speed as a minimum you eliminate most camera shake..even at arms length. anything below and tripod is the best thing.

You can use the LCD as a waist-level finder. Brace the camera against your stomach and compose through the LCD - this position is very stable. An added bonus is that people hardly realize that you're taking their picture.

I use the viewfinder unless the subject is less than about 10 feet then i use the LCD because of the parralax errors of the VF

90 percent on lcd... with vf, cant get the ideal orientation [esp when u are zooming in]
as image in vf is not directly from the lens... but stability is there ..

LCD all the time. With the VF, I never know what is in focus. I miss the VF on an SLR, where you can see exactly what you're going to get.

I use the viewfinder as often as possible. That LCD is a POS in outdoors sunlight. And viewfinder or LCD, I find it impossible to judge critical focus by looking at the screen. I simply put the AF point on the subject, and hope that Canon's voodoo does its thing. The viewfinder is the only thing I dislike about the G6 - otherwise it is perfect for my needs.

I found it interesting that some people find holding the camera against the stomach to be more stable. I find the classical camera holding position to be much more stable, personally.

Cheers,
Vandit

The camera-against-the-stomach position is also a classic hold, if you've had a twin lens reflex camera

If you've got a laser pointer, press it against your temple, and look at a wall 10 or more feet away. See how small an area you can keep the dot in. Then press it against your stomach, and try again. Personally, I can keep it to a finger-nail sized area very easilly at waist level, wheras it's a 2-3 times larger (and more eratic) area at head level. Now, press the pointer against any solid object--wall, counter, fence, whatever. Dead steady. I only use the camera against my waist when there isn't a free tripod like one of those nearby.

Certainly, if you do have better stability in the classic pose, go for it--but stabilizing the camera against some earth-bound object is going to be more solid than any body-stabilized stance.