External monitor for photography?

Hi all,

Curious to know if anyone is using an external monitor for photography, on a mirrorless camera?

I know they are popular with videographers, and nowadays many cameras are capable of both, but I am asking from a photographic perspective.

Aside from the obvious disadvantages (bulkier setup, extra cost) I wonder if the below could be advantages, but I haven't tried so really don't know:

1/ Do external monitors help with the camera's battery life? You wouldn't be using the viewfinder nor built-in LCD screen, so hopefully that helps? Yet the camera has to power a continuous video feed to the external monitor, so I wonder.

2/ Are they a proper replacement for a 45 degree optical viewfinder (when it comes to readability in bright ambient light)? I've seen some external monitors coming with shades, thinking that helps.

3/ Better rendering of contrasted scenes than the EVF? EVFs have progressed a lot but I have heard even recent models would struggle to display properly when shooting into the sun (the reef would look black). External monitors are bigger, so I suppose, less of a challenge to design that tiny EVFs, perhaps they handle contrast better?

Just curious 

Nicolas

I’ve been using an external monitor for photography for the past year. For me the big advantage is being able to put the camera in low or awkward positions that give a good angle on the subject but where it would be difficult to get your eye down to a viewfinder. I also feel like I can judge composition better on a large screen than through a viewfinder. And yes, I believe it extends the camera’s battery life since the camera doesn’t have to power a LCD/EVF.

However, there are some downsides too. For me the most significant is sometimes having difficulty seeing the monitor in bright sunlight. I have a shade around it, but maybe it’s not big enough (I’m going to try 3D printing a bigger one). However, I’m shooting in shallow freshwater streams, so that probably wouldn’t be as much of an issue with the reduced sunlight at diving depths. Another downside is that I feel like it is better suited for wide angle than macro. When shooting macro, I feel like I’m a little slower at acquiring the subject in the frame and keeping up with the subject’s movements than I was with a viewfinder.

So for myself after using one for a year I think I generally prefer it for wide angle work (especially if I’m able to fix the sunlight/shade issue) but might sometimes go back to using a 45 viewfinder for macro work.

I think the answer to some extent depends on your eyesight.  Your 45° viewfinder has diopter adjustment  and it's relatively easy to see detail on your images.  If your closeup vision is not the best seeing fine details on the monitor might be a problem - most likely to be an issue with macro photography where you are trying to get the focus just right.

Hello,  I've always used an external monitor if I can.  To me, the lager the image that I can see, the better I'm able to make decisions whether I'm shooting stills or video.  I'm using a Nauticam housing with a Sony A7SII in addition to a Nauticam housing with a SmallHD Super Bright monitor.  The batteries are separate as I believe all external monitors are. 

Yes, it is a more bulky rig, but most of the time it's not an issue.  When I'm using my Sea & Sea 12mm Fisheye lens I certainly omit the  additional external monitor.  That's my "sweet" set-up. 

When shooting video, the monitor is a necessity because the U/W monitor feeds the video output cable to the surface for the client/director to see what's being shot.

Once you begin to use the external monitor you'll always try to use it.  Try it.

Best Wishes,   Greg

Greg

Thanks all three, very insightful.

Makes me curious to try one at some point, though I wouldn't want to take it on/off when switching from macro to WA, as I always prefer to minimize gear manipulation between dives