LCD robustness

[bakubo]

I am just wondering why the Sony A700/A900 and Nikon DSLRs have the option of an LCD protector, but Canon DSLRs do not? I keep one on my A700 even though it slightly reduces the quality of the image. Mine is getting a bit old and isn't as clear as it once was with many fine scratches from rubbing against clothing. Most people with a Nikon DSLR also have an LCD protector on it. I have never seen one on a Canon DSLR and I never had one on the two I owned. Is the glass used for Canon LCDs more robust than what Sony and Nikon use?

[bfitzgerald]

I have more Canon than Nikon use, but having used 400d's/450's/30/40d's etc. They do appear to have fairly robust screens, from what I can see.

I am not impressed with the Sony screens, scratch very easily. I am even less happy about the official Sony protector on the A200, it too has a fair few scratches..and worse the bottom tab that hooks under the camera has broken off in both corners, still fits..and works..but more cracking and well it will have to be replaced. It's a load of rubbish IMO..might as well have ebayed a 3rd party one from hong kong for half the price.

Not one to bother with LCD protectors, but you simply have no choice on Sony LCD's they are that soft, even careful use and they scratch.

I have a good mind to post that protector back to sony, not cheap for what it was..unimpressed is not the word to use.

[bakubo]

My A700 LCD has always had an LCD protector on it so it is in excellent shape. When I shipped it off to Sony about 10 days ago I left it on so that Sony wouldn't scratch the LCD. I read somewhere that someone sent their camera in and it came back with a scratched LCD.

As far as I know Canon doesn't even sell LCD protectors for their cameras. My 30D and 300D didn't even have a way to attach one and I think it is the same with other models. I never had any problems with scratches with either camera. My wife's A100 doesn't have an LCD protector and it doesn't appear there is a way to attach one anyway. The coating on one side has deteriorated or something and looks pretty bad. The coating has many fine scratches and is partially rubbed off on one side. Just from rubbing against clothing.

[bakubo]

I bought one of the Sony protectors for my a700..It scratched easy as pie and then it fell of off my camera and was lost within two weeks.

I bought a Sony LCD protector for my A700 also and, fortunately, mine is attached pretty well. I have taken it off a couple of times to clean dust trapped beneath it, but it is on pretty securely. I have read from many other people though that their protector falls off easily. I was lucky to get one that fits well. Mine has many fine scratches on it just from rubbing against clothing so now it causes the image to look sort of foggy though.

DK said that the Nikon D90 uses the same Sony LCD as in the A700. Does Nikon buy all their LCDs from Sony? I almost always see Nikon DSLRs with a protector on them. I am still wondering what is different about Canon DSLR LCDs such that they don't have protectors. Do they just not need them in the way Sony and Nikon do? Maybe the LCD is not so different but Canon puts some sort of strong glass over the LCD that acts as a protector? My 30D and 300D LCDs never had any scratches on them even though I never had a protector. Does Canon make their own LCDs? I am just curious why this is not much of an issue for Canon DSLRs, but it is for Sony and Nikon.

[bfitzgerald]

Whoever makes the LCD units, it's the protective plastic on top that differs, even with same maker LCD's.
My Km5d has a matte finish on the LCD, and it is mark free, the A200 one is very glossy, and whilst it's not weak..it does not appear as thick as the 5d's one.

Simply a case of using the non scratch covering over the LCD! The other reason is to protect from impact damage.

The protector I have does not fall off, but it's scratched with very fine marks. Not a big deal, but surely they can make something that is more resistant to marks! The situation is not really very satisfactory, the quality of materials used for the LCD and the official Sony protector is not great.

I will add again, I am very careful with all my equipment, and have never even dropped a lens cap, let alone a lens or body. We ain't asking for screwdriver and sandpaper resistant LCD's, but ones that are unlikely to get marked during normal use. Even seen some threads about marked A900 screens..which is frankly completely unacceptable for a camera costing so much.

[Javelin]

Canon cameras come with a snap on screen protector already. it's not covered under warranty but does a good job and is user replaceable The part is about 25 bucks here and is OEM canon in most places i've seen them. Theres no magic indestructable screens. The A350 and A300 have had reports of screens cracking from a drop. so have the older rebels , don't know about the more recent ones. and haven't seen any reports on Nikon with broke screens.

Heres Some

I think the bigger the screens they put on these cameras the more your going to hear about it.

[bakubo]

Canon cameras come with a snap on screen protector already. it's not covered under warranty but does a good job and is user replaceable

Thanks for the info. My 30D and 300D did not have a protector in the box. I didn't see any notches or anything else to put one on so I never used one. Never had a single scratch on either one. My KM 7D came with a protector in the box. My A700 and A100 didn't. Looking at my A100 I don't see any notches like on the A700. Is there a Sony protector for the A100?

Anyway, it sounds like you are confirming what Barry said. Canon uses a better quality cover for the LCD than Sony.

[bakubo]

Whoever makes the LCD units, it's the protective plastic on top that differs, even with same maker LCD's.

Yes, I think you are right.

[bakubo]

I was walking around the beach as I do everyday and I just had my digicam in the side pocket of my cargo shorts, also as usual. It got me to thinking. Of course, the digicam doesn't have an LCD protector. In fact, none of the digicams I have ever owned had an LCD protector. Furthermore, I have never seen a digicam with an LCD protector. The LCD on my digicams get a bit more abuse than any of my DSLRs because sometimes there are other things in the pocket too. What makes Sony and Nikon DSLRs so special that they need extra LCD protection and digicams and Canon DSLRs do not?

[Javelin]

the A700 is the only cameera i have a protector on. the F717 and A200 don't nor do my wifes and daughters cameras. my nokia tablet has a sony touchscreen and it has no protector either. . the A700 has an antiglare coating and they recommend covering it with something removable the A200 anf F717 doesn't have this. . all Canon DSLRs have screen protectors guess they are afraid of the damage ? None of my screens are damaged.

[fastson]

I got this one from SonyStyle



It sits there very securely, yes it is scratched but it is made out of plastic. At first I used my A700 without any protection, then I saw a post over at Dyxum of someone having dropped his camera on the screen, the screen had cracked.. since the A700 was pretty expensive when I got it I decided to get the screen protector (better to be safe than sorry). It does not degrade the image enough to bother me, and I dont need pixel-perfect vision on it either, just fast previews. All the editing is done on a PC anyway. No visible dust has managed to sneak in either.

My A100 does not have any sort of screen protector and it looks fine, no scratched that I am aware of (after 25000 shots).

[bakubo]

all Canon DSLRs have screen protectors guess they are afraid of the damage ?

Both of my Canon DSLRs did not have an LCD protector and they never got scratched. I have yet to see a Canon DSLR with a protector on it.

[Javelin]

Ahh I see... your looking for an add on part, what your looking at on the back of your Canons are covers, they come installed from the factory. they are held on with double coated tape and can be pulled right off. for replacements I posted a link earlier but I hear Canon sometimes gives them away or is much cheaper if you have a repair depot you can go too. Just do a search on any photo forum or canon forum for "TFT protector" or "scratched LCD" theres lots of explanations and methods for getting the old ones off and where to get new ones. looking through the parts I don't see a single canon dslr model that doesn't have this part available.

[bakubo]

It sounds like what you are saying is that you agree with Barry. Canon puts good quality covers on their LCDs so you don't need a second, extra cost external one. Sony and Nikon put cheaper covers on their LCDs so you need to buy a second, extra cost external one. Even those second, extra cost external ones from Sony are not as good as just the plain old LCD cover on the Canons. Weird.

[bakubo]

It's really not that weird at all...it's the cheap consumer electronics company thing to do. I spent almost a decade managing consumer electronics stores and it is quite clear to see what Sony is doing - and I for one don't like it one bit - been there seen that!

Yes, I am starting to think the same thing. In this particular case though it seems that maybe Nikon is doing the same. I have to wonder if there is some other reason for Sony and Nikon going one way and Canon another?