Sketching a dream camera with no gimmick modes

I seem to have too much free time because lately I've been sketching this superzoom "dream camera". I wish some manufacturer would bring at least one model, where they would have concentrated on the basics again. The cameras today just have too much gimmicks and stuff you don't actually need Seems like a waste of perfectly good idea of a versatile camera to try to make them fit for both absolute novice and a experienced hobbyist.

At the moment I have a Fuji S100FS, which I find a quite good compromise, but it too has some bad points.. like no DF substraction, small EVF, one redundant button (face detection, I wish it would change WB!) etc.

I'm interested in hearing what do you think about the camera, what would you change etc? I've tried to stay within "reasonable" specs, so that the cam would be possible to actually manufacture

So, here goes:







Some specs:

• no face detection
• no scene modes
• lots of external controls --> minimum use of menu
• some new backlit CMOS sensor, maybe?
• 10x wide-angle zoom (at least)

small touches:

• minolta/sony-style proximity sensor to turn off the screen when looking through EVF
• note the timer button: 3 second timer stays on after taking picture (good for tripod shooting)
• external button for one shot of RAW (like Pentax) for occasional difficult conditions
• option to not show the last picture taken: just show a small histogram in the corner of the screen/EVF for a couple of seconds for checking proper exposure
• the manual focus ring should activate MF assist zoom when the ring is rotated (like Panasonic) BUT it should only zoom the center part of the image, so that one doesn't lose the composition completely
• something more that I forgot now

Why such a big camera with many controls, but you stuff a small image sensor in it? Put an aps-c sensor for much better IQ. It will make your lens aperture suffer but to throw a tiny image sensor in that camera is a joke.

And that is an old style camera and isn't for taking a picture in a "hurry" with an aperture ring and shutter speed dials. It can be "fun" to do things the old way, but the old way is usually the slow way. Most people want things to be easier for them, i.e. Av and Tv, P, Auto modes without dials or rings.

RedFox88 said:

And that is an old style camera and isn't for taking a picture in a "hurry" with an aperture ring and shutter speed dials. It can be "fun" to do things the old way, but the old way is usually the slow way. Most people want things to be easier for them, i.e. Av and Tv, P, Auto modes without dials or rings.

Click to expand...

I don't know . . .

I find adjusting shutter speeds and lens openings in manual exposure much faster the old way than by having to use the same hand turning dials on the body.

Of course, I did it for years that way . . .

--
J. D.
Colorado



I do understand its a Jeep thing . . . thats why I bought a Dodge!

MusicDoctorDJ said:

I find adjusting shutter speeds and lens openings in manual exposure much faster the old way than by having to use the same hand turning dials on the body.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry but using a top wheel near the shutter button to change either Tv or Av will always be faster than using your left hand to change aperture and right hand to change a shutter speed dial. Let the camera change the "other" setting. Plus you would have to take the camera down from your eye to see the values on the shutter speed wheel. If you show the value in the viewfinder you might as well just change that shutter speed dial into a modern wheel. All makes for slower picture taking. No need to make users change them both in a physical manner these days for a tiny P&S sensor camera.

If you want this kind of camera, it'll cost $1000. Just like how ridiculous the cost of a FF rangefinder that Leica is trying to sell. These are niche' cameras that won't sell well so they'll have a high price tag. Most camera buyers vote with their wallets for smaller and smaller P&S cameras, with several now even having 4x optical zoom lenses that don't protrude from the body making it more durable so if you drop it, you won't get the lens out of alignment.

. . . or rather, it's been here since the 70's. Smallest full frame 35mm SLR with the biggest brightest VF to date. Looking through the VF you will notice a significantly larger image then most 35mm equivalent. Considerably even more so compared to any less then full frame. No frills - all external controls, not dependent on batteries - except for metering, hot shoe, timer, DOF preview and full info in VF. After you get accustomed to it, it even has mirror lock-up. The Pentax MX provides all you need, what more could you want . . . ;-)

Here's the MX next to a more contemporary digicam as a reference.

jaeaetee said:

I seem to have too much free time because lately I've been sketching this superzoom "dream camera". I wish some manufacturer would bring at least one model, where they would have concentrated on the basics again. The cameras today just have too much gimmicks and stuff you don't actually need Seems like a waste of perfectly good idea of a versatile camera to try to make them fit for both absolute novice and a experienced hobbyist.

At the moment I have a Fuji S100FS, which I find a quite good compromise, but it too has some bad points.. like no DF substraction, small EVF, one redundant button (face detection, I wish it would change WB!) etc.

I'm interested in hearing what do you think about the camera, what would you change etc? I've tried to stay within "reasonable" specs, so that the cam would be possible to actually manufacture

So, here goes:

http://jaeae.smugmug.com/photos/646866684_vCfzF-XL.jpg

http://jaeae.smugmug.com/photos/646866719_wpN4t-XL.jpg

http://jaeae.smugmug.com/photos/646866766_zRbis-XL.jpg

Some specs:

• no face detection
• no scene modes
• lots of external controls --> minimum use of menu
• some new backlit CMOS sensor, maybe?
• 10x wide-angle zoom (at least)

small touches:

• minolta/sony-style proximity sensor to turn off the screen when looking through EVF
• note the timer button: 3 second timer stays on after taking picture (good for tripod shooting)
• external button for one shot of RAW (like Pentax) for occasional difficult conditions
• option to not show the last picture taken: just show a small histogram in the corner of the screen/EVF for a couple of seconds for checking proper exposure
• the manual focus ring should activate MF assist zoom when the ring is rotated (like Panasonic) BUT it should only zoom the center part of the image, so that one doesn't lose the composition completely
• something more that I forgot now

Click to expand...

--
~ Martin
http://www.martinpolanic.com

The problem with your approach is that it is biased - it seems that it is OK for you to dismiss anything that you don't want as a gimmick. Unless you have several versions of any camera which allow a mix & match approach any camera will incorporate a set of sensible compromises - so you don't want scene modes - so don't use them.

I agree that it is a good idea to allow the user to program individual control buttons to the users preferences & that way a selection of software based controls would be selectable for immediate use.
--
Keith-C

I know it was a cheapie, Olympus OM1N, but it was fully manual. I would like this type of camera. No real bells and whistles. Fully manual, but I would like the choice of AF or manual. My D50, another cheapie, only offers 4 ISO settings. I would like more choices there too. I do not ever use anything other than manual mode. The wife picks it up now and then, and she uses auto mode, so if that wasn't available then she'd have her own p&s.
--
Terry Gelgen
D50
18-55ED
Nikkor 70-300VR ED
Nikkor 105mm Macro VR ED

I want a external wheel showing the ISO instantly, and letting me change it instantly, manually, visibly. Like old film cameras.

And absolutely not merely one button which shows nothing, as in your drawing.

The ISO setting could be inside the shutter speed dial, again as in many film cameras.

And there could be a "P" or "A" setting for auto ISO, if I could specify the lowest and highest ISO for the camera to choose automatically. Maybe some button could be used for to change that, with difficulty using some readout somewhere.

I know what ISO I want. I could set it to the P or A to hand the camera off to someone who doesn't know or care.

having an EVF would be the deal killer for me. Dream camera... I own one... a Leica M6. Don't need a super zoom, wouldn't want a super zoom, and did I mention that an EVF would kill any deal for me? Nice drawings, though.

An error, really If you take a closer look, I'm not saying the cam should be just manual exposure, there is Tv and Av and even a P mode. They're just implemented without the use of "PASM" mode wheel (which, for every photographer I know, is pretty much stuck at "A").

And hey, this is just my "vision" of a camera I would want. I only ask if anyone thinks the same I tried to think the controls to be fast to use. For example if you're in shutter priority mode, changing shutter speed a lot would be quicker with the dedicated wheel than scrolling a thumb wheel many rotations. And, whats more, my design also allows for thumb wheel usage.

ojohn said:

I want a external wheel showing the ISO instantly, and letting me change it instantly, manually, visibly. Like old film cameras.

And absolutely not merely one button which shows nothing, as in your drawing.

The ISO setting could be inside the shutter speed dial, again as in many film cameras.

And there could be a "P" or "A" setting for auto ISO, if I could specify the lowest and highest ISO for the camera to choose automatically. Maybe some button could be used for to change that, with difficulty using some readout somewhere.

I know what ISO I want. I could set it to the P or A to hand the camera off to someone who doesn't know or care.

Click to expand...

It works in my sketch by pressing the ISO button and selecting with thumb wheel, but I see your point. A dedicated ISO wheel or something would be nice. I personally would just leave it in auto-ISO800 or auto-ISO1600 mode and not bother with the selection any more

Hmm. Maybe move one of the wheels to the left side of the camera, and use the free space for a small LCD readout? This way just a glance at the camera is enough for checking the settings when the cam is in your hands.

jaeaetee said:

I seem to have too much free time because lately I've been sketching this superzoom "dream camera". I wish some manufacturer would bring at least one model, where they would have concentrated on the basics again.

Click to expand...

They've tried. They generally sell poorly, and the low volumes keep the prices very high.

But that's not the issue.

jaeaetee said:

The cameras today just have too much gimmicks and stuff you don't actually need

Click to expand...

Like a 10:1 zoom?

But that's not the issue, either...

jaeaetee said:

Seems like a waste of perfectly good idea of a versatile camera to try to make them fit for both absolute novice and a experienced hobbyist.

At the moment I have a Fuji S100FS, which I find a quite good compromise, but it too has some bad points.. like no DF substraction, small EVF, one redundant button (face detection, I wish it would change WB!) etc.

I'm interested in hearing what do you think about the camera, what would you change etc? I've tried to stay within "reasonable" specs, so that the cam would be possible to actually manufacture

Click to expand...

Well, if you're making a small sensor, huge lens camera, your aperture collar is redundant for three entirely different reasons...

• small sensor cameras have very low diffraction limits. You literally can't stop a point and shoot down to f8 without softening the image. That's the main reason why they don't have much in the way of aperture controls. You're proposing an f4 lens. Three positions on the collar: f4, f5.6, f8. That would be just plain strange.
• Since the effective aperture range (relative to full frame) would be f16-f32, your DOF is so deep that there's really no need to have 1/2 stop adjustments. You really wouldn't see the difference.
• Aperture rings far back on a large lens with a light camera are not ergonomic. When you adjust them, you have both hands behind the center of gravity, and the camera pitches forward.

--
Rahon Klavanian 1912-2008.

Armenian genocide survivor, amazing cook, scrabble master, and loving grandmother. You will be missed.

Ciao! Joseph

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

Well, sort of. It's called a DSLR.

jaeaetee said:

Some specs:

• no face detection

Click to expand...

Yeah, ok, who needs it.

jaeaetee said:

• no scene modes

Click to expand...

Ok, who needs it, but it is just software, not hardware, so if you don't want to use the scene modes... don't.

jaeaetee said:

• lots of external controls --> minimum use of menu

Click to expand...

Ok, but keep it simple. Too many controls can be as bad as too few.

jaeaetee said:

• some new backlit CMOS sensor, maybe?

Click to expand...

Or maybe a larger sensor: 43, APS or FF 35mm

jaeaetee said:

• 10x wide-angle zoom (at least)

Click to expand...

Really. I like W I D E angle and most good wide angle zooms are 2x or 3x. Once you start extending the zoom range you get into too many compromises.

jaeaetee said:

• minolta/sony-style proximity sensor to turn off the screen when looking through EVF

Click to expand...

No. The proximity sensor is a royal PITA .

jaeaetee said:

• note the timer button: 3 second timer stays on after taking picture (good for tripod shooting)

Click to expand...

?

jaeaetee said:

• external button for one shot of RAW (like Pentax) for occasional difficult conditions

Click to expand...

Pass. All images benifit from raw, not just the difficult ones .

jaeaetee said:

• option to not show the last picture taken: just show a small histogram in the corner of the screen/EVF for a couple of seconds for checking proper exposure

Click to expand...

Are you talking about showing the histogram instead of the image? I think you need to see the image if you are going to look at the histogram. Or maybe I have missed your point.

jaeaetee said:

• the manual focus ring should activate MF assist zoom when the ring is rotated (like Panasonic) BUT it should only zoom the center part of the image, so that one doesn't lose the composition completely

Click to expand...

ha sip/ha sip (50/50)

But better yet, how about a real focus screen that allows one to actually determine focus (I'm talking true SLR not EVF).

--

The greatest of mankind's criminals are those who delude themselves into thinking they have done 'the right thing.'

• Rayna Butler

i might need to respectfully agree to disagree here. yes, many features are only there for entry-level users (even on semi-pro bodies). no, mfr's don't expect everyone to use them. but some do. HP's 'photo slimming' or canon's pano photo stitching.

the thing is, digital photography is a POWERFUL medium. we now have choices and abilities that were not available 20 years ago... i mean, shooting color to b&w or ISO 100 to 800 from frame to frame. cross-processing would DESTROY your original film info (not recoverable). carrying filters for tungsten to daylight, red filters for b&w skies, green filters for portraits, whatever. no longer.

we have choices, lots. to limit those, well... i dunno. imagine how many joined the imaging art SINCE digital. how many enthusiasts dint own more than a simple auto compact 35mm film camera before. well, that marketshare DRIVES innovation & design/development to a large extent (so does the pro market to a smaller extent, i realize).

i'd like to see more FUNCTIONAL features ADDED. like GPS geo-tagging in-camera. like IR remotes instead of RF. like NiMh rechargeable battery usage for universal travel and access to power. like offerings for HDR tone-mapping or Pano stitching in pro dSLR bodies. like in-camera stabilization. maybe HD video, but not until somebody can get it right... my priority is a STILL camera from my dSLR.

if you don't care for these, turn off stabilization, do HDR's on your puter using photomatix or lucis or whatever. sure, i'm pretty proficient using photoshop, but sometimes i still shoot monochrome in-camera because i wanna see the tones while chimping. options are good IMHO.

....................................................................

i'd like to see a dream pocket cam to complement my full bodies when portability is the highest priority.
if retail was $390 USD, i think this would dominate the market.

• 24-240mm equiv f/2.5-4.5 lens

24mm f/2.5-9, 40mm f/2.8-11, 90mm f/3.5-11, 120 f/4-11, 160mm+ f/4.5-11

• 7.5 MP 2/3" sensor = 12.93 mp/cm pixel density for high ISO performance
• RAW format, hot shoe, GPS built-in
• dual image stabilization
• at least 2 custom white balance settings
• 30 sec to 1/2500 sec shutter + bulb
• shutter, aperture, full manual modes
• dynamic metering or centre-weighted or spot
• 3" TFT LCD articulating display
• weatherproof seals & waterproof to 10 meters
• multi-coated lens w/ 58mm retractable filter threads
• dual SD slots & 512MB internal memory
• AA battery capable (maybe w/ an adapter?)
• interval shooting, motion trigger, and intervalometer shooting modes
• full HD video: 1920x1080 (30 fps), 1280x720 (48 fps), 848x480 (60 fps)
• pano stitching & HDR blending, selective color, & film type simulations in-camera

....................................................................

oh yeah, the closest to getting things right now seems to be sony. a limited lens line-up, but with zeiss squarely in place through most of the range. if you truly want a "purist's" camera, holga's are about as simple as photon collectors get (without including pinholes). my holga gets some use still, just for fun. otherwise, rangefinders.

what about the new leica s2 and leaf shutters on the lenses? is that 'gimmick-ey'? no, i don't think you'd say so. nor continuous tracking auto-focus motors. see, it's all about having enough choices to please all. hopefully.

cheers.

• david

Gimmicks like a 10x zoom that can only be removed with a hammer are what bug me.

I don't have to sketch my perfect camera, I can see 90% of it sitting on my shelf... Just start with my Konica Hexar with it's awesome 35/2 and dead-on active-IR autofocus. Now swap in a 1ds4 sensor and I'll be a happy, happy man.

Or if we're really dreaming, Super-size the Hexar to a 44mm x 66mm sensor (a 6x6 image circle applied to a rectangle) and give it the 110/2 Planar from the Rollei 6008 system. Or the 80/2 Xenotar.

If we're really, really dreaming, take the above and give it a scaled up AF version of the Leica 35/1.4 ASPH–maybe a 60/1.7?

RedFox88 said:

MusicDoctorDJ said:

I find adjusting shutter speeds and lens openings in manual exposure much faster the old way than by having to use the same hand turning dials on the body.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

RedFox88 said:

RedFox88 wrote:

I'm sorry but using a top wheel near the shutter button to change either Tv or Av will always be faster than using your left hand to change aperture and right hand to change a shutter speed dial. Let the camera change the "other" setting. Plus you would have to take the camera down from your eye to see the values on the shutter speed wheel. If you show the value in the viewfinder you might as well just change that shutter speed dial into a modern wheel. All makes for slower picture taking. No need to make users change them both in a physical manner these days for a tiny P&S sensor camera.

Click to expand...

Have you ever used a camera like the Canon F1n I pictured above?

Or my Canon A1's, or even most Nikon manual focus film cameras?

Or any manual focus film SLR, for that matter?

Most of those you can see the set shutter speed and aperture settings in the viewfinder . . . which means you don't have to look down at the top of the camera to make setting adjustments as you claim.

And most also had lighted info in the viewfinders!

Heck, the Canon A1's has LED digital readout in the viewfinder, and was out in the very early 1980's.

Old style camera knobs had a more natural feel for use than trying to remember which dial or knob does what on a digital SLR (try adjusting both shutter speed and f/stop on a DSLR at the same time using the same hand to see what I'm talking about . . . basically impossible).

If you have more than one brand or even differing models of the same brand, you'll find that it is hard to remember which one does what without looking at it and thinking for a few seconds.

At least on old manual cameras the shutter speed dial was pretty much always in the same spot and the aperture ring was basically in the same place on all of them, even from brand to brand, with exception of Olympus, who chaose to have the shutter speed dial at the base of the lens mount and the apeture ring on the front of the lens..

--
J. D.
Colorado



I do understand its a Jeep thing . . . thats why I bought a Dodge!

prodesma said:

....................................................................

i'd like to see a dream pocket cam to complement my full bodies when portability is the highest priority.

Click to expand...

Always easier to design dreams than real things - so in the real world...

prodesma said:

if retail was $390 USD, i think this would dominate the market.

Click to expand...

Could you buy a 10x f/2.5 lens for $390?

prodesma said:

• 24-240mm equiv f/2.5-4.5 lens

Click to expand...

You say below you're using a 2/3 sensor, that's 4x crop. A typical 10x APS-c f/3.5 zoom extends about 150mm from the sensor plane at the short end. So scale that appropriately, your lens will be 56mm when closed. Put 10mm behind the sensor, and your camera is 66mm thick - hardly pocketable (and that's with an f/3.5 lens - f/2.5 is going to be thicker still)

prodesma said:

24mm f/2.5-9, 40mm f/2.8-11, 90mm f/3.5-11, 120 f/4-11, 160mm+ f/4.5-11

Click to expand...

That f/11 is f/44 full frame equivalent - that's just not going to be sharp.

prodesma said:

• 7.5 MP 2/3" sensor = 12.93 mp/cm pixel density for high ISO performance

Click to expand...

Pixel density has maybe a very little to do with high ISO performance, sensor size somewhat more. A 4x crop camera loses 4 stops to a FF camera, so the low light performance is never going to be great.

prodesma said:

• RAW format, hot shoe, GPS built-in
• dual image stabilization

Click to expand...

Make the lens a bit bigger than I suggested above, put a bit more behind the sensor, maybe we're up to 75mm thick by now.

prodesma said:

• at least 2 custom white balance settings
• 30 sec to 1/2500 sec shutter + bulb
• shutter, aperture, full manual modes
• dynamic metering or centre-weighted or spot
• 3" TFT LCD articulating display

Click to expand...

80 mm thick?

prodesma said:

• weatherproof seals & waterproof to 10 meters
• multi-coated lens w/ 58mm retractable filter threads

Click to expand...

You don't make a 10x zoom without multi-coating.

prodesma said:

• dual SD slots & 512MB internal memory
• AA battery capable (maybe w/ an adapter?)

Click to expand...

What was that about pocketable? The power density of lithium batteries is a major factor in making cameras smaller.

prodesma said:

• interval shooting, motion trigger, and intervalometer shooting modes
• full HD video: 1920x1080 (30 fps), 1280x720 (48 fps), 848x480 (60 fps)
• pano stitching & HDR blending, selective color, & film type simulations in-camera

Click to expand...

All the uncommented are firmware features, so probably don't affect the size.