Reading mode: Light Dark

Mirrorless Camera design according to Sexton and LL. Agree?

Go to last post
Photomonkey wrote:
..
Photomonkey said:
This came about directly from the video camera innovation of having a flip out screen to follow the action easily. This was a true innovation in the camcorder field and was adapted to the still camera field as an "improvement". Never mind that one could no longer hold the camera steady, never mind that one could not even see their subjects in bright sun, never mind that one no longer had mechanical controls to override WB and exposure errors viewed on the screen. The fact that phones are the camera of choice for so many marries perfectly with this near useless method of aiming a camera.
Click to expand...
What a lot of twoddle mixed up with information :-)

It was proved on another forum a long time ago, before Yahoo dropped Geocities, that holding the camera away from the eye was as good and steady a way of operating as up to the eye when done by somebody who knew what they were doing. Thuis busines of 'holding to your eye' is better is one of the myths of photography LOL

I would be very reluctant to buy a camera which doesn't have a proper fold out and around LCD simply for how useful it is, particularly when the camera is on a tripod in the studio and saves me bending down to the EVF. I know becuase I bought a Oly Pen to go with my G3 for the IBIS but it is a pig of a camera.
 
and I am left eyed ... seeing how some hold the Leica vertical to their right eye I think it is extremely awkward where for the left eyed person the camera and many others snugs into your nose ...I gave away my Leica for a Topcon35C and then went to Pentax until digital. I had a IIIC but also used other models of that period. Pre-WWII cameras being used post war 1950's.
 
Hello Peter,

Regarding the use of the left for buttons, the X Pro really has it right. I kept my E-P2 however because I liked the buttons too.

One of my first proposal was that if EVF be included, the LCD be shrunk. In this my E-PL3 had very bad ergonomics: a 16:9 screen with an unreadable sub 4:3 one.

You are very right that makers seem in such a hurry that they make patent errors. In the case of the E-M5 I dislike the hump, because as some remarked it is more due to marketing, than to function. Although I am getting retro myself, retro appeals to me very little.

Of course it attenuates the shock of a new format/technology, but it's all there is. For me the E-Px didn't overdo it, the E-M5 does. So I am waiting for Photokina to see what happens.

Therefore I find interesting to have this round up. In fact, contrary to dSLR, mirrorless is still 'anything goes'.

Some have remarked about the haptics. It becomes increasingly important because of the crowded space, and with your eye in the EVF, one should have some tactile feedback.

Am.
--
Photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/amalric
 
PeterLeyssens said:
For example, what's wrong with using your left hand for a control ? In the manual focus days, left was focus and right controlled everything else. Now that we have had AF for at least 20 years, one would think that at least one camera maker could've come up with something useful for half our claws to do ? Certainly now that cameras are light enough that one doesn't always need to use one to hold the camera up. Surprisingly, one of the two big players invented a camera with a big dial around the lens (Canon S90). Why doesn't a mirrorless camera maker slap one around the lens fitting to control shutter speed, diaphragm or ISO (perhaps moving between a few settings with a button near the left hand) ?
Click to expand...
Look at Fuji X-Pro1. Aperture setting is on the lens, where it belongs. Marked and all.
 
jcuknz said:
It was proved on another forum a long time ago, before Yahoo dropped Geocities, that holding the camera away from the eye was as good and steady a way of operating as up to the eye when done by somebody who knew what they were doing. Thuis busines of 'holding to your eye' is better is one of the myths of photography LOL
Click to expand...
I hardly think that a reference to some long ago post purporting to prove anything counts as earnest rebuttal.

Just the simple geometry of extended arms plus the height of the individual creates a significantly longer lever for the camera to wave around on. Not to mention the fatigue of waiting with extended arms for the right moment.

An LCD on the camera is great as an adjunct to a proper viewfinder. But an LCD alone creates, to my mind, a profoundly annoying means of aiming a camera.
 
Controls the focal length like it should. It also controls the AF type, and if in manual focus, the focus itself.
PeterLeyssens said:
PeterLeyssens said:
But Richard Sexton may have a point, starting from the Leica FF, against the excesses of retro i.e. where form prevails over function.

What do you think? Indeed the OM-D leaves me cold, and I much prefer the NEX 7 solution. I wonder also when Panny might abandon its faux-dSLR paradigm. for something more streamlined. a ' la LC1 ( or was it the L1?)
Click to expand...
I think Sexton has a very valid point. I've used quite a few film cameras and many of them made sense: the Olympus OM-1/3/4, my Leica ii, even a monstrous Rollei 66. But switching to digital, I've felt comfortable with the user interface. I've used a few DSLRs (owned an E-410 once), a few compacts and now an E-P1. Except if something really revolutionary happens, regular compacts and DSLRs are all out for me. The E-P1 seemed like it was onto something: an interesting form factor (no fake prism hump, a decent mode dial) but only took a first step. There's plenty missing still.

For example, what's wrong with using your left hand for a control ? In the manual focus days, left was focus and right controlled everything else. Now that we have had AF for at least 20 years, one would think that at least one camera maker could've come up with something useful for half our claws to do ? Certainly now that cameras are light enough that one doesn't always need to use one to hold the camera up. Surprisingly, one of the two big players invented a camera with a big dial around the lens (Canon S90). Why doesn't a mirrorless camera maker slap one around the lens fitting to control shutter speed, diaphragm or ISO (perhaps moving between a few settings with a button near the left hand) ? There's nothing technical stopping them: if the camera needs to remain as thick, they can move the sensor forward with the lens bayonet.

To me, it seems like photographic technology is moving so fast that camera makers don't know how to handle it. Add to this that nobody dares to take a risk because launching even one bad selling camera can angry investors and rating agencies. Somehow, despite all the flux of news, there's no revolution happening in the photographic world. *

Peter.
  • Yeah, I know that's exaggerated. I like the X-Pro's hybrid viewfinder. Large sensor compacts are interesting, too, but currently still immature (though the X2 looks interesting). Most other cameras (including the OM-D) to me currently seem to focus on a list of specs that should be appealing. I'm not claiming they can't make good photos: this thread is about UI design. Despite its limitations, I still like what my E-P1 produces and I will continue using it until I find a valid replacement that can take as wide a range of lenses.
--
gallery at http://picasaweb.google.com/peterleyssens
blog at http://lightchangesstuff.wordpress.com/
Click to expand...
--
Completely infatuated with the "OMG"
 
dgrogers said:
Controls the focal length like it should. It also controls the AF type, and if in manual focus, the focus itself.
Click to expand...
in addition, my left hand controls camera flash (G1 has this flash) and takes care about lens cap.
How many things we can do just with one hand !!!
:D
I’m surprised how much Wikipedia contributes to the forum.

 
Hi Amalric,
amalric said:
Regarding the use of the left for buttons, the X Pro really has it right.
Click to expand...
I got a bit of feedback about the point I made concerning the left hand. Flash, zoom, aperture, even the lens cap. Good to see that people can find something to keep their hand busy, but do admit there's a lack of balance:
  • right hand: most settings (four-way controller, all dials) and making the photo itself
  • left: hold the lens cap.
I admit that I don't use flash nor zoom. The aperture is something that I set once in a while. On the other hand, getting the right focus was sometimes quite a process (tried a Leica ii ?) so it rightfully deserved one hand, with the other one to make the photo. Good balance.

I'm not complaining as I've just started to use my Summitar on my E-P1, which works really well, so I'll be using my left hand for focus again.
amalric said:
You are very right that makers seem in such a hurry that they make patent errors. In the case of the E-M5 I dislike the hump, because as some remarked it is more due to marketing, than to function. Although I am getting retro myself, retro appeals to me very little.
Click to expand...
Exactly. I don't mind if a brand completely drops the design that seems to be the default now. For example, the NEX-7 is simply a box with buttons and a few dials, which is quite honest because most digicams these days are just that. Or why don't they make it tube-like, like camcorders ? Particularly video oriented cameras like the Nikon 1 or the Panasonic GH could benefit from this.

There can only be one reason and that has to be (as was pointed out before) that humps make cameras sell. "Look, he's got a real camera !"
amalric said:
Some have remarked about the haptics. It becomes increasingly important because of the crowded space, and with your eye in the EVF, one should have some tactile feedback.
Click to expand...
Yes, that's probably why we're seeing the return of real buttons (instead of teeny-tiny plasticky wiggly stick-out thingies). The X-Pro1 looks like it has the best buttons in any sub-€2000 camera. The NEX-7 has the famous "Triple-Dial-control" that sounds like it works really well. Should work well with an eye on the EVF, too, because it's all the way at the opposite side of the camera. Together with some good VF UI (hybrid on the X-Pro, OLED+focus peaking on the NEX-7), these cameras stand out from the crowd. Some work on the UI has finally begun and it was about time.

Peter.

--
gallery at http://picasaweb.google.com/peterleyssens
blog at http://lightchangesstuff.wordpress.com/
 
Just as a sidenote the X Pro 1 has a button for AFL on the Left, which is clever b/se it's the hand you use for MF.

However on the Pro the MF is s/wed up by focus by wire, and AF is so poor, so they better have it :)

Yet I do think it's a step in the right direction, size included. Most here however, will accept that A priority is their favourite setting, so having a shutterspeed dial is something of the past.

A fetish. Marketing plays on fetish, and noobs swallow the hook with the bait.

Am.
--
Photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/amalric
 
Don Erway said:
I am going to buy an omd, even though I would much prefer it had a VF on a corner.

Having originally shot with the argus c3, and 35mm film, then gone to minolta and then nikon SLRs with film, and now a fuji x10, I vastly prefer shooting with a view finder off to the side, so I don't have to smash my nose into the camera, to shoot landscape orientation.

It is a no brainer to me. But the lack of a good range finder style body in m43, and the lack of lenses in nex, makes me want to go ahead and get an omd, even with the less than optimum ergonomics.
Click to expand...
Yes, in fact we are nitpicking.

Truth is mirrorless are smarter than dSLR, they are not only smaller and lighter. O&P took infinite pains in having good looking designs from the start, so that owners could feel they had an object of beauty in their hands.

Women customers were also included from the beginning.

Having a look at the latest dSLR I noticed how they have a lot of plastic protrusions that make then quite ugly. Dinosaurs come to mind, with all those spikes, crests which made them look scary to other animals ;)

Am.

--
Photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/amalric
 
Midnighter said:
As far as cameras go, I have used range-finders, SLR's, view cameras and 645 waist level and eye level view finders.... even box brownies and hand made pin hole cameras. If you are going to have a viewfinder, where would anyone put it? You can say you prefer the NEX position, more power to you, but frankly the most ergonomically sensible point I have ever found, in using all those different cameras, is over the lens in roughly the middle of the camera but raised above the camera body.... a film SLR prism layout position.
Click to expand...
In the case of the E-M5 the EVF is not really "raised above the camera body" since it is the eyepiece is almost level with the top deck. A PEN + VF-2 is "raised above the camera body". A G3 is not "raised above the camera body" but it does extend back a bit from the back so has much the same effect, I have found.
Midnighter said:
The idea of 'retro' design being flawed masks a few underlying realities that human interface design does not simply warp just because technology changes, hence we have the same old basic design concept steering wheel in a car when we could just as easily have a plane style joystick or a horizontal bar we shifted left or right to steer with.
Click to expand...
You have left out the fact that there are tons of new controls added for digital cameras and a huge LCD and somehow they have to be integrated (often not so well) into the retro design. I doubt if when those camera designs were originally developed decades ago they would look like they do if they had such different functions that we have now.

--
Henry Richardson
http://www.bakubo.com
 
tgutgu said:
Since Nikon 1 is one of the worst camera designs ever (ergonomically), if the mirrorless Canon would be akin to the Nikon design, Canon fails to provide a good mirrorless camera system. If it is akin to their own G cameras, it would be ok.
Click to expand...
. . . I'm guessing that that the controls will indeed be more like the G series Canons and have practically nothing in common with the Nikon 1. The important questions are will it AF better than the G Canons and what native mount lenses will be available, initially as well as in the future. Adapting PDAF lenses has been shown to be problematic with most users of the other mirrorless systems not bothering with that. Even the Nikon 1 with hybrid PDAF hasn't generated as much interest in using DSLR Nikkors as was expected. To be truly competitive with other mirrorless systems, there needs to be a good selection of native mount lenses designed for CDAF.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top