Faked DSLR - A new trend for the mirrorless.

Started Jan 30, 2014 | Discussions thread
mosswings Veteran Member • Posts: 8,626
Re: Absolutely correct!

Aaron801 wrote:

Timj351 wrote:

cainn24 wrote:

Glen Barrington wrote:

And if someone can find a believable reason why the recent MILCs are shaped like DSLRs (actually, I think I have come up with two such reasons, but I can't prove them) I'm willing to stop calling that hump, a fake pentaprism housing.

Is there something wrong with utilising an ergonomic paradigm that a large percentage of your potential customer base is already familiar with? Pentaprism or not, I've always preferred cameras with a robust DSLR-style grip, and a VF that's in roughly the same place it's always been in the SLR cameras I grew up with and loved.

It certainly wouldn't be the first example of ergonomics and aesthetics being initially dictated by design considerations but later developing into usability preferences, whether they be practical or more visceral in nature.

Nothing wrong with any of that if you ask me.

I agree. I also think the term "retro" is thrown around too much, and often in a negative tone. I think there is retro and I think there is practical and often, at least to me, they mean the same thing. The new Fujifilm X-T1 is considered to be retro in it's styling but I also think it is simply a sensible and practical design. There's no reason to reinvent the wheel if something is currently working perfectly the way it is designed for.


I agree. It used to be that the only way to make controls work was with a knob, switch, etc... a physical control. Now three's the option to make any control part of a menu. A lot of the decision to go that route has everything to do with the fact that it's cheaper to do so and that non-advanced users are going to be fine with it that way. For the folks that want more control, having access to these kind of physical controls is more desirable. It doesn't really matter that it's an older way of doing it, it's just more convenient to go direct for certain settings... rather than to thumb through a menu. With cameras they way that they are now, it makes sense that there are going to be certain lesser used controls that one will necessarily active by menu only, but having the basic ones accessible by physical control is HUGE! I bought a cheaper camera that I could afford and am fine with it, menus and all, but if money was no object, a camera with lots of physical controls on the body like this new Fuji would be on the top of my list.

Indeed, true, more physical controls operable by feel are what works for always-at-the-viewfinder shooting, and that's what the control ergonomics of current higher end DSLRs offer. You have to get to the point where the viewfinder is big enough for that to be practical, and that's one reason why DX photogs go gaga over FX viewfinders and the FX-sized EVFs of cameras like the EM-1 and X-T1.

I'm not particularly in love with all these retro dials on cameras - only if they're coupled with excellent in-viewfinder information and control placement that allows me to operate the camera by feel alone do I think that they make long-term sense. Fuji's done a reasonable job of this, but reverting to labeled dials often slows down the process. It does get rid of most of the need for a top plate LCD, but not necessarily the pre-shot chimping that accompanies a retro control scheme.  If you're into slow, contemplative, deliberate shotmaking then retro designs work very well. If you're into tripod work with Liveview, yeah, a touch screen is great.  But for the most part the retro bodies tap in to nostalgia rather than operational efficiency.

 mosswings's gear list:mosswings's gear list
Olympus XZ-1 Olympus Stylus 1 Nikon D90 Nikon D7100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR +5 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow