Every camera has it's own compromises, some more than others. Some compromises can be worked around, the willingness to do so depends on needs and how much the other features of the gear weigh in the mix, and how entitled one feels about all of it.
I have owned cameras with less than ideal ergonomics (remember what is bad for one person may be good for another) yet had no problem working around it. My question is why can't you do the same?
No I'm not. I'm asking a question.
That isn't my point. I acknowledged that all cameras have flaws. What I don't understand is the degree with which people complain to the point of rejecting an otherwise great camera. The latest is people saying "no touch screen, I don't want it". Now a touch screen can be very handy for people who use the LCD a lot but the lack of one certainly doesn't make it unusable. We used cameras for decades without one.
In other words it's an attempt to make the camera you own seem better than another you don't own.
And, by association, show your superiority by being able to make a decision to buy such an apparently "superior" object.
Absolutely agree with that sentence. So long as that flaw isn't a manufacturing fault or planned obsolescence (in which case moan to all and sundry as it motivates manufacturers to improve QC).
]I always believed in the principle that cameras are tools and it is up to the photographer to learn how to properly work with his tools.
