Z fc folks: Do you use the ISO Dial?

briantilley · Jan 18, 2023

Bob A L said:
On this point I see no reason that we all need to use the same process, looks like it should be up to the individual. For me modern digital in camera jpeg processing is absolutely fantastic and once I get my camera dialed into my preferences, absolutely no need to move away from this. If others require raw files and computer processing to get what they need or want, it's great that this day and age we have the options to choose from.

I agree - isn't it great to have these choices

I have no quarrel with the OP's preferences for setting up and using the camera - it was only his classification of the ISO dial as a "design blunder" that I felt was over the top.

FingerPainter · Jan 18, 2023

Bob A L said:
Why not an FE?

For me, would not make sense. I'm old and some days especially bad weather, I may take photos all day long. I have taken over 100 this morning. So besides film image results being lousy compared to digital, looks like 3, 36 exposure rolls of film to get processed and scanned at a resolution lower than my digital cameras with no prints would be around $45 for just this morning, it would be pretty expensive for photos that were no more than playing and occupying my day as a hobby.

The context of my question was capanikon's assertion that "The fc is tryiing to pretend it is an FM." So my question was really "Why do you think it is pretending to be an FM rather than an FE?", not "Why wouldn't one use an FE?" Sorry to have confused you with ambiguous wording.

michaeladawson · Jan 18, 2023

Iliah Borg said:
bobn2 said:

Old Ed said:

Hi,

I enjoy my Z fc a lot, and I'd buy it again for sure.

However, it does have issues. One is the ISO dial, which seems like an outright design blunder.

Yes, it's pretty. But beauty is as beauty does, and I've found no useful application for it.
If you've found a useful application for yours, I'd be interested in hearing about it.

Happy shooting,

OE

Click to expand...

The whole Zfc is an ergonomic disaster area. It wasn't designed to be very usable, it was designed to have a retro chic.

Click to expand...

I don't see it having any retro chic

I’m not going to say whether it does or does not possess retro chic. But I’m pretty sure that was Nikons intention.

michaeladawson · Jan 18, 2023

Bob A L said:
There's nothing wrong with liking the retro design ethos, but if you choose it you get what comes with it.

Exactly why I have a Zfc. Greatest set of controls yet on a digital for me and my use. If I could nit pick and modify, I would have a ring or at least a larger readout for f stop, but I'll make do with it as it. Or, maybe add a mirror and prism :-D

Just no reason for me to have to turn on camera and use battery power just to set basic starting points I set when starting to take photos.

It's like anything else, we don't all like the same automobiles, appliances, whatevers.

Yeah. It’s too bad I have to buy in to Fujifilm to get a better retro experience in digital form.

bobn2 · Jan 18, 2023

Stan Disbrow said:
Hi,

Well, then, don't buy one. It isn't for you. And that's OK. Notice Nikon makes very few old school models.

That's sort of what I meant when I said 'there's nothing wrong with liking retro chic'

Stan Disbrow said:
For some of us, such old school design is far easier to use than the modern way. It really all depends on what one learned on. In my case, F2, FE, FA and F4. I never liked the way the F5 and what followed it operated as well as the older designs.

Yes, you get to an age where any kind of adaptation is hard. I found that the main reason that an FM2n was simpler was it only had three controls, if you don't count the winding lever and shutter release. It would have been simpler still if those controls had been in sensible places, like the Nikkormat shutter speed for instance.

bobn2 · Jan 18, 2023

Iliah Borg said:
bobn2 said:

Old Ed said:

Hi,

I enjoy my Z fc a lot, and I'd buy it again for sure.

However, it does have issues. One is the ISO dial, which seems like an outright design blunder.

Yes, it's pretty. But beauty is as beauty does, and I've found no useful application for it.
If you've found a useful application for yours, I'd be interested in hearing about it.

Happy shooting,

OE

Click to expand...

The whole Zfc is an ergonomic disaster area. It wasn't designed to be very usable, it was designed to have a retro chic.

Click to expand...

I don't see it having any retro chic

It has more than the Df, though the Df did get you cut price access to the D4s sensor, at the price of having a lumpy obese FM2n tribute act round your neck.

HJVN · Jan 18, 2023

camerosity said:
Not at all yet, but I may use it for testing high ISO performance at some point. I use Auto ISO (on all my Nikon digital cameras) so that renders the manual ISO dial on the Zfc useless for me. I use the +/- EV adjustment dial a lot though! That is a super handy control to have vs. on my now sold Z50, needing to press a button and spin a dial, and then having to do it again to place the setting back to 0.

Or you could have set it to Easy exposure compensation mode.
b2: Easy Exposure Compensation (nikonimglib.com)

But you sold it, so who cares.

Iliah Borg · Jan 18, 2023

bobn2 said:
Iliah Borg said:

bobn2 said:

Old Ed said:

Hi,

I enjoy my Z fc a lot, and I'd buy it again for sure.

However, it does have issues. One is the ISO dial, which seems like an outright design blunder.

Yes, it's pretty. But beauty is as beauty does, and I've found no useful application for it.
If you've found a useful application for yours, I'd be interested in hearing about it.

Happy shooting,

OE

Click to expand...

The whole Zfc is an ergonomic disaster area. It wasn't designed to be very usable, it was designed to have a retro chic.

Click to expand...

I don't see it having any retro chic

Click to expand...

It has more than the Df,

I don't see Df having any retro chic too

To me, it's simply a camera I use when it suits me

bobn2 said:
though the Df did get you cut price access to the D4s sensor, at the price of having a lumpy obese FM2n tribute act round your neck.

I beg to differ. FM2n is a totally different camera body.

Iliah Borg · Jan 18, 2023

michaeladawson said:
Iliah Borg said:

bobn2 said:

Old Ed said:

Hi,

I enjoy my Z fc a lot, and I'd buy it again for sure.

However, it does have issues. One is the ISO dial, which seems like an outright design blunder.

Yes, it's pretty. But beauty is as beauty does, and I've found no useful application for it.
If you've found a useful application for yours, I'd be interested in hearing about it.

Happy shooting,

OE

Click to expand...

The whole Zfc is an ergonomic disaster area. It wasn't designed to be very usable, it was designed to have a retro chic.

Click to expand...

I don't see it having any retro chic

Click to expand...

I’m not going to say whether it does or does not possess retro chic. But I’m pretty sure that was Nikons intention.

I think some Nikon old timers wanted a camera with a familiar control layout.

Chic would have a much higher price tag IMHO.

--
http://www.libraw.org/

bobn2 · Jan 18, 2023

Iliah Borg said:
Iliah Borg said:

though the Df did get you cut price access to the D4s sensor, at the price of having a lumpy obese FM2n tribute act round your neck.

Click to expand...

I beg to differ. FM2n is a totally different camera body.

In general tribute acts are completely different from the real thing.

camerosity · Jan 18, 2023

HJVN said:
camerosity said:

Not at all yet, but I may use it for testing high ISO performance at some point. I use Auto ISO (on all my Nikon digital cameras) so that renders the manual ISO dial on the Zfc useless for me. I use the +/- EV adjustment dial a lot though! That is a super handy control to have vs. on my now sold Z50, needing to press a button and spin a dial, and then having to do it again to place the setting back to 0.

Click to expand...

Or you could have set it to Easy exposure compensation mode.
b2: Easy Exposure Compensation (nikonimglib.com)

But you sold it, so who cares.

I remember using that feature a long time ago with my D70 and the problem I had with it was that it was far too easy to spin the rear command dial between shots and the next thing you know you're shooting 2+ stops over and lose your images. Not worth the risk so I never used that setting again. And I much prefer the Zfc over the Z50 as the Z50 had that viewfinder zoom button right about where my nose would hit so suddenly while shooting the viewfinder would zoom in. This happened so many times it was really irritating. The Zfc has a better control layout as well as USB-C charging (much easier to find a cable if while traveling one forgets to bring it).

michaeladawson · Jan 18, 2023

briantilley said:
Bob A L said:

On this point I see no reason that we all need to use the same process, looks like it should be up to the individual. For me modern digital in camera jpeg processing is absolutely fantastic and once I get my camera dialed into my preferences, absolutely no need to move away from this. If others require raw files and computer processing to get what they need or want, it's great that this day and age we have the options to choose from.

Click to expand...

I agree - isn't it great to have these choices

I have no quarrel with the OP's preferences for setting up and using the camera - it was only his classification of the ISO dial as a "design blunder" that I felt was over the top.

I reread the OP’s post. It wasn’t just “design blunder”. It was “outright design blunder”.

How do you take someone seriously when they make statements like that?

Old Ed · Jan 19, 2023

michaeladawson said:
briantilley said:

Bob A L said:

On this point I see no reason that we all need to use the same process, looks like it should be up to the individual. For me modern digital in camera jpeg processing is absolutely fantastic and once I get my camera dialed into my preferences, absolutely no need to move away from this. If others require raw files and computer processing to get what they need or want, it's great that this day and age we have the options to choose from.

Click to expand...

I agree - isn't it great to have these choices

I have no quarrel with the OP's preferences for setting up and using the camera - it was only his classification of the ISO dial as a "design blunder" that I felt was over the top.

Click to expand...

I reread the OP’s post. It wasn’t just “design blunder”. It was “outright design blunder”.

Without misleading snipping, my full quote was this:

"However, it does have issues. One is the ISO dial, which seems like an outright design blunder." (emphasis added) That is different from "classification." Fluent English speakers should know that.

michaeladawson said:
How do you take someone seriously when they make statements like that?

It's your right to take someone seriously or not, and to have good reasons or not.

However, note that no one in this thread produced a coherent argument for avoiding Auto-ISO. All were variations on "I prefer to do that."

OE

capanikon · Jan 19, 2023

I don't want my image brightness varying shot-to-shot.

Thus, lock ISO. And lock exposure. All in manual mode.

Sometimes in any AE mode or auto ISO mode, even a slight change in framing can cause the settings to shift a third-stop, two-third stop, full stop, two full stops. You never know.

Then in post you're looking at your pix wondering why your images all look wacky.

Bob A L · Jan 19, 2023

And that is not a coherent reason for preferring that method? Likewise, what coherent reason would one give for shooting full manual, aperture preferred, shutter preferred, or programmed auto then ??

Bob A L · Jan 19, 2023

Excellent reasoning and quite coherent I'd say. Excellent response.

michaeladawson · Jan 19, 2023

Old Ed said:
Old Ed said:

How do you take someone seriously when they make statements like that?

Click to expand...

It's your right to take someone seriously or not, and to have good reasons or not.

However, note that no one in this thread produced a coherent argument for avoiding Auto-ISO. All were variations on "I prefer to do that."

Your definition of a coherent argument seems to be one that you agree with.

I have used auto-ISO from time to time. More often than not it puts the camera into a higher ISO setting then necessary. Or should I say higher than what I want for the resulting brightness of the image. As I result, I only use auto-ISO now when I am being totally lazy about my settings.

I have to be very careful in how I word this. I don't want to come across as incoherent.

If auto-ISO works for you, more power to you. Use it. But Nikon did not commit an "outright design blunder" in the ISO dial. And I did not take your comment out of context. Your context does not change the meaning of what you said one iota.

Old Ed · Jan 19, 2023

You make an interesting argument.

I recently framed a windowless shot of our pooch, then reframed with bright windows. The AE tried to fit each shot 'within the histogram,' to give the best overall exposure.

On the one with windows, AE underexposed the dog. So I lifted shadows in post, until everything looked fine. Had I manually exposed for the dog, and then included windows, said windows probably would have blown.

So I'm trying to imagine a case where I'd want to hold exposure on one part of the scene, and let other parts go over or under as the framing changed. For stills, I'm not coming up with a lot. I guess I think of each one individually.

I think video would be another matter. If I was panning a video to follow someone, I'd want the person to have constant brightness when passing different backgrounds. But as a stills shooter, I haven't even tried my video yet. So no lost sleep about that.

I think this one comes down to different situations, and different preferences on how to handle them. That's a good thing, IMHO.

Happy shooting,

OE

capanikon said:
I don't want my image brightness varying shot-to-shot.

Thus, lock ISO. And lock exposure. All in manual mode.

Sometimes in any AE mode or auto ISO mode, even a slight change in framing can cause the settings to shift a third-stop, two-third stop, full stop, two full stops. You never know.

Then in post you're looking at your pix wondering why your images all look wacky.

Old Ed · Jan 19, 2023

Sigh, another word nuance case.

I was using "coherent" as shorthand for 'logical and technically sound.'

Saying "I LIKE this candy best" is unconditionally OK.

Saying "This candy IS best" requires a logical supporting argument.

Regarding the exposure modes you mentioned, I'll pass on defending ones I don't use. As for the one I do use, I've explained the reasoning in this thread.

None of said modes are inherently bad, but each has distinct pros and cons. Horses for courses.

BTW, some technically astute Forum members PM'ed me with support. One thought it was "hilarious" that so many posters didn't understand the merits of ISO AE.

Regards,

Ed

Bob A L said:
And that is not a coherent reason for preferring that method? Likewise, what coherent reason would one give for shooting full manual, aperture preferred, shutter preferred, or programmed auto then ??

Old Ed · Jan 19, 2023

Mike,

It's clear that you don't get it about AE tradeoffs. And I see no indication that you're going to, any time soon.

The best plan is for us to 'agree to disagree.'

Good luck and happy shooting,

OE

Z fc folks: Do you use the ISO Dial?

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts