Your camera's a tool, not a jewel.

Started Feb 2, 2014 | Discussions
bruxi
bruxi Regular Member • Posts: 318
Re: Your camera's a tool, not a jewel.

Aberaeron wrote:

These retro cameras are no less sophisticated than their 'conventional' counterparts for the most part, yet they ignore the latest interfaces that have made modern cameras more convenient to use, preferring to fit multiple and confusing, sometimes unergonomic physical dials instead of, or in some combination with software adjustments.

Now that's what I call technological snobbery.
But if it's new it must be better, huh?

I think he's saying the dials on the retro cameras are a design asthestetic, but are functionally outdated, which is kinda true.

 bruxi's gear list:bruxi's gear list
Canon EOS 60D Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Canon EF 70-200mm F4L IS USM Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM
Samaistuin
Samaistuin Contributing Member • Posts: 977
Re: Your camera's a tool, not a jewel.

bruxi wrote:

I think he's saying the dials on the retro cameras are a design asthestetic, but are functionally outdated, which is kinda true.

That's what he implied, and what I disagreed with.

rjjr Forum Pro • Posts: 14,329
I prefer dials...
1

bruxi wrote:

I think he's saying the dials on the retro cameras are a design asthestetic, but are functionally outdated, which is kinda true.

Not outdated for me at all. I prefer dials over menus. I find them faster and easier to use.

Rservello
Rservello Senior Member • Posts: 1,157
Re: Your camera's a tool, not a jewel.

bruxi wrote:

Aberaeron wrote:

These retro cameras are no less sophisticated than their 'conventional' counterparts for the most part, yet they ignore the latest interfaces that have made modern cameras more convenient to use, preferring to fit multiple and confusing, sometimes unergonomic physical dials instead of, or in some combination with software adjustments.

Now that's what I call technological snobbery.
But if it's new it must be better, huh?

I think he's saying the dials on the retro cameras are a design asthestetic, but are functionally outdated, which is kinda true.

Not outdated in any way!  whst bothers me about it tho is that it's all just fashion accessories. You can bypass them all with the internal menu. So it's not a retro camera. It's a retro looking camera. And the lasylt thing I need in my camera is fashion.

-- hide signature --

https://www.flickr.com/photos/49019071@N03/
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2334596/
* Sensitive Internet User Disclaimer: All opinions are my own and are not meant to offend you or damage your precious beliefs.

 Rservello's gear list:Rservello's gear list
Panasonic LX100 Nikon D600 Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D Voigtlander 58mm F1.4 Nokton SL II Rokinon 85mm F1.4 +4 more
Mystery Gardener
Mystery Gardener Contributing Member • Posts: 838
Doublemint...

No reason it can't be both.

Cheers

-- hide signature --

'The question is not what you look at, but what you see'
Thoreau

The Incredible Hoke
The Incredible Hoke Contributing Member • Posts: 894
Re: Your camera's a tool, not a jewel.

amalric wrote:

ShawnHoke wrote:

I find myself agreeing with the camera as a tool argument and I usually just want mine to do what I ask without menu diving. My favorite cameras I use are old manual film cameras, as they have a minimum of controls. For me, this usually results in more clarity of purpose, less frames used, and ultimately better photographs.

That said, depending on your digital camera, you can approach the same way. I normally use my FF Nikon DSLR, with its endless menus and options, in a very simplistic manner - manual or aperture priority with front and rear command dials as the main controls. I've got a button for ISO and WB if I need to switch either. I can't remember the last time I've had to open the menus of my DSLR. It's all in how you choose to use it.

Yes, I do the same, but it helps if the maker has the same purpose of the user, hence the success of Fuji as a Leica redux.

I am not familiar with FF that might have a more professional approach in the sense of simplicity/tool. I remember the old Nikon F or the Hasselblad which were marvels of simplicity, and as you mention sped up the photog.'s purpose i.e. the shot.

In this sense I compare v. much the camera to a bow, as in the art of archery, or perhaps to hunting with a bow. One must limit the controls to the strict necessary in order not to lose the target. Some things help, notably with low light, but then as in a modern weapon one might add them like night vision on a Picatinny, and ignore them when not needed.

(Nikon F did it even for the Exposure meter, which I found v. funny and distinctive - might be worth collecting

At any rate we are clearly discussing about a tool, not a jewel, although some tools might become works of art.

Am.

I should have explained the "FF DSLR" in my comment. My D700 has dedicated controls that allow you to not dive into menus or extra buttons. You can shoot on the fly and not take the camera from your eye as you are adjusting.

If someone hands me a D40 or a Canon Rebel, I'm always like "Is this thing on? How do I do this? Why can't I just do this?"

I like your archery comparison very much.

-- hide signature --
Aberaeron Veteran Member • Posts: 6,641
Re: Your camera's a tool, not a jewel.

Rservello wrote:

bruxi wrote:

Aberaeron wrote:

These retro cameras are no less sophisticated than their 'conventional' counterparts for the most part, yet they ignore the latest interfaces that have made modern cameras more convenient to use, preferring to fit multiple and confusing, sometimes unergonomic physical dials instead of, or in some combination with software adjustments.

Now that's what I call technological snobbery.
But if it's new it must be better, huh?

I think he's saying the dials on the retro cameras are a design asthestetic, but are functionally outdated, which is kinda true.

Not outdated in any way! whst bothers me about it tho is that it's all just fashion accessories. You can bypass them all with the internal menu. So it's not a retro camera. It's a retro looking camera. And the lasylt thing I need in my camera is fashion.

I don't mind dials at all. I just don't want a separate one for every function. I prefer the fast adjustment using one or two dials with a jog of one or a button press to toggle the function adjusted by one or other of the dials. So I don't have to find various dials front/back/left/right/top/bottom/stacked-on-top-of-each-other, each with a dedicated function.

 Aberaeron's gear list:Aberaeron's gear list
Fujifilm X20 Sony SLT-A57 Olympus OM-D E-M10 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 Olympus 7-14mm F2.8 Pro +21 more
bruxi
bruxi Regular Member • Posts: 318
Re: I prefer dials...

rjjr wrote:

bruxi wrote:

I think he's saying the dials on the retro cameras are a design asthestetic, but are functionally outdated, which is kinda true.

Not outdated for me at all. I prefer dials over menus. I find them faster and easier to use.

A giant dial for exposure compensation? Great for film, but very dated in a world of RAW files.

 bruxi's gear list:bruxi's gear list
Canon EOS 60D Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Canon EF 70-200mm F4L IS USM Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM
amalric
amalric Forum Pro • Posts: 10,839
Re: I prefer dials...
1

bruxi wrote:

rjjr wrote:

bruxi wrote:

I think he's saying the dials on the retro cameras are a design asthestetic, but are functionally outdated, which is kinda true.

Not outdated for me at all. I prefer dials over menus. I find them faster and easier to use.

A giant dial for exposure compensation? Great for film, but very dated in a world of RAW files.

Well, that's part of the argument of retro. In mirrorless, since the EVF allows to pre-process the image, there is much less need for Raw. One can shoot with Jpeg uncompressed, and aim at no digital darkroom use or minimal.

The dials allow for direct control, which you would instead delay to PP. It is definitely a shift of interest towards action on the field.

abelits
abelits Contributing Member • Posts: 765
Re: I prefer dials...

bruxi wrote:

rjjr wrote:

bruxi wrote:

I think he's saying the dials on the retro cameras are a design asthestetic, but are functionally outdated, which is kinda true.

Not outdated for me at all. I prefer dials over menus. I find them faster and easier to use.

A giant dial for exposure compensation? Great for film, but very dated in a world of RAW files.

No. Contrary to now-popular belief, good sensors are not "ISO-less" in the most used low ISO range, so precisely chosen exposure allows the photographer to achieve greater dynamic range of the recorded image, and minimize the amount of noise.

This is very useful in RAW processing when this dynamic range is compressed (locally for composites of multiple conversions of the same source, variable-locally for HDR or globally in simple processing) for JPEG or print.

I would not be surprised if internal exposure control mechanism on some camera in auto-ISO mode already does ETTR, adjusts sensitivity for the purpose of ETTR, but records the ISO value that would compensate for the brightness -- then exposure compensation may select the amount of highlights clipping, a parameter that is very useful to control when the sensor can't cover everything.

 abelits's gear list:abelits's gear list
Fujifilm X-Pro1 Fujifilm X-T2 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS +16 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads