Simplifying Digital SLRs

[vFunct]

Discussion going on in slashdot about megapixels. Some of my thoughts on digitals cut & pasted here:

It's amazing how many useless "features" the camera makers are adding to jack up their marketing feature list at the expense of usability. There are just WAY too many options. They could get rid of almost all the buttons on a Digital camera for even the pros. I really wish they would simply cut out switches and menu options and make it so that you DON'T need a manual to operate it. My favorite camera is still a $100 fully-manual 35mm Nikon FM2. Either that or an 8x10. (I actually am starting to think that my 8x10 view camera is easier to use than my Nikon Coolpix. And, it takes a whole day of planning and work to set up one shot for an 8x10...)

There's so many useless switches on a modern Digital SLR that can be completely thrown away and still provide all the functionality anyone would want. It's possible to improve usability without compromising features, when you look at the design of a digital camera in a Systems Level perspective. I also desire to create the highest quality photos in all situations with the least bit of effort. Remember- each little option and each little switch adds just a little bit more complexity to the camera.

Things I wish manufacturers did:

1. Store all data ONLY in RAW format. (Thanks to Sigma for pushing this.) This get rids of the useless "low/medium/high quality" switch on the camera. There goes one pointless switch. You don't need small file sizes, JPG files, built in image processing, etc, if all you needed was to store the data in one big RAW file, like what Sigma is doing...

2. Store all data at the highest resolution. Get rid of the "small/medium/large" switch. If I needed to store more pictures on my card, I would have bought a higher-capacity CF drive. I can get 4GB CF microdrives for cheap, so it's pointless to have to micro-manage file sizes. That should be enough to store hundreds of pics. Another pointless switch, gone...

3. Get rid of in-camera white-balance setting, and do this on the computer or laptop or even palmtop to simplify the camera and force the complexity outside. (Again, thanks to Sigma) This can be done on the computer if needed with the RAW file. Most amateur users have NO idea what the hell white-balance means anyways. A third pointless switch gone..

4. Get rid of the Priority knob- Aperture, Shutter, Etc.. Instead, let there be an "Auto" option for shutter and for aperture on their own dials... When the Aperture knob is set to Auto- then that obviously means Aperture priorty. When the Shutter is set to Auto, then that means Shutter priority. When BOTH are set to Auto, then that obviously "Auto". This can also be done for auto-focusing with a Focusing ring. There- 3 buttons eliminated just like that.

5. Get rid of Program metering modes. All the programmed metering modes are also largely useless. All you need is an "auto" setting on your focus/shutter/aperture/flash knobs. Do people even use these modes? My guess is, they have no idea if they're good or not, so "Auto" mode would be fine. And, if they DO know what they're doing, then they're likely to set it on a fixed aperture or shutter speed anyways?

6. Use more traditional "obvious" lens controls instead to make manual control easier: Have your precise digital shutter/aperture/focus controls on individual lens rings with an "auto" mode when turned far left. It's extremely frustrating to get manual control working on some of the digitals.

7. Get rid of on-camera flashes settings (Keep the wimpy on-camera flash if you must, but leave it on Auto always, and auto-disable when external flash is connected) Pro photographers would have an external flash anyways, and any flash settings can be made on that. Another switch, gone... (although i'd love to have a powerful dual head external flash- one for bounce and another for fill.. maybe on a ring-flash)

8. Get rid of on-camera image processing. I'll never understand why anyone would need in-camera image-processing for a digital, when ALL digital cameras go through image processing software later in the chain- as they download into the computer or print out. I guess the people that kind of marketing are the same kind of people that want an FM radio in everything they buy- a toaster, shower faucets, their pillows..

Another "feature" I hate: modal buttons. Sometimes, a single button sets the flash, the same button in another mode trashes the image, and in another mode, adjusts the shutter. Nothing is more frustrating than having to go through menus of setup to do exactly what you need to do. If you're going to make a camera, put a seperate button for each useless feature you put in. If you find that your camera has too many buttons- then that means your camera is TOO complicated! Get rid of some of the buttons- it's all about intuition and usability.

Also, if you want image-processing, sell a seperate palmtop just for that- so that you don't have to go through menus to do any image processing. Don't sell me a camera with image processing- that's like having a shower-head with an FM radio- sure it's nice to have- but it IS possible to get by without it.

Some people may want all these useless features.. for them the camera vendors can have their own special overfeatured model. I would rather have one that's simple and obvious... Let's enable people to take more pictures, rather than confuse them with a complicated camera. The first Digital SLR vendor that comes out with a Camera that DOESN'T include an INSTRUCTION MANUAL, I'm buying.

(I wonder if any of the vendors are listening...)

 

[dog010]

I agree with you on all but one point: white balance. its just easier to get the right balance on location with a grey card and have all your shots set for that correct one rather than editing every single frame in Post processing.

I especially agree on the ergonomic points you make. One of the reasons why my manual film SLR hasn't been put out to pasture but is actually my primary body. (And it also happens to be a Nikon FM2!)

--
Michael King

Who cares how you get the shot; just photograph it and photograph it well

http://www.photo.net/photodb/member-photos?include=all&user_id=816617
http://www.mk.fpic.co.uk/

 

[Joseph S Wisniewski]

There's so many useless switches on a modern Digital SLR that can
be completely thrown away and still provide all the functionality
anyone would want. It's possible to improve usability without
compromising features, when you look at the design of a digital
camera in a Systems Level perspective.

Sorry, but at a systems level, you have to satisfy a multitude of users. You're designing a camera purely at the "personal" level. Otherwise, where do you stop "simplifying"? When you're down to no controls except a shutter button?

I also desire to create the
highest quality photos in all situations with the least bit of
effort. Remember- each little option and each little switch adds
just a little bit more complexity to the camera.

Things I wish manufacturers did:

1. Store all data ONLY in RAW format. (Thanks to Sigma for pushing
this.)

Sigma isn't "pushing" this, they're stuck with iut, because of the computational complexity of the math for Foveon color.

This get rids of the useless "low/medium/high quality"
switch on the camera. There goes one pointless switch.

Actually, on my D100, it's just a position on the mode selector knob, the same one that lets you select manual, aperture or shutter preferred. Would you have that knob deleted and lock the camera in manual mode full time? (Actually, it sounds like you would).

You don't
need small file sizes, JPG files, built in image processing, etc,
if all you needed was to store the data in one big RAW file, like
what Sigma is doing...

The man has obviously never used a Nikon D70, which can maintain close to 3 frames/second in JPEG mode, until the battery gos dead or the memory card fills up. You can shoot sports and not worry about buffers. That Sigma which seems to amaze you so can do 1.7 frames/sec into a 6 frame buffer, and takes about 8 seconds to write a raw to CF. "Hey ref, can you call a minute timeout? I need to wait for my buffer to clear"

2. Store all data at the highest resolution. Get rid of the
"small/medium/large" switch. If I needed to store more pictures on
my card, I would have bought a higher-capacity CF drive. I can get
4GB CF microdrives for cheap, so it's pointless to have to
micro-manage file sizes. That should be enough to store hundreds of
pics. Another pointless switch, gone...

Again, only pointless to you. Some people need to take thousands of pics, not the 500 that a Sigma can put on a 4 gig microdrive.

Some people won't trust a mechanical microdrive with even one important picture, let alone hundreds. Price a 4 gig, or even a 2 gig CF card, then try to repeat your "nobody needs JPEG" speil again with a straight face.

3. Get rid of in-camera white-balance setting, and do this on the
computer or laptop or even palmtop to simplify the camera and force
the complexity outside. (Again, thanks to Sigma) This can be done
on the computer if needed with the RAW file. Most amateur users
have NO idea what the hell white-balance means anyways. A third
pointless switch gone..

Again, only pointless to you. I don't really want to have to manually correct every picture because we switched from the strobes to the Fresnel to the fluorescent ringlight 14 times during the shoot, but the images aren't tagged with which is which.

Have you ever shot slides? What's easier, continually changing filters in front of the lens, or a white balance button?

[to be continued]

Oh, by the way, nice first post. Best way to introduce yourself to the group, a rant with a strong dose fo flame bait and trolling. Welcome aboard.

--
A cyberstalker told me not to post anymore...
So I'm posting even more!

Ciao!

Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

 

[Joseph S Wisniewski]

4. Get rid of the Priority knob- Aperture, Shutter, Etc.. Instead,
let there be an "Auto" option for shutter and for aperture on their
own dials... When the Aperture knob is set to Auto- then that
obviously means Aperture priorty. When the Shutter is set to Auto,
then that means Shutter priority. When BOTH are set to Auto, then
that obviously "Auto". This can also be done for auto-focusing
with a Focusing ring. There- 3 buttons eliminated just like that.

And instead of moving one "PASM" knob a maximum of 3 click stops to change modes, you now have to spin a shutter speed knob 19 clicks (30 sec to 1/8000 sec + B) if you're in full stop mode, or 57 clicks if you're in 1/3 stop mode (like I usually am). Then another 7 to 21 clisks on the aperture dial. Eighty clicks on two different controls, vs 3 clicks on one control.

As a historical note, the system you described was used on the Nikon 4004. It failed in the market place. I wonder why...

5. Get rid of Program metering modes. All the programmed metering
modes are also largely useless. All you need is an "auto" setting
on your focus/shutter/aperture/flash knobs. Do people even use
these modes? My guess is, they have no idea if they're good or
not, so "Auto" mode would be fine. And, if they DO know what
they're doing, then they're likely to set it on a fixed aperture or
shutter speed anyways?

6. Use more traditional "obvious" lens controls instead to make
manual control easier: Have your precise digital
shutter/aperture/focus controls on individual lens rings with an
"auto" mode when turned far left. It's extremely frustrating to
get manual control working on some of the digitals.

One knob. 3 clicks. Very frustrating indeed.

7. Get rid of on-camera flashes settings (Keep the wimpy on-camera
flash if you must, but leave it on Auto always, and auto-disable
when external flash is connected) Pro photographers would have an
external flash anyways, and any flash settings can be made on that.
Another switch, gone... (although i'd love to have a powerful dual
head external flash- one for bounce and another for fill.. maybe on
a ring-flash)

Again, the on camera flash buttons control flash exposure compensation and flash mode of either an external or internal flash. Very useful when the external flash is not within reach, either 18 inches above your head on a decent sized bracker for event shooting, or on a macro stand, etc.

And the ergonomic advantage of learnign one set of controls for all flashes, instead of different controls for every single flash, is formidable.

8. Get rid of on-camera image processing. I'll never understand why
anyone would need in-camera image-processing for a digital, when
ALL digital cameras go through image processing software later in
the chain- as they download into the computer or print out.

I do like the way you athoratively state what "ALL digital cameras go through". The problem is that you're basically wrong. There are a lot of situations when you go right from camera to printer, or maybe camera to screen (if only to put each image, as shot, up on the 31 inch monitor for the client and/or art director to see. Or to print quickly when selling prints at an event.

[pillows ands toasters rant deleated]

If you find
that your camera has too many buttons- then that means your camera
is TOO complicated!

No. It simply means that it's too complicated for you. Get a different camera, don't rant and troll about taking away features that are needed by both working pros and amateurs.

Get rid of some of the buttons- it's all about
intuition and usability.

It they're well laid out, you never have to use most of them if you don't want to, but they're there if you do.

[More shower heads and radios chopped]

Some people may want all these useless features.. for them the
camera vendors can have their own special overfeatured model.

Actually, it's quite the other way around. Most people want these features, and camera makers offer special "stripped" cameras for a few retro folk like you. Go check out something like a Leica DigiLux, or if you want a bit bigger sensor, wait for the Epson/Cosina/Voigtlander RD-1. They don't sell particularly well, supposedly DigiLus is in the 10,000 unit range, and that's where Epson is expecting RD-1 to go, to.

Guess you're more alone than you thought, if cameras "your way" only have, literally, 1/1000 of the sales of the ones you don't like.

It woudl appear that you don't speak for everyone, afterall. Looks more liek you speak for 1/10 of a percent of everyone. From a marketing standpoint, you're either an eccentric to be exploited (check the price of that DigiLux or RD-1) or an irritant to be ignored.

(I wonder if any of the vendors are listening...)

I hope not. But if they are, I hope they're not eating or drinking while they read your post. Aside from the choking danger, there's the messiness factor of coffee or tea sprayed all over the screen.

--
A cyberstalker told me not to post anymore...
So I'm posting even more!

Ciao!

Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

 

[VJ]

1. Store all data ONLY in RAW format.

Nope, as this implies custom software. While I do use NEF at all times, there are situations in which the photographer wants a more open format. Some people just want to be able to easily view pictures, and might prefer more compression in order to fit more on a card. (see 2.)

2. Store all data at the highest resolution.

Nope: When I travel, I sometimes use lower resolution, higher compressed jpgs for signs (e.g. when visiting a church, I can photograph the name, some historical text, ... without it taking up too much space on my cards. Not everybody needs high resolutions and not all situations require high resolutions... (allthough it does hurt to see people with a D70 who use the lowest resolution)...

3. Get rid of in-camera white-balance setting,

Nope: if you want a picture with as little processing as possible, you need it (see 1.).

4. Get rid of the Priority knob- Aperture, Shutter, Etc.. Instead,
let there be an "Auto" option for shutter and for aperture on their
own dials...

Now, there is one button for PASM modes, and two dials... You are turning it into 2 buttons, 2 dials, and autosettings on the dials... seems hardly simplified to me...

5. Get rid of Program metering modes.

I don't use them (heck, I don't have them on my camera), but for the user who just wants to take pictures without turning to amateur photography, they do serve a purpose.

6. Use more traditional "obvious" lens controls instead to make
manual control easier: Have your precise digital
shutter/aperture/focus controls on individual lens rings with an
"auto" mode when turned far left. It's extremely frustrating to
get manual control working on some of the digitals.

On DSLRs, there usually are 2 dials: aperture and shutter, no hassle there. (oh, when did 'shutter speed' become a lens control ?)

7. Get rid of on-camera flashes settings (Keep the wimpy on-camera
flash if you must, but leave it on Auto always, and auto-disable
when external flash is connected) Pro photographers would have an
external flash anyways, and any flash settings can be made on that.

Onboard flash can be usefull at times (more compact, can be used to fire remote flashes, ...).

8. Get rid of on-camera image processing. I'll never understand why
anyone would need in-camera image-processing for a digital, when
ALL digital cameras go through image processing software later in
the chain- as they download into the computer or print out. I guess
the people that kind of marketing are the same kind of people that
want an FM radio in everything they buy- a toaster, shower faucets,
their pillows..

Not everybody postprocesses their photos. In camera processing is needed for the reasons described in 1. and 2.

Another "feature" I hate: modal buttons. Sometimes, a single button
sets the flash, the same button in another mode trashes the image,
and in another mode, adjusts the shutter. Nothing is more
frustrating than having to go through menus of setup to do exactly
what you need to do. If you're going to make a camera, put a
seperate button for each useless feature you put in. If you find
that your camera has too many buttons- then that means your camera
is TOO complicated! Get rid of some of the buttons- it's all about
intuition and usability.

Apparently, you work like this... You have described a whole lot of buttons, which in fact are on or two buttons on a DSLR (e.g. mode switch). Yet now you are against modal buttons (which do make perfect sense in a lot of cases).

(to be honest, the D100 doesn't have modal buttons, unless you count the 4 way button as modas as it provides selection of AF area and navigation through the menu)

Also, if you want image-processing, sell a seperate palmtop just
for that- so that you don't have to go through menus to do any
image processing. Don't sell me a camera with image processing-
that's like having a shower-head with an FM radio- sure it's nice
to have- but it IS possible to get by without it.

Have you ever thought about the costs and hassle: you'd have to carry 2 devices, find a way to transfer images between them, need 2 displays, 2 batterypacks, ....

Some people may want all these useless features.. for them the
camera vendors can have their own special overfeatured model. I
would rather have one that's simple and obvious...

I'm guessing that if you were to have a camera that only does what you have described here, you'd complain about the fact that it lacks the very features you described here...

Let's enable
people to take more pictures, rather than confuse them with a
complicated camera. The first Digital SLR vendor that comes out
with a Camera that DOESN'T include an INSTRUCTION MANUAL, I'm
buying.

Frankly, if you are confused by a DSLR, you should consider staying with analog photography, as chances are you will be confused by the RAW-editing software on the PC...

(I wonder if any of the vendors are listening...)

I hope they are not...

 

[vFunct]

You're worried about not having the ability to store thousands of photos at high frame rates on a camera that ONLY does high-resolution RAW mode.

Actually, there is a simple solution to this: Mutliple CF card slots on your camera. 2,3, or even 4. This multiplies bandwidth to store data at high frame rates, and it multiplies your storage space. Adding another slot wouldn't cost more than 25 cents for the connector... (Or we could just push for CF vendors to increase their write speeds, which is just as easily possible).

I'd much rather have that than more "switches" to adjust image quality & sizes... We need to get rid of this detailed level of control on cameras. It's completely pointless and adds complexity to a user interface that we have to work fiddling with. I would hate to be seen as a photo geek- I prefer to take photos subtly and spontaneously where people don't see me fiddling with a dorky overfeatured camera. If I'm doing that I might as well break out the 8x10.. (BTW the shutter controls are on the lenses there).

Simplicity, it seems, is lost on most photo geeks. Do none of you believe in minimalism, or intuition? Do you actually PREFER complexity? From this and other discussions on simplifying cameras, I get about 50% support on the geeky message boards (remember, you guys are at the extreme ends of the user demographics). This probably translates into much greater than 50% support in the general population, maybe 90%, to make digital cameras simpler to use, so I'd say there IS a market for my kind of ideas...

PUSH YOUR VENDORS FOR SIMPLICITY! Get them to try harder at making a more INTUITIVE system! RAW only, no Menus (I'm thinking about going with a D70, but I'd rather not go through the horror that is the Nikon menuing system..), lens controls, etc...

 

[vFunct]

For white-balancing, things should be either FULLY automatic, or FULLY manual- no more "modes" or "settings".. I would prefer to keep a seperate measurement of standard gray, possibly on a through-the-lens spot meter as you hold down the shutter release. This would be the Manual control I seek. Anything else on the camera should just be Automatic- no more on-camera white balance tuning. This level of control can be had in the RAW format reader on the computer instead. I would like to avoid adjusting the RAW image to based on the white balance. (actually, I think most RAW formats don't touch the image based on white balance).

I agree with you on all but one point: white balance. its just
easier to get the right balance on location with a grey card and
have all your shots set for that correct one rather than editing
every single frame in Post processing.

I especially agree on the ergonomic points you make. One of the
reasons why my manual film SLR hasn't been put out to pasture but
is actually my primary body. (And it also happens to be a Nikon
FM2!)

--
Michael King

Who cares how you get the shot; just photograph it and photograph
it well

http://www.photo.net/photodb/member-photos?include=all&user_id=816617
http://www.mk.fpic.co.uk/

 

[vFunct]

(I wonder if any of the vendors are listening...)

I hope they are not...

So what you're saying is for the camera vendors to NOT make a model that I'm asking for? Why wouldn't you want me to have my camera? Do you think I'm asking them to NOT sell the overfeatured-comes-with-an-FM-radio model as well that you desire?

You can have your cameras, I can have mine.

 

[Joseph S Wisniewski]

You're worried about not having the ability to store thousands of
photos at high frame rates on a camera that ONLY does
high-resolution RAW mode.

No, I'm worried about a camera with both the slowest continuous shooting rate and the slowest raw writing rate in the entire industry being held up as an example of the right way of doing things.

Actually, there is a simple solution to this: Mutliple CF card
slots on your camera. 2,3, or even 4. This multiplies bandwidth
to store data at high frame rates, and it multiplies your storage
space. Adding another slot wouldn't cost more than 25 cents for
the connector... (Or we could just push for CF vendors to increase
their write speeds, which is just as easily possible).

You show a very limited knowledge of technology. Adding multiple CF slots means you need processors with the increased IO to support it, and it increases the UI. Try a Canon, Fuji, or Oly which have multiple slots: they have multiple menu items ot go with them. Backup one slot to the other. Fill the cards alternatly or sequentially. There are a lot of different things users want multiple card slots to do.

And that's where you keep getting stuck, with this belief that your way is the "one right way".

I'd much rather have that than more "switches" to adjust image
quality & sizes... We need to get rid of this detailed level of
control on cameras. It's completely pointless and adds complexity
to a user interface that we have to work fiddling with.

Again, where do you draw the line? Is there a 6 button limit? 3 button? No button? How many knobs? One could extend yoru arguments until the camera wasentirely programmed, and just had a shutter button.

I would
hate to be seen as a photo geek- I prefer to take photos subtly and
spontaneously where people don't see me fiddling with a dorky
overfeatured camera.

And that's just a function of your not understanding the situation at all. I can set just about any DSLR or P&S camera on the market for "no fiddling" spontaneous shooting. And then, if the situation demands, I can override anything.

If I'm doing that I might as well break out
the 8x10.. (BTW the shutter controls are on the lenses there).

btw, I've designed and built my own 4x5. Go be condenscending to someone else.

Simplicity, it seems, is lost on most photo geeks. Do none of you
believe in minimalism, or intuition? Do you actually PREFER
complexity?

I believe in choice. If I want simplicity, I set the camera in a simple mode, and shoot from instinct.

Is that so hard for you to understand? Set your camera to raw, then don't touch that knob abain. Set your mode to manual, and don't touch that knob again.

From this and other discussions on simplifying
cameras, I get about 50% support on the geeky message boards
(remember, you guys are at the extreme ends of the user
demographics). This probably translates into much greater than 50%
support in the general population, maybe 90%, to make digital
cameras simpler to use, so I'd say there IS a market for my kind of
ideas...

I'd say, looking at the failure of the Nikon 4004 (which implemented your ideas on using the shutter and aperture controls to select the automated modes) and the low sales of the existing DigiLux and low projected sales of the RD-1, that the market for your kind of ideas is very, very small.

As I said before, actual sales and marketing make it 1/1000 of the genera market.

PUSH YOUR VENDORS FOR SIMPLICITY! Get them to try harder at making
a more INTUITIVE system! RAW only, no Menus (I'm thinking about
going with a D70, but I'd rather not go through the horror that is
the Nikon menuing system..), lens controls, etc...

Then don't go through the menus. All the defaults will be fine, better than anything anyone is going to give you in that INTUITIVE camera you're going on about. Set the mode to raw (that's a button you'll have to use once, in the lifetime of your camera), turn the mode knob to M and stick a piece of tape over it. Tape over the rest of the buttons. Then go shoot.

--
A cyberstalker told me not to post anymore...
So I'm posting even more!

Ciao!

Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

 

[Cliff. Johnston]

vF,

I agree. The KISS principle is still germain - Keep It Simple Stupid.

I haven't had too many situations where the lack of a camera function stopped me from producing the image that I wanted quickly in processing and postprocessing. All of which led me to my last dSLR purchase, the Sigma SD-10. I haven't missed all of the bells and whistles of the others one bit.

Cliff.

vFunct wrote:
...

Some people may want all these useless features.. for them the
camera vendors can have their own special overfeatured model. I
would rather have one that's simple and obvious... Let's enable
people to take more pictures, rather than confuse them with a
complicated camera. The first Digital SLR vendor that comes out
with a Camera that DOESN'T include an INSTRUCTION MANUAL, I'm
buying.

(I wonder if any of the vendors a

--
Cliff. Johnston

 

[Joseph S Wisniewski]

(I wonder if any of the vendors are listening...)

I hope they are not...

So what you're saying is for the camera vendors to NOT make a model
that I'm asking for? Why wouldn't you want me to have my camera?

Not at all what I said. I pointed out that your camera exists (the Leica DigiLux, and the soon to be released Epson RD-1). Go get one and be happy.

Do you think I'm asking them to NOT sell the
overfeatured-comes-with-an-FM-radio model as well that you desire?

That's very much what it sounds like. "Some people may want all these useless features.. for them the camera vendors can have their own special overfeatured model."

From that, and the rest of your discussion, it sounds like you want the mainstream camera that 99.9% of people are using to be reduced to the "special" model, and your simplified camera, which currently accounts for 0.1% of the market, to become the mainstream. It sounds like you may honestly believe that the market shares should be reverset, thata majority of people want the simplified camera, but sales of simple vs. featured cameras do not support this.

You can have your cameras, I can have mine.

As I've pointed out, one's on the market (Leica DigiLux) and two more are coming (Epson/Voigtlander RD-1 and Leica Modul-R). That will pretty much cover the demand for such cameras.

--
A cyberstalker told me not to post anymore...
So I'm posting even more!

Ciao!

Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

 

[BirdsAndMore]

(I wonder if any of the vendors are listening...)

I certainly hope not!!

You're talking about electronic "switches" in a menu system, not actual switches, buttons, or knobs on the camera body. These are things you can set once and forget, if you don't trake advantage of their flexibility.
--
Have fun!

 

[Joseph S Wisniewski]

vF,

I agree. The KISS principle is still germain - Keep It Simple Stupid.

I haven't had too many situations where the lack of a camera
function stopped me from producing the image that I wanted quickly
in processing and postprocessing. All of which led me to my last
dSLR purchase, the Sigma SD-10. I haven't missed all of the bells
and whistles of the others one bit.

Actually, your SD10 has 1 more knob and 4 more buttons than the D70 that vFunct was complaining about.

And it doesn't have his Nikon 4004 style way of switching between M, A, S, and P modes. My God, man, you've even got a "func" button! Could you use that camera without reading the manual?

I think he's only approve of it's lack of flash and lack of JPEG.

--
A cyberstalker told me not to post anymore...
So I'm posting even more!

Ciao!

Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

 

[Joseph S Wisniewski]

For white-balancing, things should be either FULLY automatic, or
FULLY manual- no more "modes" or "settings".. I would prefer to
keep a seperate measurement of standard gray, possibly on a
through-the-lens spot meter as you hold down the shutter release.

I would prefer to take a color temperature reading and set the Kelvin value myself, or do the manual setting with an incident diffusion dome. Gray cards are not particularly accurate. White cards are better. incident diffusers are the best.

This would be the Manual control I seek. Anything else on the
camera should just be Automatic- no more on-camera white balance
tuning. This level of control can be had in the RAW format reader
on the computer instead. I would like to avoid adjusting the RAW
image to based on the white balance. (actually, I think most RAW
formats don't touch the image based on white balance).

No raw format (and incidentally, raw is a word, not an acronym, you don't capitalize it) will "touch the image". That's what raw means, pure data from the sensor. (It's not entirely pure, but that's a discussion for another day).

The rest of the info, WB, sharpening, hue, saturation, etc. is just "tags" attached to the data, which provide a starting point for the raw processing software. You don't have to set them on the camera at all, you can just ignore most of the camera's sontrols, shoot raw, and try to get everything right later.

Just think of the controls as a convenient "noteboot" that's always with you. If you set "flash" on the white balance control, you're not altering the image. You're just making a note to yourself that when you process these images, flash is probably a good white balnace to try. That's all, just an electronic equivelant of a day book or log book.

You don't have to use the notebook, but it's there if you need it.

--
A cyberstalker told me not to post anymore...
So I'm posting even more!

Ciao!

Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

 

[Jon Ragnarsson]

I still reach for the aperture ring on my lens. 20 years of training, and it is hardwired in your head.
Maybe a 2" touch-screen could make life simpler.

I dont want to spend more time in pre-processing, I just don't like it. I am not sure if I go RAW full time. But it does give you flexibility.

The only thing I wish were not in menus on my camera: Custom Saturation. (RGB+skin).
Everything else can be reached through a button + wheel.
--
http://www.4-3system.com/
http://jonr.beecee.org/

 

[vFunct]

(I wonder if any of the vendors are listening...)

I hope they are not...

So what you're saying is for the camera vendors to NOT make a model
that I'm asking for? Why wouldn't you want me to have my camera?

Not at all what I said. I pointed out that your camera exists (the
Leica DigiLux, and the soon to be released Epson RD-1). Go get one
and be happy.

For me the RD-1 looks the most promising. Let's hope they don't overprice it. It could still use some critical changes- CF card instead of SD card, a more common lens mount, and so on. Nikon needs to come out with their version of the RD-1...

Do you think I'm asking them to NOT sell the
overfeatured-comes-with-an-FM-radio model as well that you desire?

That's very much what it sounds like. "Some people may want all
these useless features.. for them the camera vendors can have their
own special overfeatured model."

From that, and the rest of your discussion, it sounds like you want
the mainstream camera that 99.9% of people are using to be reduced
to the "special" model, and your simplified camera, which currently
accounts for 0.1% of the market, to become the mainstream. It
sounds like you may honestly believe that the market shares should
be reverset, thata majority of people want the simplified camera,
but sales of simple vs. featured cameras do not support this.

Actually, the REAL mainstream market is the digital-point-and-shoot. The Digital SLRs are not mainstream at all. 99% of people would rather have a simple system, because, it's simple, and that drives down costs. Why digital SLRs insist on being the most complex thing on earth I'll never understand. Are manufacturers just assuming that SLR users want overdesign and bad engineering? All we seek are the best images! Please build a camera accordingly- standard lens mounts, efficient interfaces, standard flash mounts, no compromises, no complexities, and so on. You know if you're successful at that when you can sell your camera WITHOUT an instruction manual! Mainstream users usually throw away the instruction manual anyways when they buy their digital camera. To help sales, they really need to look at the REAL mainstream market, to figure out why they're so successful, and apply those same techniques to the SLRs.

Do you REALLY think a $200 Nikon digital SLR would sell poorly? Or even a $500 one?

 

[vFunct]

Good then raw modes are doing it correctly.

What's still not correct is how there needs to be any sort of image processing adjustments on the camera. It takes up processing time/power/etc.. AND, it makes the camera system more complex. Again, each little option that is thrown in adds complexity. Even if you DON'T want to adjust brightness/contrast/sharpness on camera, the fact that those option are even there means that you have to know that you can turn it off- one more useless peice of information that you need to operate a camera that has built-in image processing. Get rid of the option, and you get rid of having to know that you can turn it off. The image is going to go through image processing eventually, either on a computer, or on an output printer. You can adjust it there on final output.

About white balance, i'm still don't think they need to be set on the camera. We can just as easily get rid of the setting in RAW mode if the camera has some sort of incident light meter or possibly a spot meter, or whatever "magic" the HP cameras are using to determine white balance. This information gets tagged in the image, and the output device adjusts accordingly.

For white-balancing, things should be either FULLY automatic, or
FULLY manual- no more "modes" or "settings".. I would prefer to
keep a seperate measurement of standard gray, possibly on a
through-the-lens spot meter as you hold down the shutter release.

I would prefer to take a color temperature reading and set the
Kelvin value myself, or do the manual setting with an incident
diffusion dome. Gray cards are not particularly accurate. White
cards are better. incident diffusers are the best.

This would be the Manual control I seek. Anything else on the
camera should just be Automatic- no more on-camera white balance
tuning. This level of control can be had in the RAW format reader
on the computer instead. I would like to avoid adjusting the RAW
image to based on the white balance. (actually, I think most RAW
formats don't touch the image based on white balance).

No raw format (and incidentally, raw is a word, not an acronym, you
don't capitalize it) will "touch the image". That's what raw means,
pure data from the sensor. (It's not entirely pure, but that's a
discussion for another day).

The rest of the info, WB, sharpening, hue, saturation, etc. is just
"tags" attached to the data, which provide a starting point for the
raw processing software. You don't have to set them on the camera
at all, you can just ignore most of the camera's sontrols, shoot
raw, and try to get everything right later.

Just think of the controls as a convenient "noteboot" that's always
with you. If you set "flash" on the white balance control, you're
not altering the image. You're just making a note to yourself that
when you process these images, flash is probably a good white
balnace to try. That's all, just an electronic equivelant of a day
book or log book.

You don't have to use the notebook, but it's there if you need it.

--
A cyberstalker told me not to post anymore...
So I'm posting even more!

Ciao!

Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

 

[Joseph S Wisniewski]

Good then raw modes are doing it correctly.

What's still not correct is how there needs to be any sort of image
processing adjustments on the camera. It takes up processing
time/power/etc..

Negligable time and power compared to the lossless compression algorithms use on the raw files on Sigma, Canon, and Nikon cameras. There isn't much difference, processor wise, between compressing raws, and fully processig and compressing JPEGs.

AND, it makes the camera system more complex.

Not noticibly.

And, as you point out, using a gray card (or white card or diffusion dome or disc) isn't unreasonable for some poeple's workflows. It means you do the white balance during she shooting session, but without having to store a raw picture of your gray card (white card, diffusion dome, etc) for later processing.

Again, each little option that is thrown in adds complexity. Even
if you DON'T want to adjust brightness/contrast/sharpness on
camera, the fact that those option are even there means that you
have to know that you can turn it off- one more useless peice of
information that you need to operate a camera that has built-in
image processing. Get rid of the option, and you get rid of having
to know that you can turn it off. The image is going to go through
image processing eventually, either on a computer, or on an output
printer. You can adjust it there on final output.

If you process it with an extrenal program, then the raw just contains "notes" about the sharpening, hue, saturation (what's this about brightness and contrast? It's not a TV set). It just determines your initial settings on the image processing program. It you don't set them at shooting time, you simply set them at post processing time. Either workflow is supported.

About white balance, i'm still don't think they need to be set on
the camera. We can just as easily get rid of the setting in RAW
mode if the camera has some sort of incident light meter or
possibly a spot meter,

Incident meters add cost and complexity. Oly E-1 has one, as does Nikon D2h, Canon 1D II. Low end cameras don't have them.

If you have a spot meter, you need to search the scene for a neutral gray or white, and hope the color you eyeball is good enough, or you have to insert a gray card into the image, which uses up frames for gray setting.

or whatever "magic" the HP cameras are using

HP uses the "magic that doesn't work". I'd prefer not to have that on my Nikons.

to determine white balance. This information gets tagged in the
image, and the output device adjusts accordingly.

And you can do that with existing cameras. Put the Nikon in "custom" WB mode, shoot a gray or white or incident frame, and you're there.

--
A cyberstalker told me not to post anymore...
So I'm posting even more!

Ciao!

Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

 

[Joseph S Wisniewski]

Not at all what I said. I pointed out that your camera exists (the
Leica DigiLux, and the soon to be released Epson RD-1). Go get one
and be happy.

For me the RD-1 looks the most promising. Let's hope they don't
overprice it. It could still use some critical changes- CF card
instead of SD card, a more common lens mount, and so on. Nikon
needs to come out with their version of the RD-1...

I don't think they will. Nikon (Canon, etc) have got enough market research capability to come to the same conclusion that Epson did, the total worldwide market for such a camera is about 10,000 units. I don't think Nikon is going to put R&D resources into a project to share that market with Epson.

Do you think I'm asking them to NOT sell the
overfeatured-comes-with-an-FM-radio model as well that you desire?

That's very much what it sounds like. "Some people may want all
these useless features.. for them the camera vendors can have their
own special overfeatured model."

From that, and the rest of your discussion, it sounds like you want
the mainstream camera that 99.9% of people are using to be reduced
to the "special" model, and your simplified camera, which currently
accounts for 0.1% of the market, to become the mainstream. It
sounds like you may honestly believe that the market shares should
be reverset, thata majority of people want the simplified camera,
but sales of simple vs. featured cameras do not support this.

Actually, the REAL mainstream market is the
digital-point-and-shoot. The Digital SLRs are not mainstream at
all. 99% of people would rather have a simple system, because,
it's simple, and that drives down costs.

How would it?

If you've got enough processing power to do JPEG or compress raw files, you've got enough for the rest of the functions:

Don't forget, the point and shot crowd has a much different definition of "simple" than you do. They want to email a JPEG to Aunt Nellie, print it at a kiosk in the local drug store or WalMart, print it on their own printer by just clicking "print" in Windows Explorer. They don't want RAW.

Why digital SLRs insist
on being the most complex thing on earth I'll never understand.

I take it you've never used a Sony 717 or 828, Nikon 5700 or 8700, etc.

The D70 is simpler and frendlier than any of the high end point and shoots.

And my little Canon S400 has a 12 button, 2 knob interface, it's really not much cleaner than the D100 or D70. In fact, it has more functions (B&W mode, movie mode, panorama mode, etc) than the DSLR, but less buttons, so guess what...

Deeper menus, and more modal buttons.

Are manufacturers just assuming that SLR users want overdesign and
bad engineering? All we seek are the best images! Please build a
camera accordingly- standard lens mounts, efficient interfaces,
standard flash mounts, no compromises, no complexities, and so on.

Spend a week with a D70. It's got everything you describe.

You know if you're successful at that when you can sell your camera
WITHOUT an instruction manual! Mainstream users usually throw away
the instruction manual anyways when they buy their digital camera.

Again, your opinion on what people "usually" do.

To help sales, they really need to look at the REAL mainstream
market, to figure out why they're so successful, and apply those
same techniques to the SLRs.

I hope not. I can't think of a better definition of "successful" than the 8 million strong Canon S200, 230, 400, 410 series. Do you want a DSLR that crams in B&W mode (with and without Sepia toninc), movie mode (with 4 different compression rates and frame sizes), panorama mode, 6 flash modes, 16 different combinatiosn of JPEG compression and resolution, 4 AF modes, sound effects for shutter, focus, flash, whatever "vivid mode" is, a mysterious little button with a mountain and a flower on it, and a button just for "PictBridge"?

Do you REALLY think a $200 Nikon digital SLR would sell poorly? Or
even a $500 one?

They would sell very well, indeed.

Do you really think that stripping all the D70's buttons and one or two knobs would turn a $1000 DSLR into a $500 or $200 DSR. Processor power doesn't change (it's still got to compress raw files, that's the kicker) memory doesn't change, sensor doesn't change, power supply doesn't change. I assume you still want an LCD for review. All you save is about $1 in elastomeric buttons and one or two $0.50 rotary switches.

--
A cyberstalker told me not to post anymore...
So I'm posting even more!

Ciao!

Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

 

[Joseph S Wisniewski]

I still reach for the aperture ring on my lens. 20 years of
training, and it is hardwired in your head.

Just be thankful you didn't grow up on OM-1. Shutter speed on a collar around the lens mount. All the right hand does is hold the body and squeeze the shutter.

--
A cyberstalker told me not to post anymore...
So I'm posting even more!

Ciao!

Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com