In February 2014 I posted on this blog a piece titled
“Fuji X-T1 a contrarian ergonomic view”. The X-T1 had just been released to a
rapturous reception from reviewers and would-be users alike.
I analysed the design carefully and concluded that the
X-T1 was burdened with many ergonomic problems which would make it slower and
more awkward to use than, say, a current model Canon or Nikon prosumer DSLR. I
compared the X-T1 to the Panasonic FZ1000 and found the FZ1000 had a much more
effective, streamlined user interface.
I had the temerity to post a link to this item on a
Fuji camera user forum. The reaction was astounding. Well, astounding to me at
the time anyway.
The Fuji fanatics reacted like a pack of wild dogs
whose pups had come under attack by some predator.
Fast forward to today and I find that some things have
not changed.
Some people will still offer nasty vicious comments
online to anyone with whose views they disagree
and
There has been disappointingly little progress on the
ergonomic aspects of camera design.
I notice that Digital Photography Review posted its review
of the Fuji X-T2 on 19 October this year (2016)
Bearing in mind that DPR is owned by Amazon and the
mission of Amazon is to sell stuff I find some of the reviewer’s comments appropriately
diplomatic while trying perhaps to hint at some of the issues which I found
with the X-T1.
For instance ….”direct controls give an engaging
shooting experience”……..
My ergonomic translation: “In order to carry out the tasks required to
operate the camera the X-T2 requires more actions, each more complex than are
required by a well designed conventional (mode Dial + Control Dials) ILC or
fixed Zoom model”.
And again………(The X-T2 ) …”offers an extensive array of
direct control points to a degree that’s possibly excessive”…..
My ergonomic translation…….”The camera is cluttered
with multiple redundant control points. It would be faster and more streamlined
to operate with fewer, more thoughtfully considered controls”.
In today’s post I would like to deal with some fads,
fashions and affectations which blight and burden some modern cameras making
them more awkward to use than they could easily be with better ergonomic
design.
I am assuming hand held operation outside a studio and
using available light for the most part, supplemented from time to time by on
camera flash.
Let us start with some basic principles of camera
ergonomics:
There are four phases of camera use, Setup, Prepare,
Capture and Review.
In each Phase the user must carry out some tasks, each
of which requires actions, the number and complexity of which can be observed by
anyone having the will to do so.
Note that in the Capture Phase the user is either looking through the
viewfinder or at the monitor, not at the top of the camera.
Main
tasks in each Phase
In Setup Phase
the user trawls through the menus and selects options for the multitude
of functions on a modern camera including dial functions button functions and
much more.
Prepare Phase comes in the minutes before making
photos. This mainly consists of selecting the desired mode when conditions
change. This might include the main shooting mode, drive mode, focus mode,
autofocus mode, flash settings…..and potentially many others. These selections
are best performed with engraved (set-and-see) dials on the camera top
plate and/or various buttons and a Q Menu if available.
In Capture Phase the user must look at the subject,
frame up, zoom, adjust exposure and focus then make the shot. One is looking
either through the viewfinder or at the monitor, not the top of the camera and
not the lens barrel.
In Capture Phase one might want to adjust primary
(aperture, shutter speed, ISO sensitivity) and secondary (exposure
compensation) exposure parameters and primary and secondary focussing
parameters, all while looking continuously through the viewfinder or at the
monitor.
The most appropriate type of control module for
adjustments in Capture Phase is one or more control dials the function of which
is mode dependent and which can easily be located and operated by the fingers
without having to look at the dial(s).
So that is a quick summary of some basic principles.
Now let us examine some controls which keep appearing
on modern cameras which offer the user a less than streamlined operating
experience.
Aperture
ring around the lens barrel
This relic of the past appears on Sony RX, and Panasonic LX cameras and
others and on some but not most micro four thirds and Fujifilm lenses, go
figure.
In practice the main problems with this means of
changing aperture are:
* It requires more actions each more complex to
operate an aperture ring (requires
entire left hand and two fingers to move) than it does to turn an optimally
positioned control dial (can be done with right index finger only).
* In Capture Phase the aperture ring is invisible to
the user (unless the camera is on a tripod) and therefore the f stop numbers
marked on it serve no useful purpose.
You can see the numbers on the ring when you don’t need to (in Prepare
Phase) but cannot see them when you do need to (in Capture Phase).
* The f number indications will sometimes be incorrect
with variable aperture zooms.
* The aperture ring takes up space which could be used
for another purpose such as a focus ring or zoom ring.
Shutter
speed dial This is
another relic of the past which has multiple ergonomic problems.
* With the dial in the usual position on the right
side of the camera top plate the user must release grip on the camera with the
right hand, support the mass of the camera with the left hand then reach back
with two fingers to turn the dial. A mode dependent control dial requires only
a small movement of the right index finger to make the required adjustment with
no need to alter grip with either hand.
* No dial can contain all the available shutter speeds
including intermediates and long exposures. So for these speeds some additional
control must be provided in the form of an accessory dial or similar. This is
ridiculously clumsy and convoluted.
* You can see the shutter speed dial in Prepare Phase
when there is no need to see it, but cannot see it in Capture Phase when you do
need to see an indication of shutter speed. This therefore must be in the
viewfinder or monitor making the speed inscribed on the dial redundant.
* The shutter speed dial occupies valuable camera real estate which
would be better allocated to a control module for Prepare Phase adjustment for
instance drive mode.
Exposure
compensation dials have become very fashionable lately.
Several ILCs and fixed lens models feature one of these often top right on the
top plate of the camera. They suffer from several of the same problems as
aperture rings and shutter speed dials.
* One very effective way to determine if exposure
compensation is required is to view the appearance of zebras in the EVF or
monitor. If the zebras indicate highlight blowout negative exposure
compensation can be dialled in before the exposure is made. This process
requires that the operator have full view of the subject and zebras in the EVF
at all times in Capture Phase of use. An engraved EC dial on top of the camera
is invisible and therefore essentially useless.
* Working the dial usually requires two fingers,
causing disruption of right hand grip.
* A more useful module for Prepare Phase could be used
in place of the EC dial.
* EC is more effectively carried out with a mode
dependent control dial.
* If EC is adjusted with a control dial the setting
can be configured to revert to zero when the camera is powered down or the
exposure mode changed.
Stacked Dials There are variations on this theme. Some cameras have dial over dial, others have dial over lever module or similar. In either case it is not a matter of if but when the user will accidentally change a parameter unintentionally. Yet some new cameras persist with this feature which is entirely un-necessary for and counterproductive to a streamlined, fast reliable user interface.
Stacked Dials There are variations on this theme. Some cameras have dial over dial, others have dial over lever module or similar. In either case it is not a matter of if but when the user will accidentally change a parameter unintentionally. Yet some new cameras persist with this feature which is entirely un-necessary for and counterproductive to a streamlined, fast reliable user interface.
ISO
dial ISO sensitivity is a primary exposure
parameter requiring fast adjustment in Capture Phase of use with the eye to the
viewfinder and with minimal disruption to the hold of the hands on the camera.
All this is easily achieved if ISO is
adjusted with a control dial. The location of a separate, dedicated ISO dial on
top of or sometimes on the front of the body is intellectually logical but
ergonomically clumsy and inefficient.
Top
plate LCD screens
were required for SLRs and early
DSLRs as there was no other place to display camera data. But now all
LCD screen data and much more can be displayed on the rear monitor and/or EVF
if fitted, making the LCD screen redundant. Yet these relics of the past keep
reappearing on modern cameras (such as the Sony RX10, 1,2,3.) which have no
requirement for such a display which takes up valuable camera real estate which
could be put to better use.
No
handle, no thumb support---No excuse !! With my mockups I have shown that even a
pocketable camera can be fitted with a serviceable handle and thumb support.
There is no ergonomic reason whatsoever for the ongoing appearance of cameras
without a decently serviceable handle and thumb support.
Presumably their omission has something to do with
“styling” which raises the question -----does one buy a camera to admire on the
shelf or to use for the purpose of taking photographs ?
Studio cameras
If the camera is in a studio, supported on a tripod or
similar and the subject is lit primarily by studio flash then a different kind
of control layout can be appropriate. In this case the camera will be used in
manual mode with the aperture, shutter speed and ISO set according to the
requirements of the shoot and the exposure determined by the flash output as
measured by an incident meter at the subject.
In this setting it can be quite appropriate to have
the aperture, shutter speed and ISO settings on engraved dials on the camera
top plate, easily visible by the user looking down on the camera.
The new Fuji GFX50S medium format digital camera has
an aperture ring on the barrel of each lens, an ISO dial and a shutter speed
dial. In a studio setting this could be quite workable, even preferable. But
for users planning to take the GFX50S out and about this control layout will
not be optimal.
Back
to the camera production chart
It is clear from the CIPA chart at the top of this
post that the years 2008-2011 marked the apogee of camera production on planet
earth.
Now here is the thing………….
The most popular cameras were, of course
point-and-shoot compacts. The smartphone revolution has dealt this camera type
a terminal blow. But we also see a sharp decline in the number of
Interchangeable lens cameras (ILC) produced.
What was the most popular type of ILC in the years
2008-2011 ?
Mostly Canon and Nikon (with some Sony SLT) entry to
midrange DSLRs.
Most of these cameras
* Did not have a separate aperture ring.
* Did not have a Shutter Speed dial.
* Did not have an exposure compensation dial.
* Did not have a top plate LCD panel.
* Did not have an ISO dial.
* Did not have stacked dials.
* Did not have stacked dials.
* Did have a proper handle.
* Did have a decent thumb support.
It appears to me that the camera makers (all of them)
have decided to retreat to an alternative universe. In this very strange place
they are abandoning a modern control layout which has been shown to produce
good cameras which sell well in favour of a retreat to symbols of the 1960s for
reasons entirely unclear to me.
It seems to me that the more cameras which are thrust
upon us with slow, clumsy 1960’s era control systems the more the rush away from
cameras will accelerate. I do not have to be much of a prophet to say this, the
trend is in full flight for all to see.
Can camera makers rescue the camera industry at all ?
Not with their present strategies.
We are getting cameras with all kinds of extravagant
technological capabilities which I never knew I wanted, such as being able to
select focus after the shot or taking 24 frames per second of still photos each
separately focused.
After hearing about these amazing capabilities I still
don’t want them.
But I do want good ergonomics. I do want cameras which
are a pleasure to hold and operate.
But all too often the camera makers are serving up
technological marvels which are just not enjoyable to hold and operate at all.
They could easily fix this. But the will does not
appear to be there.
Such a pity.
Similar in-house design-driven, fashion-first/ergonomics last, technology rich/user poor philosophies are being applied to car design. consumer electronics and of course financial products, among many others. The quest for a new "killer product" often damages whole product segments at great cost to both manufacturers and end users.
ReplyDeleteWhile I generally agree with your suggestions and critiques, I feel that an aperture ring on a lens is an ergonomic improvement, mainly because it offloads one task to the otherwise idle left hand, reducing the workload on the overburdened right hand. Since I hold a camera properly, my left hand is under the body and cradling the lens anyway. Using index finger and thumb to manipulate an aperture ring requires no change in grip and interrupts no other task. OTOH, changing aperture with my right hand via a control dial delays manipulation of any other dials or control buttons with the right hand.
ReplyDeleteHi Jacques, Thank you for reading this little blog and for taking the time now and in the past to respond to some of my posts. I hear what you are saying but would raise some issues in response:
ReplyDeleteCanon and Nikon ILC lenses do not have aperture rings
I don't find the left hand idle at all. It has to support the mass of the lens, zoom (if zoom control is on the lens) and focus (if manual focus is in use).
My studies show that the number and complexity of movements required to change the aperture is greater with an aperture ring on the lens than a control dial close to the shutter button.
The question of the "correct" way to place the left hand on the lens assembly has been debated on this blog and elsewhere, not always in as thoughtful fashion as I would like.
There are several issues: some people with a flexible left wrist joint might be comfortable to hold the left hand under the lens. But I am old and getting stiff in the joints and find my hold on the camera much more stable with the left wrist straight and the "left hand over lens" position much more stable and comfortable. Then one must consider the different relationship between the fingers of the left hand and the aperture ring with landscape vs portrait orientation. This is particularly an issue when the aperture ring has serrations which go only part way around the circumference of the lens barrel or consist of just two small lands which will often not be where the fingers want to find them regardless of had over/hand under/ portrait/landscape condition.
Andrew
Agree 100%. The technicians want to change things 'because they can'.
ReplyDeletePeople only want things to do what they want them to do - smoothly.
Software 'upgrades' are the bane of everyone's life.