A Brief Ergonomic History of Cameras

CAMERA ERGONOMICS

Part 3   A brief history of cameras from an ergonomic perspective

 Author    AndrewS 

Writer's experience   Over the last 50 years, I have owned and used all the main camera types referred to in this section except the Eastman Kodak snapshooter and Brownie types, and obviously, nineteenth century cameras.

The nineteenth century

The first photograph was made by Joseph Nicephore Niepce in 1826. He was followed by Louise Daguerre whose research led to the Daguerrotype in 1839.  The equipment  used in these pioneering photographic exploits was heavy, complex and difficult to use. The processes were dangerous. Daguerre's early ventures required highly toxic chemicals in the form of iodine and mercury vapours.

All this changed in 1888, when George Eastman produced a camera for the masses, and with it the famous slogan "You press the shutter, we do the rest".  The snapshooter was born.

The twentieth century

The popularity of snapshot photography gained further impetus in 1901 with the advent of the Kodak Brownie camera, costing one dollar.  The Brownie had acceptable ergonomics. It was easy to hold and carry.  Most versions provided a useful, if not terribly accurate, viewfinder. Operation was reasonably simple with few controls, although a certain amount of fiddling with levers was part of the process.. A potential source of user frustration was loading and unloading the roll of film, which some people could have found difficult. And of course you had to remember to wind on the film after each exposure..............

BoxBrownie

Professional photographers used large format cameras taking individual sheets of 4x5 inch or larger film. These also delivered decent ergonomics in the sense that many models had well located and designed controls. Of course the camera had to be tripod mounted, the image preview under the darkcloth was inverted vertically and horizontally, it took about 30 minutes to set up for an exposure and there were at least 20 ways the operator could ruin a shot by forgetting an item on the shooting checklist.

Large Format

Press photographers in the early part of the twentieth century managed to use a type of large format camera (the Speed Graphic was a favourite)  for rapid response, hand held reportage. This was a triumph of human dexterity over limitations of the camera type.

In 1929, Franke & Heidecke produced the first Rolleiflex twin lens reflex (TLR) camera and others copied the basic design concept. The TLR provided several ergonomic advantages over existing camera types. One was full time live view on the focussing screen. The image was laterally inverted, but most users adapted to this quirk. The camera was easy to hold while shooting and the controls were reasonably well laid out.

TLR

You had to wind a cranking lever to advance the  film after each exposure which sounds tedious but could be done quickly with practice. Many professional photographers used TLR's for a wide range of assignments. The TLR's compact size and ease of handling, compared to a view camera, also encouraged the rise of a new type of photographer, the enthusiast amateur.  This photographer was well versed in the complexities of shutter speeds, apertures, film speed and manual focussing, but chose not to make a living from photography.

In terms of camera use, the enthusiast amateur and professional were both controllers. They wanted to take charge of the process of using the camera in the quest for excellent results.

Film Rangefinder

In 1925  Ernst Leitz Optische Werke produced the Leica 1 camera. This was one of the first cameras to use the "miniature" format of  24 x 36 mm on  perforated 35 mm movie film. Compared to all previous cameras the Leica was amazingly small and with practice reasonably quick to operate. A built in viewfinder and  rangefinder were introduced in 1932, but the early viewfinders were very small. Some modern commentators wax lyrical about the ergonomics of Leica M series cameras from the M3 of 1954 onwards.  These cameras do have some good features.  They are compact and easily carried. Current settings for aperture, focussed distance (on the lens) and shutter speed (on the top dial) are always visible at a glance and easily adjusted.  Shot to shot operation of the camera is simple, direct and fully controlled by the user.

But there are less appealing aspects of the design. The ISO button on the M9 is irritatingly on the left side of the camera. So to change ISO you have to drop the camera down, remove the left hand from the lens, push and hold the ISO button while turning the rear dial.  Wide angle lenses require the user to look through one window to focus and a different window to frame the shot.

Clasic Film SLR

One of photography's very best ideas was the Single Lens Reflex (SLR) camera. Models for 35 mm perforated film and for 120/220 paper backed rollfilm were released in the late 1940's. This type of camera solved most of the problems inherent in the TLR and Rangefinder types. It became very popular with professional and enthusiast amateur photographers alike. Most were compact, with good handling, viewing and operating characteristics. Over the years the SLR grew larger and heavier, as motor drive, batteries, autofocus  and electronic controls were added to the package.

Film Compact

The invention of motor drive led to the development of  fully automatic compact cameras. These replaced the Brownie to become the snapshooter's favourite. Many had a motorised zoom lens, automatic exposure, automatic focussing, a decent viewfinder, decent handling and sufficient image quality for the target user group. Many had a semi automated film loading and rewind system for ease of use.  They sold by the millions just as Brownies had done in former times.

The twenty first century

It is only 12 years old but this century has already seen more changes to cameras and the photographic industry than took place in the entire twentieth century.

The main changes have been:  Digital image capture, increased complexity, electronic camera operation, the rise and rise of the smart phone as the snapshooter's camera of choice, the decline of prints and rise of the world wide web as the place to view and share photographs and  the invention of the mirrorless interchangeable lens camera.

Many traditional camera makers have failed, their place taken by electronics megacorporations which may or may not have an ongoing committment to  making cameras.

In February 2012, what camera types are available ?

There are still plenty of snapshooter's digital compacts to be had, increasingly featuring some kind of internet connectivity.

Premium compacts seek to provide better image quality and a more engaging user experience for the advanced amateur and even professional photographer. Most of these suffer from the absence of a built in viewfinder or they provide  a small cropped optical viewfinder with parallax error and without  shooting information. If these cameras had a high quality electronic viewfinder (EVF) they would be much more appealing to their users.

Digital SLR's (DSLR) continue to sell well to professional photographers, advanced amateurs and even snapshooters, who put the camera in fully automatic mode and leave it there. Many DSLR's feature reasonable ergonomics but they could be improved by a more considered approach to basic ergonomic principles. Many place interface modules (buttons, dials etc) in suboptimal locations.

Many models have a  mix of traditional SLR operation, with fast but inconsistently accurate phase detect autofocus awkardly married to live view and video function with (usually) accurate but slow contrast detect autofocus.  But you get either one or the other, they are not integrated in seamless fashion.

CSC No EVF

Last but not least we  have the mirrorless compact system camera (CSC).  This camera type first came to market near the end of  2008 and has yet to establish a clear identity. The type also requires further development before it can be considered to have reached technological maturity. As I write this in February 2012 most CSC's  have a feature set which puts them somewhere between an advanced compact and a mid range DSLR, without being able to make a convincing case to replace either. They have features which would make them a daunting choice for the snapshooter. These include (not necessarily all in the same camera)  interchangeable lenses, a  long and complex  list of menu items, sophisticated operating options such as a choice between electronic and mechanical shutter and many capabilities such as in camera panorama stitching, high dynamic range image capture etcetera, etcetera.....  So they are really out of the snapshooter's league.

But they fall short of meeting the expert/enthusiast/professional photographer's requirements also.  This is due to deficiencies in two areas, technology and ergonomics.

CSC With EVF Good Ergonomics

The technological issues are specific. The first is the state of development of the electronic viewfinder (EVF). Even the best at present cannot keep up with the optical viewfinder (OVF) of a good DSLR with respect to refresh rate and dynamic range. As a consequence when shooting at fast frame rates the EVF displays a review of the previous frame, not a preview of the next frame. This is highly disconcerting when attempting to follow action.

The second technological issue is that most CSC's have not yet implemented effective, fast,  sensor based,  predictive tracking autofocus. One recently released CSC does have this feature but it's holding and operating characeristics have drawn much well deserved criticism.

CSC Poor Ergonomics

My main issue with most CSC's on the market as I write is their compromised ergonomics.  In fact my interest in ergonomics was sparked by my frustrating experiences with several CSC's.    Many have no built in viewfinder, no handle for the fingers to grip, or just a vesigial excuse for one, no thumb rest, no Mode Dial on the top plate. Some have a handle so poorly designed the fingers have to be contorted into unnatural positions in order to operate the controls. Many require a trip to a labrynthine and convoluted menu system for primary and secondary exposure and focussing controls. One recent offering makes the right thumb operate three dials while the right index finger has none. Please refer to Part 6 of this series for a discussion about optimum finger task allocation.

Form, function and style

Any exploration into the history of camera design will reveal an ongoing dialogue between form, function and style, since the earliest days of photography.  The layout of film cameras for most of the 20th century was largely determined by functional imperatives. Consider, for instance a traditional 35 mm SLR such as the Pentax Spotmatic.  The mirror box had to be located in the middle, with the pentaprism on top and film path running from the donor spool on one side to the receiver spool on the other side. All the controls worked by direct mechanical connection so they had to be where you find them on this camera and many others of the same basic design. The stylists had their say no doubt but their options were limited by the camera's mechanical natureand the constraints of metal working technology at the time. It seems to me that these restrictions kept camera designers grounded in functional reality. The result was several decades of classic SLR cameras which had decent ergonomics.

Smart Phone Cam

Fast forward to the present and  I think it is clear enough that the photographic industry is undergoing it's biggest upheaval ever, with multiple disruptive technologies from outside photography overthrowing the status quo as never before.

It is not surprising therefore to find that the people who make and market cameras appear to be unsure of the way forward.

Consider the  electronic, mirrorless, interchangeable lens camera. Now, with modern materials fabrication technology the body can be literally any shape at all. An electronic viewfinder and all the controls can be located anywhere, with very little constraint.  Controls can be accessed by hard modules (buttons, dials) or soft interfaces (touch screens and similar). Each interface module can be assigned a function selected by the user from a potentially long list of options. You might think this situation would liberate camera designers from the shackles of yore and free them to develop superb ergonomic creations perfectly adapted to the user's functional requirements.  But it has not happened.  In my assessment, the human machine interface (HMI) of modern cameras is getting worse, not better.

Camera makers say they are making product development decisions based on feedback about prospective buyers wants, likes and preferences. As I discussed in Part 2 of this series, these buyer attributes are transient, idiosyncratic and often unformulated.   They need to be considered separately from, not as a substitute for,  basic principles of ergonomic design.

It appears to me that even long established camera makers do not have an in house book of design principles and guidelines to optimise holding, viewing and operating cameras, in other words, ergonomics. This becomes glaringly apparent when  long established makers of well regarded SLR's and DSLR's produce their first CSC with a multitude of deficiencies in holding, viewing and operating capability. It is as though these makers learned no basic principles from their SLR experience which could be applied to the CSC.

This series of articles is my attempt to rectify that deficiency.

The articles are directed primarily at camera buyers and users in the hope that they will become more sophisticated and articulate in providing feedback to camera makers about the design requirements of a camera which will be a pleasure to use rather than a set of frustrations to be overcome.