The half closed relaxed hand. This is the author's hand which is of average size for an adult male according to Wikipedia. |
This
long post is
an attempt to gather together and summarise my discoveries about camera
ergonomics over the last five years and to present my proposal for measuring
and scoring camera ergonomics.
Ergonomics:
The science of designing things which people use for
maximum efficiency and safety.
Who
am I ?
An expert/enthusiast photographer with 60 years experience of making photos with a wide
variety of different types of camera.
I have no connection to any person or organisation
involved in the manufacture or sale of photographic equipment. Nobody lends me
cameras for testing. My observations and findings are independent.
I have had many photos published and some of my
pictures are held in the permanent collection of a State Library.
I like to know
how stuff works and will keep investigating until I figure it out, if that
appears possible.
I believe I have made substantial progress towards
understanding the elements of camera ergonomics and am now refining a method for
measurement and scoring.
How
it started
I bought a Panasonic G1 after having previously owned
several mid range Canon SLRs then DSLRs.
I encountered numerous problems holding and operating the G1 and started to
wonder why some cameras were a pleasure to operate but others were not.
My voyage of discovery into the nature of camera
ergonomics had begun. I soon realised
that there was an abundance of cameras with poor ergonomics of all sizes, from
all makers at all price points.
There
was, to put it mildly, a lot of material to study.
The
blog
I originally thought to write a book about my findings
but soon realised that a blog would be able to reach far more readers and
provide a more interactive open forum for feedback and discussion.
Philosophy
and assumptions
No endeavour arises from a vacuum.
Compact cameras are steadily being replaced by
smartphones.
This enterprise is directed towards people who elect
to use a camera for taking photos, be they snapshooters or enthusiasts.
I take the position that if the camera is to survive
and evolve as a discrete type of device it needs to be distinctly different
from and more specifically crafted for photography than any smartphone or
similar type of device.
It seems to me that the main difference between a
camera and a smartphone is the issue of engagement. A camera requires the user
to engage with the device by hand, eye and brain in the considered process of
taking a photo. Making photos with a
camera is not an afterthought to the day’s events, it is one of the events.
The process of using a camera is deliberative. Making
photos with a smartphone is more likely to be opportunistic.
The
Proper Camera This concept gives practical expression to
the ideal camera for deliberative use. Features which define the proper camera
include:
* Good enough image quality and performance for the
user’s requirements.
* Anatomical handle and thumb support of optimal
design.
* Built in, always ready, viewfinder of good quality.
* Fully articulated monitor.
* A user interface which:
Allows an expert to obtain full control of imaging parameters if desired.
Allows the novice/snapshooter to set the camera to automatic operation if desired.
* Zoom lens or ability to mount one.
* Built in flash unit.
My position is that (the declining numbers of) cameras
without the features listed above occupy a ‘betwixt and between’ position in
the imaging world, lacking both the convenience of a smartphone and the
versatility of a proper camera.
Likes
and preferences
In order for this work to move forward it has been
necessary for me to unravel the nexus between “likes and preferences’ on the one hand and ‘ergonomic analysis using basic principles aided by time and motion studies’ on the other
hand.
Likes and preferences have three characteristics
pertinent to this discussion:
* They are idiosyncratic. In other words they are held
by an individual for that person’s own private reasons whatever they may be.
Another individual has different likes for different reasons. People often say they like that to which they
have become accustomed, whatever it was. It might be a DSLR with a big fat
handle or a compact without an EVF or a handle or the camera that made some
really good pictures on our last holiday………………you get the idea.
* They are transient. Likes are shaped by a person’s
experience. With different experiences a person’s likes will change. The person who loudly proclaims in 2010 that
he will never, ever, give up his DSLR with optical viewfinder is discovered in
2012 promoting with equal fervour the EVF in his new mirrorless camera.
About 20 years ago I liked using a 4x5 inch view
camera because it was interesting and challenging and it made some amazingly
good photos, not because it had good ergonomics. But I got a bad back from
dragging the big heavy kit around then I didn’t like it any more.
* They are often poorly formulated. People will often
assert they ‘like’ something or somebody but are unable to explain why. A
person may say they really like a certain camera then on subsequent reflection realise that they
like it because of the color or an association with a loved person. Or some
other extraneous factor.
My conclusion is that ‘likes’ and ‘ergonomic analysis’
are both valid but completely separate and largely unrelated descriptors of the
human/machine interface.
What
about my own likes and preferences ?
I used many different types of cameras over the years,
from subminiature to large format. I
just took each camera as it came and learned to work with it.
The first one to which I recall forming a definite
aversion was the Panasonic G1, soon followed by the even less user friendly G3.
But instead of simply saying “I don’t like those cameras” I used the experience
of dislike as the impetus for several years of study in which I tried to
understand exactly why I preferred some cameras to others.
By the way Panasonic has lifted itself from one of the
worst to one of the best ergonomic performers, although recently there has been
some regression in the form of the LX100.
So, I ‘like’ using equipment which fulfils its purpose
in a fashion which is both efficient and engaging.
I do not ‘like’ any particular brand or type of camera
and do not ‘like’ any particular style of design although I have discovered
that some work better than others as determined by measurable criteria.
Developing
a framework for describing ergonomics
When I started this work there was no systematic way to
describe the ergonomics of a camera.
So I developed a framework within which and a language
by which ergonomic concepts could be expressed. This paved the way for me to
develop criteria for evaluating and scoring ergonomics.
The sequence was Framework>Language>Criteria>Scoring.
Technological
vs conceptual complexity
The three pillars of camera evaluation are image
quality, performance and ergonomics.
Regarding image quality it is relatively easy for
users to write a shopping list of requirements. The list would likely include good
color fidelity, low noise at all sensitivities and good resolution. It is
conceptually straightforward. But for the engineers to deliver all these things
at the same time is technologically very complex.
Likewise the user can readily write a shopping list of
performance requirements. This might include fast sensor readout times, fast
frame rates with focus on each frame, global shutter, etc.
Conceptually easy enough but technologically difficult
to implement.
Ergonomics presents the opposite problem. A camera
with good ergonomics is just as easy to make as one with poor ergonomics and
costs no more. Technology is not an issue.
The problem here is conceptual. Until now there has
been no systematic framework within which to understand, describe, compare,
measure and score ergonomics.
In general camera makers have been much better at
dealing with the technological challenges (image quality, performance) than the
conceptual ones (ergonomics).
Camera
size, hand size
The size issue is another one I had to investigate
very early in my journey of discovery.
I ran into handling problems when I downsized from a
Canon EOS 40D to a Panasonic G1, a much smaller camera.
So of course I initially thought I was dealing with a
size problem. But I was wrong. I soon
discovered that the Samsung NX10, almost exactly the same size as the G1 was
more comfortable to hold and easier to operate.
I also discovered that the canon EOS 450D, larger than
either of the mirrorless cameras felt cramped and uncomfortable with a handle
design which was not a good match for any of the hands which I used to test it.
This included adult males and females and a selection of grandchildren.
So yes, obviously, hands and cameras both come in a
range of sizes. But one of the key discoveries which I have made is that with
good ergonomic design large hands can readily operate small cameras and within
limits, small hands can effectively operate large cameras. Obviously a pro
level DSLR is going to be too fat and heavy for one of the grandchildren, aged
5-13.
But the 12 year old had no trouble holding, carrying
and using a Panasonic FZ1000 for several hours at the zoo recently. He even got
a couple of decent BIF shots at the free flight bird show.
Several of my mockups are proof of concept that even
very small cameras can have decent handling and operating characteristics in small
or large hands.
Scaling
I discovered quite early in my voyage of enquiry that
cameras do not lend themselves to scaling up or down. It is readily possible to design small,
midsize or large cameras with good handling characteristics but each size range
has to be shaped differently from the others.
Here is an example: Sitting on my desk right now is a
Panasonic FZ1000 and a Sony RX100 (original). On the control panel (the area of
the back of the body to the right of the monitor) each has a round 4 Way
controller module and 5 buttons. The FZ1000 control panel measures 40x75mm for
an area of 3000 squ.mm. The RX100 control panel measures 20x55mm for an area of
1100 squ.mm. The FZ1000 provides an efficient user interface. The buttons are
large, well spaced and located where they are easy to reach and operate by
feel. The RX100 buttons are very small, crowded, close to the edge and very
difficult to locate by feel.
This type of control panel can be scaled down in the
physical sense but that makes for a poor ergonomic result.
My proof of concept mockup compact uses a completely
different type of control panel design
with fewer, larger buttons, none near the edge and a JOG lever but no 4 way controller. This combination provides a much more ergonomic interface.
Camera
shape
Modern fabrication technology and electronic operation
has freed designers from the mechanical constraints of a previous era. So now a
camera can be literally any shape at all and the controls can be disposed in
any arrangement at all on (or off) the camera.
I experimented with mockups having a variety of
shapes, and concluded that the most ergonomically effective shape and
arrangement for a hand held camera intended for expert use is one which has
been around for years, namely the SLR/DSLR style with hump top and handle.
Hands
and fingers (functional anatomy)
Our subject is the interaction between hand held cameras
and the hands which use them so some understanding of their functional anatomy
is essential. I studied anatomy 50 years ago so this line of enquiry came
naturally to me. But anyone with hands can do the same thing. It does not
involve rocket science, just careful observation.
Here follows a summary of the main points which I
found pertinent to camera holding and operation:
* Hands vary in size but they all work the same way.
No humans have the hands of a possum.
* Humans have an opposable thumb. This is essential
for holding and operating a camera.
* The human hand aligns itself naturally into a ‘half
closed, relaxed’ position. From this position the fingers can close or open,
using muscle effort.
* The ideal camera/handle/thumb support shape/shutter
button location is that which conforms
to the ‘half closed, relaxed’ hand posture with the right index finger on the
shutter button ready to go. The camera
is shaped to fit the hand, not the other way around.
* With a small amount of flexion or extension of the
fingers and thumb, a range of camera sizes/hand sizes can be accommodated,
provided the camera shape is optimal.
* The right index finger is a ‘controller’. The right
middle, 4th and little fingers are ‘grippers’. The thumb has to
perform both gripping and controlling actions requiring careful design of the
thumb rest and rear of camera controls.
* The right index finger can move side to side through
a small range and can undergo flexion and extension through a larger
range. This is highly relevant to the
optimal design of controls in the vicinity of the shutter button.
* The right thumb can move a small distance side to
side without disrupting opposition at the base of the thumb. This enables the
thumb to undertake some movements without
the left hand having to support all the weight of the camera.
* The left hand and fingers have supporter/controller
duties.
* Lens based controls for Capture Phase operation
should be circumferential (rings) with tactile surface all the way around. This
enables the user to locate and turn the
rings with the left hand by feel without looking, in landscape or portrait
orientation.
* Lens based controls for Prepare Phase use can be of
other types usually requiring visual identification.
Haptics (The science of touch)
Early in my voyage of discovery I encountered several
cameras (Panasonic G1, GH2, G3) which used 5 little rounded buttons in the 4
way controller on the back of the camera. No matter how much I practiced I
could never reliably find the button I wanted by feel. Then I got a camera (Samsung
NX10) which used the ‘rocking saucer’ design with raised, sharpish edge for the
4 way controller. Problem solved. This one was easy to locate and operate by
feel.
One of those cameras with the little round buttons (G3)
also had a rear control dial which was so deeply recessed in its housing on the
upper rear of the camera I could only work it by jamming the very tip of my
thumb onto the dial. This required my right hand to adopt a totally un- natural
position which gave no support to the
camera and which precluded other camera tasks.
Several Canon EOS DSLRs have a line of identical round buttons behind the control
dial on top of the camera. On the 60D which I had for a time, these control AF,
Drive, ISO and Meter Pattern. There are 2 problems with this arrangement.
The first is that the buttons are so far behind the
dial I was unable to reach them with my index finger without releasing grip on
the handle.
The second is that apart from a tiny little nipple on
the ISO button they are identical. I never managed to reliably find or operate
any of these buttons by feel. I had to stop looking through the viewfinder and
shift grip with my right hand.
Canon could easily fix this problem with a modest
redesign of the camera top section but they kept the same arrangement on the
70D. Presumably they are working on the principle that ‘if it ain’t broke,
don’t fix it’. Sure, the arrangement is not broken but it could easily be
implemented better.
Haptic issues are of critical importance to the design
of everything on a camera, especially UIMs (user interface modules, meaning
buttons, levers, dials etcetera). The size, shape, position, projection,
texture and movement of UIMs determines whether they are able to be
operated efficiently or not.
The compact mockup in hand. It lacks the inverted L shaped handle, forward shutter button and quad control set of the larger mockup but still provides a decent user experience. |
Handles,
thumb supports and nearby controls
I have spent a large amount of time and effort
exploring many different types of handle, thumb support and nearby controls.
This has involved making many mockups. Each of my camera
mockups has required many alterations to the handle until I have been
satisfied. To briefly summarise a lot of
work:
* The optimum handle shape for small (larger than
RX100 size compact) medium and large cameras is the ‘inverted L, canted back 10 degrees’. The optimum location for the shutter button
is front left (as viewed by the user) on top of the inverted L handle.
* The optimum location for a top front command
(control) dial is 12mm behind and at the same height as the center of the
shutter button and angled to match the orientation of the right index finger.
* The right index finger can efficiently operate two buttons in addition to the
shutter button and control dial. These buttons are located to the right of the shutter button
and control dial to form a ‘quad control’ set. No cameras in past or current production have
the quad control set as envisaged by me. Some DSLRs and the Samsung NX-1 are
heading in that direction but have some way to go.
A well designed quad control set allows the user to
quickly and easily control with just one finger and without having to move a
muscle in any other part of the body, all the following: Autofocus, Auto
exposure, Aperture (or Shutter speed depending on capture mode), Sensitivity
(ISO), Exposure Compensation and Capture.
This means that for most photos, most of the time the
camera can be driven with just one finger.
* The inverted L handle can be scaled up and down
provided great care is taken to get the dimensions right. If done carefully, small hands move up the
handle and large hands move down the handle. Both can operate the controls effectively.
* The optimum thumb support allows the thumb to lie
diagonally across the back of the camera. This places the thumb in its
strongest and most relaxed position.
Thumb supports which force the thumb into a vertical position near the
right edge of the camera provide less strength, stability and balance and less
opportunity to effectively operate a rear control dial while maintaining a firm
grip on the camera.
* The optimum location for a rear control dial is embedded in
the upper section of the thumb support. Check out the Panasonic GH3/4 and
FZ1000 for good examples of this.
Locations
From an ergonomic perspective the highest value real
estate on a camera is that easily accessible to the right index finger and
thumb without having to shift grip or stop looking through the viewfinder, and
to the left hand/fingers without having to shift grip.
UIMs for Capture Phase are best located in these high
value locations. UIMs for Prepare and Review Phases are best placed in lower
priority locations.
I often see cameras with Playback (Review Phase) or
Menu (Setup Phase) buttons in high value locations while controls for Capture Phase
(such as ISO or Exposure Compensation) are relegated to low value locations.
Phases
of camera use, tasks and actions
There are 4 phases of camera use, Setup
(prior to using the camera), Prepare (in the minutes before
making pictures), Capture (the process of making pictures) and Review
(of images captured).
In the Capture Phase of use there are three ways by which
the user interacts with the camera. These are Holding, Viewing and Operating.
In order to make the camera do his or her bidding the user must perform a series of Tasks in each of the phases and interaction modalities.
Completion of each task requires Actions. These can be examined by time and motion
study.
Anybody with access to a camera can do such a study. It is just a matter of paying attention to every action required to make a camera work. This can reveal the number of actions required to perform each task. It can also examine the complexity of those actions and note the presence of any enabling actions required.
Anybody with access to a camera can do such a study. It is just a matter of paying attention to every action required to make a camera work. This can reveal the number of actions required to perform each task. It can also examine the complexity of those actions and note the presence of any enabling actions required.
* From an ergonomic perspective there are two types of camera:
* Interchangeable lens camera (ILC)
* Fixed lens Camera (FLC)
The process of changing lenses is so ergonomically
disruptive that in order to compare cameras I have decided to assume that an
ILC will be used with just one lens.
Some assumptions which inform the evaluation process:
* It is ergonomically preferable for camera operation to require the minimum number and complexity of actions.
* A well designed camera should be comfortable and secure to hold.
* Viewing arrangements should provide a clear subject preview in all operating conditions.
This is completely different from and unrelated to any
consideration of an individual's likes, wants and preferences. It is also unrelated to any questions about
style.
As a result of performing time and motion studies on many cameras and mockups I have come to the view that some types of arrangement for holding, viewing and operating provide clear ergonomic benefit over other types. This is reflected in the evaluation schedule.
My
scoring schedule is deliberately biased towards operating in Capture Phase with
the eye to the viewfinder. The reason for this is that I regard viewfinder
operation as one of the cardinal features which differentiate the proper
camera from other photo capable devices.
Motion picture
I
have not included motion picture in this exercise as use of a camera for that
purpose involves some quite different ergonomic priorities.
Maximum
score allocations: This represents a judgement call about which
aspects of camera use are the most ergonomically important. Obviously this is contestable but I think it
is reasonable to allocate the highest priority to the process of operating the
camera in Capture Phase. The actual numbers are somewhat arbitrary as they must
be but they can be adjusted in the light of ongoing experience, should that be
necessary.
Phase of use
|
Maximum score
|
|
Setup
|
15
|
|
Prepare
|
15
|
|
Capture
|
Holding
|
20
|
Viewing
|
20
|
|
Operating
|
25
|
|
Review
|
5
|
|
Total
|
100
|
Scoring In each subsection the maximum score will be
gained if a camera allows the user to efficiently perform all the tasks with a
small number of actions each of low complexity, has all the hardware and
positive factors with none of the negative factors. Total maximum score is 100.
I rate all cameras against all other cameras using the
same criteria. There is no division into entry, midrange, professional or any other grouping. I expect all cameras for all users to have
excellent ergonomics.
The overall score has three elements:
1. Subscores.
2. A narrative explaining the scorer’s reasoning for the subscore with reference to the criteria.
3. A total score.
Some aspects of scoring rely on subjective impressions, for instance whether a handle is rated as ‘comfortable’. In this case long term experience with many cameras helps to inform the decision process.
But many items on the scoring schedule involve rating the camera against objective criteria. For instance can all the tasks of Capture Phase be carried out while looking through the viewfinder and without having to change grip with either hand ?
Unscored features
Modern cameras come with a plethora of features and
functions such as ‘art filters’, special effects, scene modes …..etcetera. I do
not include these in the ergonomic evaluation or score.
I also do not rate touch screen capability. Some users
say they have high regard for this feature but from an ergonomic perspective it
is unusable with hand held operation and OVF/EVF viewing. It may be useful with
the camera on a tripod for stills or video but cameras designed for stills or
hybrid still/video (like the Panasonic GH4) will still work just fine without the touch
screen. Some dedicated video cameras rely
heavily on a touch screen interface.
Setup Phase [Max score 15]
Tasks Make Main Menu selections, Allocate My Menu items, Allocate Quick Menu items, Select Function Button and dial assignments, set up Custom Modes, set up other functions such as Wi-Fi.
Elements Has a Main Menu, My Menu with user selected items and a separately accessed Quick Menu with user selected items for Prepare Phase.
Most UIM's
enable user selected function.
Content Menu headings and subheadings are logical, coherent, systematic and easy to navigate. Like items are grouped together.
User interface All items are clear, legible and easy to read. The process navigate>identify>select is easily learned and becomes second nature.
Negatives Main Menu confusing, contains mystery icons or items, not logically designed, like items scattered about in different submenus. No My Menu. Q Menu items not user selectable. No Custom Modes. Navigation complex or confusing. Setup Phase UIM's located where Capture Phase UIM's need to be.
Prepare Phase [Max score 15]
Tasks Set Main Mode, set frequently used modes (usually Focus , Autofocus, Drive), set less frequently used modes and other adjustments required in the minutes prior to Capture Phase. Clearly not all these tasks are required for every shooting session but the camera should enable them for the times when they are required.
Hardware Has dedicated set and see (module with inscriptions indicating current setting) UIM's (user interface modules: covers buttons, dials, switches, levers etc) for the most commonly used Modes. Allows quick access to other modes and functions required in Prepare Phase, by Quick Menu button, Function buttons or other quick access portal(s) on body and lens.
User interface Clear graphics, icons and displays on monitor and EVF when navigating and selecting items via Q Menu, Function buttons or other portal. UIM's for Prepare Phase do not displace UIM's for Capture Phase from top value locations on the body.
Content Quick access portals allow adjustment of other modes and functions, for instance flash, metering, recording quality, image size, ISO (if set in Prepare Phase) shutter type, image stabiliser, display, burst/continuous rate, electronic level, electronic shutter, grid lines, histogram ...............and many more, as user selected.
Negatives Any Prepare Phase items only accessible via main menu. Settings locked while camera is writing files to the memory card. Q Menu items, functions of buttons and other UIM's not user assignable. Prepare Phase UIM's located where Capture Phase UIM's need to be.
Capture Phase [Max score 65]
Holding [Subscore 20]
Tasks Hold the camera in a relaxed but secure grip with both hands with right index finger on the shutter button in relaxed position. Maintain this grip while carrying out the "operating" tasks below.
Hardware Built in ergonomic anatomical handle, inverted L type canted back 10 degrees is optimal. Ergonomic thumb support. Diagonal type is optimal. Optimal shutter button position is forward, top left on the handle (as viewed by the user).
User Experience Handle and thumb support work together to allow the user's right hand to adopt the half closed relaxed posture in basic hold position. Shutter button location enables this optimal holding posture.
Negatives Absent or poorly shaped handle. Handle only available as accessory. Thumb support inadequate in position, elevation or orientation. Sub optimal placement of shutter button.
Viewing [Subscore 20]
Tasks the operator can comfortably and clearly, in all conditions, view in the EVF or monitor the information listed below.
* Subject preview (live view) unobscured by overlays.
* Major camera data, displayed outside the preview image, in either landscape or portrait orientation, optimally below but possibly also above:
Aperture,
Shutter Speed, ISO, Exposure Compensation, White Balance, Battery Status,
Capture Mode in use, Remaining exposures on card.
* Secondary camera data/displays, superimposed over the preview image:
Active AF Area
position and size/shape, Grid lines, Histogram, Manual Focus Guide indications,
others as user selected.
Hardware There is a built in high quality EVF with high quality viewfinder optics and comfortable eyecup. There is a high quality monitor. Fully articulated type is optimal.
Content EVF and monitor gain up or down to represent exposure compensation. 100% accurate preview is provided.
User Experience EVF and monitor both provide the same information presented in the same way. There is a seamless segue from one to the other. Look in the viewfinder, see the viewfinder; look at the monitor, see the monitor. Optimally there is no perceptible EVF blackout time after each exposure.
Negatives EVF not built in or not available, Camera data is only available superimposed over the preview image, EVF refresh rate slow, EVF delivers poor viewing quality in some conditions. Monitor fixed or only swing up/down.
Operating [Subscore 25]
Task list While continuously looking through the EVF (or monitor, but the EVF is a more stringent test) and without shifting grip on the camera with either hand, Capture Phase requires that the following tasks be carried out smoothly and efficiently, without impeding the capture process. Obviously not every exposure requires every one of these tasks to be performed but the camera should be configured so it is possible to do so:
* Adjust primary exposure parameters: Aperture (f stop), Exposure Time (Shutter speed), Sensitivity (ISO).
* Adjust secondary exposure parameters: Exposure Compensation, Program Shift, AE Lock, White Balance.
* Adjust primary framing and focus parameters: Zoom, Initiate/Lock autofocus, Manual Focus.
* Adjust secondary focus parameters: Change position and size of active AF area, manual over ride focus, AF Lock.
Which way is Value Up ? When operating a camera the user needs to change the value of several parameters such as aperture, shutter speed, ISO sensitivity , exposure compensation and zoom position.
It is very helpful if the dial, wheel, ring, lever or other control moves the same way for value up with each parameter and the opposite way for value down.
Hardware There are sufficient UIM's of appropriate design on body and lens with which to drive the camera as described in the task list. UIM's on the lens controlling zoom, focus and aperture (if fitted) are of circumferential type. UIM's on the body can be operated by the right index finger and thumb without having to shift grip.
User experience With practice the user can learn to drive the camera like a motor car. The user looks through the viewfinder (windscreen) at the subject (traffic ahead) and operates the device by feel without looking at it. With further practice the user does not have to think about the process of operating the camera any more than a driver thinks about operating a motor car.
Negatives The camera is configured so the user has to interrupt the capture process, change grip with either hand or lower the camera from the eye in order to change one or more of the parameters listed above. Poor/suboptimal UIM location or haptics.
Review Phase [Subscore 5]
Task list Tasks which photographers might want to perform in Review Phase may vary greatly according to individual preference. Some photographers do little in camera review, others a lot. Ergonomically this is the least critical phase of use as the photo has already been captured. As a minimum I would list:
* Recall the last 1-9 photos captured and select one.
* Zoom into and move around in a review image.
* Jump from one image to the next or previous at the same level of magnification and the same location in the frame.
* Delete one/many.
Hardware The camera needs UIM's to enable the tasks above to be performed. These need to be located low in the positional hierarchy on the camera.
Content Comprehensive data about each image is available and efficiently recalled onto the monitor screen or in the EVF in the same form.
User experience The task list can be carried out efficiently.
Negatives Essential file data is not able to be recalled. It is not possible to scroll from one frame to the next at the same location and magnification. Auto review cannot be disabled. UIM's for Review Phase occupy high value locations on the camera which are better reserved for Capture Phase.
Initial
reactions to the scoring schedule
The scoring schedule described above, together with
the supporting narrative, presents the reader who has not been following this
blog for several years with new ideas, new ways of thinking about camera
operation and unfamiliar language.
There has been a range of early responses to exposure of this material in online forums.
Feedback from some respondents has been cautiously
positive.
Some say they
disagree with my findings entirely.
Some say that I am just promulgating my own likes and
preferences.
Some say that “ergonomics is subjective”, as if there
could be no merit in further discussion.
Some say that my quest is noble but doomed to failure
like that of a modern day Don Quixote.
Some say that so great is the range and diversity of
individual likes and preferences that any attempt to measure and score
ergonomics is futile.
I have given thought to these negative comments and
realised that if they are correct, it follows that no satisfactory camera could
ever be made.
But
satisfactory cameras are made and some of them get consistently good
reviews for user experience.
So there must be ideas, concepts and functional
capabilities which can be identified and which can be incorporated into camera
design and which can benefit all camera users.
I have been challenged on the feasibility of a total
score with some respondents opining it to be futile, irrelevant or misleading.
I take all this on board and acknowledge that the framework, language, criteria and scoring schedule are all unfamiliar to most camera users, contestable and subject to debate.
The reason this material is being presented in a public forum is to enable that debate to proceed.
For the present, I
remain of the view that the overall
score is useful. With regard to the cameras I have scored to date the
total score strikes me as a fair
summation of the overall ergonomic
capability of each camera and a reasonable guide to each camera’s rank against
the others.
Further readings
On the ‘Pages’ bar of this blog, found at the top of the
home page in most browsers, there is extensive discussion about many topics
grouped under the ‘Basic Concepts’, ‘Design’ and ‘Measuring Ergonomics’ tabs.
Each of the specific camera reviews also has commentary about ergonomic issues.
End of this post
No comments:
Post a Comment