This is Mockup #13 showing the canted-back-10-degrees-inverted-L-shaped handle. Unfortunately words and photos cannot adequately describe just how good this handle type really is. |
The
subject of this discussion is cameras which will be hand held most of
the time. It is therefore of fundamental
importance that such devices be comfortable and secure in the hands and that
they can be held and operated simultaneously without interrupting the capture
flow.
I
have expended much effort
and research over the last five years into the matter of handles. I have worked with many actual cameras, full
camera mockups and handle mockups.
Handle
mockups are useful as they enable the research to focus (pun
intended) on that specific aspect of design without the distraction of all the
other stuff which burdens a modern camera.
In order to clarify my thinking and work I have
identified several handle types, with intermediates being
fairly common.
Handle type and shutter button location are
inextricably bound together as we shall see.
Handle only mockups with top/rear shutter button location. The no handle version is on the left and the 'form-follows-fingers' handle on the right. |
Hand/finger position for the top/rear shutter button, no handle. |
The handle types are:
No
handle: This
includes numerous variants with a
vestigial or minimal handle. No handle cameras have the shutter button in the
top/rear position on the camera body. In order to hold and operate a no handle camera the user’s right hand
must be held in the index finger cocked
up position.
This position is ergonomically inferior to the half closed relaxed position.
Why ? From the half closed relaxed position the index
finger can easily flex and extend as well as move side to side. This enables
the index finger to easily operate four UIMs (user interface modules: buttons,
dials etc) without strain and without having to move a muscle of any other
finger.
But in the index
finger cocked up position the index finger has already used up its side to
side movement capacity and most of its flexion and extension capacity. So it
can get onto the shutter button but nowhere else, unless the whole hand shifts
grip.
Handle
with top/rear shutter button Several camera makers have tried to
incorporate a handle on a camera with top/rear shutter button position. This
produces a result which is at best suboptimal and in some cases worse than no
handle at all.
One of the handle
mockups, as shown in the photo illustrates the general shape of handle
which results if the handle shape follows the fingers. There are numerous problems with this
arrangement. There is no overhang under
which the third finger can fit. So in order to prevent the camera falling when
the left hand is removed, the right hand
must squeeze the body tight. There is no platform on top of the handle for
control modules and the hand must be deployed in the index finger cocked up position.
Some cameras have tried to deploy a more substantial
handle, some with incorporated control dial, on a body with top/rear shutter
button. One such is the Sony A7, shown in the photo. This requires the right
index finger to separate widely from the third finger so the index finger can
get onto the shutter button and the third finger can get down to the handle. To compound the problem there is a control
dial positioned neatly in the center of the top plate of the handle. This might
look nice to the designers but is an ergonomic kludge, as the dial cannot be
operated with any finger without shifting and disrupting grip with the right
hand.
Someone apparently tapped Sony’s designers on the
shoulder about this because with the A7(II) they changed over to a projecting
handle with the shutter button and control dial top front on the handle.
The
implementation of this still requires work (the inverted L shape is better) but
at least they are moving in the right direction.
The thing which baffles me is that camera designers
move simultaneously in so many ergonomically wrong directions with the release
of new model lines, requiring
corrections with update models.
I am not picking on Sony here. Check out the major
changes seen in each iteration of the Nikon 1 V series MILCs or the
ergonomically conflicted Nikon Df.
Small cameras, projecting handle on the left, parallel handle on the right. The parallel handle is basically the same but turned 90 degrees. It works much better. |
Small camera projecting handle. Fingers in position required for operation. This forces the palm of the hand away from the camera and diminishes integrity of the grip. |
Same mockup as the one above. Fingers where they want to go. The grip is stronger and more comfortable but as you can see the index finger is not on the shutter button. |
Projecting
handle This is
typified by the classic SLR/DSLR handle dating from the Canon T90 of 1986 and
found on many cameras today.
This has definite advantages over the no handle type, especially on a medium
to large camera body.
The medium/large projecting handle opens up the
fingers, gives the user more grip and allows the shutter button to be relocated
to the vicinity of the top/front of the handle.
This in turn allows the hand to assume a posture
closer to the desirable half closed
relaxed position for strength and stability without strain.
On small cameras, the projecting handle can be
problematic. The handle is not large or
fat enough to allow the fingers to take up a comfortable holding position and
the shutter button position requires the index finger to be pulled back. This
in turn weakens the grip and destabilises the user’s hold on the camera.
Parallel
handle While working
with my mockups I realised that I could
turn the projecting handle 90 degrees anticlockwise (looking down on the
camera) and alter the shape to better fit the holding fingers.
This gives a result ergonomically superior to both the
no handle and projecting handle types. Better still, it is effective on small,
medium and large bodies.
The parallel handle brings the hand position even
closer to the desirable half closed
relaxed position, and gives very good purchase to the three gripper
fingers, the action of which is now directed into the palm of the hand for
improved stability.
In addition the parallel handle opens up a small
platform on top of the handle for the disposition of capture phase UIMs.
The parallel handle makes the camera a little wider
but less deep than the projecting handle.
Holding the small parallel handle. This is a substantial improvement on the no handle and projecting handle, providing better support and freedom of movement for the index finger. |
Holding the inverted L handle. This is even better than the parallel handle with more support, a shape better matched to the holding fingers and more options for control modules on top of the handle. |
Inverted
L handle
When I make mockups I work away at the handle shape until it feels
right. This is a subtle thing as a shape can feel good enough initially but on
further acquaintance be found capable of improvement.
The inverted L shaped handle is an evolution of the
parallel type which I arrived at by continuously improving the shape to best
fit the hands which hold the device.
The inverted L shape if optimally crafted, allows the
hand to adopt the desirable half closed relaxed position, places the shutter
button exactly where the index finger wants to find it and creates a platform
on top of the handle for a quad control set of UIMs.
It also creates a large and comfortable overhang
beneath which the third finger of the right hand takes a natural position. When
combined with a well crafted diagonal
type thumb support the inverted L shaped handle allows the right hand to hold
and support the camera with no requirement to squeeze onto the body or apply
clenching force with the finger muscles. If the left hand needs to leave the
lens or left side of the camera to change grip as is often the case, for
instance when shifting from landscape to portrait orientation, the camera is
held securely throughout. There is no need for the user to juggle the camera
back and forth from one hand to the next.
Inverted
L canted 10 degrees back The
great benefit of blogging in a public domain is reader feedback. It is clear
from some of the feedback which I receive that some of my readers are
thoughtful and analytical people who share my interest in good design.
I was recently challenged by a reader to rethink my
ideas about the ideal handle. He pointed out that a camera with the top/rear
shutter button position and no handle or minimal handle allows the right wrist
to be held almost straight when viewing through the EVF (or OVF in the case of
a DSLR).
But with a standard projecting handle, particularly on
a large camera, the right wrist has to tilt forward which could be
uncomfortable for some users.
I realised that simply by canting the whole right side
of the camera back about 10 degrees a user could have the best of both systems.
I applied this strategy to my 13th full
camera mockup a photo of which appears at the top of this post.
I made up the
basic camera body in plywood, sawed right through it at the right side of the
monitor then re attached the right side with a rearward cant of about 10
degrees.
The result has been so successful that I rate #13 as
my best mockup to date. In addition to
the handle configuration, #13 incorporates much of that which I have learned
about ergonomics over the last five years.
No comments:
Post a Comment