The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Fuji Finepix X100 Show Report

So it seems it was a happy coincidence that the best ergonomic shape was also perfect for the requirements of film rolls.
Yes, and I certainly wasn't advocating for anything avant garde, simply a more modern take. I really like the design of the Leica X1. I think that is a very good example of modernizing a classic look. It looks to me that the X1 was inspired equally by the Barnack models and the Leica CM yet it feels very fresh.
 

tom in mpls

Active member
Another point AGAINST my earlier argument: I hadn't thought about the LCD screen. That requires a big rectangular surface facing the user. OK, I'm on board. The rectangular box it is, then. At least we can ditch the prism hump and the mirror box.
 

douglasf13

New member
Well, the first half of the last decade certainly saw all kinds of interesting camera shapes, but I never cared for them, myself.

 

tom in mpls

Active member
Well, the first half of the last decade certainly saw all kinds of interesting camera shapes, but I never cared for them, myself.
Was it the esthetics, ergonomics, or images that you didn't care for? If that Konica performed by today's standards of fast focus, high ISO, and a bunch o' pixels, I think it could succeed.
 

douglasf13

New member
Well, the images weren't particularly great, but these were small sensor cameras, so that could be fixed.

Ergonomics, from the little time that I handled such cameras, were fine, but not a marked improvement for me over other more conventional designs. Aesthetics, well I do think they're incredibly ugly, but to each his/her own.

Honestly, in the small camera world, I think the NEX-5 is a nice balance of unique, modern design and ergonomics, but I still lust a bit after this X100 for shallow reasons. :) Well, actually, it's the hybrid viewfinder that really peaks my X100 interest, more so than the looks.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
Well, the first half of the last decade certainly saw all kinds of interesting camera shapes, but I never cared for them, myself.

..
It's funny: the similarly shaped Sony F505/707/717 worked, where the F828 didn't. I think the F828's body portion simply became too large and heavy. With the previous models in this line, you held the camera vary securely and stably via the lens and used the body as an articulated control surface ... it worked brilliantly. The F828 went all out on the body and that made it awkward and clumsy in the hand. (Aside from its horrendous imaging problems ... most of them ruined every photo they made with edge blooming unless you were shooting with an IR-pass filter, capturing IR photos. I tried two of them: they made great IR cameras, didn't even have to bother turning on the night-shot mode, just stick an 89a or 87c filter on there. But for normal daylight work, purple blooming everywhere was the rule.)
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
Yes, and I certainly wasn't advocating for anything avant garde, simply a more modern take. I really like the design of the Leica X1. I think that is a very good example of modernizing a classic look. It looks to me that the X1 was inspired equally by the Barnack models and the Leica CM yet it feels very fresh.
The X1 is beautiful but, having handled it, the body is too petite for what I prefer. It doesn't afford enough grip. For those with smaller hands, it should be fine. The X100 has taller, more usable gripping surface from the pictures. That makes a big difference for those of us with larger hands.
 

douglasf13

New member
The X1 is beautiful but, having handled it, the body is too petite for what I prefer. It doesn't afford enough grip. For those with smaller hands, it should be fine. The X100 has taller, more usable gripping surface from the pictures. That makes a big difference for those of us with larger hands.
I don't have particularly large hands, but I find that my leather Ciesta case provides just enough of an extra grip to the NEX-5 to be worthwhile. I would imagine such a thing would help on the X1 as well.



Or, of course, there is the add-on grip for the X1:

 

Godfrey

Well-known member
I don't have particularly large hands, but I find that my leather Ciesta case provides just enough of an extra grip to the NEX-5 to be worthwhile. I would imagine such a thing would help on the X1 as well.
Certainly, workarounds are always possible. I just like it when the basic shape works perfectly to begin with. ;-)

The Luigi half-case does look lovely.
 

m3photo

New member
Re: New Designs

I have been surprised by the conservatism of digital camera design. Since digital cameras are no longer constrained by the film camera's film-spool->image frame->takeup-spool linear arrangement, the rectangular shape is not required. Perhaps it remains the best way to grip with both hands, but I would like to see some radical new ideas.
Or just the one hand.
Haven't the "usual" camera makers realized that people with phone-cameras just hold it out in front of them and fire the shutter with their thumb?. The right index finger shutter button on cameras that only have an LCD to frame with; at arm's length, is ridiculously unergonomic. Besides, since Panasonic can come up with touch-sensitive LCD's, others could surely keep the traditional shutter button and offer an alternative thumb-press option on the back of or next to the LCD where the thumb falls naturally when gripping a small camera at arm's length. Ergonomically, this firm grip is considerably lessened by having to then curve the index finger above the top edge and lightly press the traditional shutter button.
This is one of the aspects of modern digital camera design flaws that I am absolutely astounded at.
 

douglasf13

New member
I would imagine that using the thumb to trigger a shutter would increase the chances of shake, because it is probably the more stable of the digits to hold the camera, no?

That being said, a very popular way of holding the NEX-5 is with the camera at sternum level, arms braced to the side, ldc flipped up, and thumb on the shutter release. I shoot like this all of the time.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
What I never understood with new designs like the Sony and Minolta posted above, is why they didn't come with adjustable angle grip. In many ways, I find the grip angle of videocams much more ergonomic than on traditional style DSLRs etc. My feeling is that it's more conservatism than actual search for the optimum solution that dictates the shape of still cameras.

Unfortunately, the most innovative camera with regards to ergonomics lately, the Hy6, is caught up in a jumble of bankruptcy and intellectual rights. That's an attempt that I would really have liked to succeed.
 

douglasf13

New member
Interesting idea about the video camera-type grip. FWIW, the lens portion of that Sony pictured does swivel, so you could get the grip a little more horizontal.
 

Terry

New member
Re: New Designs

Or just the one hand.
Besides, since Panasonic can come up with touch-sensitive LCD's, others could surely keep the traditional shutter button and offer an alternative thumb-press option on the back of or next to the LCD where the thumb falls naturally when gripping a small camera at arm's length. Ergonomically, this firm grip is considerably lessened by having to then curve the index finger above the top edge and lightly press the traditional shutter button.
This is one of the aspects of modern digital camera design flaws that I am absolutely astounded at.
I'm not sure if you were saying the Panasonic implementation was good or in the wrong spot but I do like both the touch focus and touch shooting on the G2/GH2/GF2.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
Re: New Designs

Or just the one hand.
Haven't the "usual" camera makers realized that people with phone-cameras just hold it out in front of them and fire the shutter with their thumb?. ...
I've seen probably a dozen different takes on thumb, palm, etc located releases. None work as well as a top mounted or top-forward mounted release for an eye level camera, for me at least.

Alternative release locations, for when you're holding the camera a different way, do make sense.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
What I never understood with new designs like the Sony and Minolta posted above, is why they didn't come with adjustable angle grip. In many ways, I find the grip angle of videocams much more ergonomic than on traditional style DSLRs etc. My feeling is that it's more conservatism than actual search for the optimum solution that dictates the shape of still cameras. ..
With the Sony F505/707/717/828, the body swiveled with respect to the lens so you, in effect, did have an adjustable angle grip (at least for making horizontal exposures).

Conservatism does have a lot to do with it too. Listen to how many people on this forum moon and swoon over the X100's "classic" control layout ... They want their shutter on the top, aperture and focus on the lens, dammnabit, and nothing else! ;-) The fact that it works well becomes almost secondary after a little bit.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Conservatism does have a lot to do with it too. Listen to how many people on this forum moon and swoon over the X100's "classic" control layout ... They want their shutter on the top, aperture and focus on the lens, dammnabit, and nothing else! ;-) The fact that it works well becomes almost secondary after a little bit.
And of course, it does work rather well. Like a bicycle. Every time I see some inventor along the road with his (it's always a him, women don't waste time trying to re-invent the wheel) revolutionary bike that in just a couple of month will, at least in theory, outsell all traditional bikes with a huge margin, traditionalist me thinks: Aren't we supposed to sit on top of the bike, not under it?

So maybe the current design of cameras do work best in our conservative hands after all :)
 

m3photo

New member
Re: Panasonic Design

I'm not sure if you were saying the Panasonic implementation was good or in the wrong spot but I do like both the touch focus and touch shooting on the G2/GH2/GF2.
In fact I was congratulating them and offering them as the only example so far. I see it works for you.
I'm still with my trusty G1, but then again I use it up to my eye. I'd like an alternative shutter press on my S90 though.
 

jonoslack

Active member
And of course, it does work rather well. Like a bicycle. Every time I see some inventor along the road with his (it's always a him, women don't waste time trying to re-invent the wheel) revolutionary bike that in just a couple of month will, at least in theory, outsell all traditional bikes with a huge margin, traditionalist me thinks: Aren't we supposed to sit on top of the bike, not under it?

So maybe the current design of cameras do work best in our conservative hands after all :)
Hi Jorgen
Don't you think that these kind of design changes are incremental and evolutionary rather than revolutionary? (to keep the bike metaphor going). Bikes have changed - there used to be uprights / racing bikes, and now there are also mountain bikes.

I think camera design has changed as well, small advantages gradually become universal - If you look at cameras from 20-30 years ago there was no bulge on the right for your hand for instance (and even the retro X100 has this). AF has gradually become the rule rather than the exception etc.

I don't think it's so much that we're conservative, more that BIG changes inevitably get some things wrong, whereas incremental changes may simply be improvements. Piecemeal Camera Engineering as Mr Popper might have had it :)
 

tom in mpls

Active member
Don't you think that these kind of design changes are incremental and evolutionary rather than revolutionary?
Jono, some changes cannot be incremental. For instance, there is no way the body style could change gradually from the standard rectangular prism shape to a pistol grip design. The only way to go from A to B is via a "revolutionary" change. I hope manufacturers are spending some design money to explore possible "revolutionary" designs. BTW I am not advocating that a pistol grip would be a superior design; I really don't know.
 
Top