johnastovall
Deceased, but remembered fondly here...
Here’s a concept design of the “Nikon D4x” by San Francisco-based industrial designer Marc Levinson.
Full details on the concept here.
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!
Nikon D4x Concept Camera Design
- Thread starter johnastovall
- Start date
Here’s a concept design of the “Nikon D4x” by San Francisco-based industrial designer Marc Levinson.
Full details on the concept here.
GrahamWelland
Subscriber & Workshop Member
I just lost my lunch ... :shocked: :ROTFL:
Hideous is the only word that comes to mind next to totally unusable. Ergonomically totally ridiculous. Dials that are unreachable, a flash that cannot be mounted, a grip that is insane, a design that makes using a 70-200 next to impossible (maybe why the cheapest rubbish kit lens is pictured with it).
Clearly someone that has never held any decent camera in his hands. Maybe he should stick to coolpix bodies.
Or simply don't quit his daytime job yet...
Clearly someone that has never held any decent camera in his hands. Maybe he should stick to coolpix bodies.
Or simply don't quit his daytime job yet...
Jorgen Udvang
Subscriber Member
No, I don't think so.
There is one thing that puzzles me though; why are the grips on DSLRs vertical, while those on video cameras are more or less horizontal? Do videographers have hands that are different from photographers? DSLRs are for some reason still designed to have room for film. Isn't that a bit odd?
There is one thing that puzzles me though; why are the grips on DSLRs vertical, while those on video cameras are more or less horizontal? Do videographers have hands that are different from photographers? DSLRs are for some reason still designed to have room for film. Isn't that a bit odd?
GrahamWelland
Subscriber & Workshop Member
The current pro Nikon's fit my hands absolutely perfectly. This is a huge factor in why I've kept shooting Nikon for many years and after a brief time shooting Canon/Mamiya I returned back to the Nikon fold. If that's due to Giugiaro's design then thank you Giugiaro because you nailed it.
Lars
Active member
Maybe you didn'r read the article:
"This was a student project at California College of the Arts in San Francisco. During my research on DSLRs I ran across some interviews of Giorgetto Giugiaro, the designer of the current top of the line flagship model for Nikon. He claimed that his product “has value as a sculptural work” and his objective was “to create a product with a value that everyone can understand at a glance.” Although I greatly respect his objective and the way he executed it, I wanted to try my own rendition making it even clearer, even to the untrained eye, that this was an object of great value and significance."
Which probably means as a student he didnt get paid.
Personally I don't see many similarities. Your E3 is butt-ugly too but seen as a sculpture it has few similarities beyond the basic camera shape.
The overly extended viewfinder housing and large volume. That defines the basic shape of his design.
Students have odd concepts of form vs function. His form is large enough for the internal relay lens of the E3, which explained the form. There is no function that explains the form of this concept camera.
If he did not get paid, does the article state what grade he got? Looking at the form, the only thing I need from the article is "Nikon will never produce a camera that looks like this AGAIN".
Students have odd concepts of form vs function. His form is large enough for the internal relay lens of the E3, which explained the form. There is no function that explains the form of this concept camera.
If he did not get paid, does the article state what grade he got? Looking at the form, the only thing I need from the article is "Nikon will never produce a camera that looks like this AGAIN".
Lars
Active member
Well, we all have our subjective preferences. While I essentially agree with you that this isn't a very attractive design, there might have been other objectives behind this particular design study than to please you and me.
In fact, the diagonal palm rest is the differentiator in this design - a more natural angle to hold your hand in front of your face wen peekin through the viewfinder. You should try it. Ergonomic and functional doesnt mean pretty; combining form and function well is a rare skill. That's why Giugiaro's F5 design belongs in an art museum (and this one doesn't). Personally I think the F5 is among the better industrial designs of the late 20th century.
In fact, the diagonal palm rest is the differentiator in this design - a more natural angle to hold your hand in front of your face wen peekin through the viewfinder. You should try it. Ergonomic and functional doesnt mean pretty; combining form and function well is a rare skill. That's why Giugiaro's F5 design belongs in an art museum (and this one doesn't). Personally I think the F5 is among the better industrial designs of the late 20th century.
Personally, I believe that a smaller and lighter camera with easy to reach and adjust controls makes for a better design. A heavy camera becomes tedious, and hard to adjust controls makes operation slow. This camera design looks heavy and is large, for no good reason other than artistic form. I have some old Pop Photo "concept design camera" articles from the 70s and 80s. Same styling over function that did not go anywhere.