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!

Simplicity...

Godfrey

Well-known member
You take my ramblings far too literally, Godfrey.
I do? How should what you say be interpreted?

Most 35mm cameras loaded film the same way, from the tiny XA to the mammoth F5. Why then are memory cards loaded in umpteen different ways, print side out, print side in, from the side, from the bottom, together with the battery, behind a separate door. Yes, film has certain restrictions that memory cards don't have, but that shouldn't prevent designers and engineers from agreeing on a standard that works better than other solutions. Apparently, it does.

Medium format is a completely different story. Professional tools are made for people who invest time in getting to know their gear. I own a GX680 and I never expected it to work like other cameras, simply because it's a unique tool made for a unique purpose. An amateur camera, I expect to pick up and use without having to read any instruction manual, the same way I could with an SLR of times past. Unfortunately, some digital cameras, I can't even switch on without reading the first 22 pages of the manual.

Interestingly, if we look at mirrorless cameras, the company that makes cameras within that category that resemble traditional SLR ergonomics the most is Panasonic, who had never made photographic equipment before they joined 4/3. Their cameras are totally boring, mostly with a somewhat daft design, but they work as one would expect a camera to do. Apparently, they did some research before they started.

As for headlight switches, I haven't driven a car in decades, or since I gave up on Citroën, that doesn't turn on the headlights by rotating a stick attached to the steering wheel column, but I mostly drive Japanese cars nowadays.
I guess lack of standardization bugs you when you don't like it, and you don't like it on some things and like it on others.

35mm cameras all loaded film the same way? I have ten 35mm cameras in front of me right now, spanning the years from 1940 to 2006 in design: Robot IIa, Minox 35, Rollei 35S, Nikon F, Nikon F6, Leica M, Leica CL, Olympus Stylus Zoom, Leica R8, Leicaflex SL. They all load film differently from one another, the Leica CL and Rollei 35 are the most similar. The controls on all of them are in different places and operate in completely different ways.

Panasonic worked together with Leica to enter the still camera market (they were in video long before that) so it makes very good sense that much of their still camera design ethos came from that collaboration and resembles the traditional forms that Leica inspired.

I guess you consider the Olympus E-M1 an amateur camera. Funny, but Olympus regards it as their premium professional tool, which (in your all too literally taken statement) means they consider it "Professional tools .. made for people who invest time in getting to know their gear."

But I guess you and fotografz don't like my opinions on this subject since they disagree with yours ... just so much "argumentative rhetoric". I'll bug out of here and unsubscribe from this "not-to-be-taken-literally ramble" as it just seems to be*a lot of hot air—or perhaps that's what you intend it to be. I can't tell any more.

Sayonara!

G
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
I do? How should what you say be interpreted?



I guess lack of standardization bugs you when you don't like it, and you don't like it on some things and like it on others.

35mm cameras all loaded film the same way? I have ten 35mm cameras in front of me right now, spanning the years from 1940 to 2006 in design: Robot IIa, Minox 35, Rollei 35S, Nikon F, Nikon F6, Leica M, Leica CL, Olympus Stylus Zoom, Leica R8, Leicaflex SL. They all load film differently from one another, the Leica CL and Rollei 35 are the most similar. The controls on all of them are in different places and operate in completely different ways.

Panasonic worked together with Leica to enter the still camera market (they were in video long before that) so it makes very good sense that much of their still camera design ethos came from that collaboration and resembles the traditional forms that Leica inspired.

I guess you consider the Olympus E-M1 an amateur camera. Funny, but Olympus regards it as their premium professional tool, which (in your all too literally taken statement) means they consider it "Professional tools .. made for people who invest time in getting to know their gear."

But I guess you and fotografz don't like my opinions on this subject since they disagree with yours ... just so much "argumentative rhetoric". I'll bug out of here and unsubscribe from this "not-to-be-taken-literally ramble" as it just seems to be*a lot of hot air—or perhaps that's what you intend it to be. I can't tell any more.

Sayonara!

G
But I love your opinions, Godfrey, particularly since they are different from mine. And I love a good discussion too. If we agreed on everything, we wouldn't learn much, would we?

I consider all mirrorless cameras except the GH3/4 and the Leica SL amateur cameras. The E-M1, A7R II and A7S II are borderline, and hopefully, they'll improve with the next version. I'm quite sure that the Olympus will. That doesn't mean that they aren't useful tools for professionals, but they lack the fluent handling of their better relatives.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Simplicity can be yours if you really want it, but don't expect to find it in any store :ROTFL: Use the same camera long enough, and it'll eventually seem pretty simple.
That is the point I was making earlier. Do we get enough time with some of these more complex digital tools for them to become second nature? With the fast track of model revamp and appetite of buyers for the new/now/new , I doubt it.

I have had some good experiences ... but it was due to long term use of a consistent system: while the Hasselblad H system does have some complex controls, I used multiple models over an extended period of time so shooting with one became fast and intuitive. I attribute that to the fact that Hasselblad kept the ergonomics and menu very similar model-to-model.

I do? How should what you say be interpreted?

I guess lack of standardization bugs you when you don't like it, and you don't like it on some things and like it on others.

35mm cameras all loaded film the same way? I have ten 35mm cameras in front of me right now, spanning the years from 1940 to 2006 in design: Robot IIa, Minox 35, Rollei 35S, Nikon F, Nikon F6, Leica M, Leica CL, Olympus Stylus Zoom, Leica R8, Leicaflex SL. They all load film differently from one another, the Leica CL and Rollei 35 are the most similar. The controls on all of them are in different places and operate in completely different ways.

Panasonic worked together with Leica to enter the still camera market (they were in video long before that) so it makes very good sense that much of their still camera design ethos came from that collaboration and resembles the traditional forms that Leica inspired.

I guess you consider the Olympus E-M1 an amateur camera. Funny, but Olympus regards it as their premium professional tool, which (in your all too literally taken statement) means they consider it "Professional tools .. made for people who invest time in getting to know their gear."

But I guess you and fotografz don't like my opinions on this subject since they disagree with yours ... just so much "argumentative rhetoric". I'll bug out of here and unsubscribe from this "not-to-be-taken-literally ramble" as it just seems to be*a lot of hot air—or perhaps that's what you intend it to be. I can't tell any more.

Sayonara! G
Hardly a ramble ... Jorgen's plea for simplicity and some sense of standardization is a worthy discussion subject as these cameras get more complex and feature different ergonomics with every new model.

I think the point he's may be touching on, whether directly or not, is that in an effort to separate themselves from the competition, camera makers have innovated new technological features and abilities, but have made it more difficult to use those innovations (or ignore some) by also making access to those innovations different and complex ... in many cases unnecessarily so.

IMO, this increasing complexity is partly why camera sales have tanked. People could take better images than with a cell phone, but doing it is beyond most people's patience and aptitude. Even in a professional scenario, who the heck wants to stop and figure out some complex procedure to accomplish a task or try to get back to a previous set-up? These GetDpi boards are packed with threads trying to figure out one complex procedure after another.

My main focus regarding this subject is Sony. It seems like they take the controls list and toss them in the air, then list them in the menu as they fall ... then do it again for the next model.

Rather than debating the merits of simplicity, it seems exchanging ideas on how we as photographers would like to see things progress would be more productive.

BTW, yes, in principle, a vast majority film cameras loaded the same mechanical way ... film canister on one end, draw film over the film gate, connect to winder on the other side of the camera. Yes there were exceptions, like Leica's bottom load. However Nikon, Canon, Minolta, Oly, Pentax who made up 98% of the market we're/are basically the same.
 

jlm

Workshop Member
I see a bit of a conundrum here. What are we looking for in our seemingly constant need to upgrade to the newest model? And hasn't that motivated the camera makers to add more and more Doo-dads?
Ultimately, more and more functions get automated: face detection, focus tracking, etc, and what will that lead to? A more accomplished point and shoot, where the operator has even less required input? Maybe even the complex menus will get automated

It would take a brave marketing decision to ditch auto-everything, but that would appeal to me, but then I shoot the monochrome and a tech camera, first choices.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
There seems to be a confusion between the terms "Simplicity" and "Minimalist"as it relates to control of a photographic tool, (primarily cameras, but also other photo accessories).

While a Minimalist approach virtually guaranties simplicity, it can also lead to the elimination of controls or features useful to creative realization ... or a least make it more difficult to realize a creative vision.

Simplicity in this context could better refer to how well an array of controls are organized. The logic of use and its effect on ergonomic design.

For example, while I do not necessarily take issue with the features/functions the Sony A7R-II makes available, I do believe it has the worst organization of access and controls imaginable.

It has six icon menu divisions leading to sub menus leading to sub-sub menu choices. That is roughly 150 individual selections in dire need of better organization and ergonomic logic.

I believe lack of ergonomic logic and streamlined user interface leads to folks wishing for a minimalist approach ... when all many of us want is a smarter organization.

- Marc
 

4season

Well-known member
I find the A7's tabbed menu system to be fairly logical but there are simply a lot of features to choose from. But they could be decluttered by making the menus more context-sensitive so that, for instance, you aren't bothered with video- or playback-related items unless you have the camera set to one of those respective modes.

When I was shooting Leica, I relied a lot on the LCD + instant review for situations where peering through the optical finder was simply not an option. Today I'd insist on a model offering Live View: I regard that feature as a genuine technical improvement
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
There seems to be a confusion between the terms "Simplicity" and "Minimalist"as it relates to control of a photographic tool, (primarily cameras, but also other photo accessories).

While a Minimalist approach virtually guaranties simplicity, it can also lead to the elimination of controls or features useful to creative realization ... or a least make it more difficult to realize a creative vision.

Simplicity in this context could better refer to how well an array of controls are organized. The logic of use and its effect on ergonomic design.

For example, while I do not necessarily take issue with the features/functions the Sony A7R-II makes available, I do believe it has the worst organization of access and controls imaginable.

It has six icon menu divisions leading to sub menus leading to sub-sub menu choices. That is roughly 150 individual selections in dire need of better organization and ergonomic logic.

I believe lack of ergonomic logic and streamlined user interface leads to folks wishing for a minimalist approach ... when all many of us want is a smarter organization.

- Marc
The King of electronic user interface, and mind you, they were not perfect either, is still Nokia with their Series 40 interface, and I believe it's one of the most important reasons for their amazing success back then. What I was told was that they hired people with all kinds of backgrounds, including priests and psychologists, to figure out how the average homo sapiens is thinking and reasoning. Simplifying complicated choices is no easy matter. An important way of making that work easier is to prioritise harder and remove choices and options that are not relevant for the intended user. In some cases, I believe that a minimalist approach could be one way to go. Just look at the popularity of micro scooters among young (and not so young, I'm getting one myself, or a Micro Pedalflow) people. It's arguably not the ideal method of transportation for any situation, but its size and simplicity makes it a usable and popular option for many, from a five year old going to kindergarten to a banker on his way to a downtown meeting.

Compare that then to, let's make a choice... some of the WB options on current cameras. Even some "simple" amateur cameras bring up controls and diagrams, if you happen to push the wrong button like I occasionally do, that most people would need the help of Professor Einstein or Doctor Frankenstein to figure out. Even with nearly 50 years of photography experience, I have never ever felt a need for that kind of control over something that 15 years ago wasn't even an option. Until then, it was Daylight, Tungsten or Black & White, and that worked perfectly fine.

And here comes one of the dilemmas:
Camera manufacturers could hide those WB options better, and they would get accused (like now) for making menu systems that are too complicated. Or they could omit them completely and get a complaint from that guy in Northern Sweden who actually used that option last month and who will probably use it again next year. I'm exaggerating of course, but not as much as some advanced users like to think. WB options other than "A" have done one thing for me ever; destroying around 3,000 photos that were unique and can never be shot again as it involved several thousand people walking over a motorway bridge yet to be opened at the time. I was still shooting jpeg then, which is what most people do. So, I'm firmly on "A", also like most people, and other options come up only because I hit some button by mistake :cussing: , losing the shot while getting it back to "A" and trying to find the option that I was supposed to find.
 
Last edited:

fotografz

Well-known member
I find the A7's tabbed menu system to be fairly logical but there are simply a lot of features to choose from. But they could be decluttered by making the menus more context-sensitive so that, for instance, you aren't bothered with video- or playback-related items unless you have the camera set to one of those respective modes.

When I was shooting Leica, I relied a lot on the LCD + instant review for situations where peering through the optical finder was simply not an option. Today I'd insist on a model offering Live View: I regard that feature as a genuine technical improvement
I find the icon tabs semi-useless and meaningless ... mostly because the sub-menus are illogically organized and similar functions scattered through-out the sub selections. Like the gear icon with 8 sub-menus featuring different focus control choices scattered all over the place. How hard would it be to have all focus related functions grouped? Then all viewing functions, and so on.

Or the fundamental function of formatting a fresh SD card ... Tool Box icon > sub-menu 5 > scroll down one ... and no way I can assign this often used function to a custom button.

I do like the notion of context sensitive menus.

- Marc
 

Steen

Senior Subscriber Member
Simplicity ...

For me "Simplicity" means:

a) stick to one system (= one mount)

b) stick to a system with good, old-fashioned no-nonsense handling
 

jlm

Workshop Member
I could live with these choices up front:
Iso, AF/MF, playback, zoom, LCD on/off
And these, more buried:
Format,

I always shoot raw, wb at daylight for convenience, stills only
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Interestingly, most who are particular about hardware simplicity never care about OOC (finished jpg)outputs.
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Re: Simplicity ...

For me "Simplicity" means:

a) stick to one system (= one mount)

b) stick to a system with good, old-fashioned no-nonsense handling
:thumbs: !!! And why I went back to Nikon as my personal choice. When I put a Nikon body in my hands it just feels right (but then so does the Leica M ... sigh...). Not that other brands or formats don't offer similar and are easily capable of producing outstanding images, just that Nikon is a system I cut my photographic teeth on very early in my photo life and they've stuck to their roots so there is a certain familiarity when I grab one. Plus menus are logically laid out and menu options and buttons are easily customized and saved to easily switchable shooting modalities. Clearly other manufacturers offer the same and I could likely have been as satisfied with say Canon or Leica, but they seemed a little "confused" about their development direction when it was time for *me* to make my final decision -- and hence I landed at Nikon. Obviously another shooters preferred brand could be different using the same reasoning :)
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Re: Simplicity ...

For me "Simplicity" means:

a) stick to one system (= one mount)

b) stick to a system with good, old-fashioned no-nonsense handling

a) I agree an I've tried. Unfortunately, and for reasons that I won't go into detail about here, I seem to be stuck with two systems.

b) This is where it starts to get interesting, and I fully agree. My first principle when it comes to camera ergonomics is that during a full day of shooting, I shouldn't need to go into the menus, not even once, no matter what happens. Preferably, all controls needed during shooting should be easily accessible while I have my eye to the viewfinder. With high end Nikon and Panasonic bodies, this is not a problem, and they work in very similar ways except for one being a mirrorless.

This is where I have problems with the body that I use most frequently at the moment, the E-M1. While it's possible that it can be configured in a way that satisfies my needs, I'm really struggling to get it right, and I have to take a deep dive into the instruction manual to figure it out. Once I've gotten it right, I doubt that I'll remember the procedures a few months later, which means that whatever settings I choose now will be there forever.

This in contrast to the GH1 which I mostly figured out within half an hour, and since the GH2 and GH3 had identical or very similar control layouts, I can safely say that I have never read a single page in a Panasonic user manual, in spite of those cameras being my main cameras for several years.

It's a bit of the same thing with the Nikons, although I must say that there is so much hiding under the surface of a Nikon body that I would probably need a 3 year extensive study to figure it all out. But the great thing with a Nikon is that what I don't know doesn't really matter. It can be used the same way as I used the OM-1 with the addition of AF, and even if I have been shooting sports professionally for years, I've never really felt the need to invest the necessary time to fully understand the great AF features of these bodies.

So the next time Nikon makes Df kind of camera, skip the retro look and all the fancy stuff. Make a camera that works 100% with the buttons and dials that the user can see and feel. It doesn't need to be as barebones as the M-D, and should include AF, but...
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Interestingly, most who are particular about hardware simplicity never care about OOC (finished jpg)outputs.
In my case, that is because post processing becomes much more complicated with jpeg files, and post processing is an integrated part of digital photography, at least for people like me who sell photos now and then. It's like writing using abbreviations and acronyms; easy to write but mostly difficult to read.
 
Last edited:

iiiNelson

Well-known member
I think simplicity is good but as many others have pointed out simplicity is in the eye of the beholder if you will. The more you use or stick with a camera the more simple it becomes to use.

As for higher end cameras - people expect a certain level of control over their image making in "pro bodies" which is why a D5 or 1Dx have much more complex menu systems than say a Rebel SL1 or a D3xxx model. Neither is wrong but usually "pro level" devices aren't meant to be handed off to a random person off the street with full knowledge of use. It's the same way that one wouldn't expect a new driver to be able to handle a high performance racing car as they may be able to handle a standard low power economy compact. One is for the masses and the other is for a specific purpose. My belief is that this is why many have a camera system they like to use and a bridge camera or travel system for vacation. Different tools for the job at hand.

That's how I view these topics in general - they're great to discuss and I certainly wish I could have my "wish list" camera now (MF of 50+MP with SLR "simplicity", no video, and a high end mirrorless/pro SLR price point) but most people expect certain features above a certain price. I'm sure Leica didn't add video just to add it to the M240 without pressure or feedback/communication that there are those out there interested in making motion imagery with Leica M optics.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Yup, bad year for DSLR in 2015. Here's compared to 2014:

DSLR:
-8.0% (number of bodies)
-8.4% (value)

Mirrorless:
+1.7% (number of bodies)
+8.9% (value)

Interchangeable lens cameras, total:
-5.7% (number of bodies)
-4.5% (value)

Still not bad enough for Nikon to launch a full frame mirrorless yet, and the fact that the total market is decreasing is probably the most worrying fact. Mirrorless is not taking up all the slack for the declining DSLR market.
 
Top