 |
The first camera I ever used was my father’s Baldafixmedium format rollfilm folding bellows model shown in the photo. 63 years later it is still in our household and the shutter still works although the lens has been destroyed by fungus.
Believe it or not this was a fairly advanced model in the early 1950s when many amateur photographers used the spartan Kodak Box Brownie.
In the 1970s I used a Pentax Spotmatic also shown in the photo. This camera is 45 years old and still working. Even the rudimentary electrical functions for the exposure meter are working.
Fast forward to 2016 and we find many cameras present the user with a mind boggling cornucopia of technological wizardry.
But the sheer number and complexity of the features and options available can make the cameras very difficult to set up and in many cases difficult to use if one intends utilising most of the features.
 |
| Baldafix on the left, Pentax Spotmatic on the right, Sony RX100(4) in the middle |
A good example of a modern wunderkamera is the little Sony RX100 Mk4 shown in the photo between the two older cameras.
It is a vastly superior picture taking machine but has so many features, functions, capabilities and options that ordinary mortals can have great difficulty setting up the device and comprehending all or even most of its functions let alone persuading them to work properly.
By way of example: Should the innocent new owner click on the [Picture Profile] tab in the [Camera] menu it is a bit like stepping into a minefield. There are 7 possible picture profiles, each able to be configured for black level, gamma, black gamma, knee, color mode, saturation, color phase, color depth and detail.
Within, for instance the [gamma] submenu, you can select from movie, still, cine 1, cine 2, ITU709, ITU709(800%) and S-log2.
Quite possibly some aficionados deeply immersed in video technology might actually know what all this means. But I don’t have clue and I bet I am not Robinson Crusoe in this.
The RX100(4) and many other current cameras are so loaded with complicated and confusing technology they run the very real risk of inflicting an aversive experience on many ordinary people who just want to make good photographs.
There have been various reactions to this in user forums and from camera makers and buyers..
Some people react with joyful embrace of every new feature whether the average camera user can comprehend it or find a useful purpose for it or not.
Others despair at the mounting complexity and a call for a return to the days when cameras were simple things with few controls and no options.
One extreme reaction is the Leica M-D, also inexplicably titled [typ 262] whatever that means.
Incredibly, the M-D has fewer controls than the venerable M3 of 1954, on which its design is based.
Leica promotes a culture which the company calls ‘Das Wesentliche’ which seems to mean ‘less is more expensive’. In Sydney the M-D with 35mm f2 Summicron lens costs AUD13,450. You could buy a decent new motor car for that kind of money.
The M-D has no handle, no EVF, no monitor, no menus and not much of anything else. The user can focus manually via the focus ring on the lens guided by the optical rangefinder, aperture via the other ring on the lens, shutter speed via the top dial, ISO via a flat dial in the middle of the camera back and exposure compensation via a little wheel top right on the back of the body.
Maybe the Leica M-D will appeal to a few wealthy aficionados of back-to-basics photography. But I suspect that for most of us it will just seem like a wildly overpriced manifestation of the alternative universe which Leica products and buyers seem to inhabit.
A hybrid version of the ‘back to basics’, ‘manual controls’ philosophy is seen in cameras such as the Fuji X-Pro models and Panasonic LX100. These models seek to combine all the features which modern technology has to offer with a user interface built around an aperture ring on the lens, a shutter speed dial and an exposure compensation dial. I have spent considerable time testing and comparing this type of user interface with the modern ‘Mode Dial + Control Dial’ control layout. My conclusion is that while the ‘back to basics’ interface is superficially logical and appeals to some people, it is slower in operation than a well implemented modern control system.
There are other problems. For instance a physical shutter speed dial can only display about 30% of the shutter speeds available on a modern electronic camera. So for intermediate and long shutter speeds you have to set the nearest available speed on the dial then go to some other place such as a menu or a control dial to set the speed you require. In practice this is so convoluted that I never use shutter priority exposure on these cameras and the shutter speed dial is just there for appearances.
One of the realities in all this is that the genie will not go back into the bottle. Much of the advanced technology in modern cameras makes the process of getting pictures easier and the results more accurate. Think autofocus, think clever auto ISO algorithms, think auto white balance….and so on.
So is there a way forward ?
I think there has to be or in due course very few people will opt to buy any kind of camera at all.
I offer some thoughts on this for what they are worth:
1. I think neither the Leica ‘strip down to your underwear’ minimalist approach nor the hybrid control system referred to above represent the way forward because neither is ergonomically coherent and neither makes best use of the genuinely useful new technology which is available.
2. I think camera makers are excessively techno-centric and camera-centric in their approach.
The need to be more user-centric. They need to design and configure cameras from the point of view of users.
3. In order to do this they need to acquire a better understanding of ergonomic factors in camera design and operation. Careful study of the posts on this blog would assist that endeavour.
I have, by the way no idea if any camera design or product development personnel actually do read this blog.
4. They could separate out basic menu items such as [Quality] from advanced and rather arcane ones such as [Picture Profile].
They could synchronise menu items with Operating Instructions and group features in submenus so they make sense to users.
They could delete features which have been provided because they can, not because someone asked for them.
5. The physical control layout of many cameras could be greatly improved.
What do we have ?
It seems to me camera buyers right now have three options:
* Feeling overwhelmed by the techo-blitz found in many current models
* Regression to 1954 or thereabouts, as represented by the Leica M-D.
* Confusion, as represented by the models featuring hybrid traditional controls attempting unsuccessfully to operate modern features.
Feeling overwhelmed, regression and confusion are not the stuff of a happy relationship between cameras and their users.
I believe the way forward is through better design utilising good ergonomic principles to provide photographers with a more engaging user experience.
My contribution to that endeavour is this blog through which I have enunciated these principles in considerable detail.
Đăng nhận xét