Poll

Which System has the Best Ergonomics: Canon, Nikon, or Sony?

I prefer Canon
I prefer Nikon
I prefer Sony

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5   Go Down

Author Topic: Ergonomics: Canon, Nikon, or Sony?  (Read 21142 times)

John Koerner

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 866
  • "Fortune favors the bold." Virgil
    • John Koerner Photography
Re: Ergonomics: Canon, Nikon, or Sony?
« Reply #20 on: February 03, 2016, 10:03:54 pm »

Switching can be tough.  As a Nikon shooter, when Canon folks ask me how to manipulate their cameras it's almost like they are handing me kryptonite! 

I am sure the preference works in reverse, also.



As to ISO, yeah it is a button and dial usually so 2 hands, but your eyen never needs to leave the viewfinder.   I use Auto ISO quite a bit in manual mode.  This allows me the flexibility to manipulate both shutter and aperture as situations dictate without having a minimum shutter speed mess me up.  You have to ensure that in high light levels there is enough shutter speed available though.

When you consider the optimal hand-positioning when using a camera [left hand clasped underneath the lens (L/thumb on side of lens), right hand holding the camera grip (R/thumb on the back of the camera, R/index finger on top), all operations should be geared toward this reality.

The Canon does exactly this.
My left hand never has to leave the lens, and can control the lens in exactly this natural position.
My right hand can control anything it needs to with right thumb + right index finger combinations.
I remain in the natural shooting position throughout whatever combinations I need to make.

By contrast, the Nikon makes me take my left hand off the lens and fiddle with the left side of the camera body, while my right hand has to fiddle with the right side of the camera body, to achieve any number of combination settings.

It is simply not ergonomically friendly.

Also, taking my hand off the camera on the left side can startle many macro subjects to which I'm going to be moving close as I attempt to nail a shot.

Taking my left hand off the lens to adjust the setting on the left side of the camera, and then bringing my hand back to the lens, can scare off a butterfly (or make a jumping spider flip to the other side of the leaf), etc.

In this respect, I believe the Canon provides a much better-thought-out ergonomic interface. I can instantly make whatever lens adjustments I have with my left thumb, never taking my hand off the lens, and make whatever ISO/f-stop/shutter speed adjustments I need to with my right hand, all the while in the natural camera position. This is simply preferable.



As to MF to AF,  you can keep the camera on AF and flip the lens switch to manual and then flip it back to AF.  No need to manipulate the switch on the body.  And you can manually focus most Nikon lenses even when lens it set to AF.  If you back button focus and set shutter button to release only, that also preclude accidently activating AF when you have MF the lens in AF mode and it also save battery because VR only activates when the shutter button is pressed instead of when focusing.

Thanks for the tip.

I am still working with the camera and enjoy the image quality. I'm trying to figure out pre-set ways I can handle some of these ergonomically-unfriendly realities.

I like the focus dots better on the D810 than the Canon, and I like the LiveView on the D810 quite a bit better.

Life is full of compromises and trade-offs. I'm still trying to us to decide the trade-offs are worth the complete switch.

Jack
« Last Edit: February 03, 2016, 10:07:39 pm by John Koerner »
Logged

John Koerner

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 866
  • "Fortune favors the bold." Virgil
    • John Koerner Photography
Re: Ergonomics: Canon, Nikon, or Sony?
« Reply #21 on: February 03, 2016, 10:06:13 pm »

The 1DXmkII seems to be a great camera but is a totally different beast compared to the D810/D500. I am less and less clear about your needs. ;)

That makes 2 of us, as I am trying to clarify my own needs ;D

I do not think the 1Dx Mk II is a "totally-different" beast than the D500.

The high-ISO is an appealing prospect (for both), as I try not to use flash if I can help it.



As far as video goes, none of those seem to come close to what Sony/Pana offer for significantly less cash.
Cheers,
Bernard

Can you clarify?
Logged

dwswager

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1375
Re: Ergonomics: Canon, Nikon, or Sony?
« Reply #22 on: February 04, 2016, 12:24:36 pm »

That makes 2 of us, as I am trying to clarify my own needs ;D

I do not think the 1Dx Mk II is a "totally-different" beast than the D500.

The high-ISO is an appealing prospect (for both), as I try not to use flash if I can help it.

My understanding is that you are coming from the 7D.  I shot DX Nikon bodies from 2007 till I bought the D810.  My D810 purchase was predicated on selling my D7100, however, for some period of time I used both.  When I sold the D7100, it was tough.  My point is that each camera has areas of strength and weakness and while you can normally work around them, it is never as satisfying or effective.  And now that I am back to one body, I know how incredibly handy it is to shoot with 2 bodies.  I've shot both sports and events with dual bodies and it is awesome.  which is why I will be buying a D500 to go with the D810.  Once I tasted it, I can't go back.

Attached is an image showing the 4 cameras in discussion 7D, 1DxMKII, D810 and D500.  Listed are the crop from full frame, the Megapixels, the frame rates and the effective focal length equavalent of a 600mm lens.  That Sigma Sport 150-600mm is 960mm equavalent on your current body at just slightly smaller pixel count than the 600mm it will be on a 20MP 1DxMKII!!!

While there are a few areas where the 1DxMKII would certainly be the best camera to have of the 4, I suspect about 90% of all shooting circumstances will be covered better by the D810 or D500 or combination of both. 


Logged

John Koerner

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 866
  • "Fortune favors the bold." Virgil
    • John Koerner Photography
Re: Ergonomics: Canon, Nikon, or Sony?
« Reply #23 on: February 04, 2016, 01:46:51 pm »

My understanding is that you are coming from the 7D.  I shot DX Nikon bodies from 2007 till I bought the D810.  My D810 purchase was predicated on selling my D7100, however, for some period of time I used both.  When I sold the D7100, it was tough.  My point is that each camera has areas of strength and weakness and while you can normally work around them, it is never as satisfying or effective.  And now that I am back to one body, I know how incredibly handy it is to shoot with 2 bodies.  I've shot both sports and events with dual bodies and it is awesome.  which is why I will be buying a D500 to go with the D810.  Once I tasted it, I can't go back.

Yes, I had the 7D, and its features were second nature to me. It has just been too far-passed by modern technology to be happy with it anymore.

I agree with you, and the 2-Body Paradigm is what I hope to begin this new season with, and to facilitate this in the field I have purchased the 2-Camera Cotton Carrier to make "instant usability" a snap.

Basically, my goal in the field is to try to document specimens + habitat ... and switching lenses is a pain in the @$$.
(Hence the need for 2 cameras, with totally-different lenses attached.)

I have my Sigma lenses as field lenses + wide-angle.

At the moment, I still have my 7D + 10-22 as the "habitat" camera/lens combo.

Eventually, I will get the Nikkor 14-24 mm and have that on the D810 for habitat, with the Sigmas attached to the D500 for specimens.

Right now, all I have is the D810 because the D500 isn't available.



Attached is an image showing the 4 cameras in discussion 7D, 1DxMKII, D810 and D500.  Listed are the crop from full frame, the Megapixels, the frame rates and the effective focal length equavalent of a 600mm lens.  That Sigma Sport 150-600mm is 960mm equavalent on your current body at just slightly smaller pixel count than the 600mm it will be on a 20MP 1DxMKII!!!

It's funny. When I first decided on Canon, several years ago, it was because Nikons were more expensive and Canon's offered "more for less."

Now, it is the opposite.

The Canon 200-400 is $11,000 ... compared to the Nikkor 200-400 II for $6900.
The Canon 5DSr is is $3800 ... compared to the Nikon D810 for $2800.

I just can't justify staying with Canon, financially.

Okay, so the Nikon D5 is a bit over-priced at $6400 compared to the new 1D X II at $5900.

But the D810 was a no-brainer at $2900, compared to the 5D Sr at $3800.

Yes, the Canon 200-400 is the best ... but it's not $4000 better :o
Yes, the Canon 11-24 is better than the Nikon 14-24 ... but it's not $1,100 better  :o

For me, this is just too much of a disparity in price to justify the modest gains in quality.

The simple fact is, the D810 is a better overall camera than the 5DSr, and the 14-24 is an excellent lens.

With a D810 + 14-24 combo, I am out of pocket $4600 for an exquisite combo.
With the 5Dsr + 11-24 combo, I am out of pocket $6,800, with a better lens but a not-better camera.

Nikon is simply offering better cameras and a better value now (IMO) ... and superb lenses also.



While there are a few areas where the 1DxMKII would certainly be the best camera to have of the 4, I suspect about 90% of all shooting circumstances will be covered better by the D810 or D500 or combination of both.

The 1DX Mark II seems to be a better value than the new Nikon D5.
(I like the look of the D5 better, though ... and I will bet its price goes down shortly ...)

The D810 is a WAY better value than the 5DSr ...
The D500 is simply BETTER than the Canon 7D Mk II in every possible way ...

Ultimately, I don't want to invest a bunch of money in the 1DX Mk II and have only 1 camera.
I would rather buy 2 cameras and have both at the-ready ... to alleviate the need to change lenses.

I have been tinkering more with the D810 since I last posted, and have benefited from your tip to just leave AF 'on' on the body.

I have set the ISO to 'auto' so I don't have to move my hand of the lens to adjust the ISO.

From there, I can tinker with f/stop + Shutter speed, and the ISO will intelligently select the best choice (even though I prefer to select my ISO myself).

I hope to take it out for its first real spin over the weekend.

Jack
Logged

RobertJ

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 706
Re: Ergonomics: Canon, Nikon, or Sony?
« Reply #24 on: February 05, 2016, 06:01:43 pm »

If you're used to the layout and ergonomics of one system, then handle another system, it will almost always feel awkward at first.

For me, Canon is very straightforward, and you can go from a 5D, 6D, 7D, 5DS, and they are all laid out the same way.
Logged

NancyP

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2513
Re: Ergonomics: Canon, Nikon, or Sony?
« Reply #25 on: February 05, 2016, 06:36:06 pm »

I am a big fan of the Cotton Carrier system. It allows you to use hiking poles or both hands in a scramble, without worrying about the camera. Yes, the Nikon D500, being newer, is going to have more features than the 7D2.
Logged

John Koerner

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 866
  • "Fortune favors the bold." Virgil
    • John Koerner Photography
Re: Ergonomics: Canon, Nikon, or Sony?
« Reply #26 on: February 05, 2016, 10:03:58 pm »

If you're used to the layout and ergonomics of one system, then handle another system, it will almost always feel awkward at first.

I figured it would be like this, but was surprised at some of the design decisions.

Fortunately, the AF issue is resolved.

On the ISO situation, I am not as concerned anymore, as the files I am getting at ISO 1200 on the D810 look better than the files from the 7D at ISO 100.
Another thing, of which Dwswager reminded me in private, is that I can take "darker" photos with the D810, and still pull out detail in post, whereas any under-exposed images were simply shot with the 7D.

The more I get used to the Nikon system (and having customized my settings, the playback display, etc.), the more I can concentrate on shooting ... and I am really enjoying the file quality.



For me, Canon is very straightforward, and you can go from a 5D, 6D, 7D, 5DS, and they are all laid out the same way.

I agree. Very straightforward.

The playback on the Canon, for example, I could see the histogram + all relevant info on one screen.

With the Nikon, I can look at the histogram, but then then I have to hit the button to see the file info, then again to see the highlights, etc.

This bothered me at first, but I am growing to like it now ;D

Jack
Logged

John Koerner

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 866
  • "Fortune favors the bold." Virgil
    • John Koerner Photography
Re: Ergonomics: Canon, Nikon, or Sony?
« Reply #27 on: February 05, 2016, 10:25:45 pm »

I am a big fan of the Cotton Carrier system.

Ditto 8)



It allows you to use hiking poles or both hands in a scramble, without worrying about the camera.

Ditto x2.

For me, it allows me to carry my snake tongs and insect sweep nets 8)

What I especially like with the Cotton Carrier, is that you can hardly feel the weight of the camera. Yeah, you see the pictures of it on the ad, but I was curious about how it would feel "on" ... and it feels wonderful (hardly notice the weight, when compared to having the camera on a tripod over your shoulder, or around your neck).



Yes, the Nikon D500, being newer, is going to have more features than the 7D2.

Let's be real here.

The Nikon D500 is what the Canon 7D Mk II should have been ... but wasn't.

All the same technology was there when the 7D Mk II came out (4K, wireless, articulating screen, everything).

Canon just sat on its corporate a$$ ... and tried to "dress-up" outdated technology with the 7D II ... and (quite frankly) it pissed me off.
(I tried to like it, I really did, but in my heart I was ultimately turned-off ...)

I had been saving, and saving, and saving to re-invest with Canon ... and they didn't deliver anything to make me send my money their way.

By contrast, Nikon simply delivered with the D500 ... they included absolutely everything and didn't hold back.

That is why, after saving for several years, I made the decision to switch brands.

I was a little put-off by the Nikon ergonomics, at first (hence the thread), but after acclimating  ... and, especially, after seeing the files ... I am glad I made this decision.

With a D810 + landscape lens ... and a D500 + field lens ... I am looking forward to a very fulfilling new season  :D

Jack
Logged

nemophoto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1021
    • Nemo Niemann Photography
Re: Ergonomics: Canon, Nikon, or Sony?
« Reply #28 on: February 08, 2016, 12:35:56 pm »

I teach an advanced level photography course (a portion of a 6-month curriculum for post-secondary students) a couple times a year. The students are generally split 65% Canon, 30% Nikon and 5% Sony. I use Canon (1Dx and 5Ds). From working with the students' cameras I can say, from a menuing standpoint, the Sonys are a disaster and the Nikon follow closely. One of the things I teach the students is the use and importance of doing custom white balance. With Nikons (and granted, these are not the D4 -- and I can't remember precisely the D810), it took no less than 10 menu steps to find, create and register a custom white balance! Truly ridiculous. Some Nikon engineer should have had his ass fired. I found on both Nikons and Sonys, many important or useful menu items were buried. It's absurd. I'm not always happy with Canon, though it's made huge leaps is usability since my first 1D. My own bias is that I greatly prefer the ergonomics of the 1Dx over my 5Ds. One thing is certain -- regardless of brand -- it seems no two cameras are ever the same in ergonomic handling.
Logged

dwswager

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1375
Re: Ergonomics: Canon, Nikon, or Sony?
« Reply #29 on: February 08, 2016, 03:20:30 pm »

I teach an advanced level photography course (a portion of a 6-month curriculum for post-secondary students) a couple times a year. The students are generally split 65% Canon, 30% Nikon and 5% Sony. I use Canon (1Dx and 5Ds). From working with the students' cameras I can say, from a menuing standpoint, the Sonys are a disaster and the Nikon follow closely. One of the things I teach the students is the use and importance of doing custom white balance. With Nikons (and granted, these are not the D4 -- and I can't remember precisely the D810), it took no less than 10 menu steps to find, create and register a custom white balance! Truly ridiculous. Some Nikon engineer should have had his ass fired. I found on both Nikons and Sonys, many important or useful menu items were buried. It's absurd. I'm not always happy with Canon, though it's made huge leaps is usability since my first 1D. My own bias is that I greatly prefer the ergonomics of the 1Dx over my 5Ds. One thing is certain -- regardless of brand -- it seems no two cameras are ever the same in ergonomic handling.

I'm not sure what "registering" a custom white balance means in Canon speak, but with a Nikon D810 it takes exactly 0 menu steps to create and utilize up to 4 (I think) custom white balances that are then saved and can be retrieved at a later time.

I tend to shoot with a Colorchecker passport most of the time so I usually shoot RAW on Auto white balance unless I'm in a controlled lighting situation.
Logged

nemophoto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1021
    • Nemo Niemann Photography
Re: Ergonomics: Canon, Nikon, or Sony?
« Reply #30 on: February 08, 2016, 04:27:35 pm »

I'm not sure what "registering" a custom white balance means in Canon speak, but with a Nikon D810 it takes exactly 0 menu steps to create and utilize up to 4 (I think) custom white balances that are then saved and can be retrieved at a later time.

I tend to shoot with a Colorchecker passport most of the time so I usually shoot RAW on Auto white balance unless I'm in a controlled lighting situation.

"Registering" a custom white balance is just that -- taking an image and making it the "Custom White Balance". Glad to know it's a "no-brainer" on an 810, though I doubt it takes "zero steps". You must first take a reference frame, then select it and set it as your custom white balance. The other Nikon models suck in this regard. (You can find a YouTube video that guides you through the mechanics on one particular model. If my memory serves me well, it was 10 separate steps.)

As for using a Color Checker, I use that as well, but for my commercial jobs, prefer to also have a custom white balance set within the image as well. I do this with an Expo Disk which has served me very well over the years. For me, professionally, I shoot RAW+JPEGs, and the clients use the JPEGs for their FPO edits and I want the color balance to be correct for them, not arbitrary for me to set in post. As such, I teach the students the mechanics of this. A 1Dx will store up to 5 different white balances, though, since most of my work is location, I rarely use the same one twice, since the shots can vary greatly. Again, for my students, I'm teaching a consistency of method and how to achieve custom white balance embedded within their photos.
Logged

razrblck

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 482
  • Chill
    • Instagram
Re: Ergonomics: Canon, Nikon, or Sony?
« Reply #31 on: February 08, 2016, 05:02:05 pm »

The D7000 requires about 3 or 4 steps, it can save five settings and you can then switch to any of them the same way you set any other WB setting (without the menu but using WB button and the control wheels). There is one more step, optional, that lets you further refine the settings with a color matrix.

It's not intuitive at all, that I can say, but if you need it often it will become a no-brainer in no time, just like any other setting.
Logged
Instagram (updated often)

dwswager

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1375
Re: Ergonomics: Canon, Nikon, or Sony?
« Reply #32 on: February 08, 2016, 08:08:36 pm »

"Registering" a custom white balance is just that -- taking an image and making it the "Custom White Balance". Glad to know it's a "no-brainer" on an 810, though I doubt it takes "zero steps". You must first take a reference frame, then select it and set it as your custom white balance. The other Nikon models suck in this regard. (You can find a YouTube video that guides you through the mechanics on one particular model. If my memory serves me well, it was 10 separate steps.)

As for using a Color Checker, I use that as well, but for my commercial jobs, prefer to also have a custom white balance set within the image as well. I do this with an Expo Disk which has served me very well over the years. For me, professionally, I shoot RAW+JPEGs, and the clients use the JPEGs for their FPO edits and I want the color balance to be correct for them, not arbitrary for me to set in post. As such, I teach the students the mechanics of this. A 1Dx will store up to 5 different white balances, though, since most of my work is location, I rarely use the same one twice, since the shots can vary greatly. Again, for my students, I'm teaching a consistency of method and how to achieve custom white balance embedded within their photos.

Not sure this is what you are asking, but for a D810 (Helpful photo attached)

1. Press and Hold WB button.
2. (If not already set) Rotate rear dial to select "Pre" (Preset) as your white balance selection.
3. (If you want to save into some position other than the current one) Rotate front dial to select which position you want to save into.
4. Release and then Hold WB button until display flashes.
5. Shoot the reference frame and you have stored that white balance into the position you selected.

If the camera is already set to "PRE" WB and all you want to do is store a new one then only steps 4 & 5 are required.  You never have to go into the menus.  It has pretty much been this easy on the D70, D300, D7100 and D810 that I have owned.

If I am distributing JPEG out of camera, then yeah, I use a custom white balance.  Normally though I shoot NEF only, download, set white balance and convert using a custom profile while adding a little overall sharpness to a reasonable size JPEG and provide those.
« Last Edit: February 09, 2016, 07:49:23 am by dwswager »
Logged

dwswager

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1375
Re: Ergonomics: Canon, Nikon, or Sony?
« Reply #33 on: February 09, 2016, 07:46:42 am »

As someone that has done Human Reliability Analysis for nuclear power reactors and nuclear weapons systems, I can assure you that any preference to one system is, in large part, predicated on your prior experience (bias).  That is, if you shoot Canon, you will be partial to Canon and find Nikon somewhat frustrating and the other way around.  This gives no indication of which is better only to which you are already acclimated.  Even the rare individual that knows well and uses multiple systems will be biased by their prior experience and the system they use on a primary basis.  The whole field of Human Factors Engineering is predicated on understanding bias (of all types) and resulting expectations and attempting to account for it.
Logged

pegelli

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1664
    • http://pegelli.smugmug.com/
Re: Ergonomics: Canon, Nikon, or Sony?
« Reply #34 on: February 09, 2016, 08:09:25 am »

As someone that has done Human Reliability Analysis for nuclear power reactors and nuclear weapons systems, I can assure you that any preference to one system is, in large part, predicated on your prior experience (bias).  That is, if you shoot Canon, you will be partial to Canon and find Nikon somewhat frustrating and the other way around.  This gives no indication of which is better only to which you are already acclimated.  Even the rare individual that knows well and uses multiple systems will be biased by their prior experience and the system they use on a primary basis.  The whole field of Human Factors Engineering is predicated on understanding bias (of all types) and resulting expectations and attempting to account for it.
Very good point.

Maybe the poll should have had 6 questions:
1) I prefer Canon and shoot mainly Canon
2) I prefer Canon and shoot mainly Nikon or Sony
3) I prefer Nikon and shoot mainly Nikon
4) I prefer Nikon and shoot mainly Canon or Sony
5) I prefer Sony and shoot mainly Sony
6) I prefer Sony and shoot mainly Canon or Nikon

My bet would be that answers 2, 4 and 6 would be a large minority vs. 1, 3 and 5, but could be wrong of course
Logged
pieter, aka pegelli

dwswager

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1375
Re: Ergonomics: Canon, Nikon, or Sony?
« Reply #35 on: February 09, 2016, 08:50:26 am »

The biggest thing any camera manufacturer could easily implement to improve the human factors of their camera would be to allow the user to save the state of the camera to a group of Settings Banks!  Everything on a modern DSLR is set electronically.  Hence, I should be able to save the current state of the camera to memory and recall it later.  I should be able to name these and recall them at least by going into the menu.  A dedicated button and command dial spin to step through them would be ever better.

Nikon has the Shooting and Extended Shooting banks which are almost useless because they work the exact opposite as needed.  What is needed is to save a set of base starting states while the Nikon banks end up as ever changing ending states.  IDIOTS!
« Last Edit: February 09, 2016, 09:10:03 am by dwswager »
Logged

hjulenissen

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2051
Re: Ergonomics: Canon, Nikon, or Sony?
« Reply #36 on: February 09, 2016, 09:00:35 am »

I agree that it comes down to "taste" ... not "ability."
...
Taste and experience is important, but I don't think that it is only that.

Some user interface/ergonomy concepts are probably easier to accept and like than others. I am guessing that the corporate culture (how much weight to put on engineering resources, test groups and "expert" beta testers) affects ergonomy a lot. Perhaps also the degree to which one stays with conservative ways of working as opposed to new ways of working.

I have had my RX100M2 for a few years now, and even though it is a very different camera from my Canon DSLR, I have accepted that I will probably never be as familiar with it as I am with my Canon. There could be many reasons why. It enables great images in a small package tough.

-h
Logged

John Koerner

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 866
  • "Fortune favors the bold." Virgil
    • John Koerner Photography
Re: Ergonomics: Canon, Nikon, or Sony?
« Reply #37 on: February 09, 2016, 10:33:10 am »

Taste and experience is important, but I don't think that it is only that.

I agree.



Some user interface/ergonomy concepts are probably easier to accept and like than others. I am guessing that the corporate culture (how much weight to put on engineering resources, test groups and "expert" beta testers) affects ergonomy a lot. Perhaps also the degree to which one stays with conservative ways of working as opposed to new ways of working.

Again I agree ... and good point.

I heard it said once that, "Canons are made my computer guys, Nikons by photographers."

I don't think that is necessarily true, as I think the Canon is ergonomically-friendlier, but it captures the concept of what you're saying.



I have had my RX100M2 for a few years now, and even though it is a very different camera from my Canon DSLR, I have accepted that I will probably never be as familiar with it as I am with my Canon. There could be many reasons why. It enables great images in a small package tough.
-h

I still have to "think and look" when I use my Nikon, compared to just "knowing where everything is" on my Canon.

With the Nikon, even though I know how to adjust f/stop and shutter speed, the dials are smaller and tougher to find "in an instant" for me.
(I am sure this lull-and-look will diminish with time and with use.)

On the positive side, one thing that has me very excited about the Nikon glass is that they still make 100% manual, all-metal short primes, such as the 50mm f/1.2, the 35mm f/1.4, and the 28mm f/2.8.

All of these are manual focus only.
All of these are manual aperture only.
All of these have 52mm front-thread size.

This is important to me because I am going to try reverse mount macro photography, applying a reverse ring, to these lenses, and explore reverse-mount macro imaging to achieve 1:1, 2:1, and 3:1 magnification, respectively, as a replacement for the Canon MP-E 65mm lens.

That these Nikon lenses are all-metal, and manual aperture, is vital because the ability to control the aperture is removed from AF/auto-aperture lenses when you reverse-mount them. Not so with manual aperture lenses!

The Canon MP-E 65 is a legendary lens to macro shooters, but it has always been regarded as somewhat soft. I think that, after I configure my Nikon D810 with these reverse-mount lenses, that I will ultimately get MUCH better ultra-close-ups with this combo than I did with the 7D and MP-E 65mm.

Jack
« Last Edit: February 09, 2016, 11:07:38 am by John Koerner »
Logged

John Koerner

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 866
  • "Fortune favors the bold." Virgil
    • John Koerner Photography
Re: Ergonomics: Canon, Nikon, or Sony?
« Reply #38 on: February 09, 2016, 12:54:27 pm »

Not sure this is what you are asking, but for a D810 (Helpful photo attached)

1. Press and Hold WB button.
2. (If not already set) Rotate rear dial to select "Pre" (Preset) as your white balance selection.
3. (If you want to save into some position other than the current one) Rotate front dial to select which position you want to save into.
4. Release and then Hold WB button until display flashes.
5. Shoot the reference frame and you have stored that white balance into the position you selected.

If the camera is already set to "PRE" WB and all you want to do is store a new one then only steps 4 & 5 are required.  You never have to go into the menus.  It has pretty much been this easy on the D70, D300, D7100 and D810 that I have owned.

If I am distributing JPEG out of camera, then yeah, I use a custom white balance.  Normally though I shoot NEF only, download, set white balance and convert using a custom profile while adding a little overall sharpness to a reasonable size JPEG and provide those.

This illustration forms the sum and substance of my beef with Nikon.

The very fact you have to "hold" a button with your left finger (taking your left hand off of where it belongs, the lens), while rotating dials with your right finger/thumb, is simply ergonomically-lame compared to the way Canon does it.

I don't have to take my left hand off the lens, to push a button with my left finger, while my right finger/thumb rotates dials.

Instead, my right index finger pushes a button, while my right thumb dials, all the while my left hand remains where it belongs: supporting/adjusting the lens.

Jack
Logged

dwswager

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1375
Re: Ergonomics: Canon, Nikon, or Sony?
« Reply #39 on: February 09, 2016, 04:17:06 pm »

This illustration forms the sum and substance of my beef with Nikon.

The very fact you have to "hold" a button with your left finger (taking your left hand off of where it belongs, the lens), while rotating dials with your right finger/thumb, is simply ergonomically-lame compared to the way Canon does it.

I don't have to take my left hand off the lens, to push a button with my left finger, while my right finger/thumb rotates dials.

Instead, my right index finger pushes a button, while my right thumb dials, all the while my left hand remains where it belongs: supporting/adjusting the lens.

I concede that some settings on a Nikon DSLR take 2 hands, but their goal is that you can do it while shooting and never have your eye leave the viewfinder.  Canon's setup for lots of things can be done one handed, but requires you to stop shooting and bring the camera down to look at the menu and top LCD.

The Canon method to change WB on the 7DmkII is a 12 step process as shown here.  Nine steps if you assume the camera is already on and set to the shooting mode you want and we drop the last step of taking a picture.  On a Nikon it is 2 steps.  Press and hold WB button till it "PRE"  flashes and shoot the WB reference. 

It's a matter of opinion, like most things, but personally, I think Nikon wins easiest "Set Custom WB" in a walk!  Personally, I think needing to go into the menu is a Rube Goldberg solution.

Oh, and I do a one hand set of Custom WB on my Nikons.   While holding the camera by the underside of the lens with my left hand, I push and hold the WB with my right index finger.  Then I shoot the reference with the shutter release button also with my right index finger.  Only if you want to change from some other WB setting to Custom WB or if you want to store the reference into a different register than the current one does it require a 2nd hand.
« Last Edit: February 09, 2016, 04:32:49 pm by dwswager »
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5   Go Up