Appeal for Divergence and Simplicity

[PatBeug]

The problem occurs when an unwanted feature gets in the way of normal usage.

An excellent example is on the Sony Rx100(II). It has a dedicated video button(that can't be disabled) that is very easily pressed by mistake. If you accidentally start shooting video there are three problems;
1. The camera is shooting video when you need to shoot a still.
2. Battery life gets wasted.... very quickly.
3. Card memory gets used up and might need attention to delete unwanted clips before yo can shoot further stills.
Whilst the camera can shoot decent HD video, that capability gets in the way of what the camera excels at which is shooting great stills.
Does it deserve divergence ? no, just a far better UI that could allow the video button to be disabled or re-configured to something more appropriate for the shooting mode chosen.

Reply: You can set the movie button on the RX100 MKII to only work when the mode dial is set to the Movie position.
Go to Menu, Gear 3, select " MOVIE button", and set it to "Movie Mode Only". Now the rear movie button is inactive unless you select the Movie icon on the mode dial. It cannot be accidently activated. 

[Rhossydd]

Reply: You can set the movie button on the RX100 MKII to only work when the mode dial is set to the Movie position.
Go to Menu, Gear 3, select " MOVIE button", and set it to "Movie Mode Only". Now the rear movie button is inactive unless you select the Movie icon on the mode dial. It cannot be accidently activated. 

Thanks for the information, it's shame that option isn't there on the original RX100.

[jjj]

Without going into small details, I think the people critical of Mark's position are pissing into the wind -- just from the responses here, it seems that a fairly large set of people (though perhaps not a majority) feel that cameras are getting too cluttered up with options, buttons, menus, etc. So even if *you* don't think this is a problem, apparently a large number of other people do.

It's Mark that's is positioned facing the wind as others have rightly pointed out. Besides Mark, yourself and others are confusing bad design with too many features. Very, very different things.
And just like with new software, people are selfishly complaining because features they do not need are included. I think you'd be rightly annoyed if your favourite fears were elided just because others found them pointless. So don't complain when it's the other way around as you may not like the result if your views prevailed.

....In other words, one decision, to buy the GX7, meant I had to upgrade my Lightroom program, which meant I had to upgrade the OS......

Seeing that Adobe have made a point of not forcing anyone to have to upgrade if someone buys a new camera, if  you are in upgrade hell it is because that is a hole you dug yourself. Which you cannot blame anyone else for.
Besides why blame Adobe anyway? It's the camera manufacturers that keep breaking compatibility by pointlessly changing their raw file if a camera model has a name change.

[jjj]

An excellent example is on the Sony Rx100(II). It has a dedicated video button(that can't be disabled) that is very easily pressed by mistake. If you accidentally start shooting video there are three problems;
1. The camera is shooting video when you need to shoot a still.
2. Battery life gets wasted.... very quickly.
3. Card memory gets used up and might need attention to delete unwanted clips before yo can shoot further stills.
Whilst the camera can shoot decent HD video, that capability gets in the way of what the camera excels at which is shooting great stills.
Does it deserve divergence ? no, just a far better UI that could allow the video button to be disabled or re-configured to something more appropriate for the shooting mode chosen.

Reply: You can set the movie button on the RX100 MKII to only work when the mode dial is set to the Movie position.
Go to Menu, Gear 3, select " MOVIE button", and set it to "Movie Mode Only". Now the rear movie button is inactive unless you select the Movie icon on the mode dial. It cannot be accidently activated. 

RTM before complaining about something, is always a good move.

[Rhossydd]

RTM before complaining about something, is always a good move.

As mentioned; that option is only on the latest model, not the original RX100.
Also there's no manual supplied anyway, so reading it isn't an option.

[BJL]

As mentioned; that option is only on the latest model, not the original RX100.
Also there's no manual supplied anyway, so reading it isn't an option.

Problem 1 was fixed by the new Mark II model;
Problem 2 (Sony providing the full manual only on a website in HTML!?) was fixed by John Colton at BYU:
http://www.physics.byu.edu/faculty/colton/Sony%20RX100%20User%20Guide.pdf
so I hope that is of use to you.

(Note that neither solution required the cost-increasing "nuclear option" of having separate video and non-video models.)

[Isaac]

1. I don't see how fixing the design in a later model can be seen as any kind of solution to the problem that exists in the earlier model -- that problem still exists unfixed, until the manufacturer takes on the responsibility to provide firmware updates.

2. The DSC-RX100 User Guide (.PDF) is available on the Sony website.

[Rhossydd]

Problem 1 was fixed by the new Mark II model;

That's not solved the problem, it's still there on the RX100.
What it does reveal is that they could offer the same option on the RX100, but can't be bothered to support their existing clients with a firmware fix.

[Manoli]

[..] that problem still exists unfixed, until the manufacturer takes on the responsibility to provide firmware updates.

What it does reveal is that they could offer the same option on the RX100, but can't be bothered to support their existing clients with a firmware fix.

Classic SONY, unfortunately. Support and continuity isn't (wasn't) their strong point.

[jjj]

Classic SONY, unfortunately. Support and continuity isn't (wasn't) their strong point.

Sony like to sell crippled products and then the next year sell you a slightly less crippled one and so on.

[Rhossydd]

Classic SONY, unfortunately. Support and continuity isn't (wasn't) their strong point.

Yes, their consumer products get SFA support.

[AlanG]

If you accidentally start rolling video when you want to shoot a still I'd look at it as your camera trying to tell you something... Either learn the camera and don't be such a screw up, or go with the video since the camera may be right.

There sure is a lot of griping in that article when you consider how easy it is to shoot technically good photos today with these cameras compared to how it was when I started. At one time you had to know not to accidentally open the back of your film camera too.

[BJL]

Isaac and Rhossyd,

    i did not make myself clear: I am not defending Sony for either its original bad design in the RX100 or its failure to offer a firmware solution. I was just addressing the premise of the article that this thread is about: that a few examples of bad designs decisions like this are an argument for new camera models that "solve the problem" by eliminating video entirely.

[BFoto]

I agree with the premise of this article. i wonder how many photographers out there, pro and amature alike, who jumped on the DSLR video waggon and have since jumped off...i'm one. Just get a gopro!

[Hans Kruse]

In general I agree that simplicity without crippling functionality is a good thing. With Apple it's mostly working but in a number of cases the simplicity makes even simple things harder than necessary to do. An example to move photos from Lightroom over on the iPad could be very simple but there are many restrictions unneeded. Btw. I'm not sure I would agree that Lightroom is a good example of simplicity. There is way too much under the hood that needs to be understood and even worse, it is not documented.

I'm currently shooting Canon 5D3 and Nikon D800E and I have not missed a single shot due to the video function and it fact I have not even shot a video so far with any of them. The old MLU burried in menues on the Canon argument...Yes it is true, but it is much better to shoot in live view and there is a button for it when you would need MLU!! MLU is not needed any more. Same on the Nikon btw. There is understandably a lot of conservatism in camera design and neither Canon nor Nikon can change their design dramatically from one model to the next or their customers would object. But I too get annoyed about bad design. One glaring one is on the D800 in live view. Why do I need to wait for the shot or shots to be written to the memory card(s) before I can take it out of LV? Or get into LV? On the 5D3 all is written to the buffer and you can go in and out LV immediately. I find very few things on the 5D3 to be annoying, only the sensor is a lower standard than the Nikon regarding DR. Resolution is a wash mostly. And why does the LV on the D800 have to stop down to the chosen aperture? There is a DOF preview button to do that when DOF needs to be checked as is the way the Canon works in LV.

Although Mark has a point I think it is a bit overdone and the examples only partially defends his case. I'm surprised he didn't mention one thing that annoyes me more than anything on the Canon and the Nikon: The lack of a true ETTR function. It would be so easy to build into the camera. For landscape shooting the solution would be as simple as: Set the camera at desired aperture and ISO (typically 100) on a tripod. The set the camera in ETTR mode and it would take a shot, analyze the RAW image and do an exposure compensation for a true ETTR shot. On top of that in high DR situations combine this with bracketing around the ETTR exposure and we are done. No more bracketing and exposure compensation and chimping. No more wasted time in looking at the LCD and histograms. We are out for composing and shooting images and not for looking at histograms, right?

[Isaac]

I’m sure everyone would like a ‘simple’ camera having exactly the features they need, the problem is that everyone’s needs will be different. What would be a step forward would be better customisation of menus/buttons and being able to hide menu items.

That seems to be happening --

"...the Sony A7's user interface is exceptionally configurable. ... This surely sets a new benchmark for camera configurability. (There may have been a camera or cameras with more configuration options, I just can't recall any.)

While it takes a little while to settle on the best configuration for a highly-customizable user interface like this, and some more time before your custom configurations become second nature, the benefit to regular shooters is huge. Rather than cursing a multi-level menu system, the camera becomes a fluid extension of your creative process. The impact of the sort of deep configurability of the Sony A7's user interface shouldn't be underestimated."

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

I mostly agree with Hans on this. Personally I like video and shoot some video almost each day (that I am shooting). But regarding user interface I absolutely agree with him, there is a lot to do.

I would also say that there is a lot to the old classic layout with aperture ring on lens and shutter speed dial. Regarding ETTR I find the Sony's I have work well enough, but I fully agree with what Hans says.

I would just add that presets are a great feature. I have three presets on my Sony's make life much easier. Five or six may be even better.

Best regards
Erik

In general I agree that simplicity without crippling functionality is a good thing. With Apple it's mostly working but in a number of cases the simplicity makes even simple things harder than necessary to do. An example to move photos from Lightroom over on the iPad could be very simple but there are many restrictions unneeded. Btw. I'm not sure I would agree that Lightroom is a good example of simplicity. There is way too much under the hood that needs to be understood and even worse, it is not documented.

I'm currently shooting Canon 5D3 and Nikon D800E and I have not missed a single shot due to the video function and it fact I have not even shot a video so far with any of them. The old MLU burried in menues on the Canon argument...Yes it is true, but it is much better to shoot in live view and there is a button for it when you would need MLU!! MLU is not needed any more. Same on the Nikon btw. There is understandably a lot of conservatism in camera design and neither Canon nor Nikon can change their design dramatically from one model to the next or their customers would object. But I too get annoyed about bad design. One glaring one is on the D800 in live view. Why do I need to wait for the shot or shots to be written to the memory card(s) before I can take it out of LV? Or get into LV? On the 5D3 all is written to the buffer and you can go in and out LV immediately. I find very few things on the 5D3 to be annoying, only the sensor is a lower standard than the Nikon regarding DR. Resolution is a wash mostly. And why does the LV on the D800 have to stop down to the chosen aperture? There is a DOF preview button to do that when DOF needs to be checked as is the way the Canon works in LV.

Although Mark has a point I think it is a bit overdone and the examples only partially defends his case. I'm surprised he didn't mention one thing that annoyes me more than anything on the Canon and the Nikon: The lack of a true ETTR function. It would be so easy to build into the camera. For landscape shooting the solution would be as simple as: Set the camera at desired aperture and ISO (typically 100) on a tripod. The set the camera in ETTR mode and it would take a shot, analyze the RAW image and do an exposure compensation for a true ETTR shot. On top of that in high DR situations combine this with bracketing around the ETTR exposure and we are done. No more bracketing and exposure compensation and chimping. No more wasted time in looking at the LCD and histograms. We are out for composing and shooting images and not for looking at histograms, right?

[Rand47]

"Get over it, you Luddites, you'll never see a dedicated stills camera again unless you buy a MF back."

Nikon Df

[barryfitzgerald]

DF is a mish mash of trying to blend old style dials and handling with a D600 back. It looks odd to me.

What Nikon should have done, forget AF just a great manual focus huge viewfinder split image. Cut the controls right down keep it simple, yes shutter speed, ISO and WB.
What we have right now is some confused designer trying to appease old school shooters with a re-packaged D600 in a partial retro body.

I for one am not convinced with the DF

[Christoph C. Feldhaim]

DF is a mish mash of trying to blend old style dials and handling with a D600 back. It looks odd to me.

What Nikon should have done, forget AF just a great manual focus huge viewfinder split image. Cut the controls right down keep it simple, yes shutter speed, ISO and WB.
What we have right now is some confused designer trying to appease old school shooters with a re-packaged D600 in a partial retro body.

I for one am not convinced with the DF

They should have packaged a D800 sensor at least