• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter
Photo

Camera user interfaces, the good, the bad and the ugly

UI firmware

  • Please log in to reply
43 replies to this topic

#1 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,571 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 21 June 2017 - 11:18 AM

From another thread I transferred a side branch to this thread:
 

The Q-menu of Fuji has 16 positions. Per default, 6 of them are IQ for JPGs. The other 10 partly show redundant settings like ISO (on a dial). There's linited possibilities of what I can assign to it, not much help (I'd like to set the whole stuff up on a bigger screen with all menus visible to get better overview).
 
Fuji already shows with their dials and wheels and lots of hardware buttons, how they think the camera should be used. But they are very inconsequent as many functions can be assigned three times - I could assign each Fn button to the same function - what is the sense of that?
 
Oh, and on the X-T2 the Auto ISO considers the FL  ;) I thought they put the same on the firmware of the X-T1? But I don't know...
 
I agree, UIs are individually questionable, everybody likes soemthing different. However, badly translated or inconsistent texts are a no-go everywhere.
 
The most simplest I saw so far (taking into account the camera itself is no as complex as all the others you mentioned) is the menu and the Quickmenu of the Sigma (Merill and dp quattro) series. Simple and elegant.


Q-menu : setting defaults that satisfy most customers is a daunting task and perhaps the majority of users are happy with it? I don't know. Regardless, that's why you can configure the Q-menu and change it to your taste.
 
Redundant button assignations : I agree that it seems pointless. Functions already assigned shouldn't not be assignable again. I have to check Olympus bodies, but I believe they do the same. Maybe some users like to have the same functionality accessible through different buttons? Not sure, but it surely seems silly to me.
 
Auto ISO : I have to double check the latest firmware, but I don't think it was passed down to the X-T1 :-(
 
Language : I always change the camera language to English which doesn't suffer from any translation issues. This said, I agree that language localization is very important and should definitely be rock solid.
 
One thing that strikes me among all manufacturers is that today everyone owns a computer, yet little is done to take advantage of this. The whole configuration process should be made configurable from a computer. It would obviously be much easier than directly from the camera. Yet, no manufacturers seems to be aware of this. Saving the camera configuration to a file should be an obvious feature in every camera model. With WIFI or Bluetooth, any devices can be connected. One should be able to network several cameras and update them at once, etc. Same with firmware. The whole process is so archaic and primitive. Even SD cards are still using the archaic FAT32 filesystem and silly old 8 characters filename length limitation back from the old DOS days. The whole UI / configuration / connectivity (or lack of) scheme is stuck in the past, almost 40 years ago to be precise. Even phone applications that let you control your cameras are crap. I haven't seen a single good remote camera app that works well and is not sluggish like hell, limited or just plain unreliable.
I wonder when manufacturers will finally realize that one of the major reasons why smartphones are so popular is because of their connectivity! Japanese companies are very much stuck in the past and very sluggish to adapt to changes and "new" technologies.


Besides of Japanese companies there are not much more offering cameras  ;)
 
Except the Q-menu paragarph (it is not possible to assign it the way I need it just because there are tons of limitations) I fully agree with every single sentence.
 
Remote WiFi controls:
 
I know of

  • CamRanger (one of the first, but not the best)
  • Tether Tools case air  (not much better in terms of features, how reliable I don't know)
  • Arsenal (currently their Kickstarter campain is 4650 % financed... so there's a need for what they offer)
  • some genuine or proprietary devices from Nikon
  • much more existing, also in camera WIfI which drown batteries super fast

So far, most of the solutions I've tried have quirks, the apps are limited in too much ways.
 
Touchscreen? Yes - but not going far enough so the menus would be "easified". In case of Fuji: Options to set up are battling themselves for first price in redundancy.
 
Do I need a function? If yes, how can it be set up quickly? Do I want to bundle it with other functions to a group of user settings? If yes, how can I make the access fast?
 
While some functions are debatable, others are a simple count of "how often do I need to press a button until the setting is done?" More than three? Bad show, do it again, developer.
 
My developer colleagues always get a very cautious look when I approach them. I have to document their "art" and sometimes diplomacy is throwing cotton balls... It's nearly the same effort to make it great to use. If they stop to early I think I have to tell them, because I like happy customers. They pay our bonuses.



#2 wim

wim

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,145 posts
  • LocationMaastricht, Netherlands

Posted 21 June 2017 - 12:19 PM

As someone who shoots Canon, Olympus and Panasonic, I would like to make a small addition.

 

The Olympus menus are not really bad at all, IMO. They are just very, very extensive, and occasionally quite deep, which makes it difficult to remember where is what. There certainly is logic to it. The neat thing with Olympus is that there is a Quick Menu for most used menu items, effectively, that it has one of the best if not the best touch screens and touch interfaces wrt cameras, and that virtually every button can be reprogrammed to whatever you like, which can also be mapped to a set controlled by one of the Custum menu options.

 

In short, if you really want to get the most out of an Olympus camera, it takes some time to set up and/or learn, possibly, depending on one's (perceived) shooting needs, but several options for different shooting types and styles can then be easily matched with one of the Custom sets (C1-C3), while it is still possible to easily adjust all the main options with the quick menu, or with the dials and buttons.

 

Generally speaking, I personally find these discussions over the top, as it is always possible to do stuff the old-fashioned and easy way, with most cameras anyway, and I reckon that will suffice 99.8% or more of most shots. Know what you want to do, and set the camera up accordingly, the simple way. You'll rarely need to use the menu in that case, and often not deep at all once the initial set up is done. That is my experience, although YMMV I guess.

 

As to Panasonic: I find the menus often too simple. And with Canon, despite the fact that I have always gelled nicely with their menu system and dials and controls set-up, even there it is hard at times and hidden fairly deep in the menus to set up something very specific.

 

All in all, unless one has become proficient with a camera menu system, take the time to learn and master the menu system, otherwise it seems rather involved, hard to do, whatever. I have heard people complain about the menu system of ANY camera brand, and that includes Fuji, Pentax, Panasonic, Olympus, Canon, Nikon, and Sony especially. My impression is that people often expect things to work immediately the way they want or expect, even though cameras cannot yet read minds, and that people are often very impatient, and not prepared to invest the time to get to know the tools one uses.

 

Kind regards, Wim



#3 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,571 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 21 June 2017 - 01:04 PM

....My impression is that people often expect things to work immediately the way they want or expect, even though cameras cannot yet read minds, ...

 

Yes. And there is nothing wrong with this expectation. If anything, amneu has to help me, not to point out how far developed the software engineers are - or how much retro and only going ways from the past.

 

Cameras cannoz read minds, true. But a lot of actions we are doing with them are the same over and over again. It is not hard to predict one wants to set up Auto-Iso and Auto ISO has to relate on the used focal length. Soem features are so common these days, that it's embarassing why camera manufacturers act as if they have the only standard recipe.

 

A couple of times I rented a car. Did I have to read the manual to find the gear shift, light switch, brake pedal?

 

No. That only was necessary because Software engineers are sometimes too arrogant to find common ways of user interface for radio or GPS. Standardization helps and sets resources free for other projects. Look at Apple and Google and their UI- these are competing firms. Trash-bin, play button, AF-button, Menu and OK made it to hardware - and each menu has to be the reinvention of the wheel? I sort of doubt that. 



#4 thxbb12

thxbb12

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 559 posts
  • LocationGeneva, Switzerland

Posted 21 June 2017 - 01:32 PM

As someone who shoots Canon, Olympus and Panasonic, I would like to make a small addition.

 

The Olympus menus are not really bad at all, IMO. They are just very, very extensive, and occasionally quite deep, which makes it difficult to remember where is what. There certainly is logic to it. The neat thing with Olympus is that there is a Quick Menu for most used menu items, effectively, that it has one of the best if not the best touch screens and touch interfaces wrt cameras, and that virtually every button can be reprogrammed to whatever you like, which can also be mapped to a set controlled by one of the Custum menu options.

 

In short, if you really want to get the most out of an Olympus camera, it takes some time to set up and/or learn, possibly, depending on one's (perceived) shooting needs, but several options for different shooting types and styles can then be easily matched with one of the Custom sets (C1-C3), while it is still possible to easily adjust all the main options with the quick menu, or with the dials and buttons.

 

Generally speaking, I personally find these discussions over the top, as it is always possible to do stuff the old-fashioned and easy way, with most cameras anyway, and I reckon that will suffice 99.8% or more of most shots. Know what you want to do, and set the camera up accordingly, the simple way. You'll rarely need to use the menu in that case, and often not deep at all once the initial set up is done. That is my experience, although YMMV I guess.

 

As to Panasonic: I find the menus often too simple. And with Canon, despite the fact that I have always gelled nicely with their menu system and dials and controls set-up, even there it is hard at times and hidden fairly deep in the menus to set up something very specific.

 

All in all, unless one has become proficient with a camera menu system, take the time to learn and master the menu system, otherwise it seems rather involved, hard to do, whatever. I have heard people complain about the menu system of ANY camera brand, and that includes Fuji, Pentax, Panasonic, Olympus, Canon, Nikon, and Sony especially. My impression is that people often expect things to work immediately the way they want or expect, even though cameras cannot yet read minds, and that people are often very impatient, and not prepared to invest the time to get to know the tools one uses.

 

Kind regards, Wim

 

I agree that one has to get used to the system their are using. It takes some time.

 

However, it's not an excuse to avoid implementing basic features requested by many photographers. I'm particularly thinking of Olympus. Everybody touts how much you can customize/configure the camera but yet some basic features that have been implemented almost a decade ago by other manufacturers are still missing from the system, namely minimum shutter speed and auto ISO implementation.

 

Another example that plagues all systems is when the user sets the aperture and shutter speed while the camera chooses ISO. Most cameras let you do this. However, most of the time, the user will very likely want a minimum shutter speed, not an exact one. Hence, why not treat the shutter speed as the minimum shutter speed? It makes much more sense and would be much less limiting from an exposure point of view.

Stuff like this makes sense. It reminds me of the first days of digital photography when ISO had to be set manually and auto ISO didn't exist. The interface and control of the camera was a carbon copy of film cameras, where ISO was fixed. It made sense with film cameras since ISO was your film, but it doesn't make sense today with a digital sensor where ISO can be changed on the fly (it's just another variable like aperture and shutter speed).

 

So much more can be done now that things can be programmed in clever ways for the benefits of the photographer. It can be much more optimal than fixed setups too, especially in dynamic situations. Yet, camera companies keep mimic-ing the way cameras used to be operated in the film days. They are hardly innovating. In fact, they are stuck in the past while a lot can be improved beyond what's available today. Cell phones (and notably google) is definitely showing the way here.

 

There are many other simple examples, such as :

  • Focus bracketing/stacking could be 100% done by the camera (on a tripod obviously) and saved in a RAW file. I think Olympus implements this, but I doubt it saves RAW files.
  • HDR capture using exposure bracketing and saving to RAW : today, all cameras only produce jpeg. Why not RAW? Totally doable, yet nobody does it! We could have files with huge DR this way without having to use special software to process them.
  • Face detection letting you pick which face to focus on. Only Sony does this and it's really an obvious feature. Yet, nobody besides Sony does it!
  • An actual modern interface such as the ones used by smartphones, especially for browsing pictures and deleting them. Take a look at how easy and fast it is on phones. Why not implement the same touchscreen interface? Cameras still use 1990s technology and interfaces.
  • Same with RAW development from the camera. I'm taking Fuji's example here. Fuji provides great film simulations. The UI is clunky and cumbersome. Make it like a proper application where you can easily preview and convert your images on the fly in a very easy and quick way. Develop an easy to use, streamlined app (desktop and mobile) that can develop the RAW files and produce the same files as the jpeg engine! Sure, Lightroom or other is best, but sometimes you want to do quick edits and share on the spot. The app (in camera, mobile app, desktop app) should make it super easy to share the photos on social medias as well (facebook, flickr, etc.).
  • etc.

Edited by thxbb12, 21 June 2017 - 03:25 PM.

--Florent

Flickr Page


#5 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,571 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 21 June 2017 - 02:22 PM

Focus stacking and HDR will be done by this Arsenal device and saved as RAW - however, it would be really crazy, if Arsenal can do things inside cameras the manufacturers cannot - or wannot - do.



#6 stoppingdown

stoppingdown

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 536 posts
  • LocationGenoa / Milan, Italy

Posted 21 June 2017 - 02:40 PM

Focus stacking and HDR will be done by this Arsenal device and saved as RAW - however, it would be really crazy, if Arsenal can do things inside cameras the manufacturers cannot - or wannot - do.

 

In fact, I don't believe Arsenal does. I think that the "RAW" they produce is a DNG. Alternatively, the RAW formats have been reverse engineered enough to write code that, in addition to read bits, can also write bits - maybe missing some parts that haven't been reverse engineered, but that are of minor importance. It would be, anyway, a huge waste of time IMHO. I believe it's a "DNG".


stoppingdown.net

 

Sony a6300, Sony a6000, Sony NEX-6, Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS, Sony Zeiss Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS, Sony FE 70-200mm F4 G OSS, Sigma 150-600mm ƒ/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary, Samyang 12mm ƒ/2, Sigma 30mm F2.8 DN | A, Meyer Gorlitz Trioplan 100mm ƒ/2.8, Samyang 8mm ƒ/3.5 fish-eye II | Zenit Helios 44-2 58mm ƒ/2 
Plus some legacy Nikkor lenses.

#7 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,571 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 21 June 2017 - 03:12 PM

here's what Ryan says:
 

Stacking Made Easy
 
If there’s one “secret of the pros” in landscape and real-estate photography, it’s stacking. Taking multiple photos and merging them together to capture detail that is lost in a single exposure. Arsenal makes stacking easy. It can take the optimal number of photos at the right settings, then merge the photos to a new RAW or JPG file. The new file is written back to the SD card and can be previewed on your phone.

 

I'll find out next year  ;) by the latest.



#8 wim

wim

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,145 posts
  • LocationMaastricht, Netherlands

Posted 21 June 2017 - 11:36 PM

Yes. And there is nothing wrong with this expectation. If anything, amneu has to help me, not to point out how far developed the software engineers are - or how much retro and only going ways from the past.
 
Cameras cannoz read minds, true. But a lot of actions we are doing with them are the same over and over again. It is not hard to predict one wants to set up Auto-Iso and Auto ISO has to relate on the used focal length. Soem features are so common these days, that it's embarassing why camera manufacturers act as if they have the only standard recipe.
 
A couple of times I rented a car. Did I have to read the manual to find the gear shift, light switch, brake pedal?
 
No. That only was necessary because Software engineers are sometimes too arrogant to find common ways of user interface for radio or GPS. Standardization helps and sets resources free for other projects. Look at Apple and Google and their UI- these are competing firms. Trash-bin, play button, AF-button, Menu and OK made it to hardware - and each menu has to be the reinvention of the wheel? I sort of doubt that.

Are you trying to tell me now that you can't shoot with a random camera when you are asked to do so?

I assume you are joking.

With a car, I can drive it straight away, and very likely, I will be able to operate all the lights too. Beyond that, with modern cars, it often depends on how advanced the electronics are, whether if is a brand you know already, etc. IOW, there is a learning curve. My old car had 300 pages worth of manuals, my current one over 800, of which over 500 are for all of its electric and electronic systems. That means there is a learning curve.

Same with cameras....

Kind regards, Wim

#9 stoppingdown

stoppingdown

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 536 posts
  • LocationGenoa / Milan, Italy

Posted 22 June 2017 - 12:04 AM

Are you trying to tell me now that you can't shoot with a random camera when you are asked to do so?

I assume you are joking.

 

I don't know whether JoJu really meant that, but for me there are chances it can be true. Typically I'm on the field taking photos in a place with other people around (it seldom occurs, since I tend to be in less known and possibly deserted places, but there are exceptions); having a big camera I "must be" a sort of professional, so typically somebody asks me to shoot a picture of him (it happens less frequently now that 1) I have a small mirrorless camera ;) , but the long lenses compensate for it, and 2) there are those funny "selfie stickers" around, so most people are autonomous). Since they put into my hands a compact camera of some kind, I'm often clueless. First, typically there's no viewfinder and I'm not acquainted without it; second, I'm supposed to shot "P-mode", which I've not been using since almost two decades. Probably there is a psychologic problem in addition to the UI, because most of times they say that the camera is already set up and I only have to compose and press the trigger, but I feel so uncomfortable of not being in full control. If I actually have to set up the camera, it's going to be embarrassing, at least because I'm doing it very slowly, and the other people weren't expecting such a slowness by a sort of pro...


stoppingdown.net

 

Sony a6300, Sony a6000, Sony NEX-6, Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS, Sony Zeiss Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS, Sony FE 70-200mm F4 G OSS, Sigma 150-600mm ƒ/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary, Samyang 12mm ƒ/2, Sigma 30mm F2.8 DN | A, Meyer Gorlitz Trioplan 100mm ƒ/2.8, Samyang 8mm ƒ/3.5 fish-eye II | Zenit Helios 44-2 58mm ƒ/2 
Plus some legacy Nikkor lenses.

#10 wim

wim

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,145 posts
  • LocationMaastricht, Netherlands

Posted 22 June 2017 - 12:08 AM

I agree that one has to get used to the system their are using. It takes some time.
 
However, it's not an excuse to avoid implementing basic features requested by many photographers. I'm particularly thinking of Olympus. Everybody touts how much you can customize/configure the camera but yet some basic features that have been implemented almost a decade ago by other manufacturers are still missing from the system, namely minimum shutter speed and auto ISO implementation.
 
Another example that plagues all systems is when the user sets the aperture and shutter speed while the camera chooses ISO. Most cameras let you do this. However, most of the time, the user will very likely want a minimum shutter speed, not an exact one. Hence, why not treat the shutter speed as the minimum shutter speed? It makes much more sense and would be much less limiting from an exposure point of view.
Stuff like this makes sense. It reminds me of the first days of digital photography when ISO had to be set manually and auto ISO didn't exist. The interface and control of the camera was a carbon copy of film cameras, where ISO was fixed. It made sense with film cameras since ISO was your film, but it doesn't make sense today with a digital sensor where ISO can be changed on the fly (it's just another variable like aperture and shutter speed).
 
So much more can be done now that things can be programmed in clever ways for the benefits of the photographer. It can be much more optimal than fixed setups too, especially in dynamic situations. Yet, camera companies keep mimic-ing the way cameras used to be operated in the film days. They are hardly innovating. In fact, they are stuck in the past while a lot can be improved beyond what's available today. Cell phones (and notably google) is definitely showing the way here.
 
There are many other simple examples, such as :

  • Focus bracketing/stacking could be 100% done by the camera (on a tripod obviously) and saved in a RAW file. I think Olympus implements this, but I doubt it saves RAW files.
  • HDR capture using exposure bracketing and saving to RAW : today, all cameras only produce jpeg. Why not RAW? Totally doable, yet nobody does it! We could have files with huge DR this way without having to use special software to process them.
  • Face detection letting you pick which face to focus on. Only Sony does this and it's really an obvious feature. Yet, nobody besides Sony does it!
  • An actual modern interface such as the ones used by smartphones, especially for browsing pictures and deleting them. Take a look at how easy and fast it is on phones. Why not implement the same touchscreen interface? Cameras still use 1990s technology and interfaces.
  • Same with RAW development from the camera. I'm taking Fuji's example here. Fuji provides great film simulations. The UI is clunky and cumbersome. Make it like a proper application where you can easily preview and convert your images on the fly in a very easy and quick way. Develop an easy to use, streamlined app (desktop and mobile) that can develop the RAW files and produce the same files as the jpeg engine! Sure, Lightroom or other is best, but sometimes you want to do quick edits and share on the spot. The app (in camera, mobile app, desktop app) should make it super easy to share the photos on social medias as well (facebook, flickr, etc.).
  • etc.
You clearly haven't looked at recent menu implementations with Olympus. Minimum shutter speed is there, as is auto-iso range.

The same is true for hdr stacking. You can either shoot an already stacked jpeg, or a bunch of unstacked raws, jpegs and raws, or jpegs. When shooting raws, you do have to do the processing yourself, and although that makes sense, I fully expect tbis to appear as an in-camera option as well at some point in time.

In short better ask first before coming to a (wrong) conclusion.

In addition, apart from extremely good filters and filtering system, you can process your images completely, if you so like, in-camera, before or after the shot. If you'd want to, you could do without an external device for processing your raws.

And if there is one company listening to input from users, it actually is Olympus, funnily enough. I don't know where you got the opposite idea.

In short, I see a lot of opinion in your reply, but not so much checking of facts.

BTW, jpeg output on Olympus is excellent, if not the best, and that is not just my opinion. :)

Kind regards, Wim

#11 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,571 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 22 June 2017 - 12:17 AM

Wim, of course I tell you I cannot shoot fully the way I like to if I I get certain cameras. At least not like sit in, turn the ignition key and off you ride.

 

Find a self timer. Check which AF mode you're in. Find the white balance. Find the exposure mode. Which wheel for aperture? How to set up ISO, how exposure correction?

 

I can find that with a lot of try and error. Sure, all have a sort of release button, but most people do not know what an AF-ON button is for, when to press it and how to move a focus point. Please do not pretend as if these things were clear on each device  ;) .

 

You can drive your new car, instantly, you know how to find the warning lights. A lot of controls are very similar in cars and for the head lights there are maybe two or three main ways to turn them on. It doesn't matter what's on the 500 pages more. You will get from A to B without problems. Except you have to program the GPS but eben then... if you're not doing it the first time.

 

Right now I came back to this thread because I found a beautiful example of maximum ignorance of UI designers.

 

Here's the (new, introduced with the latest firmware) setting for the dual display of the X-T2. There are two frames in the display/EVF, a small and big one. Here I can decide, which one should be the one with enlarged view to focus and which the one to frame.

 

Text says R (on the left side of the line) and L (on the right side of the line). Given they mean likely Right and Left - why not order the text that way? And why put tow Icons in in the opposite sense of what the text is saying?

 

i-zWGD9VK-M.jpg

 

This is the result of the above setting. The red line round the apple is quite hard to detect and framing in the small rectangle is a joke - but Fuji fanboys would have dozens suggestions how to handle this specific situation. None of them would suit to normal AF afterwards, but who cares? Originally, the big frame was for framing and the small to set up a split screen. I'm sure there are happy users, but I do it mostly in AF-S, override the result and try to hold the lens in this focus setting.

 

i-vsq8mMC-M.jpg



#12 wim

wim

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,145 posts
  • LocationMaastricht, Netherlands

Posted 22 June 2017 - 12:28 AM

I don't know whether JoJu really meant that, but for me there are chances it can be true. Typically I'm on the field taking photos in a place with other people around (it seldom occurs, since I tend to be in less known and possibly deserted places, but there are exceptions); having a big camera I "must be" a sort of professional, so typically somebody asks me to shoot a picture of him (it happens less frequently now that 1) I have a small mirrorless camera ;) , but the long lenses compensate for it, and 2) there are those funny "selfie stickers" around, so most people are autonomous). Since they put into my hands a compact camera of some kind, I'm often clueless. First, typically there's no viewfinder and I'm not acquainted without it; second, I'm supposed to shot "P-mode", which I've not been using since almost two decades. Probably there is a psychologic problem in addition to the UI, because most of times they say that the camera is already set up and I only have to compose and press the trigger, but I feel so uncomfortable of not being in full control. If I actually have to set up the camera, it's going to be embarrassing, at least because I'm doing it very slowly, and the other people weren't expecting such a slowness by a sort of pro...


Well, maybe I am an exception in that case. I haven't come across a camera yet I couldn't operate to take at least a simple picture. Neither do I have a problem with just composing and pressing the shutter button when people ask me to do so. Since I have used anything from compacts with barely to no VF to rangefinders to slrs, both analog (from a very young age) and digital, in formats from wide MF to 110 and even smaller digitally, and am fairly technically inclined, I may have an advantage I guess.

Personally, because of my style(s) of photography, I mostly use aperture priority with a max iso setting, followed by manual, and occasionally shutter speed priority and bulb. I generally set up tbe camera prior to a shoot, and if it is something I haven't done before or requires an option I don't know yet, I tend to figure it out beforehand. :)

Kind regards, Wim

#13 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,571 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 22 June 2017 - 12:31 AM

In short better ask first before coming to a (wrong) conclusion.

 

I'm no Olympus user, but arrogant comments like this - although basically true - I also read a couple when asking about settings which are just opposite of intuitive. And for settings I don't know because they're not in the manual and well hidden - how can one ask?

 

I was looking for user settings when I got my first Nikon D800. The manual doesn't tell me Nikon has an entirely different concept to handle these in their "pro" lines. The settings of the benches are floating while user settings are saved as long as I don't choose and save others.

 

If these (Olympus settings) are buried at some remote and unexpected corners (if you pay me the time, I can make you a lots of these for Fuji) it's not necessarily  the user's mistake not to find them. And I know thxbb12 as a person able to google, to read manuals and to learn.

 

Also, in these flimsy manuals are no maps which show the menu fully and readable. I always get only selections of certain regions, because that's what they can do in a max A5 or smaller manual - on PDF or via HTML they would have better possibilities, they are just to lazy to use them.

 

Also, if there's a possibility to draw such a graphic map of the menu, the next logical step would be to use this map for settings and show correlations between them, instead of just make a setting I want to use grey because Fuji cannot imagine someone would use toy camera filter with manual focus (I think it was sort of this kind of weird stuff, but I didn't put any effort into remembering it.

 

That might be the difference, Wim: Some people are impressed when they get fat manuals with gazillions of settings to learn. I get impressed when I realize, the designers had a very clear concept and idea what should be done how and in the fastest and most intuitive way. The manual can remain in the box, if these people took their job as challenge.



#14 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,571 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 22 June 2017 - 12:36 AM

Well, ..., I may have an advantage I guess.

 

We'll see about that. Next time we meet (which would be the first time, but who knows? in 10 days I'm in The Netherlands again), I give you my X-T2.

Locked.

Good luck with unlocking...  :lol:



#15 wim

wim

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,145 posts
  • LocationMaastricht, Netherlands

Posted 22 June 2017 - 12:53 AM

Wim, of course I tell you I cannot shoot fully the way I like to if I I get certain cameras. At least not like sit in, turn the ignition key and off you ride.
 
Find a self timer. Check which AF mode you're in. Find the white balance. Find the exposure mode. Which wheel for aperture? How to set up ISO, how exposure correction?
 
I can find that with a lot of try and error. Sure, all have a sort of release button, but most people do not know what an AF-ON button is for, when to press it and how to move a focus point. Please do not pretend as if these things were clear on each device  ;) .
 
You can drive your new car, instantly, you know how to find the warning lights. A lot of controls are very similar in cars and for the head lights there are maybe two or three main ways to turn them on. It doesn't matter what's on the 500 pages more. You will get from A to B without problems. Except you have to program the GPS but eben then... if you're not doing it the first time.
 
Right now I came back to this thread because I found a beautiful example of maximum ignorance of UI designers.
 
Here's the (new, introduced with the latest firmware) setting for the dual display of the X-T2. There are two frames in the display/EVF, a small and big one. Here I can decide, which one should be the one with enlarged view to focus and which the one to frame.
 
Text says R (on the left side of the line) and L (on the right side of the line). Given they mean likely Right and Left - why not order the text that way? And why put tow Icons in in the opposite sense of what the text is saying?
 
i-zWGD9VK-M.jpg
 Ee
This is the result of the above setting. The red lineme, round the apple is quite hard to detect and framing in the small rectangle is a joke - but Fuji fanboys would have dozens suggestions how to handle this specific situation. None of them would suit to normal AF afterwards, but who cares? Originally, the big frame was for framing and the small to set up a split screen. I'm sure there are happy users, but I do it mostly in AF-S, override the result and try to hold the lens in this focus setting.
 
i-vsq8mMC-M.jpg


Joju, what I was trying to say is that all the basic stuff is the same, and I am sure all of us could figure out how to shoot an image with any camera in very short time. However, doing thd semi-pro to pro stuff that some of us do, of course we can't, not immediately anyway. It does help that there is some standard with operating dials when they do exist, so even a little fancier stuff likely is no problem either, and neither will that be the case with more standard menu options.

As to Fuji, I have not yet shot with a Fuji camera yet in recent years (last one was 35 years ago), but from what I read on the internet, it seems that Fuji (and Sony) menu systems are rather complex, and not always clear. I wouldn't be able to comment on this from personal expetience, however. Olympus, on the other hand, I can, having shot with an E-M10 1 and 2, E-M 5 II, and still owning a Pen F and an E-M1 II. Their menus are very extensive, but do make sense when you get the feel for them. The only reason that stuff is hard to find at times is because there is so much, and generally you don't use all of it in equal measure.

And as to cars: my current one has a menu and button system more complex than my E-M1 II, and is not clear or logical at times either, and buggy even.

Kind regards, Wim

#16 wim

wim

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,145 posts
  • LocationMaastricht, Netherlands

Posted 22 June 2017 - 01:11 AM

I'm no Olympus user, but arrogant comments like this - although basically true - I also read a couple when asking about settings which are just opposite of intuitive. And for settings I don't know because they're not in the manual and well hidden - how can one ask?
 
I was looking for user settings when I got my first Nikon D800. The manual doesn't tell me Nikon has an entirely different concept to handle these in their "pro" lines. The settings of the benches are floating while user settings are saved as long as I don't choose and save others.
 
If these (Olympus settings) are buried at some remote and unexpected corners (if you pay me the time, I can make you a lots of these for Fuji) it's not necessarily  the user's mistake not to find them. And I know thxbb12 as a person able to google, to read manuals and to learn.
 
Also, in these flimsy manuals are no maps which show the menu fully and readable. I always get only selections of certain regions, because that's what they can do in a max A5 or smaller manual - on PDF or via HTML they would have better possibilities, they are just to lazy to use them.
 
Also, if there's a possibility to draw such a graphic map of the menu, the next logical step would be to use this map for settings and show correlations between them, instead of just make a setting I want to use grey because Fuji cannot imagine someone would use toy camera filter with manual focus (I think it was sort of this kind of weird stuff, but I didn't put any effort into remembering it.
 
That might be the difference, Wim: Some people are impressed when they get fat manuals with gazillions of settings to learn. I get impressed when I realize, the designers had a very clear concept and idea what should be done how and in the fastest and most intuitive way. The manual can remain in the box, if these people took their job as challenge.


I am replying from a cell phone here, so a little awkward, and a little shorter than normal.

No I was and am not arrogant, I certainly did not mean to be, but I get a liitle upset occasionally, when things get stated as truths which are not and seem to come forth from expertise which is not necessarily there.

Personally, I do not like manuals, I agree you should not need them, and I will only peruse them if all else fails. And as to Oly menus, they are done quite logically, so generally not a problem from that POV. The only problems which may arise are those caused by options one hasn't seen before on another camera or heard of, as in, what does the option mean, and what is the difference between the sub-options, if the in-built help option is not clear enough. For those I may grab the manual, or more likely, search the internet.

Kind regards, Wim

#17 wim

wim

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,145 posts
  • LocationMaastricht, Netherlands

Posted 22 June 2017 - 01:13 AM

We'll see about that. Next time we meet (which would be the first time, but who knows? in 10 days I'm in The Netherlands again), I give you my X-T2.
Locked.
Good luck with unlocking...  :lol:

<ROFL>
Always up for a challenge ....

Kind regards, Wim

#18 JoJu

JoJu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,571 posts
  • LocationSwitzerland

Posted 22 June 2017 - 06:25 AM

I know you're not arrogant, but your comment triggered that judgement about the comment. I mean (and exaggerate), saying basically "RTFM" gives one not the same superiority of being a menu checker than "RTFM at page 362, and the writers confused left with right and manually with automatically, they also mean image when they talk about a picture frame, but otherwise you find the desired information exactly there".

 

Because, guys, the hells in which manuals are forged are no places for the fainthearted of the ancient tribe of "manual-readers". You think, what is written must be true? Enjoy this phantasy as long as you possibly can. The truth's very cruel.  :angry:



#19 thxbb12

thxbb12

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 559 posts
  • LocationGeneva, Switzerland

Posted 22 June 2017 - 08:16 AM

You clearly haven't looked at recent menu implementations with Olympus. Minimum shutter speed is there, as is auto-iso range.

The same is true for hdr stacking. You can either shoot an already stacked jpeg, or a bunch of unstacked raws, jpegs and raws, or jpegs. When shooting raws, you do have to do the processing yourself, and although that makes sense, I fully expect tbis to appear as an in-camera option as well at some point in time.

In short better ask first before coming to a (wrong) conclusion.

In addition, apart from extremely good filters and filtering system, you can process your images completely, if you so like, in-camera, before or after the shot. If you'd want to, you could do without an external device for processing your raws.

And if there is one company listening to input from users, it actually is Olympus, funnily enough. I don't know where you got the opposite idea.

In short, I see a lot of opinion in your reply, but not so much checking of facts.

BTW, jpeg output on Olympus is excellent, if not the best, and that is not just my opinion. :)

Kind regards, Wim

 

Is the E-M5 II recent enough? That's the camera my dad uses and I borrowed it during my last vacation. Minimum shutter speed is not available. Auto ISO range is not what I'm talking about. If you had used a Pentax or Nikon body, you would know what I mean. I'm talking about the ability to bias the 1/focal_length algorithm the camera uses. Olympus forums are filled with people asking for an option to set the minimum shutter speed, yet it's still not available (and don't tell me the flash sync is a work around : it's not).

 

As to HDR stacking, you say it yourself "you do have to do the processing yourself". That's what I'm talking about, the camera doesn't save a single RAW file you can use.

 

As far as RAW processing goes, several other manufacturers let you convert RAW -> jpeg in camera: Fuji, Olympus and Pentax at least. However, it's clunky and inconvenient. Read my text again.


--Florent

Flickr Page


#20 thxbb12

thxbb12

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 559 posts
  • LocationGeneva, Switzerland

Posted 22 June 2017 - 08:37 AM

Olympus, on the other hand, I can, having shot with an E-M10 1 and 2, E-M 5 II, and still owning a Pen F and an E-M1 II. Their menus are very extensive, but do make sense when you get the feel for them. The only reason that stuff is hard to find at times is because there is so much, and generally you don't use all of it in equal measure.

 

You must be the only user who thinks Olympus menus are logical, well organized, and make sense. Olympus cameras are great, but menus are the recurrent complaints of a lot of experienced people who have shot with many systems (Dpreview, Thom Hogan, Nasim Mansurov, etc.).

 

Just to illustrate my point, here are two examples quoted from http://m43blog.dthor...o-menu-matters/ comparing Panasonic and Olympus menus:

 

1) Custom settings

One of the best features of digital cameras is the ability store often used settings for instant recall.  Both camera work this the same way. Go to the shooting mode you want to use, aperture priority, manual, whatever. Go through the menus setting everything as you want it. Brilliant! You now have a digital camera that works for you. Ok, lets save that so that it can be instantly recalled.

 

Panasonic

Go to the Custom Menu and choose Cust. Set Mem. There, select C1 for example and OK to confirm it. Now, when you set C1 on the mode dial, you summon up – surprise, surprise! – the settings you just set.

 

Olympus

Set everything as you want it, same as the Panasonic. So far, so good. Now, go to Shooting Menu 1. Select Reset/Myset. Now MySet1, Set and Yes. Now go to Custom Menu section B, Button/Dial/Lever, then Mode Dial Function where you can set MySet1 to any mode dial function except a custom one, since there isn’t any such thing. So find a mode like Art that you won’t use and put it there. In future, to recall your custom setting 1, set the mode dial to Art. Now I don’t know who thought of that but I can tell you that I won’t be hiring him to design my new house. He can argue as long as he likes that labelling the back door  ‘front’ because you can walk through the house to the front door is perfectly logical, I’m not buying it.

 

2) Setting the file quality

 

Panasonic

Rec Menu, Quality.

 

Olympus

Shooting Menu 1 and then this image :

 

35460721675_53515bd808_s.jpg

 

Now I can’t tell what that symbol means. It looks a bit like one of those little guys that the Space Invaders used to kill. Or was it one of the Space Invaders themselves? Or a radio telescope? Maybe an Anglo-Saxon warrior’s helmet that came off his head after he was slain? Maybe it sets the camera to Shotgun Mode where pressing the button peppers an uncooperative  subject with buckshot? I’d have liked that for sessions with one or two of the footballers I’ve had the misfortune to have to photograph. Whatever it is, how does it mean ‘record mode to take pictures or movies’ as the Info button informs you? Couldn’t you just print ‘Quality’ there in place of the icon? Why wouldn’t you? There’s more but I think I’ve made my point.


  • Brightcolours and JoJu like this

--Florent

Flickr Page






Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: UI, firmware

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users



© by photozone.de