07-13-2019, 02:41 AM
(07-11-2019, 09:46 PM)Klaus Wrote: While I quite like the new Sigma FP from a concept perspective, I'm wondering where the industry is heading in terms of product usability.
In the DSLR world, basically all cameras converged around the same design principals - a grip, a front- and a rear-dial to control things and navigation buttons/joystick for navigating through the camera menu.
If you know one DSLR, you know them all - roughly speaking. Cameras that didn't follow the basics vanished into history.
Not so in the mirrorless segment. As you know, this is clearly the place to be for me personally. However, I have to say that there are quite some freak products out there.
* why is a 'historic' layout with a EV compensation dial on the top a good thing? (many Fuji, Sony) There is a reason why this was abandoned on DSLRs in the early 90s. It's nice looking but it is just cumbersome in real life IMHO.
* what happened to a reasonable grip? (Sigma, many Fujis/Pana/Oly) Given the overall size with the lens, a grip doesn't add any really bulk in your bag.
* Whenever I touch a Sony A7xxx I wonder what Sony thought when they designed all these hard edges. It's just uncomfortable to hold. What happened to rounded designs? Bauhaus may be good for buildings but cameras?
* Is a (tiny) touch screen really a good thing on a system camera - at all?
I, for one, like to have a camera that is comfortable to hold and where it is possible to adjust settings with my hands not leaving the default positions while being able to keep looking through the viewfinder. Is that asking too much really?
Or am I just an old sack unwilling to accept the better new ways?
PS: In my book, the EOS R and Pana G9/G95 (probably also the Nikon Zs) are good designs but ... well ... these follow DSLR guidelines.
(07-13-2019, 01:06 AM)Klaus Wrote: Coming back to my initial rant(?) - may I ask you which mirrorless cameras have good ergonomics in your opinion?
So far, IMO:
Olympus OM-D's, and especially EM-1 II, then the one, and then the E-M5s and E-M10s. Despite these cameras being small, they are a very comfortable fit to my (large) hands, basically because they have perfectly placed controls for me, and my pinky just sits nicely underneath the body if I want it to. The E-M1s have just that slightly larger grip which make my fingers curve around it just perfectly, without most of my hand dangling in air. That makes these better then the E-M5 and E-M10.
I also like the Pen F, but I use it as a fancy kind of P&S, it is great for that, and as a back-up camera. It is rounded enough and high enough to be used comfortably for me. I used to have similarly shaped and sized compact analog cameras way back when . I even had a half frame analog Oly many years ago.
I have used Panasonic Lumix MFT cameras as well in the past, and prefer the GF and GX series, especially with an additional grip, those are comfortable to use. I think teh G and GHS series are just a tad big for the lenses and mounts; I would prefer an APS-C camera in that case. However, I do not particularly like the rendering over the Oly way, which is why I do prefer Oly these days.
Then there is the Canon EOS R, which is even better. The deep grip and height cover my entire hand quite nicely. Th eonly thing I do not like yet, but maybe need to get used to first, are teh AF-On and * buttons, which sit too much towards the right for me compared to my old 5D II. However, the thinner body is just great.
BTW, I also tried the RP, but the grip is not optimal, and teh height is just wrong for me, as I can't purt my pinky comfortably underneath, or around the grip. This wa sthe main reason I went for the R over the RP in the first place, ergonomics IOW. Ok, there are other advantages too now, but I had the camera only for a single day so far, with most of the day spent working, rather than playing with the camera .
Never tried a Canon M-series camera, but then, they do not appeal to me, and neither did the Nikon V etc., or the Pentax Q. The latter too I just found too small anyway.
I am not a Nikon fan, personally, for a variety of reasons, originaly because I could not focus a Nikon body manually with my weird eyes (probably caused by the combination of type of LCD overlay used in the viewfinder and the shorter exit pupil, which, BTW, makes it difficult for me to use a Canon 5D III as well, but not the classic one, or II and IV), so I have not tried out the Zs. Sony I find too angular, and the menus to discomforting, IOW, I do not find them an ergonomic fit for me at all.
As to MF cameras, I really love the feel and use of the Hasselblad XD, but that and the other MF cameras are priced beyond my financial ability, apart from the fact that those cameras with my current restrictions are really too heavy after quite a short while already, I found. The Fuji GFX 50S is too bulky for me, the 50R I have not tried yet, but i reckon it will be too heavy for me as well for prolonged use.
So far my thoughts and experiences . Do note that for me it is about ergonomics first and foremost, both physical and control / menu wise, combined with the rendering I like, minimum resolution requirements, and types of OEM lenses available.
Kind regards, Wim
Gear: Canon EOS R with 3 primes and 2 zooms, 4 EF-R adapters, Canon EOS 5 (analog), 9 Canon EF primes, a lone Canon EF zoom, 2 extenders, 2 converters, tubes; Olympus OM-D 1 Mk II & Pen F with 12 primes, 6 zooms, and 3 Metabones EF-MFT adapters ....