Quote: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 FLI 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.