I've wondered for years now just what it is that makes photographing with some cameras an absolute (and addictive) pleasure while other cameras feel like dead metal in my hands and offer up no joy in their use. I have some ideas and, of course, not everyone will agree with my choices and point of view since my prejudices and pleasures are grown from the time in which I came of age in photography.
In life psychologists have found that smells strongly affect happiness and that one's attraction to specific smells is more or less set in childhood. For many pumpkin spice aromas trigger happy feelings, for many others it's the smell of baking cookies. Most of the smells that cause the brain to light up the happiness circuits depend on how happy a person was in those earliest years and how those feelings were matched with various smells that were confluent with that happiness in the moment. Taste and touch preferences tend to get wired in at the outset of everyone's process through early life as well.
I had my first Baby Ruth candy bar after I won an event in an early-in-life swim meet in Adana, Turkey. The taste of one of those candy bars, even today, is a quick flick of a mental switch back to a time unencumbered by neither sadness nor responsibility. Just as the smell of my first wonderful girlfriend, brought up in my memory even now, unleashes wonderful calmness and a sense of well being. Seeing yellow sunlight through a fence feels good. Seeing clear blue water can fix a bad mood for me. Just seeing it. Even better if I'm able to swim in it.
As a species it seems that some of us really feel like we need logical reasons to like or dislike the objects or tools we use in everyday life. For logic driven cameras jockeys it seems like a laundry list of technical superlatives is enough to make us work hard on trying to develop a bond with a camera, or camera and lens. Even when, deep down, the use of it provides little or no real joy because the feel is all wrong.
I guess it's important to state that it's not necessary for a camera to bring us joy in its use if we can delay our gratification in the moment and embrace the final results of our photographic task but I know that I am not one of the gifted ones who can divorce the user experience from the totality of my pleasure in using a camera; whether the resulting images are stellar or just mundane.
For me there are a number of design issues that make particular cameras, or lines of cameras, uncomfortable. I find that cameras that are too small from top to bottom are horrendous to use for long periods of time because my pinky finger has nowhere to rest. In the rush to make cameras smaller manufacturers have compromised and made size (or the lack of it) more important than comfort or even utility. I found the early Sony A7 series cameras to be uniformly horrible in actual use because of this. I am certain I was not the only one.
Compounding the issue of making cameras too small from top to bottom was the propensity to design smaller camera bodies with fewer curves and more hard edges. This combination is very tiring to use as you go from trying to find a hand holding style with which to accommodate those dangling fingers to realizing that the new hold is pressing the 90 degree edges of the camera into your hands like knife-edges.
I liked working with Olympus EM cameras but only after fitting a battery grip to every one I ever owned. At the same time picking up an unadorned Panasonic GH4 or GH5 felt as natural and comfortable as any great tool I've ever used. The imaging potential should be much the same between the best from each brand but that lack of focus on grip and hold diminished the joy of using Olympus products for me. I found out a hard fact; cameras can be made too small.
I've owned the X-100 V for less than a week but I've already found the camera too small for my (very average sized) right hand. The front grip bulge is far too small to give my fingers appropriate purchase while the back "bump" is so slight as to be vestigial. In addition, like so many other cameras in this day and age, it's just not tall enough from top to bottom. I'm sure the people who profess to love the Fuji X100 series have either equipped theirs with an aftermarket grip addition to the bottom of the camera or they have bound their fingers with duct tape in order to force them into accepting the short and shallow configuration. Finally, the lack of vertical free space on the right side of the camera (as you operate it) means that there is no "good spot" to place the strap lug. It always feels wrong.
Wow. That's a lot to dislike in the first week. Although I do have to agree that the images are very good. I do like the color out of the camera and find the lens to be nicely sharp. It's a nice looking camera it's just that it's a long term nightmare to hold in one's hands and carry through a day of heavy shooting. You'll definitely want to equip one with a shoulder strap so you can give your hands a rest and let the camera dangle (frequently).
I own much smaller cameras, like the Canon G16, but their rounded corners and flat strap attachment points mean it's actually easier to find a useful grip on that camera. Too bad Canon couldn't have wedged a bigger sensor into that one...
I loved the color and operation of the Fuji XT and XH cameras I owned, and used extensively, but when using the XT without a battery grip I ran into the same issues I have recently had with the X100V. The camera is too short from top to bottom, the gripping bump on the right hand side is too minimal and the strap lug is deviously ill-placed.
The other part of overall feel of a camera, in addition to having it be sized right for a human hand, is its mass or density, or the lack thereof. In this regard the X100V feels much better than previous X-100 models which felt less dense. I know many photographers prefer very light weight cameras but they are wrong on many levels. At least "wrong" for people who grew up in my generation.
We experienced photographers have been brain-washed into thinking that premium materials, with a certain density and hardness to them, are to be desired. A denser camera resists micro movements better and is easier to hand hold in a steady manner. The overall mass/inertia dampens quick movements. I'm sure this is less a consideration in the age of ubiquitous image stabilization but good technique is always useful and a well made and well proportioned machine is always more useable, mostly because of the tactile confidence it inspires. And our underlying prejudice for premium construction.
It's interesting to me, now that I've handled a Leica SL, how beholden photographers can be to "how something looks" or "how it is visually designed." I wanted to like that cameras so much. But holding it for twenty minutes with a lens such as the Panasonic Lumix 50mm f1.4 S-Pro on the front quickly convinces any user with nerve endings that the cylinder-like roundness of the grip is a painfully bad design choice for human hands. The SL looks so good in the ads, and when dangling from a camera strap, but now I know why I see them so often dangling from straps instead of being held firmly in a hand. The added ingredient in this bad design is = operational pain. I can't imagine having to use that grip for a full day of shooting with a heavy lens. It would be crippling. But it looked so good on that website...... ah well. Thanks goodness for bricks and mortar camera stores. Or generous return policies...
So, what do I think photographers should be looking for in their professional cameras? Their daily user cameras? Their long term cameras? (All three of which should be the same...).
I think the answer is that haptics/feel/ergonomics/touch are so much more critical to one's ability to "warm up" to a camera than whether or not it has a mirror or a rangefinder. And added size is a benefit not a detraction.
A well designed camera should sink into one's hands like it was moulded to be there. No hard edges. No non-existent grips, and always a body tall enough to give a full grip to all four fingers on the front and an anchoring thumb on the back.
One of my recent camera purchases that I think I most regret getting rid of, from a handling point of view, was the Pentax K1. It was the most confidence inspiring body design I think I've handled since the days of the Nikon D700. While techno barbarians/minimalist camera lovers snickered at its "jelly bean" body design I think most would have been gob-smacked at the design integrity and pleasurable hand feel the camera has had they only picked one up and shot with it. And weight? If a camera is well designed then the weight seems to magically disappear from the equation.
Funny that the world's best selling cameras are the resolutely "jelly bean-esque" Canon Rebels and T line. For all their faults and missing features few would argue that most of the models are easy to hold and use. And this extends to other much loved (by actual users) more advanced cameras like the 6D plus the full range of the 5Ds and most of the traditional DSLRs that have graced their product catalog for the last two decades.
Equally funny that the cameras that "turn over" most frequently are, statistically, the Sony products. It's almost as though brand-addicted users are just praying that the next generation will be the one that solves all the issues with haptics that their poor industrial design seemed to bake into their DNA over so many attempts to make a camera nice enough to keep for the long term. Curiously, the RX10 series is a wonderful departure from the hand torture school of camera design and is also the one line from the Sony catalog that I actually enjoy using. And I also give a nod of appreciation to the a99 camera. It was a pleasure to hold.
I like what the Sigma fp generates. But I'm already over the brick design. Maybe that's because, at heart, I'll always be a photographer, not a video camera operator. On the other hand, the Panasonic S1 and S1R are two of my favorite camera bodies to handle. They are heavy and large but that is an important component of their actual charm. To make them smaller and lighter would rob them of their perfect hand fit and the feel of solidity that adds to my enjoyment. Not to mention having sufficient "real estate" to accommodate buttons without crowding them.
In the end you might fall back on saying, "To each their own." Or suggest that "everyone has a different opinion. " but I think you would be in the camp that's willing to ignore an uncomfortable design in the trade off to seeing small improvements in overall specifications. Specifications or features that might sound good when you are reading reviews but which are largely forgotten as you trudge along through the day trying to figure out how to keep your right hand from cramping up and curtailing your latest photographic adventure. And let's not even start about the design of the menus...
Just a thought. Love the images out of the X100V but the handling certainly could be vastly improved just by reshaping the body. I think I'll take one of the Canon G16s out for a walk instead.
Something to consider when next you grasp the credit card and rush to buy a camera without first holding it.
22 comments:
Maybe try a thumbrest slotted in the hotshoe of the X100V. I found it improved the feel and grip of an X100T. And I don't have small hands.
I’m a very term Canon user, so they all feel “right”, but the RP is delightful. Absolutely love it, and bought a second body. 35mm lens on one; 135 mm lens on the other, just like the film days.
I bought single coated 35mm/2.0 and 105mm/2.5 pre-AI Nikkors to use for playing at video with the RP bodies - lots of flare straight out of camera. One of the lenses came with a “free” Nikkormat FTn body. Wow! Weight and incredible build quality. Strangely satisfying to play with.
There is a very clear trade-off for a camera between being comfortable to handle for long times and being comfortable to carry for f long times. I much prefer a small and light camera that I can carry for a day of walk without being tired, even though it may offer less purchase to hold.
And that's why I shocked myself and bought a Canon D20 after 25 years of owning a Nikon F2 35mm. The crease on the Canon grip fell into my finger groves as the Nikon did not. Camera stores ... they're the best!
Oh I dunno about gear turnover, I got 7 years of regular service out of my Sony A7 Mk 1, and expect to keep my new A7R4 for at least as long. What's your longest-lived (continuous!) digital system to date? ;-) Merry Christmas, Kirk.
Jeff in Colorado
Yes to your observation on the Pentax K-1, which just gets about everything right. I found a Fuji X-T4 impossible until I fitted a Small Rig handle onto it, and now there's a place for the pinkie finger (along with Acra-Swiss grooves). The Fuji GFX 50S also feels right in my hands, although I'm still getting used to the button placements.
I guess the early impressions idea explains my memory of the Pentax Spotmatic. When I pull it out of the dresser drawer once every year or two I realize it’s not a joy to hold. But the immersive feeling of being inside the camera (my first SLR) looking out through the lens never will fade. It died, as many Spotmatics did, because I left it untended too long with the battery in. It aged out, leaked, and welded itself in place.
The modern camera I miss the most is the Olympus EM5 II. It drove me nuts because of the menu system and the conflicts which could be set up from one layer to the next. It was too small to hold comfortably and I kept inadvertently mashing buttons with the base of my thumb, changing settings without knowing it until after the fact. But it was a mechanical gem. And the lenses were the best ever. I finally found a strange metal bracket fitted with two cold shoes, angled away from the right side of the camera body, which cured the problem of changing settings. That was later replaced by a cheap Oben grip which made the camera just right to hold. The grip also provided a camera-wide dovetail plate matching the Arca mount on my tripod. It also offered a removable L-bracket arm. Genius. Images improved, user experience up by 100X. I learned to just fix the basic settings once and ignore the menu. A joy simply to hold and savor the quality of build.
Of course, I sold it and the 60mm macro lens to move up to a camera featuring 4K video. Had to have it. Ay yi yi.
Kirk, I know exactly what you are saying here. In my long-ago past, I owned a Pentax MX. I recall saying several times when using it, "Oh how I love this camera." There were many reasons for my saying that, but mostly I think it was intangibles. Then I moved to a Canon Elan IIe, which I liked, but not loved. Then I owned others in a series of film and digital cameras, all producing more likes than loves. Partly due to you, I got a used Lumix G1, the like meter moved up a fair distance. Later getting the G3, it was too small with a smaller like than the G1, but it produced very nice photos. Still later, I got the GX8 after a few others. The GX8 brought the love factor back. Next, I added a G9, which I like and is likely to keep a place on the shelf for years, but it is not a camera for which I find love. Along that MFTs path I traded my Canon 6D for a Sony a7ii, which I used for a couple of years, nice images, but I started wishing I had my 6D back. Then, a few months ago I pick up a used a7Rii and sold its little brother with its kit lens. Now I have become very confused about why I am growing so much fonder of the Rii than its predecessor. One thing I can point to is the pointed right rear corner of the a7ii seemed to always want to poke a hole in my hand. While the Rii seems to have the same shape, it does not do the same. (Wider body?) Also, the focus seems more reliable on the Rii, but its 42 MPs are about twice or more of what I really need. And, yes, the menu still sucks, but after two years with the a7ii, I have learned to cope. The ability to use both my old Pentax SMC-M and EF lenses on the Sonys is very nice. And PhotonsToPhotos ranks its sensor near the top of today's alternatives for both DR and low noise, both likely make an intangible draw. So, I find that my quest for the "one camera to rule them all" is subsiding. Instead, it is a camera trio instead of one. Ah, that new Canon R5 is yelling out to me, but then I think that I doubt it will have the flexibility of my current in-house trio. I find it strange these days that I am spending many fewer hours reading camera reviews and looking at those used cameras being sold. Perhaps, that is good.
Agree with Dave Lumb, a thumb rest will help a lot with the X100V. I used one from Lensmate back when I had an X100T and it made a big difference. They also make some nifty soft-release buttons that look nice and work well.
You hit the nail on the head with the RX10. Although I own several other cameras, each of which I like for one reason or another, I keep on gravitating to the RX10iv whenever I take a camera along for a long time. I can hold it forever and almost never use a shoulder strap even though it is not the lightest of the bunch. The facts that you take along an almost complete range of lenses and it takes good (sometimes great) pictures are an added bonus.
Happy Holidays
Jon
Great article. I agree with you about the X-100V. I bought one earlier this year as a digital replacement for a Konica Hexar that I used to enjoy using. I equipped it with the Lensmate Thumbrest when one become available for it, based upon my experience with their thumbrest for the Fujifilm XT-2. They improve the handling of both these cameras immensely. Pity they don't, like the Hexar, have such good handling from the get-go. However, in every other way the Fujifilm cameras are far superior, and a joy to use.
Kirk, thank you for these early impressions of the X100V. I had been thinking of getting this camera. Please tell us about its image compatibility with Lightroom. (Heard there were issues.)Re haptics, in my opinion the Nikon FE and FM series are perfect. Simple and precise, they disappear in the hands.
The Leica SL2 (47 MPx) changes the shape of the SL in tiny but critical ways. More rounded part to hold onto and a recess that your fingertips grip into. This one stays in the hand, while the SL needed a strong wrist strap. The new SL2-S with 24 MPx has a body and button layout identical to the SL2. Neither is cheap (yet).
The camera I use most is the one that is the worst to hold and use -- my phone. But it's also the camera that is easiest to carry and therefore always with me. Which takes us back to the old adage, "The best camera is the one you have with you."
Happy Holidays! Photographed lots of Midwest US snow last evening. More today. One more good reason to get outside.
Pulp Fiction / Fabienne:
It's unfortunate what we find pleasing to the touch and pleasing to the eye is seldom the same.
Currently, my most-used camera is the one in my iPhone 11. Adding a standard Apple silicone case improved gripability and overall handling comfort. In spite of that, I have mulled over getting a PolarPro case for it, which increases overall protection of the phone and camera lenses. One can also attach a grip to the case that includes a tripod mount and accessory shoe for an external mic, for those times when one wants to use the phone as a camera. But it would be nice if smartphone makers considered ruggedness and ergonomics as part of the design rather than just how “cool” they can make the phones.
When it comes to more conventional cameras, Nikon has been my brand of choice going back quite a ways. The cameras tend to “feel right” in my hands in ways that cameras from other brands do not. Now that Nikon is fleshing out its relatively-new mirrorless system, I think that I will continue to stick with the brand for some time to come.
My favourite camera is still the Panny LX100. I have it set up for the "step zoom" so it's like walking around with a few primes. Usually I have it set on 35mm; but it's nice to have the other options too. That camera still just feels good. Even if most think it's out of date
Hm.. isn't the Fuji X100 about the same size and weight as a Canonet QL 17 that you love so much?
I love my Fuji cameras but the sharp edges and pathetic grips are the worst. For both my X-Pro 2 and X-T3 the add on metal grip extender completely fixed those complaints though.
I'd certainly rather that the camera manufacturers focus more on how the tools feel in the hand, especially over long hours of shooting, than they seem to.
I've always thought the Nikon D700 and D750 were the most ergonomically correct cameras I've ever owned. The D750 was almost perfect. I loved the deep grip. The X-T3 was terrible until I added an l bracket, which made it quite comfortable. The Lumix S1 and S5 are almost identical in layout, but the larger S1 actually feels more comfortable to me despite being considerably heavier. I agree with you and others, let's focus (pun intended) on user interface and ergonomics at least in equal measure to latest tech.
With one exception, I've never really felt that camera/technical matters were important to my photography as long as the camera was made by a serious manufacturer and I used good lenses. That is, if I had to pick out a Nikon print from a Canon print from a Pentax print from an Olympus print, back in film days, I couldn't do it. Ergonomics were really my thing and I found the Nikon system fit me, and it still does. I went from a bunch of Fs to a D300 to a D800 to a Z6 hardly having to read the manuals because the menus and instructions were what I already had in my head, and the cameras simply fit my hand, even though they were quite different. That's also true of the Z6 -- I can literally walk around for an hour with the camera dangling from four fingers and my thumb on the nicely contoured memory card door, and never think about it. I can *almost* do that with my two GX8s. I do think there's a difference between a pro shooter of your type who might shoot hundreds of photos in a day, and my type, an enthusiast who might shoot a couple of dozen shots on a busy day. Our little fingers don't get tired, simply because they're not working as hard. Still, I think ergos are perhaps more important than any other consideration for general shooters (as opposed to specialists.) My one exception where technical/camera matters were critical is with the Leicas. I was familiar with so many great shooters who swore by them that I had to try them out, and had both film and digital Leicas and a selection of the very best lenses, and I grew to seriously dislike them. They were, perhaps, the best that could be done in the 1920s and 30s, but the 1925 is almost a hundred years ago now. Things, IMHO, have gotten much, much better with other designs.
I am going to give a negative vote to the hotshoe thumb rest on the X100 series. I purchased a T about 3 years ago, from eBay. The previous owner said he had wanted to use the camera a lot, but it did not work out for him. He apparently tried the most popular items as the camera came with the thumb rest and several soft releases. I liked holding the camera with the thumb rest. It felt good. And then I slung the camera around my neck and over my shoulder so it would not dangle around when I went for long walks. And that thumb rest dug into my side and back, or my chest, to a very uncomfortable degree. Not only that, but the shutter speed dial became a pain to operate as it was no longer accessible with the thumb. Operating it from the front proved to be another annoyance and I removed the blasted thumb rest and deal with the poor ergonomics of the camera the best I can. Like you, Kirk, I am trying hard to use this camera and hoping I find a way of enjoying it.
Post a Comment