←back to thread

361 points Tomte | 9 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source | bottom
Show context
kookamamie ◴[] No.43609045[source]
DSLRs have just dropped off the wagon a long time ago, when it comes to software and especially meaningful UX innovation.

As an anecdote, I have a Sony a7r and operating it via its mobile app is one of the worst user experiences I have had in a while.

Same goes to the surrounding ecosystem of software. E.g. Adobe's Lightroom is full of obsolete paradigms and weird usability choises.

replies(5): >>43609098 #>>43609221 #>>43609343 #>>43609666 #>>43609677 #
1. daneel_w ◴[] No.43609666[source]
Over the past 15-20 years I've used both Sonys, Canons and Nikons, and I absolutely feel that Nikon puts a lot more effort, with much better results, into the usability of their pro/prosumer cameras - and, really, even their $500-$1000 consumer range - both in terms of the on-display UI and the ergonomics and handling of the actual camera.

What always stood out most for me compared to Canon was Nikon's larger viewfinders, letting you commit to actual photography rather than being stuck with a feeling of peeping through a keyhole, and placement of buttons on the camera body allowing for maintained control of the most necessary functions (shutter speed, aperture and even ISO) without having to change your grip or move the camera away from your face.

replies(2): >>43610190 #>>43613292 #
2. throwanem ◴[] No.43610190[source]
Nikon bodies are designed by photographers, and in the F-mount line, also by the same guy who did the Ferraris that made that brand's name.

Canon bodies are designed by engineers, who all had to prove they could palm a cinder block in order to get hired.

Sony bodies are designed by the cinder block.

replies(1): >>43613611 #
3. kjkjadksj ◴[] No.43613292[source]
I havent tried the mirrorless cameras but on dslr canon is great ux imo. Everything you need to adjust on the fly is easy. Its usually controlled with a dial that can change the parameter it adjusts with a modifier button. Saving you what might be yet another dial on like a fuji xt5.

But even then once youve metered a scene how often do you adjust iso on the fly? Hardly ever. Fixed iso, aperture priority, center dot focus and metering, off to the races.

4. stas2k ◴[] No.43613611[source]
Only Nikons I own are 35mm film FM2 and F4. The bodies feel like tactile bliss. FM2 has a dry lubricated system with crazy titanium honeycombed etched shutter and F4 is the last pro DSLR they made with no menu system.

On the digital front I found Fuji X-Txx series to be like tiny Nikons in their usability with all common controls on dials.

replies(1): >>43613857 #
5. throwanem ◴[] No.43613857{3}[source]
I'm (at least) a third-generation Nikon shooter, and I still have my grandfather's FTn. For its era, predating CNC and CAD, it is very comfortable to use, but the leather "eveready" case shell is welcome.

(One reason I shoot Nikon is because I can still shoot his glass on modern bodies. Indeed, that's what my D5300 spends a lot of its time wearing these days.)

True revolutions in consumer imaging excepted, I doubt I'll feel more than an occasional gadget fan's urge to replace my D850 and D500 as my primary bodies. Oh, the Z series has features, I won't disagree, even if I'm deeply suspicious of EVFs and battery life. But the D850 is a slightly stately, super-versatile full-frame body, and the D500 is a light, 20fps APS-C, that share identical UIs, lens and peripheral lineups, and (given a fast card to write to) deep enough buffers to mostly not need thinking about.

For someone like me who cares very little about technical specs, and a great deal for the ability to hang a camera over their shoulder and walk out the door and never once lose a shot due to equipment failure, there really isn't much that could matter more. I may have 350 milliseconds to get a flight shot of a spooked heron, or be holding my breath and focusing near 1:1 macro with three flash heads twelve inches away from a busily foraging and politely opinionated hornet. In those moments, eye and hand and machine and mind and body all must work as one to get the shot, and having to think at all about how to use the camera essentially guarantees a miss.

Hence the five years of work I've put into not having to think about that. I suppose I could've done more than well enough with any system, sure. But my experiences with others have left me usually quite glad Nikon's is the system I invested in.

replies(2): >>43615792 #>>43645068 #
6. steeeeeve ◴[] No.43615792{4}[source]
Old school Zeiss glass is like butter for any camera body. My dad told me to stick with Nikon and spend my money on lenses first. He was not wrong. You can put 25 year old professional lenses on a mid-market Nikon body and the images will be stunning with very little effort.
replies(1): >>43616314 #
7. throwanem ◴[] No.43616314{5}[source]
Oh, tell me about it. Sure, you can only stop-down meter Pentax 645 lenses on F mount since the aperture levers go opposite ways, and I don't know any of the YouTubers who are the only ones left doing that kind of engineering. So what? With anything that doesn't move around a lot, and the sensor crop working in your favor to deliver only from where the glass is sharpest - sure, you're not doing wide angle that way, but where else are you getting a razor-sharp 120mm f/4 macro for a hundred bucks?

The 105mm f/2.8 VR II Micro-Nikkor is still better for the field, of course; that kind of work requires a lens which can talk to my body and flashes, and the stabilizer is actually useful. But for folks not chasing wasps around or the like - and willing to be a little old-fashioned about their working, in a way that will teach you about photography some of what a Piper or Cessna does about flying - there really is no better way to get anywhere near that kind of performance at a similar price point, and a well-maintained lens of such stately age is a joy to work with besides.

8. redeeman ◴[] No.43645068{4}[source]
the EVF on nikon Z8 is pretty great. I seriously doubt you'd be disappointed, quite the opposite
replies(1): >>43646837 #
9. throwanem ◴[] No.43646837{5}[source]
Oh, I've tried them a time or two. In the store they look great. The trouble is that I don't really shoot in camera stores often, and when I'm shooting wild wasps in close macro, I'm not autofocusing or even manually focusing but rather holding my breath and timing the insuppressible tiny movements of my body, and the contrast of the ommatidial boundaries in the wasp's eye as perceived through the carefully trained and practiced sensitivity of my eye, as I've learned to anticipate the moment in which my desired composition exists. This way, as the shutter release closes and the shutter itself opens, what's captured is a perfect portrait shot of the wasp, with the tack-sharp, razor-thin macro focal plane exactly where I want it - which almost always is indeed exactly at her eyes.

After all, most of the time she's watching me every bit as closely as I her, and I like to be able to show that. From the ways people look at and talk about that work, the effort has not been wholly wasted, but it is a more demanding task than I expect a median EVF, or if I'm honest really any even remotely affordable model, to handle. My eyes barely handle it, such that even in the D850's bright and generous viewfinder, the way I perceive this kind of focus is not as a clear sense of seeing those fine divisions between optical elements, but rather as minimizing a sort of unpleasant perceptual "static" or "interference," and it doesn't work at all even in my dominant eye through the lens of my glasses. (My cameras' eyepieces have diopter inserts adjusted to match my prescription.)

On reflection, maybe that's why the EVFs I've tried (Nikon Z5 and Z7 iirc, so previous generation) felt like they had a kind of weird shimmer I didn't like. I assume the Z8 does better, and sure, all the focus peaking and trick shot stuff in the viewfinder is nice. I'll even grant it feels like looking at the future. It's just that, so far at least, I find I seem to prefer looking through a camera.