Thinking

Bill Pierce

Bill Pierce

Well-known
Local time
12:57 AM
Joined
Sep 26, 2007
Messages
1,407
One of the things you can say in favor of film cameras is the uniformity of controls. When you are using a Leica, you set the aperture and shutter speed, focus and press the shutter release. When you are using a twin lens Rolleiflex, you set the aperture and shutter speed, focus and press the shutter release. When you are using an 8x10 Deardorff, you set the aperture and shutter speed, focus and press the shutter release.

Not so with digital cameras from different manufacturers. Even when you tailor their massive menus, there will be buttons and dials in different positions performing different tasks. And, if your muscle memory is in Fuji mode when you are using your Sony or Canon mode when you are using your Leica, you will punch the wrong button or twist the wrong dial.

As many of you know, I’m not big on thinking about the dials and buttons on my camera when I should be thinking about what’s in front of the camera. Does this mean that I should stick with one camera manufacturer, maybe even on subset of cameras within that manufacturer’s line up, just to have a set of common controls? My newsworthy, streetwise film rangefinders, my modified sports film SLRs with beamsplitters and jacked up frames per second, the medium format studio film cameras and the much beloved and little used 8x10 view all had similar controls. And I didn’t have to think when I was using them (or, at least, I didn't have to think about the cameras). The truth is if I’m to use the best tool for the job and the “jobs” are varied, I’m going to use digital cameras from different manufacturers just as I did with film cameras. Do you think camera manufacturers would respond, simplify menus and minimize buttons and dials, if we staged protests and carried banners that read, “Photographers don’t think!”
 
Bill as a commercial photographer I shoot many varied jobs - everything from architectural work for homebuilders, to food products for food manufacturers and restaurants, jewelry and fashion items for editorial, some events, lifestyle for retirement communities as well as video. And for all that I use pretty much one camera, a Nikon Z7. Now I do of course have backups in case something goes wrong and admittedly I have a drone for aerial photos and video, but just because all those jobs are ‘varied’ does not necessarily mean that I need a different camera for each. Yes a perspective control lens will be needed for the architectural work as well as some video, perhaps a closeup accessory for some of the food and jewelry work, but all those lenses and accessories fit the one camera. And that same camera is used for personal work, which can also be ‘varied’.

Now glass plate cameras, totally different story. In that case I need many, many different cameras. And sheesh don’t even get me started on the menu in an Ermanox — completely different than the menu in a Gaumont Spido.
 
I am confused how your Leica and your 8x10 camera are similar but two digital cameras are dissimilar. Because of buttons? Deactivate them and / or do not use them. I still use my Fujis like I did film cameras. Instead of changing film, I format a card. That is the big difference. Just because a camera has options does not mean you need to use them.
 
This is why I stick with the Leica M8, M9, M Monochrom and Nikon Df.

With other Digital cameras- need to "shift gears" and search through the damned menu to find a simple function like "ISO" or "Format". Not as bad as a Nikon D1 or Nikon E3- where you had to look up funcion numbers. But too many bells and whistles with useless functions. My neighbor somehow managed to turn off AF on his Nikon SLR- some non-intuitive menu setting, not labeled AF. I did not like the looks of it, enabled it, AF worked. I use the "Push buttons and keys at random until the device does what I want it to do" approach. Actually thinking about the problem never seems to work, as none went into the design of the firmware in the first place.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wet
I use two brands of cameras--Fuji and Nikon--with the occasional use of a Ricoh GR. The GR is sufficiently different in use that I do have to think about things when I first pick it up but that quickly resolves as I use it. I only use Fuji X-Pro and X100 models. They handle very similarly. And, of course, every Nikon DSLR back to the beginning of digital time is enough like every other Nikon DSLR to make my oldest D2X handle pretty close to the D810, my most recent model. So I don't have to think much when out shooting.

Things were different when I was shooting film. At one time I used Nikon and Leica 35mm cameras, Mamiya and Pentax medium format cameras and a Wista 4x5 field camera. They were all totally different in handling and it did require some thought. Today, life is less complicated.
 
Dogman said:
I use two brands of cameras--Fuji and Nikon--with the occasional use of a Ricoh GR. The GR is sufficiently different in use that I do have to think about things when I first pick it up but that quickly resolves as I use it. I only use Fuji X-Pro and X100 models. They handle very similarly. And, of course, every Nikon DSLR back to the beginning of digital time is enough like every other Nikon DSLR to make my oldest D2X handle pretty close to the D810, my most recent model. So I don't have to think much when out shooting.

Things were different when I was shooting film. At one time I used Nikon and Leica 35mm cameras, Mamiya and Pentax medium format cameras and a Wista 4x5 field camera. They were all totally different in handling and it did require some thought. Today, life is less complicated.
Click to expand...

I still do boneheaded things with my film cameras. I was out for a walk with my Bronica ETRS this last week. I stashed it in the tote bag hanging from my shoulder as I went into a store to use the bathroom. I came out, took the dark slide out and walked home through a park. I saw a potential picture in the park, raised the camera and noticed the back had become dislodged. I hastily put the darkslide back on and reattached the back. I haven't had the film developed yet so I don't how how many (if any) pictures are ruined. Maybe the whole roll. Maybe just one. Maybe only the next picture. Many of the pictures on this roll are from a project I'm working on. I can fortunately revisit all the locations but I'd still not be happy having to do them over.

Also, many of the focus rings on my camera systems focus in different directions. My Bronica, Pentax and Fuji X digitals focus in a different direction from my Canon and Olympus rangefinders. And my GA645, being a point and shoot, requires a series of button presses before you can even start manually focusing (and even then you have to set it at fixed distances - more zone focusing than than manually focusing).
 
This is a subject that I have experienced over the years of using many different cameras from various manufacturers, Bill. Even the mostly uncomplicated models from the fifties and sixties had enough variation in the controls that you could get confused when going from say, a Canon to a Yashica to a Minolta. And that's just the SLR's. Though the buttons and levers might have looked the same, they did not always interact with each other in the same fashion or sequence. This was due to the manufacturer designing certain quirks into the actions to differentiate themselves from every other camera maker.

And then there was Olympus. They made it hard to keep up with what you could do from one model to the next. An OM-1 didn't work the same as an OM-2, 3, or 4. That's why I quit using their cameras very shortly after I got into the system.

Today with digital, the reason there are so many settings is that 1) The systems are highly capable of customization to fit the parameters needed for acquiring the images as envisaged by the photographer, and 2) Photographers over the years have asked the manufacturers for these features to match the very convolutions they had to go through with manipulating the way the film was exposed or processed in order to achieve a certain "look".

It's also great that all one has to do in the middle of a shoot when the weather or lighting or situation changes all you have to do is pause for a bit, change a few basic settings, and you're off again making photos. Back in our days when doing an event meant sometimes having multiple cameras hanging around our necks to be able to keep up with the changing parameters, I always thought it would be great to have a do-it-all camera. No more changing film in the middle of a roll, or switching cameras or lenses (zooms being another area in which many improvements have been made). And highly customized Quick Menu's are great to have the most used settings available at the touch of one button to activate on a touch-screen monitor.

But yeah, there are times I don't use all those features, and just shoot like I've got a roll of film in the camera. Roll the front dial for aperture, the back dial for shutter, a half push on the shutter release for focus and I'm ready to freeze some photons.

Just depends on what mood I'm in, or what the situation calls for, on which mode I operate the camera in. And the only reason for a second camera is as a backup in case there is an issue with the first body.

PF
 
Bill Pierce said:
One of the things you can say in favor of film cameras is the uniformity of controls. When you are using a Leica, you set the aperture and shutter speed, focus and press the shutter release. When you are using a twin lens Rolleiflex, you set the aperture and shutter speed, focus and press the shutter release. When you are using an 8x10 Deardorff, you set the aperture and shutter speed, focus and press the shutter release.
Click to expand...

Clearly this is a straw-man argument, because the WAY you set, for example, the shutter speed on a Leica has no resemblance to the way you set the shutter speed on a Deardorff. And it skips over all the other operations involved: e.g. for a Deardorff, insert the slide, remove the film holder, use the press opener to open the shutter (if equipped), compose on the ground glass, close the shutter, insert the other side of the film holder, withdraw the dark slide, set the shutter speed on the ring (or dial) and the aperture on the other ring (or other dial), then press the lever or squeeze the cable release to make the exposure, re-insert the dark slide, rinse, and repeat. Did somebody say digital camera menus are complicated?
 
It is regrettable, and a little embarrassing, that making photographic recordings using the digital systems necessitates that we become menu scrollers, button pushers and file jockeys. I minimize that by always treating the digital like film: shutter, aperture, ISO and focus.
Once I got some cool treble exposures on a digital Nikon when I forgot that it was set to multiple exposure.
 
I sometimes find myself watching Youtube videos of musicians breaking down 80s synth pop into its individual elements and re-creating the song. All very quickly and (seemingly) easily accomplished on a laptop with a few accoutrements. And shockingly close to the original. But one thing they can't get right is what I term the attack of the beat. I'm not a musician so I'm not sure if that's the correct term even. But this thread brought it to mind.
 
Maybe this goes to the continued popularity of adapted legacy and new lenses with manual focus and aperture dials. It gives this old timer something familiar and instantly understandable, no diving into cryptic menus. Just set to aperture preferred auto with one dial controlling exposure bias. Selected shutter speed visible in vf. I have come to find this easy and intuitive.
 
ptpdprinter said:
I think menu angst is overblown. What in the world are you guys changing in your menus every time you take a photo?
Click to expand...

Well, since owning a mirrorless for 2.5 years I’ve had to get online to look at the manual several times. Usually to try to figure out what I accidentally pushed to get the camera into some state and how do I get it back to what I want. But yeah, after the first 6 months very seldom have I needed to sit down and search the manual. My camera has a digital 2x setting that will still occasionally engage, seemingly all by itself. Have never figured out what I did to cause it but now know how to go back without consulting the manual.
Just a couple of weeks ago with orion glimmering in the night sky I did need to go to full manual for the first time in a long while. Wanted to see what could be captured in the night sky with relatively short exposures. What that showed me was I need to build a barn door tracking arm.
 
zuiko85 said:
Well, since owning a mirrorless for 2.5 years I’ve had to get online to look at the manual several times. Usually to try to figure out what I accidentally pushed to get the camera into some state and how do I get it back to what I want. But yeah, after the first 6 months very seldom have I needed to sit down and search the manual. My camera has a digital 2x setting that will still occasionally engage, seemingly all by itself. Have never figured out what I did to cause it but now know how to go back without consulting the manual.
Just a couple of weeks ago with orion glimmering in the night sky I did need to go to full manual for the first time in a long while. Wanted to see what could be captured in the night sky with relatively short exposures. What that showed me was I need to build a barn door tracking arm.
Click to expand...
The next time you need to consult your manual to change a menu setting back to where it was before you accidentally pushed a button, my suggestion is that you also check to see if there is a menu setting to disable or lock your buttons. I think I read that some cameras have that option. I don't remember if my camera has that option or not. Either It does and I have engaged it, or it doesn't and I haven't had a problem with accidentally pushing buttons. I think the last time I changed a menu setting was a couple of years ago when I was taking a studio lighting course. I had to change something but I can't remember what it was.
 
With most cameras having the option of setting up a "quick menu" or "my menu", there's little need to delve into the full menus. I sometimes dig into the menus of my cameras to see what I've forgotten about being there but I hardly ever go in to change anything.
 
It's not quite true that film cameras operate that much more uniformly. What's true is that they have very few additional settings beyond exposure, ISO, and focus. Different brands have the manual focus ring go in opposite directions leading to a few minutes of confusion every time I switch between my Leica M and Nikon FM2. I think I remember that aperture rings also open and close in opposite directions on different brands. Olympus had their exposure time on a ring around the lens mount. Hasselblads have focus, aperture and exposure time rings on the lens. TLRs have a focus dial on the side of the body. Nikon rangefinders have a focus ring in front of the body under the index finger. I could go on, but you get the idea.
 
Is it really a surprise that different cameras operate differently? That is sort of why they are different. A couple of years ago I bought a new car. I had to learn a different way to turn on the windshield wipers and seat heaters. Heavens to Betsy, the gas tank filler-upper place was on the opposite side, and they hid the hood release in a different place. You have to be flexible about these things. If it is a problem for you, don't change cameras. You probably don't really need to upgrade anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top