willie_901
Veteran
Many of the body buttons can be temporarily deactivated by pressing the MENU OK button for 3 seconds. A yellow Lock icon will be displayed. Anther 3 second press will reactivate all the buttons.
It is possible to deactivate the FN buttons that are causing you trouble. Just set disable each button by choosing NONE in the Menu. You only have to do this once.
These features should eliminate your "don’t screw up by touching it where I shouldn’t" frustration.
There are two reasons the focus point will move around. The AF Menus could be configured to automatically hunt for a focus subject. Setting the AF menu parameters for single, center focus point eliminates this behavior. It is also possible to limit the focus point search region to search just a 7×7, 5×5, or a 3×3 matrix of individual points at the center of the frame. I use MF mode with a single point because I like to focus and recompose just as I did with my film RF cameras.
The second reason the focus points could move is accidentally pushing the focus stick down and simultaneously moving the stick in any direction. I have never done this accidentally as the dentent to activate the stick is long. It seems unlikely this is how come the focus point seems to have a mind of it's own.
Separately when the camera is in AFC mode it will always attempt to focus. In this mode AF will always hunt. When the AF menu parameter PRE-AF is set to ON, the camera is acts as if AFC mode even though AFS or M mode are selected. This is useful for video.
It does take some time to configure the X-Pro 2 to operate in a minimalistic fashion. But it is possible.
raid
Dad Photographer
I agree with Robert
I agree with Robert
I ignore the manuals and I try to get by with the few basic functions on any digital camera used by me. Much is obvious. The non-obvious is almost always not useful to me.
I agree with Robert
4, than 4 and then 4 again resonates for me!
Maybe 1 ...it's not me who has to state it
robert
I ignore the manuals and I try to get by with the few basic functions on any digital camera used by me. Much is obvious. The non-obvious is almost always not useful to me.
Bill Pierce
Well-known
Please understand, I have nothing against non rangefinder cameras - especially the modern mirrorless. They are certainly my preferred choice for studio, portraiture, theatre and a host of other professional photographs. But when it comes to the important stuff, misrepresenting innocent people on the street and, similarly, photographing grandchildren with puppies (albeit grandchildren rarely try to hit you when they see you taking their picture), it’s rangefinder.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
(Bolded) Huh? I can't figure out what you were trying to say.
If it was something like "unobtrusively photographing people on the street": I've done street photography just as unobtrusively with everything from a Minox to a Hasselblad. My tool of choice for many years was a Nikon FM. I work today with the Leica M-D and CL, the Light L16, and a Polaroid SX-70. Few people notice when I make a photo unless I reach out and engage them; most, when I do, want me to make the photo and even then only rarely notice when I've released the shutter (except for the Polaroid photos, because they're watching for the print to slide out...
). My thesis: Engagement with the subject is under the photographer's control. If you want to photograph subjects without their engagement, you act and move one way. If you want to engage them, you act and move differently. The camera being used is mostly irrelevant, except inasmuch as how it requires being used constrains how you act and move. Few hand-held cameras affect a subject unless they are overly large and bulky, or are handled in such a way as to draw attention.
G
Bill Pierce
Well-known
Agreed. My preference for the rangefinder is in part because I scale focus or prefocus on the street. Both are a little simpler on the rangefinder with lenses that usually have more complete distance scales and depth of field guides plus a “set it and nothing will change until you change it” guarantee. I also find that in bright sunlight or backlight the simple, non screen finder is more legible and quicker to use when I bother to use a finder. I simply find the rangefinder a little quicker when you are responding to quickly changing, fleeting moments on the street. And that tiny difference in time can make a great difference in the image.
Richard G
Veteran
I certainly found the M6 with a small 35 Summicron was best for photographing my children. It was always there, no startup time as always on and meter batteries lasted several years, and it was small could be left out unobtrusively and quickly grabbed and manouevred and shot with negligible shutter lag, no mirror blackout and the scale focus or quick, precise RF focussing. An M7 might have been one further step up but it came slightly too late and I couldn’t have afforded it back then.
The digital rangefinders work well but have to have the shutter button ridden like a bad driver rides the clutch to keep them awake around children. And the M9 era cameras can’t cope with shots in quick succession: just when the best face is presented the camera is buffering the preliminaries. To say nothing of the battery level warning stopping the show.
The digital rangefinders work well but have to have the shutter button ridden like a bad driver rides the clutch to keep them awake around children. And the M9 era cameras can’t cope with shots in quick succession: just when the best face is presented the camera is buffering the preliminaries. To say nothing of the battery level warning stopping the show.
sepiareverb
genius and moron
Yes, some searching and reading has made it MUCH better. Took me several rounds of diving deeper into set-up to get it 'fixed'.
Working with gloves seems to be the main culprit with the focus point moving, tho it surely does get moved when carrying, I can only surmise, by bouncing against my coat. It is worse with the one coat that has buttons.
The Ricoh GR Digital has many buttons on the back as well, but I never had any trouble with all the different models of that I've used, and that is perhaps my most used camera.
Dogman
Veteran
Ahh. Now I understand.
I was puzzled about your problems inadvertently pressing buttons on the XPro2 but now I see. Personally, I have turned off the joystick and I only use the center AF sensor or (very seldom) let the camera pick the focus point. I've simplified my XP2 cameras so much I don't recall all the features I've disabled that others might find useful.
cz23
-
Hey, I think you're dissing us technical writers.
Seriously, though, the philosophy of never looking deeper than the obvious seems an unfortunate way to live. Most of the best of life is beneath the surface.
John
charjohncarter
Veteran
Bill Pierce: And since they didn’t require a retrofocus design, the image quality of those lenses was often higher while the lenses were always smaller. And the viewfinder and focusing were better in dim light.
This is one reason I like RF cameras, especially when your eyes get older. I just can't focus an SLR with wide angle lenses anymore.
BUT not only retro-focus lenses not being as sharp as RF lenses, I read in 1963 that Leica really was reluctant to use a swing door on their new 'M' model. They felt that film flatness and exact film depth was better controlled by the Barnack models.
Is this true or urban myth or from CNN?
This is one reason I like RF cameras, especially when your eyes get older. I just can't focus an SLR with wide angle lenses anymore.
BUT not only retro-focus lenses not being as sharp as RF lenses, I read in 1963 that Leica really was reluctant to use a swing door on their new 'M' model. They felt that film flatness and exact film depth was better controlled by the Barnack models.
Is this true or urban myth or from CNN?
raid
Dad Photographer
Hey, I think you're dissing us technical writers.
Seriously, though, the philosophy of never looking deeper than the obvious seems an unfortunate way to live. Most of the best of life is beneath the surface.
John
I never said "never look deeper" for all aspects of life, John. It was about simplicity of camera controls.:bang:
cz23
-
I never said "never look deeper" for all aspects of life, John. It was about simplicity of camera controls.:bang:
Just about everything becomes simple and second nature if we take the time to learn it. But if we always stick with what's obvious, or what we know, there's a good chance we're missing something valuable.
I recommend a leisurely reading of camera manuals and feel we'll usually find a gem or two that we're glad to have discovered.
John
cz23
-
Duplicate post
Richard G
Veteran
Hey, I think you're dissing us technical writers.
Seriously, though, the philosophy of never looking deeper than the obvious seems an unfortunate way to live. Most of the best of life is beneath the surface.
John
My first digital was the Coolpix 4500. That was and is a seriously good camera and I still use it occasionally. The manual was a lot longer than the instructions for my M2. (But even in the manual for the M2 there are some gems to relearn.) I read the Coolpix Manual right through three times before I felt on top of that camera and enjoyed its many offerings. The next complex camera was the X100. I needed three readings of the manual and then on top of that, the clever collaborators here on RFF to make best sense and best use of that camera. The Leica digitals are much simpler, but renaming the folders in the file structure or customising the set manu for different lenses requires a return to the manual. It's not for nothing there is the phrase abbreviated RTFM.
Steve Williams
Established
Interesting observations regarding the sort of things that are easily dismissed under the umbrella of "elderly idiot" or whatever other old age excuse people devise.
Looking at your list -- here's what I think:
1) Elderly idiot means you know what works for you.
2) Can't comment with certainty. If you drive a Ferrari, perhaps it's true.
3) See number 1. A hammer still works. Not every job requires a power tool. The past is where you figured out what works for you.
4) Infinite menus just drives a photographer further and further away from the subject matter. Tangible version of ISO invariance.
5) Camera variables can make a person nuts. Once I set up a digital camera, like my Fuji X-Pro 1, I hate to let others look at for fear they'll change something that will drive me further towards insanity. Similar effect to following Twitter.
Simple is good for better subject matter engagement. Endless technical things just turn me into a technician.
My three cents.
Looking at your list -- here's what I think:
1) Elderly idiot means you know what works for you.
2) Can't comment with certainty. If you drive a Ferrari, perhaps it's true.
3) See number 1. A hammer still works. Not every job requires a power tool. The past is where you figured out what works for you.
4) Infinite menus just drives a photographer further and further away from the subject matter. Tangible version of ISO invariance.
5) Camera variables can make a person nuts. Once I set up a digital camera, like my Fuji X-Pro 1, I hate to let others look at for fear they'll change something that will drive me further towards insanity. Similar effect to following Twitter.
Simple is good for better subject matter engagement. Endless technical things just turn me into a technician.
My three cents.