What do you want?

One of my pet dislikes in mirrorless cameras (it's not a pet hate - my dislike is not THAT strong I suppose - perhaps "frustration" would be a better word) is the over reliance on focus peaking. I guess this is because it is new and is therefore thought to be marketable. But my frustration with focus peaking is that if I set the sensitivity to a low setting, quite often nothing at all appears in the finder to confirm focus unless there happens to be high contrast in the image. With low contrast images you can forget about focus peaking if you have set it to low in an effort to be precise. Alternatively, if I set focus peaking sensitivity to a higher setting, in this case too much seems to be in focus. In either event the only way to confirm WHICH bit of the image has maximum focus is to enlarge the image in the finder and then use the mark 1 human eyeball. All of this slows down shooting far too much and effectively means I am only using focus peaking to get approximate focus at best, then I need to complete the job using my eye. Not a good use of technology.

Something I would dearly love in mirrorless cameras is the kind of focus confirmation found in my Nikon D700 DSLR which has an exceedingly effective system. With the Nikon, to manually focus you point the centre focus point where you want it, turn the focus ring on the lens and then a small white dot lights up in the viewfinder confirming that the subject is correctly focused. THATS IT! This works with both chipped lenses and non chipped lenses and is accurate, reliable and quick - all I have to do is look for the focus confirmation dot. I have seldom missed a shot using this system and its far, far, far superior to bloody useless focus peaking which is yet another example of camera makers over complicating things in the hope that they will sell product. And I suppose it is also that camera makers prefer to sell to the vast myriad of dumb asses out there who would not understand how to use the D700 style focus confirmation. All a part of dumbing down of society and compensating by designing so-called smart technology.
 
I'd like the price of the good stuff to come down a bit, more than a bit. I have a hard time understanding why the lesser grade cameras which have essentially the same ingredients, cost so much less than the high priced spred. Sure the sensor is bigger and sure the processor is too but both are grown in the same way as the little guys.

Puzzled in Logtown
 
Fewer "features"

Fewer "features"

In the prior post, all of us established our megapixel needs and, for the most part, felt current digital cameras were more than sufficient in that department. Which brings up the question, what, in your opinion, does need to be improved in modern digitals?

For me it’s simple. I want the ability to quickly change my basic settings, shutter speed, f/stop, ISO and focus and to be able to see those values without accessing a screen or holding the camera to my eye. I don’t want to take up time accessing a series of menus one at a time, one after the other. To an extent Fuji, Leica and, I’m sure others, have made this possible with external dials and rings that control these functions. But, for example, Fuji, allowing rapid access to most of the camera’s basic controls, is sadly lacking in providing distance scales on their lenses, providing none or ones that provide inadequate information at greater distances for scale focusing.

I’m amused by folks who call these controls retro rather than immediately accessible. With news, street photography, even portraiture, I really don’t want to waste time sorting through menus on an LCD screen even if it is a more modern technology. I want to be able to see and change the basic settings on my camera quickly and then raise it to my eye.

That’s what I want. More important, what do you want?

The headline says it all .... I might clarify/amplify: functional elegance, dependability, and durability. Doubtless, everyone realizes that these are the hallmarks of any quality technology product.
 
I'd like the price of the good stuff to come down a bit, more than a bit. I have a hard time understanding why the lesser grade cameras which have essentially the same ingredients, cost so much less than the high priced spred. Sure the sensor is bigger and sure the processor is too but both are grown in the same way as the little guys.

Puzzled in Logtown

They are grown in the same way, but with larger surface area (more raw material) and with lower yield. If you imagine an error every 10cm^2, then you only have to throw out 1 in every 5 m43 sensors, or 1 in every 2 full frame sensors. Better technology can increase the yield (why we've seen cheaper full frame DSLRs) but the raw material is always costing more.

Sensors will always scale with area (plus yield difference). On the other hand, newer processors are just higher resolution, so the amount of raw material isn't really going up at all, more is being squeezed into the same area. So faster processors aren't always more expensive to build, but bigger sensors always will be.
 
Hi,

Standardised batteries would be nice. A ban on the nasty ones that was enforced would be nicer. And how about smaller menus?

As for major changes to the cameras, we have such a wide choice available it should be easy to find one that scores 9 out of 10 on our individual check lists.

Regards, David
 
As a former film Leica user who has been priced out of the brand's digital models completely, I wouldn't mind reasonable pricing.

Oh, yeah, one more thing. You can add autofocus as well.

Otherwise I stand by my previous post.
 
I would like to have the option to use an iOS or Android app with well-designed user interfaces to select and store camera menu options. The current firmware-based models are needlessly limited.

I would like Fujifilm to offer fn button selected fixed, pre-focus distance modes.


Honestly... I just want an ISO-less sensor... meaning I can just shoot at any shutter speed and aperture combo in any light with maximum clarity and dynamic range. With this, I'd like the ability for the camera to auto-focus in almost darkness just as fast as it can in the sun. In the meantime, the Fujis will do. 😉

Right now still, digital camera technical imaging quality is limited by photon (shot) noise. Noise from other sources is no longer problematic unless signal levels are extraordinarily low (astronomy for instance).

Quite a few of the most recent cameras are ISO invariant to within ~1/3 stop. No camera I know of is completely ISO invariant due to a trade-off between conversion gain (sensitivity) and full-well capacity (dynamic range).

That said, I find too using a pseudo-ISO invariant camera to be liberating. I typically auto-bracket three exposures 1/3 or 1/2 stops. I keep the raw file with optimum highlight region retention and delete the others. You only have to worry about sensor overexposure in bright light, The disadvantage is in low-light the in-camera JPEG is too dark for in-camera image review.

Several of the newest bodies use dual-gain Aptina's technology where there are two ISO invariant regions. From base ISO to ISO 400 or 640 (brighter light) the sensor electronics are configured to increase full-well capacity which offers the highest possible analog dynamic range. At higher ISOs (lower light) the conversion gain is maximized to increase signal level (conversion gain) and minimize read noise.

The result is two pseudo-ISO invariant regions – one for maximum dynamic range and the other for maximum sensitivity.

I never thought I would use auto ISO. But for X-Pro 2 raw capture, I sometimes do. In bright light I use ISO 200-400 with a minimum shutter time of 1/125, In low light I switch to ISO 800-1600 with the same shutter time. I set aperture manually as needed. Now the exposure (raw file signal level) is limited by DOF. Each range is pseudo-iso invariant and I can. quickly switch between the two ISO ranges.

At the moment I am okay with the digital cameras that I use (Canon 5DII and Fuji x100t), although I have been looking at the x100f because of the ability to manually adjust the ISO via an external dial. The x100t is approaching ISO-less capability so that helps... With the x100t in manual focus mode the distance is visible through the finder (as well DOF seems to be indicated), but quite frankly I mostly use face recognition for the majority of my situations.

...

The X100T is about as ISO-invariant as they come. The X100F uses dual-gain technology. I often use face recognition as well.
 
...
OK, now I want to see in real cameras the innovations we have been seeing in smart phones:
- Flash that balances color temp to the ambient
- Hit the shutter. Get a burst that starts before and continues after. You pick the best.

The auto-flash color temperature idea is interesting. This would be great anytime a scene's illumination is dominated by a single color temperature.

I don't think you can record data before you press the shutter button. But minimum shutter delay and fast auto-bursts are valuable without significant buffer delays are valuable.
 
Many years ago, on another forum, I wondered why there isn't an "H" button to set the thing at the hyperfocal distance for whatever aperture & focal length is being used; I guess it proves camera designers don't look at forums...

Regards, David
 
Many years ago, on another forum, I wondered why there isn't an "H" button to set the thing at the hyperfocal distance for whatever aperture & focal length is being used; I guess it proves camera designers don't look at forums...

Regards, David

Best idea for an screen on the back of the camera. Focus by wire rather messes with the old way of marking lenses. Even without focus by wire it would be really helpful for all digitals to have this.

Excellent idea David!

B2 (;->
 
Many years ago, on another forum, I wondered why there isn't an "H" button to set the thing at the hyperfocal distance for whatever aperture & focal length is being used; I guess it proves camera designers don't look at forums...

Yes, I agree - I've often thought this. My other 'wish' would be a setting to ensure that the metering system would calculate exposure to the absolute maximum, while still avoiding even a single pixel blowing out. Blown highlights are a real nuisance with digital, but when compensating manually, it's easy to over-correct.

Let's utilise all that computing power in modern cameras. 🙂
 
Many years ago, on another forum, I wondered why there isn't an "H" button to set the thing at the hyperfocal distance for whatever aperture & focal length is being used; I guess it proves camera designers don't look at forums...

Regards, David

I have wondered for years why this can't be implemented. Much, much faster than auto-focus. Would be a terrific and very natural addition to Leica's digital M cameras.

Other than what is noted above I have very few wants. My Pentax K-5iiS is about the perfect dSLR with the possible exception of autofocus speed, which I currently side step very nicely using the DOF scales on my manual lenses.

However, as long as we are wishing on a star, I would like a 100% viewfinder and a better mirror damping system for my K1000.

I would like someone to give me a loan of a Nikon DF so I can put it through its paces and see if I would like to own one long term. The idea certainly intrigues me.

What I would really like to see are pre-built print instruction files (whatever they are called) to send to a 3D printer when you need a new part for your camera.

It would also be nice if 3D printers had the ability to print complete circuit boards for outdated electronic cameras.

EVF that actually worked in real time so I didn't get nauseous shooting with both eyes open.

Oh yeah. One last thing. Rechargeable batteries that will run for a week of shooting rather that just a few hours. Either that or cameras that are actually designed to use very little battery power so the batteries we already have last longer. That way I only need one battery on a trip.

As long as I am on the topic I'll bring up one more thing. It would also be nice to have a recharging system that doesn't require me to remove the battery each time. Let me plug it in like my phone if the battery isn't completely depleted at the end of my shooting session. Or better yet, just set it on top of, or even just in the vicinity of, the charger.

Ok, that is good for now. Back to my happy snapping.
 
That reminded me, years ago the lovely Leica Digilux 2 had an extra lead with it that I've never seen on another camera. It enabled you to use the battery charger as an AC powered supply. All it took was that extra lead and an extra socket in the battery charger...

Regards, David
 
That reminded me, years ago the lovely Leica Digilux 2 had an extra lead with it that I've never seen on another camera. It enabled you to use the battery charger as an AC powered supply. All it took was that extra lead and an extra socket in the battery charger...

Regards, David
Some Fujis can do that as well.
 
But on a M you can do it the old fashioned way pretty easily... no? On other cameras, you can't even do it really...

You're right as long as you lens has the markings that you can use. Lots of new glass for mirrorless out there doesn't have any marking for DOF.

Might get some folks to purchase lenses from the manufacturer too.

B2 (;->
 
Back
Top Bottom