A Personal Voyage of Discovery

CAMERA ERGONOMICS

Part 1    A personal voyage of discovery

 Author  AndrewS

My purpose in writing this series of articles is to help photographers make decisions about camera choice informed by an understanding of ergonomics and to lay the groundwork for  improved ergonomics in camera design through articulate consumer feedback.

In 1953 when I was ten years old,  my father acquired a Baldafix medium format camera.  This sparked my lifelong  interest in cameras and photography. I was allowed to use it from time to time and in order to do so, had to learn about film speeds, apertures, shutter speeds and how to judge exposure by the sunny f16 rule.

In due course I graduated to single lens reflex cameras. I most enjoyed using the  Pentax Spotmatic.   Some of the photos I made with this in the late 60's and early 70's remain my favourites and have found their way into a state library.

After the Spotmatic came a diminutive Pentax ME Super which gave way to the autofocus Canon EOS 630. This was followed by a string of Canon EOS film then digital SLR's. Over the years successive models grew larger and heavier as they acquired more electronic and automated  functions.


Along the way I also bought and used  a variety of medium format and 4x5 inch large format cameras. But those big, heavy cameras became increasingly tiresome to carry. As I aged, the appeal of smaller, lighter equipment became irresistible.

By 2008, I had a mid sized prosumer DSLR  with three upper mid range zoom lenses. I convinced myself that the DSLR  kit was larger and heavier than I wanted so I got a smaller DSLR  with two budget zoom lenses. This kit delivered the same image quality at half the weight, size and cost. Mission accomplished, it would seem.  So why is this little anecdote not the end of my story but the beginning ?

The problem was that I could not get comfortable with the smaller DSLR and in consequence, never enjoyed using it. I never experienced any major ergonomic problems with the larger DSLR.  But with the smaller camera, I found the grip cramped, the AF start button in the wrong place and the viewfinder small and dim. The final annoyance was the camera's inability to achieve consistently accurate autofocus with the kit lens in less than bright light. 

I noticed that most DSLRs  were the same basic shape  regardless of size. Presumably this makes sense to the marketing people who want to project an identifiable corporate style.  But the hands which use those cameras do not care about corporate style and do not shrink to fit smaller models.

My voyage of discovery about camera ergonomics had begun.

In 2009, I bought a Compact System Camera. This incorporated a great deal of sophisticated technology within it's compact body. An excellent electronic viewfinder, fast, accurate autofocus, good enough lenses and decent image quality should have made this a very desirable camera. But the more I used it, the less I enjoyed doing so.  I found this camera's human machine interface (HMI) even less agreeable than that of the small DSLR.  If I held the camera with my fingers in a relaxed, natural position, the tip of my index finger was nowhere near the shutter button and my thumb nowhere near any of the rear controls. To operate the shutter I had to pull my right hand  back away from the camera body so only my third finger was actually holding the camera. The main control dial was located in front of and below the shutter button such that it was forever obstructed by the third finger. The four way controller consisted of small buttons which I could not distinguish by feel.

 I was irritated yet intrigued that cameras with good ergonomics seemed to be large and expensive while some of those of a more appealing size handled poorly.

I had to wonder: am I just a grumpy old bugger or have camera makers failed to properly understand basic principles of ergonomics ?
On reflection I am indeed old. Well, old-ish anyway, and I do get very grumpy about several things, poor design being one.  Unfortunately there is a lot of it to be found in modern cameras, some of which are miracles of electronic engineering but ergonomic kludges.

I also had to wonder: Is it possible to make a small camera which does handle well ?

The answer to this question came soon enough.  I bought a CSC from a different maker.  This camera with  kit zoom was the same size as the first one but provided  a much improved handling and operating experience. I realised that the viewing, handling and operating problems which I had experienced with some cameras were partly about size and partly about design.

At this point I got really serious about the study of camera ergonomics and over the next two years expended considerable energy trying to better understand the principles involved.          I developed a method of studying the human machine interface (HMI)  then evolved a language and taxonomy of ergonomics applied to the use of cameras.

 I read numerous reports by professional camera review organisations. I noticed a heavy emphasis on the technical aspects of a camera's performance but  limited and often vague references to the HMI. I was intrigued by a comparison report in a widely read magazine which declared Camera A better than Camera B because it was rated at 2200 lines per image height while Camera B had 2000. I happened to have both cameras on my desk  and found Camera A to be an awkward, irritating thing to use, while Camera B had much better handling and operating characteristics. Camera B was much easier to hold still at the point of exposure which I figured would deliver sharp images more reliably than a minor difference in resolution detectable only on a test bench. It seemed to me there was and continues to be, a lack of language and paucity of robust descriptors by which a camera's ergonomic capability might be evaluated.

After happily using the second CSC  for 20 months, I became concerned at the slow pace of development of that particular camera line. I had been reading some favourable reviews of the latest product from the maker of my first CSC so I  tried that, with, unfortunately, the same result as I had experienced with the first model.  The technology inside the camera was  excellent but I found it  suffered from  substantial  handling and operating deficiencies which could have been avoided easily with  better ergonomic design.

Photographs

Photo 1, CSC #1  Natural Grip   This is my first and the world's first Compact System Camera.  Here I try to hold it in a natural grip with my right hand.  This shows where my fingers fall when I just pick up the camera without regard to the location of any control modules (buttons, dials etc)  You can see that my index finger is nowhere near the shutter button and my thumb nowhere near any of the control modules on the back of the camera. You can't see it in the photo, but  the main control dial on the front of the handle is completely inaccessible.

Photo 2, CSC #1 Forced grip   To get my index finger on the shutter button and thumb onto the AEL/AFL/AF Start button, my hand has to adopt this position. The only body part actually gripping the camera is the middle finger of the right hand.  I found it impossible to hold and operate the camera with the right hand simultaneously. It was necessary for the left hand always to hold and support the camera while at the same time trying to operate the zoom collar.

Photo 3, CSC #2 Natural grip   Here is my second, much more satisfactory Compact System Camera.  This photo shows the comfortable hand position which results when I hold this one using a natural half closed grip. This camera is the same size and weight as the one shown in Photos 1 and 2  but it's human machine interface is much better designed. 

Photo 4, Camera A rear   This camera (which is not the one in Photo 1)  has 23 mm width on the right side of the monitor screen. There is a control dial where a thumbrest could have been.  You can see that this particular control dial is almost completely submerged. As a result the dial can only be operated by the very tip of the thumb, just below the nail bed. This requires the metacarpophalangeal and interphalangeal joints of the thumb to flex. This in turn forces the palm of the right hand away from the camera, resulting in an unstable grip.

The four way controller on the back of this camera is of the "5 button" type.  Despite much practice I find I cannot reliably distinguish by feel which button my thumb is pressing. So to operate it I have to take the camera down from my eye, locate the correct button by looking at it, make the adjustment then return to making photos.

Photo 5, Camera B rear  This is the same camera as that shown in Photo 3. This one has 40 mm width to the right of the monitor. This has allowed the designers to fit a well shaped and positioned thumbrest. The main control dial is on top of the camera just behind the shutter button and easily operated by the index finger without having to move a muscle of any other finger.

The four way controller on Camera B is of the "rocking saucer" type. I can easily find and operate this with my right thumb, by feel, without taking my eye away from the viewfinder. This makes for a vastly more streamlined human machine interface and a much more pleasant user experience.