I kept the G6 and sold the GX7: Why ?

GX7 on the left, G6 on the right. Obviously the EVF is in a different location.  But also the entire right side is different in each case. Can they both handle well ?

 

It's all about holding and handling

Moving against the tide ?  Last year I bought an Olympus EM5 with accessory battery grip and several lenses. I used this for several months then sold it, having decided to keep the GH2 already in my camera drawer. At the time the EM5 was the hottest thing in M43 world,  receiving many awards. It had better image quality and better performance than the ageing GH2.

So why did I sell it ?  In five words,  ergonomics and the user experience. The EM5 was a polarising camera. Some people loved it, others just couldn't adapt to its user interface. I was one of the latter.

Control layouts have similarities but also differences dictated by the style.

 

Lumix GX7 vs G6  I recently had the opportunity to own and  test the GX7 and  G6  at the same time. I found the GX7 to have  better picture quality especially at high ISO values. In several ways the GX7 also had better performance. The GX7 received many glowing reviews. The G6 did not even get reviewed by some sites.  But I kept the G6 and sold the GX7.  I went against the tide again.

Why ?  Same reason, ergonomics and the user experience.

I should make it clear that my main M43 camera is a Lumix GH3. So the G6 or GX7 would just be a back up in case of problems with the GH3 (of which there have been none, by the way). 

If I were choosing between the GX7 and G6 as a main or only M43 camera the decision might be a bit more difficult.  In that case I might keep the GX7 for it's better picture quality and investigate aftermarket thumb supports and accessory handles to improve it's holding and handling.

My hands are of average adult male caucasian size.

GX7  top, G6 above. Both handle/grip arrangements get the job done. I happen to find the G6 more comfortable and secure. It is also easier to carry in the hand all day with a lens attached.

The language of ergonomics (or lack of it)   There are many ways to identify and describe technical image quality, but the language and taxonomy of camera ergonomics is poorly developed. This blog is one camera user/buyer's attempt to rectify that deficiency.

One of the negative consequences of the paucity of language by which ergonomic issues may be described is a lack of attention to ergonomics (compared to technical image quality) in many camera reviews. A consequence of this is that it is possible to read many reviews of some camera only to discover after purchase that it is difficult or uncomfortable to hold.

Holding a hand held device   Given that the great majority of cameras are hand held devices one might have expected that analysis of holding and handling would have prime place in camera reviews. Unfortunately that is not the case. My own experience is that I have to buy or borrow a camera to evaluate it's holding and handling qualities. It might be argued that holding is an individual matter and that a camera which feels good to one person might be uncomfortable for another. But this ignores basic human anatomy. Human hands differ in size and length/width ratio. But they are all constructed the same way with the same fingers and joints operating the same way. No humans have the forelimb of a possum or a seal.

Studies of holding and handling  My investigations using mockups of whole cameras and handles have shown that it is possible to design small, medium and large cameras which can accommodate the normal range of variation in human hand size and shape.  The key lies in understanding which hand/finger positions provide a comfortable, strong base position and which finger movements are preferred by nature. The functional anatomy of hands and fingers preferences some positions and movements over others.

Mockup handle, front and top views. The mockup body has the same depth as the GX7. The handle is 3mm deeper but does not protrude beyond lens mount depth. You see here two versions of the parallel type. The mockup gives a  secure hold with less strain and positions the index finger to more readily operate the shutter button and top plate controls.

The design process  Earlier this year I read some promotional material by a well known camera maker (Nikon) describing the in house team's approach to designing a new camera. The promo indicated the team started with preliminary drawings then moved on to detail drawings and after that they made shaped mockups.

I think they are going about it the wrong way.   My work strongly supports the construction of  rough mockups as the  first step of the shaping  process, once guidelines about overall dimensions, mount size, flangeback distance and other essential engineering parameters have been set.

Nikon's capacity to make a camera with truly awful ergonomics was demonstrated with the 1 Series V1, described by one reviewer as a "mongrel".

How was the GX7 designed ?  I have no inside knowlege of the design process at Panasonic or any other camera maker. So I have to guess. Hypothesise to put a fancy word to it.  The GX7 looks and feels as though styling came before ergonomics. It has a specific shape and style which interferes with the creation of an anatomical handle and thumb support.

The G6  looks and feels as though it's designers learned from from the mistakes, of which there were many,  of  previous cameras in the "Small SLR-like" series of  Lumix MILCs since 2008. These include the G1,2,3,5 and GH 1,2,3.

GX7 and G6, Holding  The G6 has a substantial handle with anatomically sculpted shape. There is a distinct thumb support. You can get a proper hold on the thing without having to grip tightly. Finger spacing is close to that which the hand and fingers seek to adopt by nature with the "half closed, relaxed" posture.

The GX7 handle is small and does not conform to the shape of the fingers which are trying to grip it. The shutter button is not where my index finger wants to find it. There is only a vestigial thumb support. The space between the index and third fingers is greater than the space between the thumb and index finger. But the human hand in half closed natural position has a substantial space between the thumb and index finger but at the most only a few millimeters between the index finger and middle finger.

Holding the GX7 could be dramatically improved  if it used the handle and thumb support as shown in the attached photos of the mockup. But it would look different. I don't mean the color.  The style would be different and the layout of controls would be different.  Size could  be the same. The holding issue is not primarily one of size but of ergonomic design.

The challenge of design  Do camera designers preference style over function ? In my assessment they do it all the time, to the detriment of the user experience. I live in the eternally frustrated hope that camera designers will put ergonomics first and let the shape of the thing evolve to best serve the user experience.

So, I keep the G6   It's ergonomic realisation is some way short of perfection.  I would like to see the Function Lever (just behind the shutter button)  changed to a front control dial. It could perform all of it's present functions but also be available as part of the preferable twin dial control system. The rear dial needs to protrude slightly more, have sharper serrations and be angled upwards a little. These things would make it easier to operate without being unduly prone to accidental activation. Some detail improvements to the buttons would help make them a little easier to locate and operate by feel. The Fn4 button and surrounds need to be redesigned to make the button less prone to accidental operation. The shutter button could with advantage move 5-10mm to the left, giving a more natural position to the index finger.  Details, details,  but they affect the user experience.

However the basic size, shape, handle and thumb support are good for a small ILC and would be hard to improve I think.  The viewfinder is well located and the fully articulated monitor is very useful.

We shall see what the next round of models brings.