Using mockups to explore camera ergonomic design

Mockups 2014. I will discuss these in detail in subsequent posts. Older models towards the rear, most recent versions at the front.

 

A brief personal history

 Background I have been using cameras for 60 years. The first was my father's Baldafix folding medium format rollfilm model which I was allowed to borrow sometimes when I was 10 years old. Since then I have owned and used almost every kind of camera ever invented. I became interested in ergonomics around 2009. I bought a Panasonic G1, the very first mirrorless interchangeable lens camera [MILC], after having used Canon SLR's and DSLR's since 1990. I could see that mirrorless was the future for interchangeable lens cameras but there were several problems with the G1's user interface (and image quality and performance, but this blog is mostly about the ergonomic issues). The G1 had the appearance of a scaled down L1, a 4/3 format DSLR. I realised that cameras are not scalable for the rather obvious reason that the hands which operate them stubbornly remain the same size no matter how large or small the camera might be.
I bought a Samsung NX10 which was the same size as the G1 but was much nicer to hold and operate. I realised that the problems with the G1 were not caused by it's small size relative to DSLR's but were due to design issues.

To investigate the nature of these problems I began making mockups.

The mockups I made these from scrap plywood lying about in my garage. I did complete cameras and also basic handle modules. I had very few preconceived ideas about the proper shape of a camera. The benefit of mockups is that nothing is disallowed, anything can be tried. I dreamed up and experimented with several avant garde shapes but none of these made it to completion, for the reason that none of them was practical. My most recent designs look very ordinary with hump top and handle like a small DSLR. I arrived at this shape because it works well ergonomically. The difference between my mockups and most actual cameras lies in the detailed realisation of the concept.

I now have 5 handle modules, 8 lenses (mostly peanut butter jars in various sizes) and 9 camera bodies. I also made a mockup of the Sigma dp2 Quattro just to discover for myself how one might hold and operate this odd looking device.

Ergonomics and camera makers I like to understand cameras in terms of product development, picture quality, performance and ergonomics. My impression is that camera makers are good at dealing with problems which are conceptually straightforward but technically difficult, such as picture quality and performance. But they often flounder when attempting to deal with problems which are conceptually difficult even though solving these problems may pose few technical problems. In this category I would put product development and ergonomics.

Ergonomics and camera users I am constantly surprised by the extent to which users appear to tolerate suboptimal or sometimes frankly dreadful ergonomics in their cameras. There are many well established metrics by which technical image quality and performance of cameras can be described and compared. But there is a paucity of words and taxonomy with which to describe ergonomics. So we read inane comments in camera reviews like "it feels good in the hand". I think that we are unable to describe, think about, discuss or analyse any subject such as camera ergonomics until we have the words and taxonomy with which to do so. Hence this blog which is one user's attempt to rectify the deficiency.

Next, Basic design decisions