The Nikon 1 V3 could have been...............

V2 on the left with 10-100mm lens, Mockup on the right. You can see the inverted L shaped handle topped by the quad control set

 

Using a mockup to illustrate how it could be done

The Nikon 1  series cameras which arrived on the scene in late 2011 certainly caught my interest.  The V1 in particular had a remarkable performance capability never previously seen on a budget consumer camera.  But Nikon right from the start has appeared to be conflicted about it's 1 series, not able to clearly identify it's position in the product spectrum.  Was the V1 a super speed demon for sports/action enthusiasts, even some professionals, or was it a half baked "inbetween" camera with crippled ergonomics, not knowing what it's purpose in the world might be ?

The V2  came along about a year later.  This model corrected many of the glaring ergonomic deficiencies of the V1. There are three V2's  in our family, each white, each used by a woman, each with the 10-100mm lens.  So I have had plenty of opportunity to familiarise myself with it. It's not a bad camera at all. It almost meets  my Proper Camera  definition apart from the fixed monitor. I think the V2 has  lots of potential for development.  It has some very impressive guts. The system also has the 1 series 70-300mm lens coming along soon. If this is good optically it will be very interesting for bird/nature/sport/action/wildlife photographers, of whom there are many. But a long lens like this needs a camera which can be held securely and it needs a built in EVF as viewing with such a lens will almost exclusively be through the EVF to contain camera shake.

V2 on the left, Mockup on the right. You can see the anatomically shaped thumb support and JOG lever to the right of the EVF. The V2 looks to me like a "styling" exercise. The mockup has it's own style born out of form following function. They are effectively the same height although the higher shoulders of the mockup make it appear larger. It is certainly easier to hold.

My hope   for the Nikon 1 system has been that Nikon would develop and market  it as a fully fledged but very much more compact alternative to the traditional DSLR.   So, I really wanted the V3 to look like the mockup illustrated in this post.  This represents a  further evolution of the V series ergonomic design.

But some reviewerssaid they thought the V2 was ugly. Has this been the reason for the V3 reverting to a boxy shape similar to the V1 or many compacts, with minimal handle and no built in EVF ? Who knows ?  Nikon has continued to output a range of lower cost, lower spec 1 Series cameras each looking very like a compact but with interchangeable lenses. The market has delivered  it's collective verdict on compacts without EVF, sales of which have crashed over the last few years. So I really don't understand why Nikon keeps rolling out multiple minor variants of these things.  

I also don't understand why Nikon keeps crippling the V Series, it's top tier 1 System camera with sub optimal ergonomics.  It's a baffling mystery to me. If they got the ergonomics right and priced it right and were able to supply the thing to buyers, I suspect they would sell plenty.

The camera I wanted them to make  is shown in the mockup.  Camera evaluation can be considered under the headings: Specifications, Picture quality, Performance and Ergonomics. This post and the mockup are about the ergonomics.

Dimensions

	Width mm	Height mm	Depth body	Depth total
V2	108	82	23	56
V3/4 Mockup	111	83	30	56

 

You can see the mockup is marginally wider and taller than the V2 but they are essentially the same size.

V2 in the hand. Holding and operating the V2 is not a bad experience but it could so easily be better with more evolved ergonomic design.

 

Ergonomic issues with the V2   The V2 provides a reasonably decent user experience but it could be considerably improved with some design modifications. The specific design features  which I have identified as capable of improvement are:

Prepare Phase   When using the camera I find myself having to access the main menus in Prepare Phase of use. The camera needs a Q Menu or equivalent quick access menu separate from the main menu and able to be populated with user selected items. The existing F button is an awkward access portal to some of the  items  which would better be found in a well designed Q Menu.

Most of the buttons on a camera like this should allow user selectable function from a long list of options.  Novices can select the green zone on the mode dial and leave all other user interface modules at default settings.  There is no need to dumb the camera down just because novices and snapshooters will use it. Novices also use high spec DSLR's. Some of them will become experts one day.  They need a camera which can grow with them through it's ability to be user configured.

Capture Phase

Holding   The V2 has a built in handle which is desirable but it could be better designed. It could be taller, providing a better grip, if the shoulders of the camera were raised. The boxy, squared off shape does not conform well to any known human hand or fingers.

There is no proper thumb support.

Viewing  The EVF needs to be of higher quality, needs to be more adjustable by the user and it needs a more effective light excluding eyecup.

Fixed monitors are much less versatile than the fully articulated type.

Operating  The user interface needs a rethink.

Buttons on the left side of the monitor require the left hand to be removed from holding the lens. No great problem if the lens is very light and small, but the 1 System is acquiring some lenses of decent heft.

Changing AF area position requires the lower rear dial used as 4 way controller. This works but a JOG lever located just to the left of the thumb in rest position would be better.

The mockup uses my signature quad control set consisting of shutter button, front control dial button 1 and button 2 (both with user selectable function). This is the most efficient way which I have yet discovered to drive most Capture Phase functions with just one finger.

Holding the mockup. The shape is just right and the main controls are in the optimum locations because I shaped the body and handle to fit into the natural half closed position of the hand then put the buttons and dials where my fingers wanted to find them, not where some stylist decreed they should go.

 

How the mockup improves the user experience 

Holding  There is a fully anatomical, inverted L shaped handle. This is one of my signature design features.  It provides a very comfortable grip for the right hand because it has been shaped to fit the hand, not the other way around. The overhang allows the right middle finger to take the mass of the right side of the camera without muscle effort. It is not necessary to "grip" the camera, it is held securely with minimal effort. The increased height of the handle allows a full five fingered hold even with many adult male hands.

The inverted L shape provides a wide top platform on which the quad control set can be located.

The substantial thumb support complements the handle to make the camera very easy to hold without strain.

Viewing  The width of the monitor is the same on both the mockup and the V2. The available space could be used for a swing up/down or fully articulated version.

Operating  The quad control set allows control of  all the following with one finger, while continuously looking through the EVF and without having to change grip with either hand:  AF, Aperture (or Shutter Speed depending on mode dial position), ISO (or other parameter as user selected), Exposure Compensation (or other parameter as user selected) and capture.

The JOG lever allows the active AF area to be moved directly without looking away from the viewfinder and without shifting grip with either hand.

There is space on the left side of the hump for a second set and see dial so I have placed one there.  I would use this for direct access to Drive Mode.

Summary 

The V3 which has appeared on the market recently has disappointed many reviewers on many levels and for many reasons. Nikon had an opportunity to improve on the V2 but instead went backwards, sideways, down (in size), any way but forwards. On their top tier 1 System model line they took away the inbuilt EVF, took away the proper handle, shrank the body so it is more difficult to hold,  made the battery smaller, used a smaller memory card for no apparent reason at all and shifted the lens axis back towards the center of the body, providing less room for an accessory handle.

They paired this with a new kit lens having mediocre performance and no ability to fit a screw in filter.

By way of contrast, the mockp improves on the V2, allowing a more efficient, streamlined experience in all phases of use.  The layout is clean and uncluttered yet provides a comprehensive suite of controls for the expert/experienced user while remaining perfectly suitable for the novice.  It represents a win-win result in all aspects of use.  Nothing has to be given up in order to proved improved ergonomics.

This is the camera I want Nikon to make.

 

 

 

Panasonic G7 mockup, silver

G7 Mockup showing uncluttered but comprehensive control layout, clear space for the thumb, large buttons located where they will not be hit accidentally, JOG lever, quad control set.

 

Last week I posted a two part piece arguing that Panasonic needs to proceed with a G7 camera even though there is unsold stock of the G5 and G6 on camera store shelves. I illustrated the argument with a mockup of the camera I would like to see as a replacement of the G6. This was criticised by a user forum member for it's "dried blood" color. On reflection I have to agree the color didn't work so I have rebirthed the mockup in silver.

One of the fun things about making mockups is that I can, and do, change anything then rebirth the mockup at will. This is also highly instructive, as it allows me to develop a considerable understanding of the effect on holding and operating of various different variations on a theme.

I will use this rebirthing as an opportunity to illustrate the features of the mockup in more detail.

On the left, G7 mockup, on the right, G6. The styling differences are easy to see. The ergonomic advantages of the mockup are best felt.

The process When I set out to make a mockup I decide on a few basic dimensions. These are overall width and height, monitor width and height, height allowance for EVF, body depth (not including the handle or EVF eyepiece rear projection), distance from lens side of handle to center of lens mount and distance of lens axis from left side of body. I take these from an existing camera, often with small alterations, to be sure that the resulting mockup would be able to contain the guts of the device if it were used as the basis for a real camera.

Next I decide what I am trying to achieve with this particular mockup. In most cases that is to evolve a camera which I have used and which I think has possibilities for ergonomic improvement, within or very close to the same physical and conceptual envelope.

I have a good idea of the shape and style which I want and I initially express these in the form of rough sketches. But I do not make drawings of the mockup before construction begins. This is very important, particularly on the right side both at the front (handle) and the back (thumb support and control panel). I do not lock in the body shape or location of user interface modules (UIMs) before construction. I cut, glue and shape pieces of plywood until the result feels very comfortable in my hand. I often get this not-quite-right resulting in a tear down and rebuild. Having done this many times, I have developed a very good idea of which shapes are comfortable and which are not. When the shapes are to my satisfaction by feel, I start allocating positions for UIMs where my fingers want to find them.

The process of building and rebuilding mockups has taught me much more about camera ergonomics than simply using the cameras which one buys. With the mockups, I can say .."what would happen if I just changed this..."? And I get the answer. For instance in the process of changing the G7 mockup's color I took the opportunity to relocate the shutter button and button 1, 2mm to the right and also shaved 2mm off the lens side of the handle for a more comfortable holding feel and also to allow a little more space between the fingers of the right hand and a large lens.


Dimensions
I gave the mockup a fraction more body depth than the G6, measured from front face of lens mount to rear face of monitor housing. Actual measurements are G6, 41.2mm, G7 Mockup, 42.4mm.

	Width mm excl lugs	Height mm excl hotshoe	Depth mm Total W/O lens	Monitor housing width mm	Box Volume cc
G7 Mockup	118	81	69	79	659
G6	122	83	69	91	699

You can see the mockup is a little smaller in width and height than the G6. The mockup width works as it stands at 118mm but if it were 4mm wider that would allow a little wider monitor and also a little more space between the fingers of the right hand holding the handle and any large lens mounted.

Mockup G7 rear. The function of most buttons is user assignable.  The JOG lever is used to directly move active AF area around the frame without having to press another button and without having to move the eye from the viewfinder or shift grip with either hand.

Rear of camera
The mockup's fully articulated monitor housing has 12mm less width than that of the G6. I had a good look at the preview and review image in 4:3, 3:2 and 16:9 aspect ratio on the G6 (and other Panasonic cameras with fully articulated monitor). In no configuration does the image occupy the full width of the screen. Presumably there is a technical reason for this but other makers manage the same actual image size with a narrower monitor housing. I have assumed that if others can do it then so can Panasonic.

The relevance of this is that the main issue leading to inadvertently pressed buttons on the G6 is that the wide monitor housing steals width from the control panel (the remainder of the camera back on the right side). This in turn crowds buttons together and forces them across very close to the right side of the body.

This also pushes the rear control dial way over to the right where it is located on the corner of the body rather than on the back. Here it is slightly awkward to operate with the right thumb. Operation of the dial is further impeded by a slightly too recessed position and slightly rounded serrations. Each of these details has it's influence and each detracts from the user experience a little. Anyone who handles a G6 then a GH3/4 will instantly experience the difference. On the GH3/4 they got those details right making these cameras much more positive to operate.

During the process of making the G7 mockup I investigated whether there was enough room for a rear dial. I increased the width of the control panel from 29 to 38mm. This allowed a larger thumb support which I suppose could have incorporated a rear dial. But it would have been a tight squeeze. One of the principles which guides me in making the mockups is to always aim for layouts which are uncluttered, providing plenty of space for the fingers to operate freely. So the control dial went to the front where I have created plenty of space in a very high value location.

The thumb support is of the optimal diagonal type so the thumb can help support the mass of the camera without having to grip tightly. There is a clear space on the upper section of the control panel for the thumb, such that the thumb will not inadvertently hit any buttons.

The lower right side of the body is rounded off for comfort but also to allow the 4 way controller and button 8 to sit below the level of the slightly raised right side of the body. Thus they are easy to press when required but will not be bumped inadvertently.

Top view shows the quad control set and the [Alt] button is just visible.

Top of camera The main item here and one of the signature features of my mockups, is the quad control set, consisting of shutter button, front control dial, button 1 and button 2. Space for this quad set is created by the inverted L design of the handle. Function of the buttons is user selectable from a long list of options. (I would allocate ISO and Exposure +/- to them but others will have different ideas) Both the shutter button and the front control dial are set quite high and both are strongly textured so they are easy to locate and operate by feel and also so buttons 1 and 2 will not be pressed accidentally. Both buttons are also strongly textured.

The quad control set is a very efficient way of controlling the most frequently changed primary and secondary exposure and focus parameters with just one finger, without having to take one's eye from the viewfinder and without having to change grip with either hand. It is sympathetic to the preferred natural movements of the index finger. Many DSLR's require the index finger to undertake a large amount of side to side movement in order to reach buttons and or dial located in front of and behind the shutter button. The quad control way utilises the index finger's natural range of movements more effectively.

On the left side I have put a set and see dial which I would use for Drive Mode. On the right side of the hump is the Main Mode Dial with Auto, P,A,S,M etc Modes. There is space for a third set and see dial but I elected to use two buttons, both with user selected function as this gives the user more options. There is space for more than two buttons but I am mindful that some recent cameras have an overly cluttered top deck leading to frequent miss hits.

Front of camera The lens axis has been moved 2mm to the left (as viewed by the user from behind the camera) to free up space for a larger handle than that on the G6. The mockup's handle has been raised to allow a full five finger grip even for a slightly larger than average adult hand. Shutter button height is 73mm on the mockup and 70mm on the G6. This might not sound like much but I have found that camera ergonomics is sensitive to quite small changes in dimensions, shape and control module layout.

The inverted L shape of the handle is very apparent when viewed from the front. This has two benefits over the more traditional layout seen in the G6. First the right index finger has space to lay where it wants to go. This in turn allows the shutter button to follow the finger and the quad control set to be created. Second it provides a deep overhang beneath which the right middle finger fits allowing the right side of the camera to be supported with minimal effort and maximum security.

Conclusion The G6 is a good small full featured camera which has been underappreciated by the marketplace. The ergonomic improvements suggested by my mockup could, if implemented by Panasonic make the G7 the best small ILC on the market.

"Classic and Authentic" or "Ergonomic"

Classic and authentic Church Point scene made with ergonomic Panasonic G6 camera 

 

An interesting piece by Sam Byford appeared in The Verge (www.theverge.com) on 8 May this year, titled " The beautiful blueprints for Fujifilm's camera of the future". In this Mr Byford quotes Masazumi Imai and other Fujifilm designers explaining some aspects of the process by which Fuji came to the X-T1 design.


Some of these quotes were of great interest to me as a student of camera ergonomics.

Quote 1. ....."To this end, the X-T1 features a more substantial grip than any X camera to date, but it’s not oversized and doesn’t break the compact lines of the body too much. Imai showed me some early prototype sketches for the X-T1 that looked similar to regular DSLRs, with ergonomic, bulbous grips that would have made the camera an even greater departure from Fujifilm’s X-series lineage.


"Our X design is classic and authentic," says Imai. "I could have chosen an ergonomic style but our X design is completely different. It’s flat and straight and based on ‘good-old-days’ camera style." In particular, Fujifilm’s own Fujica ST901 from 1974 served as inspiration for Imai. "Late ’70s to ’80s SLRs were very cool to me," he recalls. "The ST901 was very small with a very characteristic finder, so this was very close to the X-T1 concept. Very simple, not so ergonomic — this was the basic inspiration."
My thoughts: I used cameras very similar to the ST901 for many years through the mid part of the 20th Century. In fact I have in my camera drawer right now a Pentax Spotmatic which looks almost identical to the ST901 except for the maker's logo. The Spotmatic and many film SLRs of the day were indeed quite small (but heavy) and they were indeed "not so ergonomic". In fact compared to my current camera of choice the Panasonic GH3/4 they were buggers of things to hold and operate. In those days we managed. We had no choice. But now we do have a choice. For goodness sake why on earth would anyone want to return to the ergonomic travails of the (not so) good old days ?

For the dubious merit of partial adherence to a style of yesteryear ? Seriously ?

Quote 2. ...."One area where Fujifilm didn’t budge is the classic, dial-heavy control scheme, which the company believes is a more efficient and enjoyable way to shoot than the abstracted, context-sensitive wheels used by nearly all its competitors. Imai traces the shift back to Minolta’s 1985 Alpha 7000 camera, the first to use autofocus and automatic film advance, and the designers compare this movement to the rise of automatic transmission in cars. "The X series is a new combination, the dials and digital," says Imai. "At first, film cameras with dials were common, then it changed to PASM with automatic cameras. Next came digital cameras with PASM that were also automatic. But now, we should be coming back to the standard."

My thoughts:

First: the "classic" control scheme was not dial-heavy at all. There is only one dial, for shutter speed, on top of the classic film SLR. There are rings for aperture and focus on the lens. And that's yer lot.

Second: Fuji designers can "believe" what they like but believing something does not make it so. They can believe that a "dial heavy" control scheme is a "more efficient and enjoyable way to shoot than the....context sensitive wheels.... of competitors". But I have done and anybody with a little time can repeat for him or her self a series of time and motion studies demonstrating that the modern, (Main dial+Control dial) user interface requires fewer, less complex actions to operate the camera than the hybrid, Dials+Digital system used by the X-T1.

There seems to be an idea here that a camera with a PASM dial is "automatic" and this for some reason is a bad thing. In truth the user of a camera with a Main Mode Dial gets to choose. It can run in fully auto mode or fully manual mode. You get the best of both worlds.

Quote 3. " The viewfinder is another prominent area where the X-T1 takes influence from SLRs — it’s housed in a hump in the middle of the body, directly above the lens. This is how Fujifilm was able to achieve the X-T1’s headline feature — the huge electronic viewfinder that displays a larger image than full-frame DSLRs. The X-T1 isn’t the first mirrorless camera to house an EVF inside a facsimile of an SLR prism hump, a look I’ve always thought came across as a little inauthentic and dishonest to the digital reality of these products".


My thoughts: Is the hump "inauthentic" and "dishonest" or not ? If so how come they used it on the X-T1 ? If the Fuji people have been quoted correctly they just seem confused about this and in any case far too concerned with the ephemeral issue of "authenticity", whatever that means.

Quote 4.... " These are cameras designed to be used manually by people who know what each physical control is for; there are no automatic sports or portrait modes as found on almost all competing models. "Nowadays we don't need special technique, the camera does everything," says Iida. "We think we should go back to basics. The photographer can control the camera, the camera doesn't control the photographer."
My thoughts: This is disingenuous nonsense. The photographer can fully control a well designed camera with modern Mode Dial+Control Dial user interface and do so with greater efficiency than the hybrid, old style interface.

Quote 5. ..."Not everyone will prefer Fujifilm’s approach, and the X-T1’s design choices have sparked disagreement even among those who do. The team agonized over countless minor decisions that all add up, and it’s impossible to satisfy everyone. "Basically we asked a lot of professional photographers," says Iida, "and if we asked a hundred people, we’d probably get a hundred different answers." The engineers decided to put a lock on the ISO dial because they thought it would be less frequently used, but they stiffened the exposure-compensation dial after feedback that it was too loose on the X100 and X-Pro1. "Maybe in the future we can provide some kind of a service where the customer can come to our support center and we can customize that sort of thing," says Iida. "Because there is no perfect answer."
My thoughts: Of course, if you ask a hundred people you get a hundred different answers. That is because a person's likes and preferences at any point in time are idiosyncratic, transient and often poorly formulated. So the camera designer has to do the hard work of design and figure out, regardless of all those confusing, competing and contradictory likes and preferences, exactly what design will allow the operator to drive the camera in the most efficient fashion. This can be worked out by identifying what tasks must be performed in each phase of camera use and what actions must take place to carry out those tasks.

On the subject of customising cameras, I simply note that other makers such as Panasonic, enable extensive customisation of their current cameras without the customer having to attend a "support center".

Summary These revealing quotes from Fuji designers show they are deliberately preferencing style over ergonomics. The particular style they have selected derives from classic film SLRs of the 1960's to 1980's.

Why ? They say ...." It's flat and straight and based on 'good old days' camera style."

What is thought to be so appealing about this particular "style" ? They don't say. No argument of substance is provided to support the proposition.

They state "....But now we should (my emphasis) be coming back to the standard" by which presumably they mean the "good old days" style referred to above. Why should we be doing this ? No case is presented.

My careful observations of the process of camera operation indicate that

a) Cameras with a properly designed anatomical handle are easier to hold and operate and

b) The new type user interface using a Main Mode (PASM) dial and Control Dial(s) allows more efficient operation and more options for automatic or manual operation plus the ability to have pre programmed Custom Modes.

Conclusion Fuji has been making some interesting products recently. Some of them have qualities which suggest that someone at Fuji mission central is trying to make cameras which expert/enthusiast photographers might want to buy and use.

But I believe that in preferencing style over ergonomics they are heading in the wrong direction. I think they will do their customers a very big favour by placing good ergonomics at the top of the design priority list. The resulting product will probably end up looking like some other modern cameras.

So what ? The dearly beloved ST901 which is referenced as the inspiration for the current X-T1 had exactly the same appearance and operation as dozens of extremely similar film SLRs from many makers in a former era. They were that shape and they worked that way because the requirements of film transport and manufacturing limitations meant there were few realistic options.

Now manufacturers do have options. They do not have to make cameras which look (a bit) like and operate (a bit) like a 1970s era film camera.

Buyers also have options. In the ILC category, most choose a Mode Dial+Control Dial model.

The X-T1 is not, in my view, a "camera of the future". I looks to me like a camera which can't decide what it is trying to be. It seems to want to be modern yet retro and has gotten itself stuck in the middle, neither fully one or the other.

If Fuji would stop messing around with half baked retro style ideas and start making "authentically" modern cameras, I might seriously consider the prospect of buying one.

Why Panasonic needs the G7, Part 2, The Mockup



On the left, the G7 mockup, made of plywood. This is slightly smaller in all dimensions than the G6 on the right. But the shape is designed to "fill the box" more with higher shoulders and a taller handle with inverted L shape providing a much larger top plate for the quad control group of UIMs. The mockup is more of a handful allowing a full five finger grip with the right hand.  You can see the [alt] button on the mockup just to the right of the bottom of the handle.    To the casual eye, these two cameras might look very similar but the mockup has a substantial ergonomic advantage.

Rear view. You can see that the monitor housing of the mockup is smaller horizontally so although the mockup is a few millimetres narrower, the control panel on the right side of the mockup is considerably larger. The right rear of the body is more softly curved, the buttons are well clear of the edge of the body, the control dial has moved to the front where it has more room, and a Jog lever has been added just to the right of the viewfinder. Even though the lens axis has moved to the left, the shape of the mockup provides space for a set and see dial on the left side of the hump.

 

 

Like many bloggers I have formed views about various matters photographic. In the case of camera ergonomics and the user experience , these views have evolved over 60 years of using many different types of camera and in the last four years from my camera mockups. The mockups in particular have taught me a great deal about those aspects of camera design which enhance the user experience and those which diminish it.

In the last post I put forward a consumer's case for Panasonic to retain the G series of cameras.

In this post I present a mockup illustrating the form which the G7 could take.

I believe that one reason the G5 and G6 have not sold as well as Panasonic hoped has been a lack of assertive marketing .

But there is another reason. The G6 is a nice camera but it doesn't really make a strong case for the MILC in the way that the GH4 does. There is a lack of "Wow !" factor.

The G7 needs to step up several levels in order to make a persuasive case to would be buyers. it needs to improve specifications, picture quality, performance, ergonomics and the user experience.


My contribution in the form of the mockup described here is about ergonomics and the user experience.

In what way could the G6 ergonomics be improved ?

The G5/6 are a great improvement over previous G models such that I rate them as quite good ergonomically. The size is just right for a small fully featured MILC and the hump top form with EVF, flash and hotshoe on the lens axis has some advantages over the flat top shape. There is a decent handle on which the right hand can get a grip.

But there are some grumbles which I have noted and users have reported on forums. Those of which I am aware include:

* The Disp and Fn4 buttons are often pressed inadvertently. Fn4 is too close to the edge of the body. Disp is right under the lie of the thumb.

* Playback and Disp which operate in Review and/or Prepare Phase are located in a higher priority (more easily reached by the thumb) position on the control panel than Fn3 and Fn4 buttons which could be used for Capture Phase adjustments.

* The rear dial is located far over to the right side and is not as easy to operate as that on, say the GH3/4.

* The toggle lever behind the shutter button is (a) too easy to activate inadvertently and (b) has been allocated a very limited number of functions. If this was a mode dependent front dial it could be much more useful.

* Neither the iA button or the Video button allow user assignable function.

* The matte black finish picks up dirt and face makeup very easily. The rubberised finish on the lens side of the handle is easily scuffed by the fingertips.

 

You can see that although the mockup is a few millimetres smaller than the G6 it provides much more space on the top deck. This allows for a more natural position to be adopted by the right index finger on the shutter button and reduces crowding even though there are more UIM's on top of the mockup.  The quad control layout of shutter button, front dial and two buttons (1 and 2) allows the user to drive the camera with just one finger most of the time.

 

In designing the mockup some of the matters which I considered are described below:

* Monitor/control panel ratio on the camera back. G cameras have a fully articulated monitor, which is the most versatile type and should be retained. But the monitor is 91mm wide, forcing the control panel (the area on the right side of the back which houses the cursor and other buttons) into the remaining 28mm on the right side. Only 55mm (in 4:3 aspect ratio) of that 91mm is actually occupied by the review image. Other cameras manage a higher image: housing ratio. So the horizontal dimension of the monitor could be reduced without substantial deficit. This frees up space for the control panel. This in turn allows buttons to be moved away from the right side and a more curved, hand friendly shape to be built into the rear part of the handle.

* Even with the change described above, when I got into building the mockup I discovered that there is still not enough space for an easily operated rear dial. I tried various arrangements but none of them worked well with a rear dial. However the redesigned handle described below provides plenty of space for a front dial.

* Still on the back of the camera, I have given the G7 mockup a JOG lever. One of the great benefits of the MILC is its ability to place the active AF area almost anywhere on the frame. But to maximise this benefit there has to be a way to move that area quickly and efficiently while continuing to look through the viewfinder. Many MILCs and DSLRs use the cursor (4 way) buttons for this. That works but requires the right hand grip to be released in order to allow the thumb to drop 50mm down from its rest position in order to operate the 4 way buttons. One solution to this problem is the JOG lever which I have located just to the right of the viewfinder where it can be easily reached by the thumb without having to shift grip with the right hand. The JOG lever has a very textured surface so it can be pushed up/down, left/right with the thumb to instantly move the AF area.

* I have spent much time and many trial mockups on handle design. The one shown in the mockup has the following features:
* Raised height. This allows an adult male with average or even slightly above average hand size to get a full five finger grip with the right hand. That is a substantial achievement on such a small camera.
* The inverted L shape creates
* The opportunity to locate the shutter button where the index finger wants to find it. This is somewhat further to the left (as viewed by the user) than is the case on the G6 and many other cameras.
* A notch beneath the overhanging part of the inverted L which fits the middle finger nicely and allows the right hand to support th camera's weight without strain.
* A platform on top of the handle which allows placement of the Quad Control set. This consists of the shutter button located forward in the most relaxed position for the index finger, the front dial 12mm behind the center of the shutter button, and buttons 1 and 2 both with user assignable function. This is a highly efficient way to gain control of primary and secondary exposure and focus parameters with just the right index finger.
* There is a balance of set and see dials with fixed functions, and buttons with user assignable functions allowing the camera to be configured to individual preference, or simply left in Auto mode for snapshooters.

* On the front, easily accessible to the tip of the right 5th finger is an [Alt] button. This is a way to achieve two dial function with just one dial. Pressing the [Alt] button+ Front Dial causes the dial to perform a second, user allocated function. Or it could evoke an alternate function from button 1 or 2.

Overall the mockup is extremely comfortable to hold. It provides simple operation for the novice and highly configurable, controllable operation for the expert. All the buttons are larger than those on the G6 so they are easiler to find by feel, but none is placed where it wil be bumped inadvertently.

Styling All my mockups are designed to feel good and operate really well. So all the components and user interface modules are located where my fingers tell me to put them. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.


　

Why Panasonic needs the G7, Part 1, Concept

On the right, current model G6. On the left, mockup of proposed successor, the G7

 

In decline I keep reading reports of declining sales across all categories of camera. One has the feeling that some manufacturers are going to fail. In the face of this most of them are churning out ever more models presumably hoping that one or some of them will be the money spinner which allows them to survive while others fail.

Panasonic started the mirrorless interchangeable lens initiative with the G1 in 2008. The G1 looked and mostly worked like a little DSLR. Since then the G series has delivered the G2 which was much like the G1, then the G3 which was an ergonomic backward step with a top/rear shutter button position and only a mini handle. There was no G4 apparently for superstitious reasons to do with the number 4. (but there is now a GH4, so much for superstition). The G5 which was announced in July 2012 had a much improved user interface with good handling.

G5 marketing ? I can't speak for other countries but in Australia Panasonic did not market the G5 in any way which I could detect. I found it difficult to find one so I could buy it. No surprise that it did not sell very well. When I look through the current catalogue of Australian vendors I see G5's are still being offered for sale.

G6, coming ready or not Without clearing stocks of the G5 Panasonic released the G6 in April 2013. The G6 is a makeover of the G5 with enough improvements to make it attractive to G5 owners wanting to upgrade. Assuming there were enough G5 owners to make this a viable proposition, which apparently is not the case. In fact the G6 is a very nice camera in the mini DSLR style. It is enjoyable to use and it makes very good pictures.

G6 in hand

Now I read rumors that there will be no G7 this year. With unsold stocks of G5's and G6's that is not surprising. Panasonic is trying to turn around it's overall financial position, apparently with some success, so I guess underperforming lines and products will not be tolerated by head office.

The 43 Rumors website recently polled readers about their wishes, with the question "what camera line should Panasonic keep and what not"? Most support has been declared for the GH line followed by the GX, GM, G and GF, in that order.

If Panasonic (or any other maker) is to survive in the camera business I believe they need to establish a core line of models and stick to it, with incremental updates. Non core models can come and go. Consider the automobile business and Toyota in particular. Their core passenger car models are the Corolla, in the small car category (well, actually it's not all that small these days, they got size creep) and the Camry in the medium car category. Motoring writers love to hate these vehicles but they sell very well because they provide what the customers want and expect in a reliable passenger car. I think that Panasonic, and by the way Sony, Fuji and Olympus need to consolidate their product lines into a small set of core models which reliably and consistently meet the needs of most photographers.

My work on camera ergonomics leads me to the view that within the genre of mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras a well designed humptop type provides the best ergonomics and best user experience. This is a proper camera with an inbuilt EVF, anatomical handle, forward shutter button, fully articulated monitor, built in flash and a full set of hard controls suitable for the expert/enthusiast user. The control system is of the modern Mode Dial and Control Dial type. Novices can be very happy using the Auto Mode and have the opportunity to graduate to the expert modes as their skills increase.

GH series Every camera makers needs a flagship, or hero line of models. These are the cameras with the highest possible picture quality and performance, able to tackle almost any photographic assignment. The GH3 comes close to hero status. From all current reports, it appears the GH4 has what it takes with a combined level of still and video imaging capability never before seen in a single consumer product. So Panasonic has it's flagship.

G7 Mockup in hand

G series I have briefly described the G series story above. In the CanoNikon world very few buyers opt for the hero camera. Most buy an entry or upper entry level model. That is CanoNikon's bread and butter. Panasonic needs an entry/upper entry model for the same reason. If the product development people at Panasonic are really smart they will offer just one such model (to contain R&D costs) and make it fully featured so novices can use it with no trouble on Auto Mode, while more experienced users can customise their camera in the expert modes. A fully evolved G7 can be that model.

GF series Until quite recently and I suspect even now at Canon and Nikon, MILC's were regarded as a kind of half way stage between a compact and a Real Camera which some people still think is a DSLR. I never believed this and have long been of the view that the only way forward for MILC's is to compete head on with DSLR's and beat them at their own game. It has always seemed to me that the "half way" camera is really a "half baked" one ultimately serving no user group particularly well. So I would not shed a tear if Panasonic dropped the GF series.

GM series (assuming the GM1 is the start of a series) I see this as a demonstration project showing just how much photo capturing technology can be stuffed into an amazingly small package. Sony has also been on this trip recently in various guises. I think when buyers get over the "OMG look how small it is" initial response they will come to discover that it is burdened by many holding, viewing and operating compromises forced by that very smallness.

In brief I think the GM is a techno-frolic and buyers will get over the novelty.

GX series This is a bit more complex as Panasonic changed the GX series concept in mid stream. The GX1 appeared towards the end of 2011. It was initially well received but it has no built in viewfinder, a deficiency which limits it's long term appeal. Panasonic kept the GX name but changed everything else with the GX7 of 2013. This camera does have a built in EVF. But the retro styling places the shutter button in the suboptimal top/rear position on the body and forces use of a mini handle which does not provide a secure grip on the camera. In addition the thumb support is vestigial. In consequence the camera is not particularly comfortable or secure to hold. In Australia Panasonic marketed the GX7 with some of the vigour which was so notably lacking in the (non existent) campaign to sell the G5 and G6.

In brief I think the GX7 is a niche model enjoying some success right now on a little wave of retro enthusiasm. But I do not see it as the core small/entry/upper entry fully featured Panasonic MILC.

So, I think the way ahead lies with continuation of the G series in the form of the G7. I have some explicit ideas about the shape which this camera might take and will present these in the next post.

Panasonic 100-300mm lens reappraisal, Part 2, Optics and Techniques

100-300mm lens on GH3, 300mm, f8, 1/500 sec, E-Shutter, sturdy tripod, cable release, no wind. The yachts are about 300meters from the camera. You can see the posts marked C and D. Just above the C and D is some writing. In the original converted RAW file at 200% on screen I can just read "Welcome to the Alfreds"   This picture has been reduced and compressed for the internet so you won't be able to make out the writing. I chose this subject as a test as it presents the lens with a mass of detail which has been rendered rather well.

 

Sample variation ? I did not have my original copy of the lens available but my distinct impression is that the second copy is better optically at all focal lengths. My experience across all brands is that sample variation is a fact of life particularly but by no means exclusively at the budget end of the price spectrum. The 100-300mm is remarkably inexpensive for a superzoom so I guess sample variation is not surprising.

The short and the long of it Using the lens toward the long end requires a more demanding technique from that which works well at the short end.

Challenges at the long end I recently tested and reviewed in this blog the Panasonic FZ200 which has the same angle of view at the long end as the 100-300mm on M43. Both kits present similar challenges at the long end making sharp pictures more difficult to achieve than they are at the short end. The problem is that everything is working against sharpness as the lens is zoomed out and subject distances increase. The main issues appear to be:

* Even with impeccable technique in ideal conditions and absolutely no camera shake at all,
a) The lens has somewhat lower resolution and contrast at the long end.
b) Optimum resolution is achieved at f8 whereas at the short end peak performance comes in at about f4.5.
* The effect of camera shake is greatly magnified at the long end and

* OIS is not able to counteract the effects of fast jitter typically produced when hand holding or even on a less than sturdy tripod. Panasonic OIS works well to stabilise the appearance of the preview image in the EVF mainly due to it's ability to compensate for relatively slow camera/lens movements.

* Atmospheric haze and heat distortion are significant detractors from image clarity as distance from the camera increases.

* Autofocus is a little less confident at the long end but simultaneously greater AF precision is required due to the small depth of field at long focal lengths.

* My tests show that the standard rule for minimum safe hand held shutter speed is too slow by about one EV step at maximum zoom. So the rule would indicate that a hand held shutter speed of 1/600 sec should be safe but I find that reliable sharpness hand held requires a shutter speed of 1/1250 or faster. Even at 1/1000 sharpness is not consistent at the long end. With slower shutter speeds I will get an occasional sharp frame but lots of unsharp ones.

Same subject as the photo below, different day and slightly different camera position. 100-300mm at 300mm, 1/500 sec, f8, cable release, E-Shutter, sturdy tripod. Sharp, clear, no artefacts.

100-300 at 300mm. Handheld, 1/1000 sec at f5.6, E-Shutter. Look at the top row of windows. The frames appear to be bent. This is one of the E-Shutter artefacts referred to in the text.

 

Optical performance

Resolution and contrast are excellent to outstanding at the short end. I rate the 100-300mm at 100mm as equal to the 35-100mm f2.8 with both at f4. It really is a top performer at this focal length right from maximum aperture.

In the middle of the focal length range, 150-200mm, it is excellent. On my tests the 100-300mm has better resolution than either the 45-150mm or 14-140mm at 140mm. Again there is little to be gained from stopping down apart from reduced corner shading.

Towards the 300mm long end resolution and contrast drop a little from excellent to very good. There is a definite improvement as the aperture is stopped down from f5.6 to f8. I found no benefit to further reduction in the lens aperture in fact on several of my test sequences resolution fell slightly at apertures in the f9-f10 range.

Corner shading is obvious at wide apertures, becoming less so as the aperture is decreased.

Flare is generally well controlled especially if the lens hood is ued which I recommend at all times. Veiling flare becomes evident if the lens is pointed directly into the sun or sunlight reflected off water. However shadow details are quite well preserved and can be revealed in Camera Raw.

Chromatic aberration and Purple fringing CA is corrected in Panasonic cameras so is not usually an issue. However small amounts of both CA and PF can appear at bright, high contrast edges. They are easily corrected in Camera Raw.

Distortion is minimal at al focal lengths.

Centering My copy appears to be well centered with no significant asymmetric unsharpness at any focal length as long as no pressure is applied to the inner barrel.

Bokeh is generally smooth although at some focal length/focus distance combinations I did see some tendency to a jittery appearance in out of focus backgrounds.

Artefacts with E-Shutter The following phenomena are mostly seen at maximum zoom. If the E-shutter is used handheld some curious artefacts can appear in the image. One type I have seen at low shutter speeds is horizontal bands of blurring across the image (landscape orientation). Another, seen at higher shutter speeds is a horizontal band in which vertical subject elements are distorted in wavy fashion. I attribute both these artefacts to camera/lens movement occuring while the E-Shutter is scanning a strip of pixels. It takes 0.1 seconds to scan the whole frame which is a long time in relationship to the shutter speeds required for hand holding a long lens.

The houses in this photo are 1.4 kilometres from the camera. Some afternoon haze present. 100-300mm lens at 300mm. Sturdy tripod, 1/500 sec, f8, E-Shutter, cable release. As usual there are details in the original which will not survive the passage to internet publication.

How to get sharp pictures at the long end

Hand held Key message: Fast shutter speed, careful technique.
Settings: Mechanical shutter, speed 1/1250 or faster, let the ISO come up to allow f8. OIS on (IBIS if Olympus).
Technique: Auto focus very carefully on a clearly defined part of the subject, make sure there is nothing in front of, behind or near the desired focus point to cause misfocus. I find that AF is more reliable than MF on the GH3, but even on a camera with peaking, hand held MF will be difficult as the enlarged image is jumping about so much. Do your relaxation exercises before shooting. Consciously relax the arms and hands. Adopt a comfortable posture. Breath in then out and at the point of full exhalation gently squeeze the shutter button.
Tripod mounted Key message: Keep the camera/lens absolutely still during the exposure.
Equipment: Use a sturdy tripod. My experiments with a lightweight tripod showed it is not stable enough. Wind will cause havoc even with a solid tripod. Use the aftermarket Collar/mount for portrait orientation. Trigger the shutter with a cable release or smart phone. If you use timer delay I suggest 10 seconds. The preview image appears stable on the monitor after 2 seconds but my results with 2 second timer have been inconsistent so I think there is still some residual vibration happening there which is not problematic at shorter focal lengths.
Settings: E-Shutter on, unless the exposure time is longer than 1 second in which case use shutter delay of at least 2 seconds (Panasonic) or antishock (Olympus). OIS/IBIS off.
Technique: For distant subjects choose a clear cool calm day or time of day with low air pollution.

100-300mm at 300mm, sun shining directly at the lens and sunlight reflected off the water also shining directly into the lens. this produced moderate veiling flare which was easily managed by juggling the sliders in Camera Raw. This photo also shows the character of the bokeh at f8.  I focussed on the front yacht.

Summary My original, very likely inadequate, evaluation of the Panasonic 100-300mm lens was that it was quite good at the short end and a bit soft at the long end.

My re evaluation reveals a much better lens which is really excellent at the short end and very good at the long end. The second copy may have been better than the first but I believe the main reason for the different result second time round is that I used more careful technique. The lens represents outstanding value for money and is one of the reasons for the M43 system's appeal.

My wish list for the Mk2 version I think the basic concept, focal length and aperture range are just fine. Some contributors to user forums have wished for a wider aperture and/or longer focal length. But those things would make the lens larger, heavier, more expensive and therefore less appealing to most users. So my wish list is:

* Same focal length and aperture range. Of course if the designers came up with a way to make the lens more compact that would be a bonus.

* A built in rotating tripod collar standard with every lens.

* Faster burst rate in continuous shooting. I think this will become a more pressing issue when users start mounting the 100-300mm on their GH4's. There are already reports that the advertised frame rate is not achievable with this lens.

* Some improvement in resolution/contrast at the long end would be welcome.

* Some improvement in zoom smoothness would be nice also.

* As a user I would prefer a lens with internal zooming like the 35-100mm f2.8. I would opt for this even if it meant the lens were slightly longer in the camera bag. A lens with internal zoom is easier to work with both on the tripod and hand held and is not subject to mechanical decentering by external force.



　

　

　

Panasonic 100-300mm lens reappraisal, Part 1, specifications and operation

100-300mm at 300mm, hand held shot by the roadside. 1/500sec at f5.6. Sharpness is adequate for this type of shot  even though the shutter speed is quite slow for this lens.

 

Panasonic's first and the world's first electronic mirrorless interchangeable lens camera the G1 was introduced in 2008. Two years later the 100-300mm tele zoom arrived. This gives the M43 system a full range of zooms from the ultrawide 7-14mm to the super tele 100-300mm.

Review history I bought a 100-300mm three years ago, used it for over a year then sold it. I had become dissatisfied with pictures taken at the long end of the zoom range, many of which were not sharp. Several reports on user forums confirmed my own experience, namely that the lens was sharp at the short end but soft at the long end. Then I read some more reports suggesting the problems at the long end might be more about operator technique than outright optical capability.

So I bought another one and carried out a more comprehensive set of tests than I had done previously.

Picture courtesy of camerasize.com  Sometimes the picture tells the story. On the left Canon EF 200-400 f4 [with inbuilt 1.4xconverter] on 5D3. On the right 100-300mm on GH3. Same angle of view range, same aperture range.

Specifications The 100-300mm f4-5.6 OIS lens [H-FS100300] is compatible with the Micro Four Thirds format and works on both Panasonic and Olympus M43 cameras. With 67mm UV filter, front and rear lens caps fitted it is 145mm long. With the supplied lens hood reverse bayonet mounted the diameter is 88mm. These are the dimensions you need to fit into a camera bag. Mass with UV filter, front and rear caps and hood is 605 grams. The lens comes boxed with a soft pouch and operating instructions.

On the outer barrel are a focus ring towards the front and a wide zoom ring in the mid section. At the rear is an OIS on/off switch. There are no other user interface modules on the lens.

No tripod collar/mount comes with the lens and none is available from Panasonic.

Panasonic does not reveal in it's literature whether the lens is parfocal (stays in focus when zoomed) or varifocal (has to be refocussed after zooming). On my informal testing it appears to stay in focus on the monitor when zoomed however at the long end focus accuracy is very critical to sharpness so I always refocus after zooming. The lens is not weather sealed.

Closest focus distance is 1420 mm at the short end and 1485 mm at the long end. This enables one to zoom in on small subjects like little birds from a not-too-threatening distance,

The lens mount is metal as you would expect.

Diagonal angle of view is 12 degrees at the short end and 4.1 degrees at the long end. This is the same as a 200-600mm lens on a full frame (sensor 24x36mm, 43mm diagonal) camera.

GH3 with 100-300mm on Roesch tripod collar.

Comparison with full frame You can see in the photograph that although the 100-300mm is the largest lens in the M43 system it is dramatically smaller than its full frame equivalent. The closest full frame lens I could find for comparison is the Canon EF 200-400mm f4 [With inbuilt 1.4x converter] This gives effectively a 200mm f4 to 560mm f5.6 range which is a little short of the Panasonic lens but close. You can see them side by side in the photograph. The Canon lens is 3x as long, 7x as heavy and ...........19x as expensive. It had better be good.

Mechanical properties As the lens zooms the inner barrel extends by up to 57mm. Zoom action is a little uneven and slightly stiff although I notice this is improving with use. Autofocus is quick and accurate on the GH3, although AF is a little slower at the long end. OIS effectively holds the EVF preview steady for composition. I did not systematically test it's effectiveness at producing sharp pictures but see my comments about this in the next post.

Follow focus on moving subjects is effective on the GH3, using AF Continuous (not focus tracking), 1 Area center focus point and Burst Mode M which provides AF and live view on each shot. I have noted that with any M43 camera which I have used the 100-300mm gives a lower frame rate than other tele zooms, including the 35-100mm, 45-150mm and 14-140mm. In addition the shutter sound has a different cadence when the 100-300mm is used. I have no idea why this might be so. I have read that the aperture mechanism on the 100-300mm is slow but the frame rate is still slow even at maximum aperture. So, it's a mystery.

On the GH3 or G6 unsharpness due to shutter shock is readily produced with the mechanical shutter especially at the long end. For this reason I recommend use of the E-Shutter and a sturdy tripod for speeds slower than about 1/400 second.

I found when using the lens at the long end that it is very important to keep my fingers or any other source of pressure off the inner barrel. Pressure on the inner barrel deflects it out of proper alignment leading to softness along one edge of the frame. This could be a significant issue when handholding or with the lens placed on a bean bag or similar soft support.

After market tripod collar/mount Rudolf Rosch (with an umlaut on the o) in Germany, contact at info@roesch-feinmechanik.de makes a very nice aftermarket tripod collar/mount. It is beautifully made to very close tolerances and fits on the lens nicely. I paid E75 delivered to Australia. Payment is by PayPal. I think the 100-300mm really does need a tripod collar/mount as the body/lens combination is rather unbalanced on tripod using the camera tripod socket. On the GH3 this is 19mm from the front edge of the camera base but on the G6 the center of the tripod socket is only 10mm from the front, placing a lot of strain on the socket.

Although the Rosch product is as well engineered as you could wish there are still problems resulting from the fact that it is aftermarket and not incorporated into the original design. When handholding it impedes the left hand's grip on the lens and the ability to rotate the zoom ring. If you try to deal with this by rotating the collar, it bumps into either the handle or flash housing. So for hand held use, I leave it off.

The collar is at its most useful when shooting in portrait orientation. If the camera is mounted to the tripod via the tripod socket then flipped over for portrait orientation, substantial twisting force is applied to the camera base by the weight of the lens and the screw has to be tightened hard to counteract this. The aftermarket collar allows the camera and lens to be rotated while the collar and tripod mount stay in place, with all the weight balanced nicely over the top of the mounting point.

100-300mm on GH3 at 100mm, hand held, 1/1000 sec f4.5, OIS on. This picture has been reduced and compressed for the internet so some loss of original detail rendering will be inevitable. The houses are about 200 meters from the camera.  In the original file individual leaves on trees and blades of grass are rendered quite clearly. Apart from some explicit commercial, strategic or scientific purpose, I am not sure why anybody would want more information in a photograph. 

Next Post, optical performance