 |
| Classic and authentic Church Point scene made with ergonomic Panasonic G6 camera |
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.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar