By the turn of the century the modern [Mode Dial + Control Dial] control system had become dominant among interchangeable lens cameras [ILC], advanced compacts and superzooms.
But soon a little counter movement started to emerge.
The Panasonic LC1 of 2004 was an advanced fixed zoom lens camera which featured a return to retro in the control layout. There were three labelled rings on the lens; for zoom, manual focus and aperture each with an inscribed scale. There was a traditional shutter speed dial on the top plate to the right of the EVF housing.
Why did the product development team return to traditionally styled controls with the LC1 ? Of course I don’t know but this extract (below) from the promotional material at product launch in 2004 might give us some clues.
LAS VEGAS, Feb. 13 /PRNewswire/ -- Once again Panasonic revolutionizes the world of digital photography with the new DMC-LC1 Lumix camera. The DMC-LC1 has a digital brain but the heart and soul of a finely crafted 35mm camera, right down to its controls. A true breakthrough in digital camera craftsmanship, the 5-megapixel DMC-LC1 brings a traditional photographic experience to the digital world, evoking the look, feel, precision, and responsiveness of a 35mm camera. Zoom, focus and aperture are manually controlled by ring settings on the lens; shutter speed is controlled by a dial located on the top of the unit.
This appears to speak to the user who for whatever reason, hankers for the idea of a“traditional photographic experience”. It is not clear from the promotional material precisely why some users might feel this way, nor indeed what exactly might constitute this traditional experience. It seems to me there is some kind of inference here that the modern controls [Mode Dial+Control Dial] are thought by someone to be in some way inferior or less precise or less responsive, or less something than traditional controls.
So was the LC1 a huge success ? Apparently not, as no LC2 ever appeared.
But the L1, a four thirds sensor DSLR appeared in 2006, also featuring traditional style controls.
Again, there was no L2 suggesting the L1 did not fare well in the marketplace.
It was followed by the L10, another 4/3 DSLR this time with modern controls. But by this stage it was clear that the 4/3 format DSLR was doomed. Panasonic abandoned 4/3 in favour of the new Micro 4/3 line which began with the G1 of 2008. This had modern controls as have all subsequent G and GH models.
In more recent years Fuji has joined the retro movement. The X100 of 2010 has rings for manual focus and aperture on the lens plus dials for shutter speed and exposure compensation on top.
The X-T1 of 2014 takes the theme even further with dials for sensitivity (ISO) shutter speed and exposure compensation on the top plate. There are rings for aperture and zoom on most lenses.
Now we come to the LX100 In the promotional material some of which is reproduced below we see reference to the same kinds of sentiments as those which accompanied the release of the LC1.
Please describe your experience in developing the new model.
Hironori Katsuura
The LX Series, which was developed in 2005, has maximized the potential of our lens and digital technologies. The LX7 is a compact camera with an F1.4 large-diameter lens, that was highly praised by our customers. From there, addressing the need for a large-scale sensor was our first challenge.
Another task was how to add to the fun that users have when shooting. We got the first hint of this from the LC1 that we released in 2004. This camera, which had an aperture ring and shutter speed dial, is still in use by some of our customers. We began developing the new model by inheriting the DNA of the LC1.
Yumi Minamino
As the LX100 model number suggests, it's the highest model of the LX Series. It's a completely new type of camera that also incorporates the best features of the LC1. Kind of a dual concept.
What type of customer do you see using it?
Yumi Minamino
In addition to people who like photography as a hobby, we've come to recognize a segment that really appreciates the mechanics of a quality camera. The camera offers this user both visual and tactile excitement. So, one of our goals was to create a sort of "tool" that goes beyond the ordinary camera form.
And some more extracts from the same material:
Why did you decided on analog-like operation?
Yumi Minamino
The allure of the LX100 is how it renders images with the 4/3-inch sensor and F1.7 large-diameter lens. In order to create a tool that maximized this attraction, we went with analog-like operation.
To create highly original images, we think it's better to control the camera manually instead of using automatic functions. It brings more personal enjoyment to the shooting experience itself.
Hironori Katsuura
The aperture and shutter speed are the most basic parameters for setting the exposure. The LC1 gave users free control of these factors, which was highly acclaimed.
In the LX100, we concentrated on the exposure and focus by adding features like an aperture ring, shutter speed dial, exposure correction dial, control ring for MF operation, and viewfinder. We returned to the photographic basics to create a truly enjoyable
camera.
camera.
Adding a mode dial simplifies the access to scene modes and custom settings, which makes it more functional. But we think the feeling of being able to operate the camera yourself is what makes the LX100 so much fun to use.
This is an extreme example, but there's something enjoyable about physically turning rings and dials. Is it fun to hold? Is it fun to operate? The mechanical perspective is important. So we repeatedly asked user opinions and built these features into the LX100. It's something we hope people will experience for themselves with the LX100.
[End of quotes]
To sum up the designers’ statements about their latest baby it seems to me the consistent theme which comes through is their desire to make a camera which will ….”add to the fun that users have when shooting”…..
That sounds like a very good idea to me.
The issue with which I find myself struggling is the proposition that providing the camera with “traditional, analogue style controls” will achieve that laudable ambition.
Do the Panasonic designers think their many cameras with modern style controls are notenjoyable to use ?
I note in passing that pro zooms from Canon and Nikon do not have an aperture ring and pro bodies do not have a shutter speed dial. This gear uses a version of the modern control system, mostly without a mode dial, presumably because professional photographers have no need for some of the modes which usually appear on such dials.
There are also some statements the meaning of which is quite unclear to me. For instance they say “we think it is better to control the camera manually instead of using automatic functions”, as if a modern camera using the [Mode Dial + Control Dial] interface did not allow the user to “control the camera manually”.
The designers say they ….“repeatedly asked user opinions”… …. To this I would make three comments:
1. Which users were polled ? I have purchased and used many Panasonic cameras and lenses over the last few years and they have never sought my views. I look at Panasonic camera user forums and have never seen any solicitation from Panasonic for user feedback.
I have been commenting on the ergonomics of Panasonic cameras on this blog for several years without the slightest hint of response from the maker.
So the reader has no way of knowing which users were asked to offer their opinions, which questions were asked, what answers were given and what interaction occurred between the users and the questioners.
2. Those who would offer the world a new design of some equipment or a new political policy should in my view be thoughtful about the ways in which consumer feedback is used to design that new offering.
People’s likes, wants and preferences are idiosyncratic, transient and often poorly articulated. That which a person “likes” this week may be ancient history next week.
Maybe Panasonic’s research people are hearing a yearning from some users for a “back to basics” camera or something of the sort.
Modern cameras have become remarkably complex devices, bristling with menus, options, modes, functions and capabilities never even imagined in the old days.
I would not be the first person to wonder if all this complexity could be simplified at the user interface.
The problem is that the genie will not go back in the bottle. Once invented, features will not be un-invented.
If a manufacturer released a modern Pentax Spotmatic with a similarly spartan feature set and control layout, all six people who bought it would most likely be very disappointed as by modern standards it really is a most limited device.
Merely replacing the [Mode Dial+Control Dial] interface with the [Aperture Ring+Shutter Speed Dial+Exposure Compensation Dial] doesn’t simplify anything. Indeed as I discuss in a later post this interface brings its own complexities and confusions.
3. If the traditional [aperture ring/shutter speed dial and +/- dial] style of user interface is the answer, what was the question and who asked it ? I really cannot figure this out from the Panasonic promotional material.
Tradition vs Functionality Panasonic does appear to acknowledge that there is a loss of functionality in moving to the traditional controls: One of the quotes above is … “Adding a mode dial simplifies the access to scene modes and custom settings, which makes it more functional”
Has Panasonic deliberately offered its customers a camera which is “less functional” ? Why would they do that ?
Do they believe a camera can be “less functional” but also “more enjoyable” to use ?
What are they not saying ? I notice that most of the promotional language favouring the (hybrid) traditional user interface is couched in emotional language. …..”is it fun to hold ?”……..”is it fun to operate ?”……. and so forth.
They are not saying the traditional interface is more efficient.
They are not saying it is easier to use.
They are not saying it is faster to operate.
They are not saying that a well implemented modern style camera (like most of Panasonic’s recent offerings) is “not fun” to hold and operate.
In fact they are not offering or claiming any tangible benefits over the modern control system at all [such as it works faster or requires fewer, less complex actions or is easier to learn].
In the next post I will look at comments from reviewers and users about the LX100 user interface.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar