Canon EOS 60D Ergonomic Review

CAMERA ERGONOMICS

Ergonomic evaluation of the Canon EOS 60D

Not bad but not excellent

Author  AndrewS  June 2012

Introduction   For many years my cameras of choice were Pentax SLR's starting with the Spotmatic.  But Pentax was slow to embrace autofocus so in 1989 I switched to Canon EOS, starting with the 630.  That was followed by the 10, 50E, 1V  and 33V.  In the digital era, I have owned and used the 20D, 40D, 450D  and currently the 60D with a range of zoom lenses.

Photo 1

User level  Looking at it's price point, specifications and features I rate the 60D as a camera intended for use by photographers at  Level 4 (Expert/Controller, frequent use).  This is not an entry level/snapshooter camera.  Photo 1 shows the 60D basic hold.

Image Quality and Performance   This is an ergonomic review but I will make brief reference to the other two pillars of camera evaluation. Image quality has been exhaustively analysed elsewhere. Suffice to say it is good enough for almost any photographic project. Performance is also very good in all respects except autofocus accuracy. I find that particularly at the wide end of zoom lenses, AF is erratic, sometimes focussing incorrectly even in good light.  I have experienced this problem to some degree with every Canon EOS camera which I have owned.

Ergonomics   There are four phases of camera use, Setup, Prepare, Capture and Review.

Setup Phasemostly involves selection of menu options. The 60D menus are well laid out and easy to navigate. Submenu options never occupy more than one screen so scrolling down  in search of an option is not required. My Menu takes user allocated options for quick access. This is a much better arrangement than some other cameras which automatically shift recently used items to the My Menu screen. Compared to some other cameras, the 60D's menus are a model of clarity.

Prepare Phase  AF Mode, Drive Mode and Metering Mode are adjusted by the Press Button>Scroll Wheel>View LCD Panel method.   This gets the job done but Set and See Dials/Levers use fewer actions and can be set without having to switch the camera on. Other parameters are adjusted via the Q Menu. This also gets the job done but a more streamlined interface would be possible if each item in the Q Menu could be user set.

Capture Phase       The three main descriptors of ergonomics in this Phase are Holding, Viewing and Operating.

Holding  The 60D is a nice camera to hold. It is a good size for average adult human hands. It has a well shaped handle and thumb rest. It conforms to the hand much better than many smaller DSLR's and Compact System Cameras.

Viewing  Both the eye level viewfinder and the monitor screen are clear and bright, giving an excellent view of the subject. Camera status indicators are clearly visible in either viewing mode. The only downside of the viewing arrangements on this camera are those inherent in the DSLR concept, namely that eye level viewing and monitor (Live) viewing are separate user interfaces with a different AF system and different presentation of camera status data. This arrangement is not bad. However mirrorless (or Sony SLT) cameras offer a seamless segue from eye level to monitor viewing.

Operating  For the Level 4 photographer who wants to take control of camera functions in the Capture Phase, there is a substantial task list to be completed in a few seconds. The specific items on the list will vary somewhat with individual preference, but deliberative practice will typically include the following:

* Hold camera steady with both hands, without changing grip.

* View subject in the viewfinder without interruption, compose, zoom.

* Shift active AF area if required,  or center focus and recompose, or AE + AEL, or AF + AFL.

* Adjust Aperture in A Mode, or Shutter Speed in S Mode, or Program Shift in P mode, or Aperture + Shutter Speed in M Mode.

* Adjust ISO.

* Adjust Exposure Compensation if required.

* AF or MF > AE > Capture.

Let us analyse how the 60D goes about completing this task list.

The left hand is busy supporting the mass of the lens plus zooming and manual focussing if required.

The right thumb has to play an important part in gripping the camera but also has carriage of three Capture Phase tasks.

1. Start/lock AF with the AF-ON button. This button is just about perfectly placed on the 60D, making back button AF start/lock a smooth operation.  I would prefer the button to be slightly more prominent to make it easier to operate without having to flex the interphalangeal joint, but it works well enough as is.

2. Shift active AF area. This task is allocated to the 8 Way Controller. To engage with the 8 Way Controller the thumb has to drop down 50 mm from base hold position. In order to do this  the right hand has to release it's grip on the camera, forcing the left hand to take the full mass of the camera and disrupting the Capture Phase work flow.  It is also difficult to reliably hit the exact spot on the controller required to select intermediate AF sensor positions.

Photo 2

3. Exposure Compensation is allocated to the rear/lower scroll wheel, access to which requires the same actions as described above.

These arrangements for shifting active AF area and Exposure Compensation get the job done. Ergonomically the process is not bad but it could be upgraded to excellent with some minor changes to the user interface.

This camera has plenty of space for a JOG Lever, the optimum location for which is indicated by the white X in Photo 2.  The existing buttons would have to be slightly relocated.   The thumb has only to move 12 mm to the left, by side to side movement at the carpo metacarpal joint to engage with and operate the JOG Lever. This is the ideal user interface for shifting active AF point. The JOG Lever can also make itself useful for scrolling around items in Setup, Prepare and Review Phases of use.

Exposure Compensation can be moved up to the index finger's operational zone, as described below.

Photo 3

Now let us examine the role of the right index finger in Capture Phase.     On the 60D  the index finger operates the Shutter Release Button, the Mode Dependent Scroll Wheel and the ISO button.  The layout is shown in Photo 3.   But there are several ergonomic problems with this arrangement.

* The horizontal distance from the center of the Shutter Release Button to the center of the ISO button is 27 mm. This is a stretch too far for many people whose metacarpo phalangeal joint may have just average flexibility for side to side movement.

* ISO is a Primary Exposure Parameter, which should be easily adjustable in the Capture Phase of use. But the ISO button is in the middle of a row of identically shaped (apart from a tiny little nipple on the ISO button) and sized buttons, the other three of which are allocated to Prepare Phase actions.

Photo 4

* The consequence of these arrangements is that when using this camera I cannot reliably find  the ISO button by touch. My hands are 69 years old, like the rest of me, but they are in good working order, free from arthritis and degenerative disorders. If I can't do it, there will be plenty of other people in the same situation. As a result adjusting ISO goes back to being a Prepare Phase action, requiring the camera to be lowered from the eye and the ISO button located by sight. This is not the end of the world, it just means that the process of making photos has to be interrupted to change ISO. Ergonomically, it's not bad but not optimal either.

This camera has plenty of space to fit a much more efficient layout of User Interface Modules for use by the right index finger. One option is the Quad Module system which could be implemented in any of several different ways, but one which fits the projecting handle design of the 60D is shown in Photo 4.  This system allows the index finger to rapidly control the primary exposure parameters (Aperture, Shutter Speed, ISO), the secondary exposure parameter (Exposure Compensation), AF if desired, AE and Capture, all with minimal physical movement, without disrupting view or grip. There is a division of labour between the thumb and index finger with the  thumb having control of AF if desired and focus area position.

Photo 5

I like to use the sports car analogy when thinking about camera ergonomics. For optimum speed and accuracy of operation without the driver having to think about each separate action, the accelerator, brake and clutch pedals have to be at the same height and close to each other, but not too close.

The UIM's in Photo 4  are placed with a similar concept in mind. They are at the same height so the finger can move directly from one to the other and they are close, but not too close. I spent a lot of time relocating UIM's on mockups to arrive at the disposition shown here. The horizontal distance from the center of the Shutter Release Button to the center of either the ISO or EV Buttons is 21 mm, an easy reach for most people. These two buttons  have a different shape and feel so they are easily located by touch. In a working camera their functions should be user selectable from a wide range of options.  There are plenty of photographers who would want to use these buttons for different purposes.

Photo 5  shows another version of the Quad Module system on a Sony camera. In this case we see a good  idea poorly executed, with excessive distance between the Scroll Wheel and the other Modules which are also at a different height and in a different plane.

Photo 6

Photo 6  shows another version of the Quad Module system on a mockup with Parallel Handle,  with the UIM's laid out in a fashion which suits the handle design.

Summary  I have been using Canon's mid range SLR's and DSLR's for many years. Apart from chronic autofocus accuracy problems they have all functioned reasonably well. The thing which I am not seeing is evolving improvements to the user interface, in other words, ergonomics. There are changes, the monitors grow and acquire swivel. The buttons move around, mostly to allow the larger monitors. But the process of controlling the camera in Capture Mode has not improved.   In fact, in some respects such as the loss of the JOG lever, it has gone backwards.

If Canon revised the user interface of the 60D in the ways which I have suggested the experience of operating this camera could  improve from "Not Bad" to "Excellent". There would be no cost penalty. Good ergonomics costs no more than poor ergonomics. Poorly located UIM's cost just as much as well located ones.

The Curious Case of Samsung i-Function

CAMERA ERGONOMICS

The Curious Case of Samsung  i-Function

If  i-Function is the answer, what was the question ?

Author AndrewS  June 2012

Background   In January 2010, Samsung introduced the company's first compact system camera, the NX10.  I used the NX10, then a mild upgrade, the NX11,  for the next two years. It is a decent little camera with a user friendly human machine interface (HMI).  However the NX10/11 needed an upgrade to  image quality, performance and  EVF  to keep up with it's CSC competitors. Instead, it got Samsung i-Function.

What is it ?      i-Function is activated by pressing a button on the barrel of the lens.  This brings up a unique interactive window on the monitor or EVF.   This consists of a broad ribbon of data across the lower quarter of the frame, completely obscuring the standard  display of shutter speed, aperture and exposure compensation status beneath the image area.  The button may have to be pressed up to 5 times to scroll between functions available. When the desired function has been reached, adjustments are made by turning the focus ring on the lens. A half press on the shutter button confirms the setting and returns the camera to normal shooting mode.

What can it do ?   On the NX11, i-Fn can alter several Capture Phase parameters. These are the  primary exposure variables (ISO, Shutter Speed, Aperture) and  the secondary exposure variables Exposure Compensation and White Balance. Selection of Scene Modes, a Prepare Phase function, can also be allocated to i-Fn. 

Note that Samsung cameras with i-Function allow all these imaging parameters to be adjusted in traditional digital camera fashion, using the buttons on the top and rear of the body together with the mode dependent scroll wheel behind the shutter release button. On my NX11, i-Fn cannot be completely disabled although the ability to adjust ISO and White Balance by i-Fn can switched off  via the main menu.

Photo 1, Prepare Phase UIM's

User and reviewer response  Some users reported negative reactions to i-Fn, others said they really liked it. Several reviewers reported positively about i-Fn. I have not seen a published systematic ergonomic analysis of  i-Fn, so here it is.

Principles of Lens Based User Interface Modules (UIM)   Buttons and levers on the barrel of a lens are appropriate for Prepare Phase adjustments when the user is not taking photos. The camera can be held in one hand while the other hand operates buttons and levers on the lens barrel after locating them visually. Typical parameters for adjustment this way would  include Focus Limiter, AF/MF, Stabiliser O/I and Stabiliser Mode. Buttons and levers are difficult to locate by feel and become impossible to find when the camera is rotated to  portrait (vertical) orientation. Some users prefer underhand, others overhand grip on the lens.  Buttons which might be reasonably accessible with one of these grips become difficult to locate with the other.

Photo 2 Standard Data Display

If lens based adjustments are required in Capture Phase the UIM's  must be located by feel.  In this case,  circumferential collars or rings work best.   If these have an appropriately tactile surface profile, they  can be operated by the fingers of the left hand in landscape or portrait orientation, using "hand under" or "hand over" grip. Typical Capture Phase tasks allocated to lens based modules include manual focus and zoom.

Ergonomic analysis of one task, i-Fn versus Scroll Wheel

First, here is the sequence of actions required to adjust Aperture using the Scroll Wheel.  Neither the right or left hand is required to shift grip or move in any way during this brief action sequence.

1. Move the right index finger 13 mm back from the shutter  release button to engage with the Scroll Wheel.

2. Turn the Scroll Wheel while watching Aperture and Shutter Speed readouts in the data strip below the image.

Photo 3, i-Fn Data Display

3. Return index finger to shutter release button and press to capture.

Now here is the sequence required to adjust Aperture using i-Function.

1. Release the left hand from normal operating position, search by feel for the i-Fn button with the left thumb. Note  this button is much more difficult to find in Portrait orientation and requires an awkward position of the left hand.

2. Press the i-Fn button 1-5 times depending on the number of functions allocated to i-Fn and the order in which they appear on the information ribbon.

3. Move the left hand again (some lenses require more movement than others) until the focus ring is located by feel.

4. Move the focus ring while observing the readings on the data ribbon. Note that when changing any parameter by i-Fn the standard data display of Aperture, Shutter Speed and Exposure Compensation status, is obscured, preventing observation of the effect of changing one parameter on the others. Note also the i-Fn display presents a completely different cognitive experience (the appearance of a horizontally moving ribbon) to the standard data readout (Aperture and Shutter Speed readouts stay in one place, changing in value, with a coloured background indicating the currently active parameter).   Either arrangement works but switching back and forth between the two is disorienting.

Photo 4A Normal Hold

5. Half press the shutter release button to confirm the setting and return to normal operating mode.

Summary of action analysis  I could describe the steps required to alter each of the variable parameters able to be changed using i-Function, but there is little to be gained by so doing. The process is very similar for each. Adjustment of ISO and WB the standard way  requires a button press before rotating the Scroll Wheel.

Photo 4B Thumb on i-Fn

Conclusion  In every case, when compared to the standard operating method, adjusting a parameter with i-Function takes longer, requires more steps, requires more finger movements and obscures camera status data during the process.

All of which leads to the obvious question:  What was Samsung trying to achieve with i-Function ? As a consumer, I have no idea what Samsung's product development team were thinking.  However perhaps we can get a clue from the way i-Function is used in Samsung's promotional and marketing material.

These quotes from Samsung website material on 1 June 2012 are representative:  "Touch one button.  Change everything".  "The i-Function lens just made conventional cameras obsolete".  "One step control of Shutter Speed (Aperture, WB ...etc)".

Photo 4C Rotate Focus Ring

Clearly the marketing people want you to believe that i-Function is a wonderful new thing which somehow changes everything and makes conventional cameras obsolete.

One of the claims made for i-Fn is incorrect as to fact.  That is the "One Step Control" claim. I suppose one could have a futile debate about the precise definition of a "Step", but on my evaluation the minimum required for an i-Fn adjustment is 3 steps, with several requiring more.

Photo 4D Vertical hold

My guess is that Samsung marketing wanted a unique selling proposition (USP) for the NX series and somehow came up with the i-Function idea.  Unique it may be and selling point it may be but when subjected to ergonomic analysis it becomes very clear that if the camera is used for the purpose of making photographs (as opposed to just experimenting with the controls) then  i-Fn adds nothing useful to the user experience.

Photographs

Photo 1, Prepare Phase UIM's   This shows a set of  switches on the barrel of a lens. They operate functions required in the Prepare Phase of use. Zoom and Focus in the Capture Phase are operated by wide circumferential rings. This lens is a good example of optimal UIM design and location.

Photo 2, Standard Display This shows the well designed, easy to read, standard  Samsung data display. Here Aperture is showing as active. When altered the effect on Shutter Speed is immediately apparent.

Photo 3, i-Fn data display  This obscures the standard display and prevents the operator from monitoring Shutter Speed while Aperture is changed. In addition it presents a cognitive experience which is completely different from the standard display and a distraction from the process of making photographs.

Photos 4 A-C  This sequence of three photos shows the process of using i-Fn with the 50-200 mm lens.  4A shows the left hand in standard "Hand Under" position.  4B shows that in order to activate i-Fn the left thumb has to move back 40 mm to find the I-Fn button. The button has a low vertical profile to prevent accidental activation but this makes it difficult to locate by feel.  4C shows that in order to change a setting the left hand must now move forward 65 mm to reach the focus ring.

I actually prefer the "Hand Over" grip with this lens which makes using i-Function almost impossible.

Photo 4 D Shows the camera in portrait orientation with the i-Fn button out of sight, difficult to reach with any finger and therefore almost impossible to use.  

 

Ergonomic Analysis of Mode Dependent Scroll Wheels

CAMERA ERGONOMICS

AN ERGONOMIC ANALYSIS OF

MODE DEPENDENT SCROLL WHEELS  [MDSW]

Author  AndrewS  May 2012

Introduction  I have spent substantial time over the last two years making camera mockups with the aim of improving the ergonomics of  hand held cameras. One strategy I have used is to explore options for the position and design of User Interface Modules (UIM).  I do this by physically moving buttons and dials to different places on the mockup. This article deals with the Mode Dependent Scroll Wheel.

Definition   There are two main types of control wheels or dials commonly found on cameras.  One is the "Set and See" type. Set and See levers are also popular, often incorporated into a dial type control module. Set and See dials have a single function at each set point although some cameras allow user configuration of the details.

Photo 1 Optimum MDSW Layout

A Mode Dependent Scroll Wheel [MDSW]  has no markings. It's function is dependent on the current operating mode.  It is particularly well suited to Capture Phase tasks.  Thus in Aperture Priority Mode the Scroll Wheel will change Aperture. In Shutter Priority Mode it will change Shutter Speed.

Rationale of the MDSW   Modern electronic cameras suitable for Level 3 users  (Expert/Controller, occasional use) or Level 4 (Expert/Controller, frequent use)  users, are very complex, requiring the operator to make many adjustments very quickly. In the Capture Phase, these adjustments need to occur while the operator is holding the camera firmly with both hands and looking at the subject through the viewfinder. The mode Dependent Scroll Wheel can, if optimally positioned and designed, meet the requirements of that situation.

Photo 2, Good MDSW Location

Job Description for a MDSW  In the Capture Phase, a well designed and located Scroll Wheel should be able, if optimally supported by other User Interface Modules (UIM's) to  adjust Aperture, Shutter Speed, ISO, Program Shift and Exposure Compensation. In addition it provides  scrolling functions in Setup, Prepare and Review Phases. It should not be prone to unintended activation. It should be easily located and operated by feel, while the user is framing the subject with the eye level viewfinder. It must be fully operational without the user having to shift grip on the camera with either hand.

Current Practice  A review of current camera designs shows that some cameras have none, some have one, others two. Some cameras have three. There is no agreement about location. Some cameras have them on the top plate. Some of those rotate on a horizontal axis others on a vertical axis. Some are on the back but there is no common practice as to where precisely they should be located on the back. Some cameras put a Scroll Wheel on the front.

Compare this to the location and operation of shutter release buttons on cameras about which there does appear to be substantial consensus.

Scroll Wheels are in a state of design flux, with no agreement about the optimum number, position or function having yet been reached.

By way of further comparison we can consider the motor car.  Convergent evolution in cars has reached the point where  the main controls are located in the same place and operate the same way in all makes and models.

Photo 3, Poor Front Location

The same kind of convergent evolution has not yet occurred in cameras.

Functional Anatomy of the Human Hand  Camera design is subject to multiple interpretations but the hands which use those cameras do not change at all. They have had the same morphological and functional anatomy for many thousands of years.  I have discussed this in detail in my article "Functional Anatomy of the Hand" on this blog in March 2012.

Briefly, the right index finger is the only digit which has no "gripper" role. It only has "controller" functions. It is the only digit which can operate UIM's  (provided they are correctly designed and positioned)  without affecting the user's grip on the camera.

The Problem with Likes and Preferences  It might be thought that a useful way to discover the optimum arrangement of Scroll Wheels would be to ask camera owners about their likes and preferences. But there are serious problems with this approach. Likes and preferences are idiosyncratic, transient and sometimes unformulated.   They can only arise out of prior experience and as such may give no useful guide to the way forward. The conclusions reached from that experience may be misconstrued.

Photo 4, Difficult Rear Location

Here is an example from personal experience.  I bought and used a Pansonic G1 with a Scroll Wheel located upper front on the handle.  This was unsatisfactory as the right middle finger lay right across the Control Wheel in normal holding position. So, in order to operate the wheel I had to release the camera with  my right hand to allow access to the wheel with my index finger. Thus I could not hold and operate the camera at the same time. Subsequently I bought a Panasonic GH2. This camera has the Scroll Wheel located on the back, upper right where it is operated by the thumb. The GH2 wheel is easier to reach and operate. I might have concluded  incorrectly from this experience that rear/thumb operated Scroll Wheels are "better" than front/index finger operated ones.  However a full ergonomic task, time and motion analysis revealed that although one is easier to use than the other, neither solution is optimal. The way forward lies in a direction different from either of these arrangements.

Another example: I sometimes read on user forums the idea that a camera operator would "like" or "prefer"  to have his or her right index finger resting on the shutter release button "ready-to-make-the-exposure" while the right thumb makes adjustments using various UIM's.  A task, time and motion study shows that typical adjustments in the Capture Phase (AF Area position, Exposure Compensation ISO, Aperture, etc) are made sequentially prior to shutter release. The actions do not occur simultaneously. If these tasks are allocated to the thumb then a better ergonomic description of the index finger's role in the process would be "Sitting-idly-doing-nothing-when-it-could-have-been-adjusting-exposure-parameters".

Photo 5, Poor Rear Location

My point is that user's likes and preferences do not reliably lead us to optimal ergonomic solutions to problems at the Human Machine Interface (HMI).

Analysis of Scroll wheel  locations

1. Rear of camera, thumb operated.  Many cameras have these and they get the job done  in most cases. However if the Scroll Wheel is located directly under the ball of the thumb in basic hold position it will be constantly at risk of accidental activation. If  it  is located to the left , right or below the ball of the thumb in rest position then the user must shift grip with the right hand in order to operate the Wheel. The amount of shift may not be great but it still adds two steps to the process which is suboptimal.

2. Front of camera, below the level of the Shutter Release Button.  The worst of these require the right hand to shift downwards in order to allow the right index finger access to the Wheel. Better ones allow the grip to remain but require the index finger to move a substantial distance to reach the Wheel. 

Best Practice Derived from Ergonomic Study and Mockups  An analysis of task, time and motion shows that the best place for a Scroll Wheel is close to, on the same level as and just in front of or behind the shutter release button.  If optimally designed this location meets all the requirements of the job description.

My experiments indicate the  optimum distance between the center of the shutter button and the center of the Scroll Wheel is 13 mm.  The best ergonomic result is given by a cluster of four UIM's all operated by the right index finger. These are Shutter Release Button, Mode Dependent Scroll Wheel, ISO button and Exposure Compensation button. Both these buttons should permit user selectable function from a substantial list of options.

The optimum distance betweeen the center of the Shutter Release Button or Scroll Wheel and the Exposure Compensation or ISO buttons, is 17 mm.  Each of those UIM's has to have a precisely calibrated physical profile to ensure swift  operation without unintended activation.

Photo 6 Canon DSLR Style

How Many Scroll Wheels ?  My work indicates that IFthe UIM cluster described above is in place and IF there  is a JOG lever correctly positioned for thumb activation then only one Scroll Wheel is required.   The Scroll Wheel changes both Aperture and Shutter Speed in Manual Exposure mode.  In Manual Mode the function of the Exposure Compensation Button automatically switches to  toggle Scroll Wheel action between Aperture and Shutter Speed.  If the UIM's are all correctly positioned in three dimensions the process of adjusting Aperture and Shutter Speed  is quick and becomes almost instinctive.

Photographs

Photo 1, Optimum MDSW Layout.  This photo shows one of my mockups. The Shutter Release Button and Scroll Wheel are optimally angled and positioned on top of the parallel type handle. ISO and Exposure Compensation buttons (both with user selectable function) are optimally located.  It is very easy to locate and operate these four UIM's by feel without shifting grip with either hand. All primary and secondary exposure parameters can be quickly adjusted by the right index finger using this UIM layout.

Photo 2, Good MDSW Location.  This a Samsung NX11, showing good Shutter Release Button position, with the Scroll Wheel 13 mm behind and on the same level, where it is easy to find and operate by feel.  Unfortunately some of the other buttons are not so well located.

Photo 3, Poor Front Location.  The Scroll Wheel on this Canon  G12 is obstructed by the third finger of the right hand in normal hold position. Therefore the right hand grip on the camera has to be released in order to get the index finger onto the Scroll Wheel.  Good idea, poor implementation.

Photo 4, Difficult Rear Location.  The Scroll Wheel on this Panasonic G3 extends from it's housing only about 1 mm. Therefore it must be operated by the very tip of the thumb, just below the nail. You can see the cramped, awkward  hand position which results from this constraint. You can also see the right hand has barely any grip on the camera while operating the Scroll Wheel.  

Photo 5, Poor Rear Location.  The scroll wheel of this Fuji X10 is located right where the thumb wants to be in basic grip position.  In this photo the thumb is pressing on the small thumbrest right at the edge of the camera body. This position is cramped and awkward as you can see in the photo.  There is a brisk trade in after market thumb rests for this and other cameras with the same problem from the same maker.

Photo 6, Canon DSLR Style.  This is a Canon EOS 60D which has a comfortable, well designed grip and mostly well designed UIM layout. However it could easily have been much better. The Scroll Wheel is not on the same level as the Shutter Release Button and is a little further away than optimal. The ISO button is one of four identically sized buttons behind the Scroll Wheel, identified only by a tiny nipple on top, so it is difficult to find by feel.   There is plenty of room on this camera for a more ergonomically productive arrangement of UIM's near the Shutter Release Button. I would describe this camera as a missed opportunity to achieve excellence.

The Lens Lottery

THE  LENS  LOTTERY

Author  AndrewS  May 2012

Introduction  I have enjoyed making photographs and working, or just messing around with cameras for almost 60 years. Along the way I have bought and used many cameras and lenses. In the early days  I assumed, perhaps incorrectly, that one copy of a particular model lens would be the same as the next copy for all practical purposes. However in recent times I have developed the habit of systematically testing every new lens which comes into my hands.   This practice has revealed great variation between copies of many lenses together with a high rate of defects and problems.

Here follows a list of the lenses I have purchased new over the last few years with some comments about each and the cameras which drive them.  Yes, I am a confessed cameraholic, but eBay helps to offset  the cost of my addiction.  So here they are, in vaguely alphabetical order:

Canon EF 70-200 mm f4 L IS   This is the nearest thing to a perfect lens I have ever owned. It is optically and mechanically superb, OIS works really well and it's not outrageously expensive for such a fine optic.  This one gets a STAR  rating from me.  Unfortunately the Canon 60D camera which I chose to drive this lens is not up to the same lofty standard. I thought I would use this combination a lot, but don't for two reasons. First, my Panasonic GH2 with Olympus 40-150 mm lens delivers 95% of the image quality at a fraction the size and weight. Second, the 60D  is plagued  by capriciously inaccurate autofocus to the extent I cannot rely on my photos being in precise focus. Perhaps a more expensive EOS camera body would fix the AF problem, but I am not encouraged by ongoing reports of AF inaccuracy from the EOS 7D and have no interest in going up to full frame. Even if I did the 5D2 has an underwhelming record on AF performance, with many complaints in user forums. By comparison the GH2 nails correct focus with near perfect consistency in single shot operation.

Canon EFS 15-85 mm IS  [First copy] This was returned to the vendor, faulty with obvious decentering, producing marked softness on the left side.  The  [Second copy] was good.  When focussed correctly this lens delivers excellent resolution at all focal lengths.  Unfortunately focus with the 60D is erratic especially at the wide end in SLR mode with the mirror down. In live view mode the camera uses contrast detect AF which is extremely slow, more accurate but still prone to errors.

Canon EFS 17-55 mm f 2.8 IS   This is a good lens with which I made many documentary photos. It would not focus reliably at the wide end on EOS 20D or 40D. The workaround for this was to zoom out to the long end, set AF then zoom back to the wide end. Tedious.

Canon EFS 18-55mm IS kit lens [First copy]  This was the Mark1 version which was surprisingly good optically. I got a good copy in the kit lens quality lottery. AF accuracy was unreliable on Canon EOS 450D.  The [Second copy] was the mark 2 version which is supposed to be better, but I got the wrong lottery ticket and ended up with a bad copy, soft on one side at the wide end and soft on the other side at the long end.

Canon EFS 55-250 mm IS budget zoom  [First copy]  This was the Mark 1 version which was surprisingly good and a real bargain. I should have kept it because the  [Second copy]  the Mark 2 version was not as good, with decentering and  marked softness with loss of contrast at the long end.

Olympus 40-150 mm  This compact Micro 4/3 lens is a  STAR. It delivers most of the performance of  more expensive lenses.  It lacks IS but that has not been a problem for me on the Panasonic GH2.  It should be perfect on the Olympus EM5.

Olympus 75-300 mm  This is another M43 lens from Olympus with very compact dimensions for it's focal length range. No problems but the optical quality is not quite up to that of the Panasonic 100-300 mm.

Pansonic 14-45 mm OIS  I have used two copies of this M43 standard zoom and both have been STARS  with very good to excellent image quality across the focal length and aperture range and no mechanical or optical defects.

Panasonic 14-42 mm OIS kit zoom  My copy of this was faulty.  Optically it was reasonable but it was unpredictably prone to double imaging for reasons I never determined, maybe a case of Shutter Shock Syndrome  (See my post about S.S.S. on this blog) involving the OIS module.

Panasonic 45-200 mm OIS I have used two copies of this both showing the same characteristics.  From 45 to about 120 mm focal length the lens delivers very decent results. But at the long end it exhibits loss of contrast and sharpness with a tendency to misfocus even on the GH2 which has an exemplary focussing performance with most M43 lenses.

Panasonic 45-175 mm PZ OIS  Presumably this was intended to be Panasonic's upgrade  to the somewhat outdated 45-200 mm. I bought one in November 2011 and found it to be totally unserviceable. It was faulty with severe jitter effect (double imaging) in all operating conditions. It went back to the vendor for a refund.  Some, but not all, users have reported the same problem. I have not yet seen any acknowlegement from Panasonic that a problem even exists.

Panasonic 100-300 mm OIS  This is another super zoom lens for M43, with overall very decent performance. My copy shows a bit of decentering evidenced by softness on the left side at most focal lengths. Ortherwise it is a good lens suitable for hand held use on Panasonic OIS bodies.

Samsung NX 18-55 mm IS  My [First copy] of this was a bit soft at the long end but otherwise turned in a very decent performance for a budget kit zoom. The [Second copy] was even better with good sharpness at all focal lengths.

Samsung NX 30 mm f2  This is a STAR lens in Samsung's lineup, with an excellent rating in all aspects of performance.  A very small lens with a big performance.

Samsung NX 20 mm f2.8  My [First copy] of this was a poor performer with low resolution and poor resistance to flare. It was retured to the vendor. The [Second copy] was better, delivering good sharpness stopped down a little. But the flare problem remained.

Samsung NX 50-200 mm OIS  My [First copy] of this is slightly decentered evidenced by a little softness on the right side at 200 mm. This one also has a slightly sticky zoom action. I tried two further copies to see if I could find a better one. The [Second copy] was faulty with poor sharpness at the long end so it went back to the vendor. The [Third copy] had a nice smooth zoom action but was not quite as sharp as Copy 1 at the long end. So I kept the first one.

Summary  Of the 25 lenses listed here, one was completely unserviceable on delivery. This and 3 others were returned to the vendor as fauly. Seven others had faults or defects impacting on image quality. Fourteen had no faults or defects. That is a rate of  56% with no obvious faults and 44% with a fault or problem affecting operation and/or image quality.

Conclusion   As you can see from this experience, the bad copy rate in new lenses is disappointingly high. There does appear to be a tendency to less problems in the higher price range but even expensive lenses are not immune from trouble. I see no trend to prefer one manufacturer over another.   It would appear from my reading of reviews and reports that all brands have a percentage of  bad copies.   The further disappointment about this issue is that lens makers rarely acknowlege problems publicly and rarely issue recalls.

Recommendation to buyers     My suggestion is to buy from a vendor which guarantees replacement or money back on return. The rate of bad, or at least "not best" copies is so high that any buyer who acquires more than 2-3 lenses is almost guaranteed to encounter a problem. You may find it worth buying from a real shop with a real live sales person who you know by name, and more importantly who knows you and respects your judgement.

I suspect that most retail customers who report a "problem" with a camera or lens are probably not using their equipment correctly. So, when you present yourself to the vendor claiming to have faulty equipment make sure you have in hand  good evidence in the form of hard copy photographs illustrating the problem.

Panasonic 100-300 vs Olympus 75-300 Lens Test

MICRO FOUR THIRDS SYSTEM EQUIPMENT

LONG TELEPHOTO ZOOM LENS COMPARISON

Panasonic 100-300mm OIS  VS  Olympus 75-300 mm

Author  AndrewS  May 2012

Introduction           With the release of new lenses and camera bodies, there has been a recent surge of interest in the Micro 4/3 system.

There are two long telephoto lenses designed specifically for the M43 system, the Panasonic 100-300 mm OIS and the Olympus 75-300 mm without IS.  These both offer the real prospect of handheld ultra telephoto photography in a compact, lightweight, moderately priced  package.

Photo 1

I bought and have tested both on a Panasonic GH2 body.  I will re run some of the tests with and without IBIS on the Olympus EM5 when I can obtain one.

Notes for potential buyers     1)  Results reported here are valid for the specific copies which landed in my posession. In my experience of the lens lottery there is considerable sample variation between copies of the same lens. This can be greater than the difference between one model and another.  2)  These are both super telephoto lenses, best suited to use on a camera with EVF.  They are not, in my view, suitable for hand held photography using monitor view only, as they need to be held very steady, using good technique.  3)  while testing these lenses, I encountered the highly unwelcome phenomenon which I have called "Shutter Shock Syndrome"  [S.S.S]  which you can read about elsewhere on this blog.

Photo 2 Crop from Photo 1

S.S.S.  is a real and significant problem with the Panasonic GH2. I have not tested any other M43 body.

Tests  With both lenses, I photographed distant subjects (100 meters - several kilometers) and test charts at closer distances (8-20 meters). I ran series of exposures on a sturdy tripod, on a monopod and hand held. I used subjects of different types, some with fine detail, some with high contrast, some low contrast, some backlit. This produced several hundred frames from each lens.

Description and specifications  You can read all the details elsewhere, but my impression after using both for several weeks is that the Olympus lens feels significantly more compact in operation and in the camera bag than the Panasonic. This could be the most important issue for some users. The Olympus also zooms more smoothly whereas the Panasonic tends to get a bit jerky when zooming slowly. The Panasonic comes with a soft pouch and lens hood, the Olympus has neither. Based on B&H New York prices the Panasonic is considerably less expensive.

Photo 3 Olympus 75-300 mm lens 200% crop

Focussing Both achieve AF and MF with about equal speed and accuracy on the GH2.

Image Quality  I had to run many tests in different conditions to separate the two, which should tell you they give similar results in most situations. Testing was complicated by the Shutter Shock Syndrome  referred to above and also by the finding that the two lenses perform a little differently when comparing closeup with distant subjects.  In addition my copy of the Panasonic is slightly decentered, producing  some softness on the left edge of the frame at most focal lengths.  This softness cleaned up somewhat by stopping down the Panasonic one stop. Apart from that both lenses appeared to perform just as well wide open as stopped down at each focal length.  On several test runs I found the Olympus at 300 mm gave better results at f6.7 than any smaller aperture.

With distant subjects the Panasonic produced slightly but consistently better resolution of fine details and better clarity across the frame than the Olympus at all focal lengths and apertures. With subjects, including the test chart,  8-20 meters from the camera the difference between the two was less clear cut although I scored a slight advantage to the Panasonic after much pixel peeping.  Neither lens rendered the test chart with as much clarity and resolution as lenses of shorter focal length such as the Panasonic 14-45 mm OIS or the Olympus 40-150 mm.

Photo 4 Panasonic 100-300 mm lens 200% crop

Both lenses delivered good contrast. The GH2 corrects for chromatic aberration with the Panasonic lens but not the Olympus lens which showed significant CA towards frame edges which would require correction in post capture processing.

Conclusion  Either of these lenses is capable of good to very good results if used with care, handheld, on a monopod or on a tripod.

I would not recommend pairing the Olympus lens (no OIS) with a Panasonic body (none has IBIS at this time).  Some form of IS is required for accurate hand held framing and composition at the long end of these superzoom lenses.

The Pansonic lens works just fine on the GH2, with the OIS providing good stabilisation of the viewfinder image. I will discuss the effectiveness of OIS in this and other Panasonic lenses in another post on this blog.  It should also be suitable for the Olympus EM5 but I have not been able to test this yet.

Overall the Panasonic costs less and delivers better resolution which I suspect will make it the clear choice for most buyers.

Photographs

Photo 1  This was made on a windy day, with air turbulence causing atmospheric distortion of the subject which was about 1.5 kilometers from the camera. I rested the camera on a folded towel on the roof of a motor car. This gave much better stability than a tripod in the windy conditions. Panasonic GH2, Panasonic 100-300 mm lens at 197 mm, f 6.3, 1/1600 sec ISO 160.

Photo 2 is a crop of Photo 1 showing detail.

Photos 3 and 4  are 200% crops of a static subject about 400 meters from the tripod mounted camera. Focal length 124/127 mm, 1/640 sec @ f 5.6, ISO 160. Photo 3 is the Olympus, Photo 4 the Panasonic. This illustrates the slightly better resolution delivered by the Panasonic lens.  

 

 

How Effective is Panasonic OIS ?

MICRO  FOUR THIRDS CAMERA PRACTICE

HOW EFFECTIVE  IS PANASONIC OIS ?

Author AndrewS  May 2012

Introduction    I recently conducted a systematic evaluation of Panasonic OIS using a Panasonic GH2 body with Panasonic 14-45 mm, 45-200 mm and 100-300 mm OIS lenses. In standing posture the camera was handheld for all exposures, using the EVF.  I held the camera as steady  as possible for each exposure using the same holding, breathing and shutter release technique for all shots. I photographed the center section of a test chart at shutter speeds from 1/4 sec to 1/1600 sec with OIS off for the first run then on for the second run. I repeated the whole test twice to check for variable results, which I found.

Limitations of method     Before detailing the findings I should say that measuring OIS effectiveness is an inexact process. There is considerable variation in camera shake from one frame to the next and deciding what is sharp and what is not sharp is to some extent subjective. So my second run of tests gave a slightly different result from the first.

Panasonic 14-45 mm OIS lens  Tested at 45 mm.  I was able to get sharp results handheld down to 1/80 sec with OIS off and 1/30 sec with OIS on. The improvement was 1.3 shutter speed steps.

Panasonic 45-200 mm OIS lens  Tested at 200 mm.  I got sharp results down to 1/320 sec with OIS off and 1/250 sec with OIS on, an advantage of 0.3 steps.  If I would accept slightly soft frames, that grew to 2.6 steps. You can see how the subjective factor comes into the equation.  There was a group of frames in the 1/100 sec to 1/200 sec which my notes record as "very slightly blurred".

Panasonic 100-300 mm OIS lens  Tested at 300 mm.  Results with this lens were variable. On my first run there was a benefit of 1.3 steps. On the second run I got sharp frames down to 1/500 sec with OIS off and 1/320 sec with OIS on, for a benefit of 0.3 steps. However if I would accept a slight amount of softness this increased to 1.0 steps. 

On both runs with this lens the OIS produced a markedly bimodal effect. There was a group of quite decently sharp frames from 1/25 sec to 1/50 sec, then a blurred group from 1/60 sec to 1/160 sec with sharpness improving again from 1/200 sec.

Findings 

1. None of the test runs showed a worse result at any shutter speed, hand held, with OIS on compared to OIS off.  The implication is that with these three lenses on this camera body there will be no harm done by leaving OIS on for all handheld shots.

2. The most useful thing about  OIS is it's ability to stabilise the viewfinder image when using telephoto lenses especially at the long end.  The 100-300 mm lens at 300mm with OIS on is eminently usable hand held in good light, which is remarkable considering the angle of view is only 4.1 degrees.

3. OIS does extend the useful hand holding shutter speed range of each lens by a small amount.

4. The most important factors in achieving sharp photos hand held are, in order of importance as indicated by the results of my trials:

a)  Good camera hold and shutter release technique. This includes posture, breathing, holding and finger movement control.

b)  Sufficiently fast shutter speed.  The old rule which says go no slower than  the reciprocal of the focal length (x2 for M43) is still useful.

c)  OIS can provide a small but potentially useful downwards extension of the useful hand held shutter speed range, but it is not a panacea for poor handholding technique.

5. I am at a loss to explain the bimodal effect of OIS with the 100-300 mm lens.