Ugly new designs? « Nikon Rumors Forum

Nikon Rumors Forum » Weird & Fun

Ugly new designs?

(17 posts) (6 voices)

Tags:

No tags yet.

bjrichus

preferred member
Joined: Nov '10
Posts: 921
offline

This has to be said...

I've been considering the latest designs in M4thirds and SLR designs on the Photo Rumors pages from the likes of Pentax, Sony etc and I have to say that in my view, ALL of them look both hard to use and ugly. NONE of them look to be designed as something easy to use, and while they may appeal to readers of a modern architecture magazine they all look like a small flat slab with a round lens stuck on the end. Hand grips? Nah. Easy to read and large displays? Doesn't look like it to me. Dials and controls large enough to be easy to use? Maybe. If I just take a quick look st my Nikon dSLR bodies, heck, even at my 35 year old Nikkormat, then the picture (sorry about the pun), is very different.

Then there are those bright almost neon color "special editions"... Look the other way while I vomit. Ok now... I concede that maybe they are designed for particular markets or are target purchases for those who want a camera that matches this morning's shirt, but PLEASE - for photographers?

I did some product shots last week (was the first time on my own doing that) and they turned out quite good.Was complimented on the pictures I presented yesterday and I know one shot is slated for nationwide distribution on a brochure for the organization. I used film AND my D7000 --- the point is could I have even thought of doing this on an M4thirds camera... That's a rhetorical question I know the answer... or am I just too old and cynical?

Posted 1 year ago #
NSXType-R

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 2,803
offline

While we're at it, let's bash Canon cameras too!

I tried a 60D yesterday. Why did they cram the scroll dial and the ISO button so closely? Do they expect us to be special finger contortionists?

And some of the latest Olympus M4/3 camera don't have hot shoes.

But wait, why are you complaining about other camera manufacturers when you know Nikon would come up with a better solution? *sarcasm*

Posted 1 year ago #
casperwb

preferred member
Joined: Jan '11
Posts: 558
offline

not too old and cynical

just designed for a different generation, and for folks who use cameras differently from the way we do.

as an example, most people take 95% of their shots of people.

and as they get more into photography, that amount comes down.

those cameras appeal to different people. snap shot of people at a better level than point and shoot units, with the now and then foray into other types of photography.

as they advance into photography, they will most likely step up to a DSLR, so, I look at those cameras as an something in between the P&S and the DSLR.

however, I do agree with you, they are not for me.

Posted 1 year ago #
bjrichus

preferred member
Joined: Nov '10
Posts: 921
offline

NSXType-R said:
While we're at it, let's bash Canon cameras too!

Rather than Canon bashing, I was complaining more about the ever increasing trend to make cameras too small for anyone grown beyond the size of a 10 year old and as for the ergonomics... Did anyone who ever designed this stuff ever actually USE it? Pah!

NSXType-R said:
But wait, why are you complaining about other camera manufacturers when you know Nikon would come up with a better solution? *sarcasm*

Hmmmm.... What good news do YOU know that the rest of us don't?

Queue for echo sound effects from a horror movie sountrack: HAHAHAHAHAHAHA....

Posted 1 year ago #
bjrichus

preferred member
Joined: Nov '10
Posts: 921
offline

casperwb said:
not too old and cynical

[...]

however, I do agree with you, they are not for me.

Glad I am not alone....

Posted 1 year ago #
TaoTeJared

preferred member
Joined: Apr '10
Posts: 2,422
offline

I agree with bjrichus - I can't stand the Panasonic, Sony, smaller Olympus M4/3. The Ep-2 (largest one) is fairly good. Then again, (even though marketing says it) they are not designed for DSLR users, they are enticing digi cam users to move up - hence why they are getting smaller and the control layout is that of a digi cam.

All of that is why I bought the Fuji X100 - designed for DSLR users. I absolutely love the thing more every time I use it.

Posted 1 year ago #
casperwb

preferred member
Joined: Jan '11
Posts: 558
offline

TaoTeJared said:
IAll of that is why I bought the Fuji X100 - designed for DSLR users. I absolutely love the thing more every time I use it.

TTJ

it kind of resembles a Lecia rangefinder digital, could you give a little more on it?

Posted 1 year ago #
TaoTeJared

preferred member
Joined: Apr '10
Posts: 2,422
offline

If you do a forum search, there is a thread that I posted stuff in.
I also did a review for photo rumors. Just go to their X100 page.
Here is my review: http://photorumors.com/2011/05/31/fuji-finepix-x100-review-take-2/
Many image examples are on my Flickr page.

Posted 1 year ago #
NSXType-R

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 2,803
offline

bjrichus said:
Rather than Canon bashing, I was complaining more about the ever increasing trend to make cameras too small for anyone grown beyond the size of a 10 year old and as for the ergonomics... Did anyone who ever designed this stuff ever actually USE it? Pah!

Hmmmm.... What good news do YOU know that the rest of us don't?

Queue for echo sound effects from a horror movie sountrack: HAHAHAHAHAHAHA....

Haha, Nikon can't ignore the mirror-less line any longer, even Canon and Leica are seriously considering it.

But think of it this way- what happens if Nikon decides to scale up M4/3 and roll back on DX in general?

Scary, right? I need to start hoarding D7000 bodies! :D

I think this smallest DSLR or M4/3 thing has got to end. Nikon, Olympus and Canon had tried to market their DSLRs at one point or another as "the smallest".

The smallest you can really go is the Canon Rebel or Nikon D40 line of DSLRs, any smaller you lose the viewfinder, compromise on the grip, etc. and it doesn't seem to work as well anymore.

And I can still manage to bash Canon...

By the way Canon has an inferior grip by the way. It's longer, but it digs into your hands. The Nikon D40 line grip is shorter, but fatter, it's more comfortable in long photo sessions. My pinky slips off every so often, but I'd rather have a slipping pinky than a really tired hand in general.

Posted 1 year ago #
TaoTeJared

preferred member
Joined: Apr '10
Posts: 2,422
offline

NSXType-R said:
Haha, Nikon can't ignore the mirror-less line any longer, even Canon and Leica are seriously considering it.

I think this smallest DSLR or M4/3 thing has got to end. Nikon, Olympus and Canon had tried to market their DSLRs at one point or another as "the smallest".

Although the Compact digi cams feature sets and MP have improved, the IQ really hasn't changed much in the last 4 years. I have an old 7mp Panasonic little digi cam and the images compared at iso 400 and down rival it's 12mp digi cam counterparts when printed at the usual 4x6. There is little since in pixel peeping as probably 95% of images won't even be printed and rarely above 4x6.

They have to do something to get people to buy a new cameras. Few understand the advanced digicams have larger sensors so they just look too expensive for the same thing and DSLRs for many seem too complicated. Hence ILCs (interchangeable lens compacts). Pentax's is way smaller than a 4/3rds and some have said Nikon's will be as well.

I have grown to realize these camera's design focus was not for advanced amateurs or pros but to get more money out of the digi cam market and offer something better IQ than a pocket cam..

Posted 1 year ago #
PB PM

preferred member
Joined: Jan '10
Posts: 2,217
offline

In response to the original post. To each there own. There is nothing ugly about modern design, it's just different. Different designs appeal to different people. Guess who the number one buyers of consumer electronics are? People between 18-40. So you can guess who consumer electrics makers (Panasonic/Sony) will design their products for!

Personally I like both. I like some modern designs, Panasonic and Olympus M4/3s cameras are not ugly IMO. At the same time, I very much like the design of Nikon cameras, or the Fuji X100, or even say my Nikon FE.

As for controls: Looks can be deceiving. I thought all the M4/3s cameras were crap in terms of controls, then I actually tried some of them and I no long feel that way. Don't just a book by it's cover.

Posted 1 year ago #
bjrichus

preferred member
Joined: Nov '10
Posts: 921
offline

NSXType-R said:
Haha, Nikon can't ignore the mirror-less line any longer, even Canon and Leica are seriously considering it.

But think of it this way- what happens if Nikon decides to scale up M4/3 and roll back on DX in general?

Scary, right? I need to start hoarding D7000 bodies! :D

I will be a better person if I can remember that M4/3 is aimed at a different market than anyone who wants maximum quality, or flexibility, or... well, you know.

Now how's THIS for scary... If I may, let me turn the tables on this discussion...

A while ago, I commented somewhere that FX was the endangered species and about a dozen D3 users shot me down. In the end it's what you get on the screen/print that matters, and *when* or *if* an APS-C body ends up (in a generation or so of DX camera body perhaps?) producing FX quality output, it's everyone who is saving up for a D4 right now that might be in the camera body hording game. Of course, in this decade, we certainly still need FX, but in 8 years time, maybe... perhaps...

Just remember history from school and it was all those who thought the telephone would never replace the telegraph ... They were betting on things staying the same, and of course, they don't.

NSXType-R said:
I think this smallest DSLR or M4/3 thing has got to end.

The race down is driven by economics - shame - but if it *is* going to happen, then lets try to get the camera makers to produce the best (quality of products, design, usability etc), or we'll only have ourselves to blame!

NSXType-R said:
And I can still manage to bash Canon...

Back on topic, huh? Big pat on the back to you... ;)

Posted 1 year ago #
bjrichus

preferred member
Joined: Nov '10
Posts: 921
offline

TaoTeJared said:
All of that is why I bought the Fuji X100 - designed for DSLR users. I absolutely love the thing more every time I use it.

Do you think that Nikon would do well re-working it's rangefinder designs to bring them into the digital age?

Posted 1 year ago #
casperwb

preferred member
Joined: Jan '11
Posts: 558
offline

TaoTeJared said:
I agree with bjrichus - I can't stand the Panasonic, Sony, smaller Olympus M4/3. The Ep-2 (largest one) is fairly good. Then again, (even though marketing says it) they are not designed for DSLR users, they are enticing digi cam users to move up - hence why they are getting smaller and the control layout is that of a digi cam.

All of that is why I bought the Fuji X100 - designed for DSLR users. I absolutely love the thing more every time I use it.

Very very nice review, well done, later thi year when I am in NY will have a look at one, very tempting.

Posted 1 year ago #
shasta_doug

member
Joined: Apr '10
Posts: 12
offline

bjrichus said:

A while ago, I commented somewhere that FX was the endangered species and about a dozen D3 users shot me down. In the end it's what you get on the screen/print that matters, and *when* or *if* an APS-C body ends up (in a generation or so of DX camera body perhaps?) producing FX quality output, it's everyone who is saving up for a D4 right now that might be in the camera body hording game. Of course, in this decade, we certainly still need FX, but in 8 years time, maybe... perhaps...

.

In 8 years time we'll just need our iPhone 12s

Posted 1 year ago #
TaoTeJared

preferred member
Joined: Apr '10
Posts: 2,422
offline

bjrichus said:
Do you think that Nikon would do well re-working it's rangefinder designs to bring them into the digital age?

I do not think so. The trade-offs and Cost would be unacceptable by too many users for it to be viable. Just look at the massive complaints with Leica M cameras, X1 and the Fuji X100 - you can really only design these types of cameras for a specific type of shooter.
As we have seen in the above comments, the key trade-offs revolve around:
-Image Quality -Physical Size
-Operation Speed -Ergonomics
-Controls -Lens Size
-Lens Speed and -Cost

If you want everything, you get a D3x/D3s/D4 for $5-6,000. If you are fine with less, Less IQ, ergonomics, controls, size and want something under $1,500, you have the D7000. If Size it the big concern, you get a digi cam that suffers on even more. The problem comes to cost that someone is willing to pay for the trade-offs.

The Fuji X100 although I love it, really doesn't fit well to most people's desires for a camera. Single focal length, slower operation, Slower AF, but really fast lens, and very high image quality. How many are willing to spend $1,300? Not many. Fuji has posted that they lost money on the X100 this year.

So back to the question, or even a better one - Why is Nikon and Canon staying, or at least delaying the release of a 4/3rds, ILC type of camera to the market? The market is too small, the production cost is high, profit prospects are low and the market demand is saturated already with Olympus, Panasonic, and Sony who have a multi-year head start. My guess is they will release something that will not cost them much to produce, just to satisfy their loyal users but the trade-offs will be give a image like the G12 and P7000. Whatever they release, it will be far from and S2-type system.

Posted 1 year ago #
TaoTeJared

preferred member
Joined: Apr '10
Posts: 2,422
offline

casperwb said:
Very very nice review, well done, later thi year when I am in NY will have a look at one, very tempting.

Thanks!

Posted 1 year ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.

The new Nikon Rumors Forum is now live at http://forum.nikonrumors.com/discussions. This forum is now in "read only" mode until I figure a proper way to import all data over to the new platform. Please register over at the new forum.

Ugly new designs?

Reply