I love 1/4-20 sockets. Attach my camera to a flash bracket? Yep. Attach an eyebolt to attach a carabiner to attach a neck strap? Yep. Attach a hand strap or a 40mm, 80mm, or 200mm Arca Swiss plate. Yep. Yep, Yep and Yep.
There's nothing stopping a photographer from permanently attaching an Arca-Swiss plate to the bottom of a camera body with a bit of cyanoacrylate or some screws if it makes better photographs. For me, walking around with an Arca-Swiss plate on my camera made me appreciate that 1/4-20 socket is flush. Walking around with a 120mm plate made me appreciate that the 1/4-20 socket is flush both top to bottom and front to back.
Like everything in photography 1/4-20 and Arca-Swiss are defined by engineering tradeoffs. The cost of slower direct attachment of 1/4-20 is in exchange for the physical strength of bolted connection and the flexibility adopting a broader standard affords - I can build a camera mount from general components available at the hardware store (including round stock and a 1/4-20 die in a statistically unlikely universe).
edit: I left out all the electronic/software rants because photography is undergoing Cambrian explosion in regards to controls and computation (but mirrorless cameras are nothing new).
As said in this [1] article, one of the worst thing camera makers are guilty of is not slapping Android on their cameras to open up th instant publication, photo manipulation, etc. It's a shame that a professional camera is 90% of the time simply not as useful as a smartphone, even ... as a camera.
If Android is on a camera, I want some sort of a hypervisor situation where it does not interfere with real-time operations. My Canon T4i will very responsively snap a picture once I have locked the focus, aperture, and shutter speed. I do not want to lose that and "gain" lagdroid.
I don't want android on my camera. I just want it to be able to send all data that it's curating to my android device (which has an actually useful screen size and powerful enough cpu/gpu to do real editing) in a browsable fashion where I can see what's on the camera, and pick what to transfer. Kind of like, say... FTP over bluetooth/wifi? (or sFTP, of course).
And of course, a full input mapping for all "buttons" on the camera so that I can "press" any of them from my android device. Don't even bother labeling them appropriately, just have a button signal protocol that says "the following numbers will work, and have the following N-step granularity" and then simply supply the relevant profile both on-camera (it's a USB device after all) and as download for each camera model that can be used to resolve "number" to "name of actual button on the camera".
In fact why stop there: I want that standard to be so open that any windows, linux, osx, raspi, android, iphone, etc. user can communicate with any camera. Got a Sony and a Nikon? Why would you care, just switch profile, done.
While Android on the camera itself would be a terrible idea (it would only be useful in such a stripped down config that user apps would be pretty much impossible), seemless interoperability backed by at least two open standards would be fantastic.
I guess we'll see how long it takes IKEA to make a good camera. None of these things are new, they've all been around for decades, camera makers just can't be bothered to make cameras for people. They purely make them for money.
Battery life could be a concern. While using my Nikon DSLR I won't turn it off at all until I'm done for the day and that seems to barely affect the battery. I can leave it in a drawer for months, pick it up and snap a hundred pictures and put it back in the drawer for a few more months and the battery is still fine. In fact, I'd be surprised if I charge it more than once a year (mind you, since phone cameras became good enough I have very little use for my DSLR.)
I love Android (I've only had Android phones since my first smartphone), but battery efficiency is definitely not its strong suit, even on a clean install on a flagship phone.
I don’t think people really want or need that. A big pro DSLR is a big investment, it will last 5-10 years easily. Any SoC will be ancient by the time it’s 5 years old, and no one will want to support it.
And who would want to edit photos on a big, heavy DSLR when they have a much more convenient smartphone, or iPad with a better screen?
The battery drain is also an issue. DSLRs use a mechanical shutter, which is sort of antiquated today. But it means one camera battery can last for hundreds or thousands of shots, and days of standby since the main screen is rarely on.
The camera doesn't need to run Android itself, and Android is probably too slow and power hungry to make sense in dedicated cameras. Instead think of the camera as a peripheral to the user's existing smartphone. There is a lot of room to improve connectivity and usability for that mode.
So a camera released just 5 years ago would be now running....Android 2.0? Slowly losing any ability to publish anything over time as services like google and facebook are cutting off support for older Android devices each year? It's the same argument as saying that PS VITA should have had Android - I disagree. If it did, it would be a horribly outdated piece of tech today, while as it is now it runs just as well as the day it came out.
Here's another dumb thing. The camera companies make things harder and more expensive for underwater photographers by making minor changes to size, shape, and control positioning in every new model. Much of this is just change for the sake of change and doesn't actually improve functionality. Every little change means photographers need a completely different waterproof housing. These are quite expensive, often more than the camera itself. So you see a lot of underwater photographers still using old cameras because even if they could afford a new camera they can't afford a new housing for it. The camera companies are missing out on those potential upgrade sales.
And one more dumb thing. They don't include internal GPS receivers or electronic compasses for geotagging even in fairly expensive models. The chips cost <$10 now so this is just a silly limitation. Add-on GPS receivers tend to be bulky and fragile.
I could only imagine if Apple took all of their camera expertise from the iPhone and all of their existing Chip expertise and all of their Operating Systems expertise to create a Semi-Pro Mirrorless camera.
Imagine full iOS integration, super fast A-11 Bionic chip (same as iPhone), high throughput wireless components, custom OS (like WatchOS), developer API, W2 chip for Bluetooth pairing, OLED screen, and beautiful lightweight aluminum housing.
That would completely change the market. But we can only dream.
I don’t think Apple will venture into dedicated camera equipment. The iPhone camera is one of the big selling points and keeps people upgrading. Apple will not sacrifice their cash cow for a comparatively niche market. A dedicated device also goes against the unification that Apple seems to pursue.
No - what Apple will do is evolve the iPhone camera(s) and computational photography, over and over every year, pushing it further and further until most of the needs for a mirrorless camera are gone.
Rather than disrupt the high end consumer camera market with a camera in 2 years, they’ll do it with iPhone in 5 or 10 years.
An alternative - a partnership with Canon on Nikon where they would build a shell around the iPhone that would accept DSLR lenses, and build an iOS app to have all the DSLR features, with deep integration (like panorama, could make use of the other lens, AI, etc). They make more money on lenses anyway, let apple sell razors while they continue to sell razorblades. Furthermore, the case itself would cost $100-$200, which coupled with the phone would be > $1000, while the "normal" DSLR sensor shell is already about $600, so it still leaves room for both products. Also, it would even lower the barrier to entry to purchase DSLR lenses for current iPhone owners, which would increase lens sales. Assuming it works from a technical perspective, I don't really see a downside with this business model.
> That would completely change the market. But we can only dream.
No, it really wouldn't. Look at the heavyweights right now, they all either have a ton of expertise in optics or in sensors. That market cares more about glass selection, sensors and taking pictures than bells and whistles like iOS would provide.
It would only make sense from a financial perspective if the market they were entering (think: auto) is bigger than the one they could be endangering (mobile).
Also, would they then be making camera sensors? Or would they just figure Sony (whose profits they'd be stepping on) would just take it? Do they have a 2nd source for this critical component?
I was hoping that the author would add something about the UIs of these cameras. The bodies of modern DSLRs are jampacked with every kind of knob, control, button, dial, and dongle that you can possibly think of.
To a large extent, that's kind of the whole point — these cameras are for professionals and professionals ostensibly need to be able to adjust every aspect of their picture. But in practice, 95% of users aren't using 95% of these adjusters 95% of the time. Most people are changing their aperture, exposure compensation, and a small handful of other things, and yet, dozens of other readily-available and features are still bolted onto the camera that get used roughly never.
There are other downsides besides complexity too. Fuji's mirrorless X100 series is a popular camera with consumers and for years it's shipped with an exposure compensation dial right at the top edge of its body. For just as many years the thing's been loose enough and with little enough inset from the outside that whenever you throw it in a bag or something, there's a pretty reasonable chance that it'll come out cranked all the one way or the other. Sometimes you don't notice, and there goes your shot.
The possible fixes are pretty easy — either move it in so it's less prone to accidental adjustment, or take the units off the thing so that it could optionally be reset every time you turn the camera on, but Fuji will probably never fix the problem – the way things are is the way things are, and they should stay that way.
It would be insanely great if instead of just cargo culting what they themselves have done in the past and what everyone else is doing, camera manufacturers started to think about optimizing these designs for the benefit of the user a little bit. Unfortunately, they never seem to.
As an economist: isn't this 'just' an example of software eating the world?
One the one hand, quality camera's should keep upgrading the periferal hardware to keep match with modern IT-supplies and on the other hand keep a focus on durable products. Why wouldn't producers do this? Cost savings and probably price competition.
The competition (smart phones) have a whole different market. They have a product that people (regretably?) replace every 2-3 years. The market dictates the newest techniques. Pictures are sensors + software. Software has a much shorter improvement cycle. Hence, I would expect a continuously larger part of the camera market to 'fall' for the smartphone camera. Heck, the 'official' advice from my preferred reviewers is not to buy a small camera anymore, but use the savings for a better smartphone.
And then you have large old-camera corporations struggling because their highest margin products (just a guess that that was the little cameras in the former days, not the professionaly product) are falling away. So they don't have the money to keep their high-end products up quality wise nor the institutional awareness to quickly adapt. Cycle a few times... Read OP.
I disagree with this article in a lot of ways; the tripod mount is about the closest thing to mattering to a field/wedding/studio photographer.
- IR Remote; Works in the studio (or in the field) because your lighting is to the sides or front (if it's behind the camera, you have shadow)
- USB/Wifi version. The typical pro is taking 300-3000 clicks before uploading to lightroom for post; between this there are many other time sucks: A) transportation back to the studio B) unpacking your camera gear backpack C) showering bathroom. I don't know how this is interfering. The field shooters are traditionally switching multiple cards from a day/week/second shooter - there HD gig and backup purposes never have them go camera to computer.
- Slow card writes; this affects burst and you'll find the best sports cameras either compensate with ram or have faster card writes. Of course, this matters more with video.
I can agree with some of the the points though; better AF UX; though I appreciate my classic dot that lights up and I can preference with a joypad. The better tripod mount. And battery grips should mount through the tripod/battery/base and need no cables (my camera battery grips work like this)
I also don't want android apps; for the most part, i even resist a program that does multi exposure for fireworks - especially now that anybody with an iphone can take that picture, probably better.
My pet-peeve with modern DSLR's is that none of these manufacturers seem to care about motion-cadence with their video offering. There's been amazing leaps with 4k video and now 10 bit image depth with the Panasonic GH5, but the footage looks so damn robotic and souless compared to cinema cameras from Arri and Red.
I obviously don't expect a $2000 dslr to match a $50k Alexa in image quality, but surely they must be able to make the motion of the images smoother and less CCTV looking.
Blackmagic put out an amazing little pocket camera a few years ago with gorgeous colours and buttery smooth motion, why can't the big guys follow suit?
I really want the focus information in the display.
Tell me the DOF, and make finding the hyperfocal distance easier -- a button to just take me there, or a calculator that tells me the ideal distance and a display that shows me my estimated focal distance.
In the manual film days, all that information was often engraved on the lens. Some currently manufactured manual focus lenses also include depth of field scales as well. These make zone focusing easier...not that I don't like autofocus.
Agreed. The camera knows this stuff, why not display it. I've got the top of the line Canon 1DX II, a $6000 body. WTF, Canon? You can't put that in there?
Some cameras do have this. The Fuji X10/X20 (and probably X30) had a focusing distance indicator on the screen, and I loved that feature. I can't speak for the other Fuji X models since I only had the X10 and X20. I really miss this feature on my other cameras.
I also wish split prism focusing screens were at least easier to get your hands on, if not the default. Makes it 10x easier to quickly tell when a subject is in focus instead of squinting & hoping.
Another thing I hate about a lot of recent camera hardware is the move toward cheap plastic, everywhere.
I shoot pretty much only with old manual-focus lenses from days of yore. Most of my lenses are older than I am. They're all made of metal, built like a tank, and way easier to use. No fidgety UIs or menus to manipulate, perfectly calibrated infinity focus (slap the focus ring to the end until it stops and landscapes are perfectly sharp 100% of the time), rock-solid, don't break under pressure inside my bag, and they just work, no questions asked.
Totally agree about the lack of Arca-Swiss adoption by camera manufacturers. Camera bodies and heavy lenses could easily have a built-in Arca-Swiss shape at the bottom and still have a 1/4-20" screw hole for people who need it.
And they do the same thing phone companies do, don't support the device. I have a camera with wifi that got a shitty remote app on release and that's it. There is so much potential with remote controls, but no.. it can only take pictures on auto settings. At least document the API if you are lazy...
Camera itself got some bugfix updates, but is missing some essentials as working as a web cam, supporting timelapse, etc...
I have a Canon DSLR and my biggest frustration is with the software. I do a lot of night photography and the longest exposure possible is 30 seconds. To go beyond this you need to buy an external shutter release. It should be a simple thing to add a few more options with longer exposures to the menu.
Also, doing things like HDR or stop-motion can be a pain. Better software or the ability to run apps could solve this.
I must say, I have a small Leica camera running Android and I totally adore it (CM-1).
It meets 9.5 of the 11 features the author is requesting but those aren't why I like it. It's also why I find his argument to be flawed.
The best parts of owning it aren't any of the authors points. It's that it solves a class of problem not addressed by the market. It fits the bill for: "ultimate international travel camera". It gives me: 1] nice photos (raw, 1" sensor) 2] that I can process immediately (runs Android, Photoshop, Lightroom, Instagram) and 3] publish directly (4G connection, WiFi N) in a 4] compact form factor (bit thicker than a smartphone). I'm sad to see this category not take off but I'm glad I have one for myself. As an added benefit its great for China and Taiwan where I can still have my primary iPhone and use my camera as WiFi hotspot to get cheap data with a local sim.
It was done as a design exercise with Panasonic similar to the Hasselblad True with Motorola. It's far from perfect (design exercises usually aren't).
But. And that's a big 'B'. This camera let's me solve my photo problem (How do I take nice photos and share them while on the go) in way fewer steps and with less equipment than the mainstream camera solutions and with better quality than smartphones. (I want the photos to be "Nice" remember? Also 1" sensor! Raw! )
The author is in effect pushing for more features. That's not how you solve your users problems. What the camera industry needs to do is diff assumptions made about how camera's were used when these platforms were created (D series, EOS series) and how they are being used today - then solve for the new problem classes that emerged. Not tack on more features and higher performance as the author is suggesting. In the former case you push for the ability to run Photoshop and Instagram on the camera and publish mobiley, in the later case you push for faster bus speeds and more stable camera mounts.
My biggest complaint is that they keep thinking we want Wifi more than we want GPS on high end cameras. Really, hooking up to a wire at home is far easier than adding on GPS data in the field. If I can only have one, give me GPS.
I feel that a lot of these problems are not purely born out of lazy engeniering but has to do with the review culture. In camera land as well as any other consumer products reviewers have quit a lot of power. If you get a bad review it can destroy your product. As most reviewers converse to the same opinion it is very tempting to please the reviewers. So if you create a semi pro camera is had to have a tripod mount even if most buyers have to use it. For a long time and party true today a simple interface was not something the reviewers would like.the interface should look like the Pro DSLR to be taken seriously. When Sony launched the original Xperia z every reviewer said the waterproofing was a gimmick now day's you get faulted for not having it. In the car world reviewers are constantly patting the top op the dashboard no other human does this as a result more car companies are making an effort to give it a nice feel, but stuff like a good feeling steering wheel seem more important to me. There are countless examples f reviewers dictating what is important with out looking at true usability but by looking at an spec sheet and see if it is 'better' than before
I'd like to see more innovative lens design with software correction. IE many expensive lenses are complicated by the tradtional need to reduce barrel/pincushion distortion and Chromatic aberration. For film that is important but now with digital its relatively easy to correct in software. I was expecting lots of innovation in lenses because of this but I haven't seen much change.
I had a Sony RX100III until last year.
It is considered a top-of-the-line compact camera.
Yet sony thinks it's cool to have an app store for a camera that costs somewhere in the 800USD ballpark to sell you "apps" for 4 dollars to allow you to add software features. There are a handful of apps in the whole marketplace, proving that this is indeed a poor business idea. The whole "you bought a camera for ±1k but can't afford 4$" discussion is unrelevant, i am just frustrated that Sony can't develop these features in house and supply them to their users as it should have done in the first place.
Call me skeptical, but this guy's rants sound to me like a super demanding, high-end user. No doubt his complaints are well-reasoned for him, but I have to say that as an amateurish photographer, I disagree with a lot of what he says.
First of all, what's wrong with having a standardized mount size? I like knowing that I can fit my camera onto any standard mount I want to buy without issue. The quick-release and plastic body concerns are a non-issue for me because most tripod manufacturers have fixed this by simply putting a quick-release plate on the tripod that has a rubber surface. Voila- when I am in the mode of taking mounted photos, I screw the plate on, and just leave it. Then I can quickly mount and unmount the camera as-needed. Sure, this might not pass the "smack the lens and there shouldn't be a single iota of movement test", but that's a very narrow use-case, as opposed to not having to spend hundreds of dollars on a more expensive camera whose manufacturer invested hundreds of thousands of man-hours to develop and test.
As for the remote, that also seemed to be a pretty narrow use case. I have a standard infrared remote I use when taking mounted photos, and it works fine 99% of the time. I don't like the Bluetooth idea for a few reasons. One, you have to toggle it on and off if you want to conserve camera battery. Two, you have to have a Bluetooth enabled device capable of controlling the camera (read, smartphone) which introduces a potential failure point because now you have to make sure you have two things charged (your phone and your camera) because remote batteries can last for years. You want to take pictures with your steering wheel? Sounds cool, but is that a use-case Sony should invest heavily to satisfy?
To me, the innovation in the camera market has been phenomenal. The speed at which cameras can autofocus and burst shoot, as well as the battery life have all improved while the prices have continued to drop. The one thing I think could definitely be improved (as a Sony Alpha user) is the software interface, which took me a solid month of study to master and is still cumbersome to use on a daily basis. But, the complexity of photography and understanding all of the variables involved is one of the most appealing parts to me.
I am also a Sony Alpha user and the interface seems anti-designed. Like, willfully obtuse and user-hostile. I know UI is not easy, but relative to the scope/scale of Sony, how hard would it really be for them to cop even a few best practices in software design?
They made sense to me. Practically, it would be easy for camera makers to add these features on their pro bodies as they're not intended to be appealing to amateurs/casual shooters.
>Sure, this might not pass the "smack the lens and there shouldn't be a single iota of movement test", but that's a very narrow use-case,
That is a mainstream usecase for pretty much every single professional! A more secure interface between the plate and body would mean the tripod and body are better integrated and would allow for improved vibration reduction IMHO.
>as opposed to not having to spend hundreds of dollars on a more expensive camera whose manufacturer invested hundreds of thousands of man-hours to develop and test.
Okay but the cost of the kit is not a big concern if you're making money with it. I wouldn't think twice about sticking in 32 gigs of RAM or a thousand dollar CPU on my dev box either because I would make that back very quickly.
>I don't like the Bluetooth idea for a few reasons. One, you have to toggle it on and off if you want to conserve camera battery.
Bluetooth LE devices can have upto a year of battery life !
>Two, you have to have a Bluetooth enabled device capable of controlling the camera (read, smartphone) which introduces a potential failure point because now you have to make sure you have two things charged (your phone and your camera) because remote batteries can last for years.
Why does it have to be a smartphone?
>To me, the innovation in the camera market has been phenomenal. The speed at which cameras can autofocus and burst shoot, as well as the battery life have all improved while the prices have continued to drop.
Yes, this has been amazing. Pretty much any basic DSLR can take great pictures. And having a common mount across the basic/pro bodies unlocks this huge library of lenses (which make more of a difference w.r.t IQ anyway).
> this guy's rants sound to me like a super demanding, high-end user.
Yes. He is. He's a respected professional photographer, and most of his readership are also serious photographers, with many pro or semi-pros among them. His site is largely read by people looking to optimise for the best IQ their equipment can deliver, and he doesn't really write all that much that's targeted at more casual photographers.
> First of all, what's wrong with having a standardized mount size? I like knowing that I can fit my camera onto any standard mount I want to buy without issue.
Arca-swiss plates are the de-facto standard. I don't know any serious photographers that don't use arca-swiss plates when they do tripod work - the issue here is that not all photographers actually do that much tripod work (I know several wedding photographers, for example, who rarely if ever mount the cameras on tripods (note: they still have tripods for lighting, but that's a different system with different requirements).
> To me, the innovation in the camera market has been phenomenal. The speed at which cameras can autofocus and burst shoot, as well as the battery life have all improved while the prices have continued to drop.
This is less true at the end of the market he (mostly) writes for. A professional DSLR body has generally risen in price over the years, even taking into account inflation. Battery life has improved, but honestly battery life has never been the problem with pro DSLRs that it has been - and to some extent still is - with mirrorless and consumer cameras. The autofocus in the latest nikon pro DSLRs is a notable improvement over the previous generation, but, again, the nikon pro DSLR focus system has always been really good so again it's a lot less of a significant leap than you see in generations of mirrorless cameras, where technology is evolving more quickly.
To people at this end of the market, using high end canon/nikon DSLRs, the progress of innovation has been far slower, with lots of longstanding problems and frustrations that never get addressed. For example, neither the nikon d5 ($6500) or the nikon d850 ($3300) have a built in GPS (cost of GPS chip is less than $5), and the standalone GPS is bulky, interferes with holding the camera, expensive and is actually discontinued in some regions(!!).
> The one thing I think could definitely be improved is the software interface
This is me as well but its because I may go a whole month without using my Canon. There is a a 5-10 minute learning curve to remember how to do everything (ie changing aperture, shutter speed, etc.). I'm sure its not a problem for a professional who uses it regularly.
If Sony would stop making as many smartphone models and add a couple of those engineers to their DSLR team, they should be able to solve most of these issues pretty quickly.
Sony makes about 5 different smartphone models each year. If they focused on shipping just one or two I guess they'd have more time to develop a better DSLR?
This would give them a big advantage over Nikon and Canon. Sony has a lot of knowledge and experience that Nikon and Canon don't have. Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, USB-c, batteries are all great in their smartphones. Why not use that to make their cameras better?
Seems like they mostly did this with the a9, though the dig in the article about the upper card slot being slow is annoying, and Sony's mobile app for WiFi image transfer is bizarre, requiring the phone and camera to join a camera-created network, even though the camera can be manually configured to join your own access point.
[+] [-] brudgers|8 years ago|reply
There's nothing stopping a photographer from permanently attaching an Arca-Swiss plate to the bottom of a camera body with a bit of cyanoacrylate or some screws if it makes better photographs. For me, walking around with an Arca-Swiss plate on my camera made me appreciate that 1/4-20 socket is flush. Walking around with a 120mm plate made me appreciate that the 1/4-20 socket is flush both top to bottom and front to back.
Like everything in photography 1/4-20 and Arca-Swiss are defined by engineering tradeoffs. The cost of slower direct attachment of 1/4-20 is in exchange for the physical strength of bolted connection and the flexibility adopting a broader standard affords - I can build a camera mount from general components available at the hardware store (including round stock and a 1/4-20 die in a statistically unlikely universe).
edit: I left out all the electronic/software rants because photography is undergoing Cambrian explosion in regards to controls and computation (but mirrorless cameras are nothing new).
[+] [-] wazoox|8 years ago|reply
[1]: https://mondaynote.com/memo-to-camera-makers-put-android-in-...
[+] [-] speleo_engr|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] TheRealPomax|8 years ago|reply
And of course, a full input mapping for all "buttons" on the camera so that I can "press" any of them from my android device. Don't even bother labeling them appropriately, just have a button signal protocol that says "the following numbers will work, and have the following N-step granularity" and then simply supply the relevant profile both on-camera (it's a USB device after all) and as download for each camera model that can be used to resolve "number" to "name of actual button on the camera".
In fact why stop there: I want that standard to be so open that any windows, linux, osx, raspi, android, iphone, etc. user can communicate with any camera. Got a Sony and a Nikon? Why would you care, just switch profile, done.
While Android on the camera itself would be a terrible idea (it would only be useful in such a stripped down config that user apps would be pretty much impossible), seemless interoperability backed by at least two open standards would be fantastic.
I guess we'll see how long it takes IKEA to make a good camera. None of these things are new, they've all been around for decades, camera makers just can't be bothered to make cameras for people. They purely make them for money.
[+] [-] dguaraglia|8 years ago|reply
I love Android (I've only had Android phones since my first smartphone), but battery efficiency is definitely not its strong suit, even on a clean install on a flagship phone.
[+] [-] rhinoceraptor|8 years ago|reply
And who would want to edit photos on a big, heavy DSLR when they have a much more convenient smartphone, or iPad with a better screen?
The battery drain is also an issue. DSLRs use a mechanical shutter, which is sort of antiquated today. But it means one camera battery can last for hundreds or thousands of shots, and days of standby since the main screen is rarely on.
[+] [-] nradov|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gambiting|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] TheSoftwareGuy|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nradov|8 years ago|reply
And one more dumb thing. They don't include internal GPS receivers or electronic compasses for geotagging even in fairly expensive models. The chips cost <$10 now so this is just a silly limitation. Add-on GPS receivers tend to be bulky and fragile.
[+] [-] alecdibble|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] askafriend|8 years ago|reply
Imagine full iOS integration, super fast A-11 Bionic chip (same as iPhone), high throughput wireless components, custom OS (like WatchOS), developer API, W2 chip for Bluetooth pairing, OLED screen, and beautiful lightweight aluminum housing.
That would completely change the market. But we can only dream.
[+] [-] tqkxzugoaupvwqr|8 years ago|reply
I don’t think Apple will venture into dedicated camera equipment. The iPhone camera is one of the big selling points and keeps people upgrading. Apple will not sacrifice their cash cow for a comparatively niche market. A dedicated device also goes against the unification that Apple seems to pursue.
[+] [-] Angostura|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pavlov|8 years ago|reply
Also, the Mac Pro fiasco makes me doubtful that Apple wants to be in any pro markets anymore.
[+] [-] dflock|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] djrogers|8 years ago|reply
Rather than disrupt the high end consumer camera market with a camera in 2 years, they’ll do it with iPhone in 5 or 10 years.
[+] [-] headcanon|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Mikeb85|8 years ago|reply
No, it really wouldn't. Look at the heavyweights right now, they all either have a ton of expertise in optics or in sensors. That market cares more about glass selection, sensors and taking pictures than bells and whistles like iOS would provide.
[+] [-] r00fus|8 years ago|reply
Also, would they then be making camera sensors? Or would they just figure Sony (whose profits they'd be stepping on) would just take it? Do they have a 2nd source for this critical component?
[+] [-] buildbot|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] newsbinator|8 years ago|reply
But that, too, would be moving in the wrong direction.
[+] [-] clra|8 years ago|reply
I was hoping that the author would add something about the UIs of these cameras. The bodies of modern DSLRs are jampacked with every kind of knob, control, button, dial, and dongle that you can possibly think of.
To a large extent, that's kind of the whole point — these cameras are for professionals and professionals ostensibly need to be able to adjust every aspect of their picture. But in practice, 95% of users aren't using 95% of these adjusters 95% of the time. Most people are changing their aperture, exposure compensation, and a small handful of other things, and yet, dozens of other readily-available and features are still bolted onto the camera that get used roughly never.
There are other downsides besides complexity too. Fuji's mirrorless X100 series is a popular camera with consumers and for years it's shipped with an exposure compensation dial right at the top edge of its body. For just as many years the thing's been loose enough and with little enough inset from the outside that whenever you throw it in a bag or something, there's a pretty reasonable chance that it'll come out cranked all the one way or the other. Sometimes you don't notice, and there goes your shot.
The possible fixes are pretty easy — either move it in so it's less prone to accidental adjustment, or take the units off the thing so that it could optionally be reset every time you turn the camera on, but Fuji will probably never fix the problem – the way things are is the way things are, and they should stay that way.
It would be insanely great if instead of just cargo culting what they themselves have done in the past and what everyone else is doing, camera manufacturers started to think about optimizing these designs for the benefit of the user a little bit. Unfortunately, they never seem to.
[+] [-] wjnc|8 years ago|reply
One the one hand, quality camera's should keep upgrading the periferal hardware to keep match with modern IT-supplies and on the other hand keep a focus on durable products. Why wouldn't producers do this? Cost savings and probably price competition.
The competition (smart phones) have a whole different market. They have a product that people (regretably?) replace every 2-3 years. The market dictates the newest techniques. Pictures are sensors + software. Software has a much shorter improvement cycle. Hence, I would expect a continuously larger part of the camera market to 'fall' for the smartphone camera. Heck, the 'official' advice from my preferred reviewers is not to buy a small camera anymore, but use the savings for a better smartphone.
And then you have large old-camera corporations struggling because their highest margin products (just a guess that that was the little cameras in the former days, not the professionaly product) are falling away. So they don't have the money to keep their high-end products up quality wise nor the institutional awareness to quickly adapt. Cycle a few times... Read OP.
[+] [-] smileysteve|8 years ago|reply
- IR Remote; Works in the studio (or in the field) because your lighting is to the sides or front (if it's behind the camera, you have shadow)
- USB/Wifi version. The typical pro is taking 300-3000 clicks before uploading to lightroom for post; between this there are many other time sucks: A) transportation back to the studio B) unpacking your camera gear backpack C) showering bathroom. I don't know how this is interfering. The field shooters are traditionally switching multiple cards from a day/week/second shooter - there HD gig and backup purposes never have them go camera to computer.
- Slow card writes; this affects burst and you'll find the best sports cameras either compensate with ram or have faster card writes. Of course, this matters more with video.
I can agree with some of the the points though; better AF UX; though I appreciate my classic dot that lights up and I can preference with a joypad. The better tripod mount. And battery grips should mount through the tripod/battery/base and need no cables (my camera battery grips work like this)
I also don't want android apps; for the most part, i even resist a program that does multi exposure for fireworks - especially now that anybody with an iphone can take that picture, probably better.
[+] [-] l33tbro|8 years ago|reply
I obviously don't expect a $2000 dslr to match a $50k Alexa in image quality, but surely they must be able to make the motion of the images smoother and less CCTV looking.
Blackmagic put out an amazing little pocket camera a few years ago with gorgeous colours and buttery smooth motion, why can't the big guys follow suit?
[+] [-] rrauenza|8 years ago|reply
Tell me the DOF, and make finding the hyperfocal distance easier -- a button to just take me there, or a calculator that tells me the ideal distance and a display that shows me my estimated focal distance.
[+] [-] brudgers|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] luckydude|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] MikeTV|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] slantyyz|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mi100hael|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dheera|8 years ago|reply
I shoot pretty much only with old manual-focus lenses from days of yore. Most of my lenses are older than I am. They're all made of metal, built like a tank, and way easier to use. No fidgety UIs or menus to manipulate, perfectly calibrated infinity focus (slap the focus ring to the end until it stops and landscapes are perfectly sharp 100% of the time), rock-solid, don't break under pressure inside my bag, and they just work, no questions asked.
Totally agree about the lack of Arca-Swiss adoption by camera manufacturers. Camera bodies and heavy lenses could easily have a built-in Arca-Swiss shape at the bottom and still have a 1/4-20" screw hole for people who need it.
[+] [-] rplnt|8 years ago|reply
Camera itself got some bugfix updates, but is missing some essentials as working as a web cam, supporting timelapse, etc...
[+] [-] web64|8 years ago|reply
Also, doing things like HDR or stop-motion can be a pain. Better software or the ability to run apps could solve this.
[+] [-] paulgerhardt|8 years ago|reply
It meets 9.5 of the 11 features the author is requesting but those aren't why I like it. It's also why I find his argument to be flawed.
The best parts of owning it aren't any of the authors points. It's that it solves a class of problem not addressed by the market. It fits the bill for: "ultimate international travel camera". It gives me: 1] nice photos (raw, 1" sensor) 2] that I can process immediately (runs Android, Photoshop, Lightroom, Instagram) and 3] publish directly (4G connection, WiFi N) in a 4] compact form factor (bit thicker than a smartphone). I'm sad to see this category not take off but I'm glad I have one for myself. As an added benefit its great for China and Taiwan where I can still have my primary iPhone and use my camera as WiFi hotspot to get cheap data with a local sim.
It was done as a design exercise with Panasonic similar to the Hasselblad True with Motorola. It's far from perfect (design exercises usually aren't).
But. And that's a big 'B'. This camera let's me solve my photo problem (How do I take nice photos and share them while on the go) in way fewer steps and with less equipment than the mainstream camera solutions and with better quality than smartphones. (I want the photos to be "Nice" remember? Also 1" sensor! Raw! )
The author is in effect pushing for more features. That's not how you solve your users problems. What the camera industry needs to do is diff assumptions made about how camera's were used when these platforms were created (D series, EOS series) and how they are being used today - then solve for the new problem classes that emerged. Not tack on more features and higher performance as the author is suggesting. In the former case you push for the ability to run Photoshop and Instagram on the camera and publish mobiley, in the later case you push for faster bus speeds and more stable camera mounts.
[+] [-] codingdave|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] stefanve|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rb808|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cm2187|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sethx|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dkrich|8 years ago|reply
First of all, what's wrong with having a standardized mount size? I like knowing that I can fit my camera onto any standard mount I want to buy without issue. The quick-release and plastic body concerns are a non-issue for me because most tripod manufacturers have fixed this by simply putting a quick-release plate on the tripod that has a rubber surface. Voila- when I am in the mode of taking mounted photos, I screw the plate on, and just leave it. Then I can quickly mount and unmount the camera as-needed. Sure, this might not pass the "smack the lens and there shouldn't be a single iota of movement test", but that's a very narrow use-case, as opposed to not having to spend hundreds of dollars on a more expensive camera whose manufacturer invested hundreds of thousands of man-hours to develop and test.
As for the remote, that also seemed to be a pretty narrow use case. I have a standard infrared remote I use when taking mounted photos, and it works fine 99% of the time. I don't like the Bluetooth idea for a few reasons. One, you have to toggle it on and off if you want to conserve camera battery. Two, you have to have a Bluetooth enabled device capable of controlling the camera (read, smartphone) which introduces a potential failure point because now you have to make sure you have two things charged (your phone and your camera) because remote batteries can last for years. You want to take pictures with your steering wheel? Sounds cool, but is that a use-case Sony should invest heavily to satisfy?
To me, the innovation in the camera market has been phenomenal. The speed at which cameras can autofocus and burst shoot, as well as the battery life have all improved while the prices have continued to drop. The one thing I think could definitely be improved (as a Sony Alpha user) is the software interface, which took me a solid month of study to master and is still cumbersome to use on a daily basis. But, the complexity of photography and understanding all of the variables involved is one of the most appealing parts to me.
[+] [-] barretts|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ksk|8 years ago|reply
>Sure, this might not pass the "smack the lens and there shouldn't be a single iota of movement test", but that's a very narrow use-case,
That is a mainstream usecase for pretty much every single professional! A more secure interface between the plate and body would mean the tripod and body are better integrated and would allow for improved vibration reduction IMHO.
>as opposed to not having to spend hundreds of dollars on a more expensive camera whose manufacturer invested hundreds of thousands of man-hours to develop and test.
Okay but the cost of the kit is not a big concern if you're making money with it. I wouldn't think twice about sticking in 32 gigs of RAM or a thousand dollar CPU on my dev box either because I would make that back very quickly.
>I don't like the Bluetooth idea for a few reasons. One, you have to toggle it on and off if you want to conserve camera battery.
Bluetooth LE devices can have upto a year of battery life !
>Two, you have to have a Bluetooth enabled device capable of controlling the camera (read, smartphone) which introduces a potential failure point because now you have to make sure you have two things charged (your phone and your camera) because remote batteries can last for years.
Why does it have to be a smartphone?
>To me, the innovation in the camera market has been phenomenal. The speed at which cameras can autofocus and burst shoot, as well as the battery life have all improved while the prices have continued to drop.
Yes, this has been amazing. Pretty much any basic DSLR can take great pictures. And having a common mount across the basic/pro bodies unlocks this huge library of lenses (which make more of a difference w.r.t IQ anyway).
[+] [-] jfindley|8 years ago|reply
Yes. He is. He's a respected professional photographer, and most of his readership are also serious photographers, with many pro or semi-pros among them. His site is largely read by people looking to optimise for the best IQ their equipment can deliver, and he doesn't really write all that much that's targeted at more casual photographers.
> First of all, what's wrong with having a standardized mount size? I like knowing that I can fit my camera onto any standard mount I want to buy without issue.
Arca-swiss plates are the de-facto standard. I don't know any serious photographers that don't use arca-swiss plates when they do tripod work - the issue here is that not all photographers actually do that much tripod work (I know several wedding photographers, for example, who rarely if ever mount the cameras on tripods (note: they still have tripods for lighting, but that's a different system with different requirements).
> To me, the innovation in the camera market has been phenomenal. The speed at which cameras can autofocus and burst shoot, as well as the battery life have all improved while the prices have continued to drop.
This is less true at the end of the market he (mostly) writes for. A professional DSLR body has generally risen in price over the years, even taking into account inflation. Battery life has improved, but honestly battery life has never been the problem with pro DSLRs that it has been - and to some extent still is - with mirrorless and consumer cameras. The autofocus in the latest nikon pro DSLRs is a notable improvement over the previous generation, but, again, the nikon pro DSLR focus system has always been really good so again it's a lot less of a significant leap than you see in generations of mirrorless cameras, where technology is evolving more quickly.
To people at this end of the market, using high end canon/nikon DSLRs, the progress of innovation has been far slower, with lots of longstanding problems and frustrations that never get addressed. For example, neither the nikon d5 ($6500) or the nikon d850 ($3300) have a built in GPS (cost of GPS chip is less than $5), and the standalone GPS is bulky, interferes with holding the camera, expensive and is actually discontinued in some regions(!!).
[+] [-] devmunchies|8 years ago|reply
This is me as well but its because I may go a whole month without using my Canon. There is a a 5-10 minute learning curve to remember how to do everything (ie changing aperture, shutter speed, etc.). I'm sure its not a problem for a professional who uses it regularly.
[+] [-] LoSboccacc|8 years ago|reply
I'd be ranting if he were a mid-range guy being demanding, but the point here is that no amount of money can buy a decently composed camera hardware
[+] [-] spiderfarmer|8 years ago|reply
If Sony would stop making as many smartphone models and add a couple of those engineers to their DSLR team, they should be able to solve most of these issues pretty quickly.
Sony makes about 5 different smartphone models each year. If they focused on shipping just one or two I guess they'd have more time to develop a better DSLR?
This would give them a big advantage over Nikon and Canon. Sony has a lot of knowledge and experience that Nikon and Canon don't have. Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, USB-c, batteries are all great in their smartphones. Why not use that to make their cameras better?
[+] [-] Terretta|8 years ago|reply