A concept camera that is even simpler than a Leica

[kdriceman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Some people have resistance to these features and some don't but like it or not they are here to stay and need to be considered when designing the interface. How large the demand is for a camera with minimal features is hard to say but I'm sure many companies did a lot of testing with focus groups and others before loading up the cameras as they have.

 

I'm probably somewhere in the middle on this. I have to admit that I haven't exerted the energy to learn much about the scene modes in my Nex camera. But I have used the low-light mode you mention and like it very much. I have also used the in-camera HDR and did not like the results as well as taking my own bracketed images and putting my HDR together in post.

 

I also use Canon DSLRs for action photography and although I have shot 10s of thousands of images I am still amazed at the speed, accuracy and quality of the auto-focus on these cameras. 8fps, 1/8000s perfectly exposed and focused. What a tool.

 

But, I do also enjoy the simplicity of my Leica digital RFs and my film cameras.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[AlanG]

I do believe that nothing replaces the human mind. The reason a camera can take decisions faster than us photographers because there are many factors left out during the decision taking process. Had all these elements been factored in the decision making, it would take a camera one year if at all to make a decision on each photo after you click the shutter. Our capabilities of instantly recognizing elements in front of us at any angle, any direction, any location, any lighting condition is not matched yet in computer vision and artificial intelligence. Let alone feeling the emotions emitted by a person or a scene in front of us. Take face detection for instance. I was looking at a photo by Steve McCurry which consisted of a woman protecting her daughter on the left of the frame with a man next to a tree slightly behind them. He cut off the mother from her chest upward and from the left (her right arm) and decided to include the man and the tree on the right instead but out of focus. Had he had facial detection on, the camera would place the face of the young girl, and the face of the man in focus and the shot would be ruined.

 

I agree but good photographers have always known when to rely on automation in a camera and when to turn it off... starting from the earliest exposure metering systems.

[AlanG]

.... I have to admit that I haven't exerted the energy to learn much about the scene modes in my Nex camera. But I have used the low-light mode you mention and like it very much. I have also used the in-camera HDR and did not like the results as well as taking my own bracketed images and putting my HDR together in post....

 

 

Doing HDR in post is certainly likely to give more control. But even then you might want a camera that does auto bracketing.

 

I think with the Nex series, Sony has included everything but the kitchen sink and this is a primary example of the difficulty of including all of those features without taxing your brain too much to use them. I sometimes get overloaded when I use it and that camera takes real study, even for an expert, to get the most out of the many "special" features. I presume other cameras are similar but I am not so familiar with them. It is easy to throw up your hands and say you want something simpler but then you also can't do some things.

 

These must be interesting and challenging times for camera designers. Whereas Leica once took about 12 years to come up with a faster film take up system and an angled rewind crank. Designing a "simple" camera today will have the challenge of what features to leave out and also to decide if there is anything about new control methods that are better than the old ones.

[Jriachi]

I agree but good photographers have always known when to rely on automation in a camera and when to turn it off... starting from the earliest exposure metering systems.

 

Hello AlanG,

A camera will never see a scene in an artistic fashion (at least not in the near future)! I presume that you turn off automation when you need to get artistic. This concept allows you to shoot yourself in the foot should you find it artistic... On the other hand you could get artistic with your composition using a point and shoot camera (fully automated). However, the manual one is more versatile. You really need to learn what is happening under the hood and to understand the full capabilities of your camera. To operate a manual camera efficiently you have to have some mental presets for the camera. You have to slowdown as a photographer to start seeing, but there are times where you have to react fast when you do see because photography is all about timing. It is a paradox. I know:)

 

At the end of the day a photographer should use whatever works for him/her. There is no right or wrong as long as you are content with your photos. By designing your dream camera you learn about yourself as a photographer.

 

Feel free to share your dream camera... I am curious.

 

Jawad

[AlanG]

 

Feel free to share your dream camera... I am curious.

 

Jawad

 

I think you are on the right track coming up with a minimalistic camera. But it is just a thought exercise I presume since it is pretty difficult for any individual to manufacture a digital camera today. (The guy who thought of the GoPro did it.) It seems to me that what you really are trying to do is find some kind of philosophical association between camera features and creative approaches. That certainly is worthy of discussion but we all know that many creative images have been made with all kinds of gear and approaches. Most photography serves a function and is not meant simply as a form of artistic expression.

 

There have always been people who picked a narrow way of working and thus did not need much versatility. For them there may be an association between the "purity" of their work and the purity of their cameras. Maybe they also only use one kind of film and never crop an image, filing out their negative carriers to prove this. But consider if a camera and processing system could just automatically always produce the image exactly as you envision it or allow you at any time to change it in any way... would we care about settings and features at all? That is the direction photography has been heading and needs to be considered as the key aspect to any philosophical discussion about the essence of what it means to be a photographer. To me photography is becoming more like painting where you can revisit and revise an idea.

 

I can't say I spend any time thinking of what would be my dream camera. If technology did not move along I would have been happy using a Nikon F, 4x5 or Hasselblad for my entire career. For many serious photographers the gear from 1880 was good enough. But as cameras evolved it became easier to get good photos under a wider range of conditions and more possibilities opened up. A long time ago I moved from a Hasselblad to a Rollei 6006 and that was the beginning of my understanding of how electronic technology could improve camera design and make them more useful.

 

I think all of the modern DSLRs offer a lot and it will be interesting to see what improvements and features they come up with. EVFs will surely take over from SLRs. Just go to a store and look through a Canon APS DSLR camera and then look through one of the Sony SLT models. The full frame optical DSLRs, MF DSLRs, and the M optical viewfinders will be the last holdouts.

 

I don't make any associations between artistic results and the cameras used to make them. I feel I could be just as artistic with any camera as long as it provides the quality I need under the conditions I use it. Photography comes down to two basic things - where you aim the camera and when you fire the shutter. The rest is preparation and part of that is choosing the camera or settings for that moment. Some of my favorite photos were made with 2 MP p&s cameras that were automatic and fairly limited in capability. But I know how to work within those limitations which is a requirement of using any camera. What I find challenging today is to fly cameras and use them via remote control. This is something that recently became possible due to advances in electronics.

 

I think the Nex 6 is closest to the perfect combination of size, design, versatility, features, etc. for a camera that is convenient to carry and is quick to use. It could use some work on the interface which could probably be fixed if the user could plug it into a computer and program it. And of course it can use some work on AF speed to get it up to what a DSLR can do. This will be the general design of many cameras in the future and all of this stuff will evolve.

 

Fuji and Panasonic recently showed that they are trying to design new sensor technology that will allow for smaller lenses (due to better acceptance of light from a steeper angle) and much higher signal to noise ratios. So before long there may be wider dynamic range which will give more control in post and will make the idea of "accurate" exposure less important. Shutters won't be needed so this will make cameras smaller, silent and faster. Pulling a moment from a video clip will become a common way to work. Greater light sensitivity opens up new possibilities in smaller lenses and can also open up new ways to shoot.

[Jriachi]

Most photography serves a function and is not meant simply as a form of artistic expression.

 

Hello AlanG,

The above sentence states our difference. This camera concept is purely meant to remove the boundaries of artistic expression, and it does not comply to any built-in logic or algorithm.

 

I like your reading of the future. The market tends to move slowly though.

[AlanG]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello AlanG,

This camera concept is purely meant to remove the boundaries of artistic expression, and it does not comply to any built-in logic or algorithm.

 

I like your reading of the future. The market tends to move slowly though.

 

Then it should probably have rise, fall, shift, swing and tilt too along with a method of producing multiple exposures. The more robust the raw files the more that can be done with them. Besides features that are left out, I am not sure what boundaries are restricting one's expression with any camera.

[earleygallery]

This camera concept is purely meant to remove the boundaries of artistic expression, and it does not comply to any built-in logic or algorithm.

 

What exactly does this mean?

 

If I use an AE camera and want exposure compensation, I've always found it easier just to switch to manual. Apart from your slider/exposure compensation button what does it do differently?

[AlanG]

What exactly does this mean?

 

If I use an AE camera and want exposure compensation, I've always found it easier just to switch to manual. Apart from your slider/exposure compensation button what does it do differently?

 

It struck me a bit too late that below the surface this is really a discussion about approaches to photography and not about cameras at all. And to say something such as "remove the boundaries of artistic expression" would really need some defining in that context. Compared with sculpture for instance, photography has some insurmountable bounds of artistic expression. Likewise a camera that forces one to learn how to set it would be a boundary for some very artistic people.