Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
StephenPatterson

No focus peaking???

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am not going to read all those freaking numbers in the view finder while eagle is flying away. I will consider myself lucky if I can keep the flying eagle in the frame!!

 

Likewise when a warbler is jinking around in a bush I'd rather be watching for that single moment when light, posture, visibility, background and focus intersect. I don't want the distraction of checking to make sure some unwanted exposure, focus, meter pattern, drive, playback, bracketing, flash or storage mode wasn't accidentally activated. A good user interface makes these features available when needed, and difficult to activate accidentally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Likewise when a warbler is jinking around in a bush I'd rather be watching for that single moment when light, posture, visibility, background and focus intersect. I don't want the distraction of checking to make sure some unwanted exposure, focus, meter pattern, drive, playback, bracketing, flash or storage mode wasn't accidentally activated. A good user interface makes these features available when needed, and difficult to activate accidentally.

 

Why would anyone disagree with this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why would anyone disagree with this?

 

Absent a good user interface I'd rather not have the unused features at all. It's one of the biggest reasons I switched from Nikon to Leica R. Nikon's feature creep did not come with a well-designed user interface and I was willing - and still am willing - to pay more for fewer features along with a better user interface.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Absent a good user interface I'd rather not have the unused features at all. It's one of the biggest reasons I switched from Nikon to Leica R. Nikon's feature creep did not come with a well-designed user interface and I was willing - and still am willing - to pay more for fewer features along with a good user interface.

 

OK sounds reasonable.

 

FWIW the Nex 6 can be used with totally manual settings and nothing but the image in the screen. The rest of the interface can be ignored. I almost always work this way with any camera shooting architecture and it is the only way I work with studio flash. It has been the same on all of my digital cameras as with my view cameras. The tethered interface of Capture One is what I use a lot.

 

I hate to comment on the T but if that works for your needs, fine.

Edited by AlanG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do think camera companies make a lot of effort trying to design their interfaces to work rapidly with the feature set. Pro photographers have a wide range of needs and preferencs so pro cameras try to accommodate as many as possible. For others a simple interface can work and maybe the T is one of the best for that market. But lots of people using amateur level cameras want pro features and a pro type of interface. You can't just arbitrarily say that one is better than the other. But it is good to have choices.

 

FWIW I have come up with two unique interfaces that are nothing like what is on the market. IMO there is a conceptually different way to look at the problem that is nothing like what any of these companies is doing. The T is not close to what I have in mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find this harping on pro photographers a bit strange. I have found about the same proportion of photographers that I respect amongst both serious amateurs and professionals.

I would say the needs and skills are similar, with the main difference being the decision to make a business out of a talent.

 

Having said that, professionals are not the target market for camera makers. The money is to be made from selling cameras to amateurs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I find this harping on pro photographers a bit strange. I have found about the same proportion of photographers that I respect amongst both serious amateurs and professionals.

I would say the needs and skills are similar, with the main difference being the decision to make a business out of a talent.

 

Having said that, professionals are not the target market for camera makers. The money is to be made from selling cameras to amateurs.

 

I am using "pro" as a design configuration. A lot of amateurs use Hasselblads today but it is still a pro camera. However I am on a private forum of exclusively pro photographers and can't recall any threads complaining about having too many features or a need for a simplified interface. So take that however you want.

 

Do you actually think most enthusiasts reject these cameras and want something different but the manufacturers are totally oblivious to this market demand? Maybe the last thing some manufacturers want to do is make their high end cameras work like cellphones. Although Sony makes two cameras already that attach to cellphones and work with that kind of interface. So clearly they have been re-thinking the interface for that market way before Leica did.

Edited by AlanG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I see professional wedding photographers (being the ones most seen out in the wild) using things like Canon 40D with a Vivitar direct flash on top….

No comparison to many of the members here, pro or ama.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And I see professional wedding photographers (being the ones most seen out in the wild) using things like Canon 40D with a Vivitar direct flash on top…. No comparison to many of the members here, pro or ama.

 

Just keeping the exchange light...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And I see professional wedding photographers (being the ones most seen out in the wild) using things like Canon 40D with a Vivitar direct flash on top…. No comparison to many of the members here, pro or ama.

 

So you would rather see the wedding photographer using a T with its pop up flash?

 

You seem to be making some kind of point that people here know what they are doing because many own expensive gear. Surely true for some. Why put down anyone due to the gear they choose to use? That 40D is more capable than the gear used for numerous iconic images. Anyone can buy equipment if they have some money. When I was 15 I shot weddings and bar mitzvahs with a Minolta SR-1 and a little Braun flash. It worked for me. Then I bought a Nikon and a Leica but my work did not miraculously get better. Thinking gear ownership on its own has any significance is kind of sad to me. I knew a guy who had 4x5 to 8x10 Linhofs and every lens but just shot boring portraits of his kids. He was happy though.

 

Come with me on an interior shoot and see what you can do with 10 studio strobes, all kinds of light modifiers, radio controls, grip gear, tethered shooting to C1, etc.using all of my high quality gear. My assistant will even help you. The camera interface is really such a simple aspect of the process that I don't even notice it. And we are not even talking about production work where you have to find locations, build sets, hire models, choose wardrobe and props, have a crew with stylists, photo techs. deal with permits and contracts, weather forecasting, insurance, meals on the set, etc.

 

The pros I am talking about are the ones doing the very top level advertising work worldwide and they don't seem to worry about their gear a fraction of the amount as many do here. They do shoot some wonderful photos too.

 

If a simpler interface floats your boat that is great. Maybe it will lead to better photos for some too. Choice is a good thing and maybe other manufacturers will learn from it. But my needs are met.

 

In general what separates many successful pros from enthusiasts is that the pro understands that he/she is not in the picture making business but is in the customer pleasing business. So there is a lot more to deal with than the gear.

Edited by AlanG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I find this harping on pro photographers a bit strange. I have found about the same proportion of photographers that I respect amongst both serious amateurs and professionals.

I would say the needs and skills are similar, with the main difference being the decision to make a business out of a talent.

 

+1

 

Selling photography involves selling as much as it involves photography. There are many amateur photographers whose work far eclipses that of many professionals but are relatively unknown because they lack selling skills.

 

Having said that, professionals are not the target market for camera makers. The money is to be made from selling cameras to amateurs.

 

+1 again. Amateurs are the volume market. Camera makers build the pro-spec cameras for the 'halo' effect, much as GM makes the Corvette to draw customers into showrooms so they can be sold a minivan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I missing some argument? What does it matter how many buy pro cameras or what cameras sell the most? Why does it matter if amateurs lack selling skills and don't sell their photos? Some experts (pro or amateur) like one kind of camera while other experts like another. The same is true across all skill levels. That is why there are so many choices. Most pros and advanced amateurs seem to gravitate to the more sophisticated, more costly, and more feature rich camera systems. Do they not?

 

I am simply stating that my observation is that the pros I've known (and they are in the hundreds including many NG photographers and top commercial shooters) do not focus on the equipment let alone complain about it very much.

Edited by AlanG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The implementation of focus peaking on the NEX-5n and A7r looked good, but in practice was not really up to the mark for me. I found I got a better hit rate (crisp images) with it turned off.

 

So, much like Jono, while I love the idea in theory, in practice it was considerably less than ideal. I like the way that the T has had some rigour attached to the interface and the options offered, rather than simply including options and settings because they are possible. I've had too many Sony options in the past (and Nikon, to be honest) which bloated what was effectively a simple camera.

 

Much like the M, I like the way the T seems to be concentrated on what is necessary or optimal for image quality and nothing more - I know there will be features I don't like, and maybe some that are missing, but I do like the lack of clutter and the ability to customise the My Camera menu - I think it's a stroke of genius and a bold move away from the bloat which has been the hallmark of many digital cameras.

 

Sorry to get back on topic.

 

Cheers

John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The first place I saw something similar to focus peaking is in the Focus Mask feature of Capture One software. In tethered shooting of a model, the photographer or assistant can keep an eye on the computer and see if the subject is moving out of focus while shooting. It works a little differently in C1 as it masks the whole area instead of putting shimmering lines around the edges. So there are other ways to implement it.

---------------------------

Focus Mask

Accelerate your image editing selection with the Focus Mask for fast verification of image sharpness and focus. The Focus Mask is applied to all images in the thumbnail browser so it becomes easy to identify the images that have the desired focus. The Focus Mask is perfectly suited for portrait, wedding and fashion shoots where, for example, the eyes of a model need to be in pin sharp. Additionally, the Focus mask can be active during tethered shooting to constantly monitor the sharp areas of focus.

 

Here is a video that demonstrates it.

 

Edited by AlanG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that is practical for a camera that is emphatically not designed to be used in a studio….

 

Am I missing some argument? What does it matter how many buy pro cameras or what cameras sell the most? Why does it matter if amateurs lack selling skills and don't sell their photos? Some experts (pro or amateur) like one kind of camera while other experts like another. The same is true across all skill levels. That is why there are so many choices. Most pros and advanced amateurs seem to gravitate to the more sophisticated, more costly, and more feature rich camera systems. Do they not?

 

I am simply stating that my observation is that the pros I've known (and they are in the hundreds including many NG photographers and top commercial shooters) do not focus on the equipment let alone complain about it very much.

Yes, you are missing that you make all kinds of spurious arguments against a camera that was never intended for the customer base you claim to be representing.

Pro buyers mean nothing in this case, yet you trot it out in every second post.

Edited by jaapv

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion there are the following reasons why we do not have focus peaking (yet) in the Leica T:

 

  • They where not able to integrate it into the firmware because they still have/had much bigger issues/todos on their list before releasing the camera to the market
  • They thought they could leave out the focus peaking feature for now, because the majority of the Leica T users will use the AF T lenses designed for the camera
  • They might plan on adding focus peaking later to the camera after they have ironed out the "more important" bugs and problems and if they see great demand by T users using M lenses on the T and wanting focus peaking

 

In general I liked focus peaking for some use cases and for some not. For me it is not a problem not having it in the T, but for other it might be and therefore I hope that Leica will add it to the camera firmware.

 

I think the statement by Maike Harberts from Leica ("We could not integrate Focus peaking the way we liked it") really means "We did not manage to integrate it in time to meet the May 24/25/26 deadline"...

 

As for features in cameras:

 

I think features itself are not the problem, but the way how they are integrated. A lot of companies do absolutely underestimate user experience design. I worked for industrial software and hardware design companies, which where hired by big companies all over the world designing and integrating their user interface for smartphones etc. ... believe me, thats expensive and you really have to educate the client on the best practices etc.

 

And in my opinion some camera companies do not spend enough money on user experience and UI design and development...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And on the other side the "best cameras" with the "best and most features" do still not help you to be financially successful:

 

Sony forecasts further losses despite strong PS4 and smartphone sales | The Verge

 

"...The digital camera business reported a sales decrease of 2 percent, owing to an overall contraction in the market..."

 

Sony again makes a loss of over 1 billion in the last fiscal year.

 

I think Leica clearly understands that just adding more features and more megapixels does not help you to survive in the current "race", and they have even more pressure to be financially successful than Sony has.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Alan

All of these technologies are likely to be useful to someone in some situations ( well, most of them!)

However, if you want to present a slimmed down interface without menu bloat (which we all agree is a supportable position and was certainly Leica's intent) then some things are going to have to be left out. So they've left some things out. Inevitably there will be disagreement about which are the things to leave out!.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Now that is practical for a camera that is emphatically not designed to be used in a studio….

 

 

Yes, you are missing that you make all kinds of spurious arguments against a camera that was never intended for the customer base you claim to be representing.

Pro buyers mean nothing in this case, yet you trot it out in every second post.

 

The pro buyer aspect only came up when I asked why the guy who didn't understand dual card slots bought a pro body. Then you went off on a tangent saying lots of amateurs are better photographers than pros. So I asked where you were going with that.

 

Gee I'm the one specifically saying these pro bodies with lots of features are not right for everyone and that a camera like the T would be more suiitable for them. And now you get on my case for the opposite reason.

 

I can't ever win with you because you twist all of my statements into your own peculiar biases that have no consistency of direction it seems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...