edwardkaraa Posted October 30, 2015 Share #41 Posted October 30, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) But I agree that on a new M body I would like to see both the SL top screen and the M speed dial and the SL EVF as an accessory. But I don't see the point on the SL. I don't see the advantage of the top screen on the M, except for making the top more cluttered. I would rather have more information in the viewfinder instead. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 30, 2015 Posted October 30, 2015 Hi edwardkaraa, Take a look here What's wrong with a good old shutter speed dial?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
LucisPictor Posted October 30, 2015 Share #42 Posted October 30, 2015 Nothing wrong with it, that's why I have (and love) my M8, M6, Fuji X-E2, Fuji X-T1, Nikon Df... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hepcat Posted October 30, 2015 Share #43 Posted October 30, 2015 This iconic design was invented by Oskar Barnack and used on the very first Leica camera. Shutter speeds marked on a top-plate dial, apertures around the lens. What could be simpler? Oskar Barnack designed an entirely manual camera driven by a gear train and mechanical linkages. Each of those controls was actually connected to either the shutter or aperture, and essentially physically connected the photographer to those mechanical moving parts. Each was placed (out of necessity) where it would work the mechanism. Today's cameras have no gear train or linkages... they're all electronic, so the designers have a choice of how the shutter speeds and apertures are selected; much like cars today have no direct linkage between an accelerator pedal and a carburetor. The accelerator could be a dial on the dash. Actually the "shift lever" in my wife's Prius is just a joystick that has no mechanical connections at all. The electronics allow designers free-reign in body design. However, the X-T1 and Nikon DF show that it's possible to retain conventional, mechanical-style controls even in a fully electronic camera. With the X-T1 and the current firmware, you don't even need to use the mechanical shutter; it's select-able. And frankly, there were only three reasons I bought an X-T1; they're weather-sealed, they have a traditional control layout, and with an adapter, accept M-mount lenses. I suspect that the deck-mounted shutter speed dial on the digital Leicas doesn't perform any actual mechanical task either, but the placement is where you'd expect it on a mechanical camera. I doubt we'll ever see that change on M cameras, but other than being traditional, there's no reason to have it on any other camera; particularly one with the automation the SL shows. And we've seen with the M5, R8, the Q, T, and now the SL that Leica body designers aren't afraid to take fashion risks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted October 30, 2015 Share #44 Posted October 30, 2015 Oskar Barnack also design a camera you had to put the lens cap on before you wound the film on ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted October 30, 2015 Share #45 Posted October 30, 2015 Oskar Barnack also design a camera you had to put the lens cap on before you wound the film on ... Yet another feature left off the SL! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted October 30, 2015 Share #46 Posted October 30, 2015 I suspect that the deck-mounted shutter speed dial on the digital Leicas doesn't perform any actual mechanical task either, but the placement is where you'd expect it on a mechanical camera. I’m not sure about the SL but the shutter speed dial on the M (Typ 240) isn’t mechanically linked to anything; it is just a rotating disk on an axis, not connected with anything inside the body (which is helping with weather sealing as there is no opening to seal in the first place). There is a magnet inside the dial so its position can be determined even without a mechanical link. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NZDavid Posted October 30, 2015 Author Share #47 Posted October 30, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Oskar Barnack designed an entirely manual camera driven by a gear train and mechanical linkages. Each of those controls was actually connected to either the shutter or aperture, and essentially physically connected the photographer to those mechanical moving parts. Each was placed (out of necessity) where it would work the mechanism. Today's cameras have no gear train or linkages... they're all electronic, so the designers have a choice of how the shutter speeds and apertures are selected; much like cars today have no direct linkage between an accelerator pedal and a carburetor. The accelerator could be a dial on the dash. Actually the "shift lever" in my wife's Prius is just a joystick that has no mechanical connections at all. The electronics allow designers free-reign in body design. However, the X-T1 and Nikon DF show that it's possible to retain conventional, mechanical-style controls even in a fully electronic camera. With the X-T1 and the current firmware, you don't even need to use the mechanical shutter; it's select-able. And frankly, there were only three reasons I bought an X-T1; they're weather-sealed, they have a traditional control layout, and with an adapter, accept M-mount lenses. I suspect that the deck-mounted shutter speed dial on the digital Leicas doesn't perform any actual mechanical task either, but the placement is where you'd expect it on a mechanical camera. I doubt we'll ever see that change on M cameras, but other than being traditional, there's no reason to have it on any other camera; particularly one with the automation the SL shows. And we've seen with the M5, R8, the Q, T, and now the SL that Leica body designers aren't afraid to take fashion risks. The top-plate would appear to be the logical place for a mechanically operated shutter speed control for a focal-plane shutter. But not the only one. My old Olympus OM cameras had the shutter speed around the base of the lens mount and a dial on the top controlled exposure compensation instead. With electronics you can indeed put controls in different places -- but are they any better? Interesting that early digital cameras came in all kinds of weird and wonderful shapes. I remember one pro photographer describing them as looking like hairdryers. But the shape of cameras reverted back to traditional shapes. Why? Perhaps because the compact box shape really is the best most ergonomic shape for a camera. Similarly, it is interesting that other manufacturers such as Fuji and Nikon have reverted to classic camera controls for some models. It is not all about fashion and style. I'd take ergonomics over fashion any day. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.