Is it the instructions, or is it the functionality?

[Le Chef]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It seems when Leica launches a new camera or an update to an existing one, that buyers, new to the brand, struggle with getting the camera to work they believe it should work.

So, the question that could be asked is whether the instruction book is clear enough in terms of what functionality you can have, and also how to achieve it? 

Take setting profiles as an example. It seems almost every week someone struggles with getting profiles to function the way they believe they should function. Is this because the instructions are not clear? Or because the expectations of new owners are different from Leica engineers as to how they should work?

We also get examples of functionality that does not deliver what is considered to be “normal” for other camera manufacturers. Examples like exposure preview or the use of function buttons.

Does Leica look at these examples (assuming they read forums) as opportunities, or features they don’t want to consider?

Anyone want to express a point of view on all this?

[Advertisement]

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

[David Wien]

18 minutes ago, Le Chef said:

It seems when Leica launches a new camera or an update to an existing one, that buyers, new to the brand, struggle with getting the camera to work they believe it should work.

So, the question that could be asked is whether the instruction book is clear enough in terms of what functionality you can have, and also how to achieve it? 

Take setting profiles as an example. It seems almost every week someone struggles with getting profiles to function the way they believe they should function. Is this because the instructions are not clear? Or because the expectations of new owners are different from Leica engineers as to how they should work?

We also get examples of functionality that does not deliver what is considered to be “normal” for other camera manufacturers. Examples like exposure preview or the use of function buttons.

Does Leica look at these examples (assuming they read forums) as opportunities, or features they don’t want to consider?

Anyone want to express a point of view on all this?

Not on all of it. I have no complaints about my Q3 working differently from the Canon R6 that I know better; but I am having difficulty in learning exactly what profiles do and dont do -- this by trial and error, because the manual is not totally explicit. A thread here explaining the ins and outs of profiles would be a useful resource.

David

Edited March 24, 2024 by David Wien

[Guest]

55 minutes ago, Le Chef said:

Anyone want to express a point of view on all this?

I think the manual is very good compared to other manufacturers. It does require reading, and then re-reading when a particular aspect is a problem. However, as you've pointed out from time to time, most people just switch the camera on and get on with it expecting the behaviour to be the same as their other cameras. That's not really Leica's fault.

There are also some third party videos that are a great starting point. Perhaps if Leica did a deal with, for example, "mathphotographer" and actively promoted his tutorials as "getting started" videos people might have a better understanding. Nowadays a lot of people prefer to learn on YouTube and have an aversion to spending time learning from manual.

[David Wien]

Yes, mathphotographer, while a bit ponderous (he comes across as a Swiss academic), is a breath of fresh air after the irritating teenage „influencers“ on Youtube!

David

[coleica]

I do enjoy mathphotographer's videos.  Not only are they very thorough, but each video is index.  Makes it easier to find stuff.  I have gone back to his videos a few times.  He also seems to have one heck of a camera collection.

Edited March 25, 2024 by coleica

[Pindy]

9 hours ago, Le Chef said:

It seems when Leica launches a new camera or an update to an existing one, that buyers, new to the brand, struggle with getting the camera to work they believe it should work.

So, the question that could be asked is whether the instruction book is clear enough in terms of what functionality you can have, and also how to achieve it? 

Take setting profiles as an example. It seems almost every week someone struggles with getting profiles to function the way they believe they should function. Is this because the instructions are not clear? Or because the expectations of new owners are different from Leica engineers as to how they should work?

We also get examples of functionality that does not deliver what is considered to be “normal” for other camera manufacturers. Examples like exposure preview or the use of function buttons.

Does Leica look at these examples (assuming they read forums) as opportunities, or features they don’t want to consider?

Anyone want to express a point of view on all this?

Guilty as charged, but not new to the brand. I bought my first Leica M 15 years ago.

I am never judging a Leica product against another camera. In my case, I'm trying to do something that suits my workflow and if there is no way to do that without inconvenience, and it should be an easy fix from a design standpoint, I'm going to speak up about it. If I can be persuaded that a different way of working suits me better, then like Keynes I will change my mind.

Software design is hard. Manual writing is also, evidently, hard. But harder still is nailing a release candidate with no bugs or inconsistencies. The Math Photographer tutorials are quite thorough and I've watched them in their entirety. I've also read the entire manual for the new camera. Users can be impatient and gloss too thinly over instructions. Manufacturers, too, are often subject to self-imposed deadlines that incentivize not checking your work for the sake of shipping. Or they kick the can down the road.

Is it the instructions or is it the functionality? It's unfortunately a lot of things and there is not any one culprit at which to point the finger.

Take the original Macintosh "OK" button, a masterpiece of UI design. In 1984, it had a bold ring around it, which meant that if you hit the ENTER key, it will select it as opposed to "Cancel" and you didn't have to touch the mouse. As the software evolved, the bold ring turned into a colored background, but you knew that it still meant it used the same consistent functionality. Windows did it one better and assigned an underline to the letter that would select that button. But nowadays, so much software contains a dialog box that has a "Cancel" and some form of "OK" with a colored background and bold font, but if you hit ENTER, nothing happens. Is that the user's fault for having an expectation that is violated?

And like you I have read many knee-jerk posts all over the internet about a feature or a function that, had the user taken a bit more time, they would have figured it out. I think we'd be hard-pressed to ever see a relationship like the one you describe where both halves conduct themselves with such virtue that is reciprocal to the point of consumer utopia. Reality and complexity get in the way.

 

Edited March 25, 2024 by Pindy

[David Wien]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, Pindy said:

Take the original Macintosh "OK" button, a masterpiece of UI design. In 1984, it had a bold ring around it, which meant that if you hit the ENTER key, it will select it as opposed to "Cancel" and you didn't have to touch the mouse. As the software evolved, the bold ring turned into a colored background, but you knew that it still meant it used the same consistent functionality. Windows did it one better and assigned an underline to the letter that would select that button. But nowadays, so much software contains a dialog box that has a "Cancel" and some form of "OK" with a colored background and bold font, but if you hit ENTER, nothing happens. Is that the user's fault for having an expectation that is violated?

It seems that I am rare in that I find extreme difficulty in understanding the meaning of icons, so your explanation of the MAC and Windows UI designs is news to me!

What I find more than slightly irritating are questions like "Do you really want to quit?" when the positive option given is "OK". What is wrong with "Yes"?

As far as the Q3 is concerned, I am unable to distinguish between the icon for spot focus and that for spot focussing. I finally realised that the spot focus icon is next to the AFs button on the status screen...

David

[thegobi]

I think some people want a Leica because… Leica.

Then fight against what makes a Leica… a Leica. 😜

[SLamb]

13 hours ago, David Wien said:

Not on all of it. I have no complaints about my Q3 working differently from the Canon R6 that I know better; but I am having difficulty in learning exactly what profiles do and dont do -- this by trial and error, because the manual is not totally explicit. A thread here explaining the ins and outs of profiles would be a useful resource.

David

I found the Hudson Henry Q3 setup video was very informative, and the sections where he discusses how he sets up and uses profiles was useful to help with my understanding of how they work.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kygz9b6Wus

[Woodstock]

+1 for Hudson Henry

[Pindy]

7 hours ago, SLamb said:

I found the Hudson Henry Q3 setup video was very informative, and the sections where he discusses how he sets up and uses profiles was useful to help with my understanding of how they work.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kygz9b6Wus

Thank you for sharing. I like Hudson’s perspectives. This looks like a useful channel in general.