
Dumb Things Camera Companies are Still Doing - ValentineC
http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/dumb-things-the-camera.html
======
brudgers
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).

~~~
dpark
The only thing wrong with the 1/4-20 mount is that there's only one. Camera
manufacturers should add a second one half an inch to the side so that plates
can be mounted with two points of attachment, which would eliminate concerns
with twisting and loosening.

Wanting to force the weight and cost of Arca Swiss on everyone is just
selfish. In fact most of these complaints are just examples of wanting
everyone else to subsidize features they might not need that this guy happens
to want.

The Qi demand on the other hand is just dumb. Wireless charging requires close
proximity, so you'd have to set your camera down _just so_ or it would fail to
charge. With different lenses changing the balance point and accessories like
portrait grips changing the shape, many people would never get Qi to work
properly. Plus in a world where enthusiasts largely have multiple batteries
anyway, wireless charging built into the camera seems utterly useless. I'd
rather rapidly charge my battery in a dedicated charger than leave my camera
on its own charging pad all the time.

~~~
brudgers
For some applications, Velcro on the bottom of the camera and top of the
accessory might mitigate twisting. I've also read about people using
compressible materials to increase friction. For what it's worth, there's
nothing preventing modifying a camera to add a second screw.

~~~
dpark
Drilling into the body of a camera that costs multiple thousand dollars to add
a second screw seems like a risky maneuver and definitely warranty-voiding. I
would personally advise against this.

Adding Velcro doesn't seem to me like it would do much for vibration or
slippage (large rotation, yes, small scale rotation, not so much), since
Velcro is not a rigid connection. Rubber or similar spacers can help but it's
still not great. I use a plate that's got a lip on it to prevent twisting
(which was a happy accident, because I actually ordered the wrong plate).

~~~
brudgers
To me, the degree to which a camera is likely to see a built in Arca Swiss
plate is inversely proportional to the degree to which it costs multiple
thousands of dollars because the higher the price the more modular the design.
The reason for more modular designs is that the variety of systems with which
high end cameras are designed to integrate tends to be higher. Or conversely
the more likely the camera is to be designed to lock the photographer into a
proprietary systems sold by the camera manufacturer.

In terms of adding a second screw, a multiple thousand dollar camera body is
probably not the ideal first subject for a person who has never disassembled a
camera or done similarly fine grained work. Such a person should perhaps hire
a technician or practice on broken equipment first in cases where such
modifications seem worth the effort/cost. Hoping camera manufacturers would
design around the edge case is not much of a plan.

~~~
dpark
I think the inverse proportionality is probably wrong since entry-level
cameras generally never get mounted on anything. Arca Swiss mounting on my
mom's camera wouldn't be particularly useful.

I don't think a multiple-thousand dollar camera body is a good target for
invasive modifications unless it's already out of warranty, regardless of
whether the change is being made by someone with the appropriate skills. I
also doubt that the result of such a modification would be very good anyway.
Without being part of the initial design (e.g. a captive nut embedded in the
base), the best aftermarket modification would likely be based on either
threads tapped directly into the body or a nut essentially glued in place.

------
wazoox
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.

[1]: [https://mondaynote.com/memo-to-camera-makers-put-android-
in-...](https://mondaynote.com/memo-to-camera-makers-put-android-in-your-
device-of-face-extinction-1c9a228287e2)

~~~
dguaraglia
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.

~~~
IgorPartola
I don't understand. A phone that's 7mm thick and the size of your hand can
operate for like 16-24 hours on a charge. A 1.5 lb hunk of plastic that's
nearly a cubic foot in volume can't? Maybe we need better camera batteries.

~~~
dguaraglia
A lot of the "hunk" and weight in the camera comes from needing a certain
amount of room for the mirror and sensor, plus a solid coupling mechanism for
the lenses, plus a good amount of surface to provide comfortable grip, plus a
number of slots for all kinds of connectors (for your tripod, for you external
flash), etc.

I'm not saying the design can't be improved, or that every empty recess
couldn't be filled with extra battery capacity, but personally I find the
current state of affairs (where you can just get an extra battery for $20 and
throw it in your camera bag) better than a phone-like model with non-
replaceable batteries.

~~~
IgorPartola
Totally agreed. My point was that making the camera 75 grams heavier by adding
a little more battery capacity to run Android wouldn't make a noticeable
difference to most users. I would assume some pros would want the lightest
possible body, but most photographers wouldn't care that much. And worst case
scenario, yeah just swap batteries.

------
nradov
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.

~~~
alecdibble
While GPS chips might seem like an obvious addition, it might negatively
affect other camera functions like battery life.

~~~
brians
That has massive import/export implications, changes how you can ship them,
all sorts of nonsense. As always, when a group of hundreds of smart engineers
are doing something superficially inexplicable, it's actually either:

a) complicated, and a good idea, or b) complicated, because of the government.

~~~
nradov
I don't accept that. Many cameras, even some cheap point-and-shoot cameras,
_do_ include GPS receivers. I have an old Canon Powershot S100 with GPS that
was sold all over the world for less money than a smartphone. So obviously the
import/export and shipping implications aren't that massive. There's no valid
reason to exclude that feature from DSLRs any more.

~~~
rogerbinns
> I don't accept that.

For a start you need to deal with the laws in China. They apply not only to
items sold in China, but also to items brought into the country (eg by
customers). Economies of scale make this easier with widely sold products, and
more painful for low volume products (higher cost of implementation per unit
sold). Repeat for laws in other countries.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restrictions_on_geographic_dat...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restrictions_on_geographic_data_in_China)

My point and shoot from a few years ago had two pages in the manual covering
the builtin GPS usage in China.

------
askafriend
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.

~~~
newsbinator
Apple could take their MacBook experience and make a phenomenal netbook.
There's no argument that it would be the finest netbook of all time.

But that, too, would be moving in the wrong direction.

~~~
dagw
_Apple could take their MacBook experience and make a phenomenal netbook._

They kind of did when they released the MacBook Air.

~~~
anoother
And even moreso, the new 'macbook'

------
clra
Great article.

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.

~~~
ioulian
> The bodies of modern DSLRs are jampacked with every kind of knob, control,
> button, dial, and dongle that you can possibly think of.

That's what I actually like on the more "expensive" camera's, the ability to
control everything just with single click/rotation.

I'm mostly shooting manual, on my Canon 5D I have a dial for apperture,
smaller dial for shutter speed and a knob for the focus point(s). When I used
Canon 500D from my friend, I couldn't use it in manual as this requires you to
push one button, to then change the shutter speed with a dial (the same one
that controls the apperture (or vice versa I can't remember anymore)).

But I think canon is doing it alright as the "entry" level DSLR's like 500D
are meant for normal users who just want a point and click camera for most of
the time, and don't need that many knobs and dials. While the professional
versions have a lot of controls.

But then again, this all goes to personal preference, and most users will buy
a camera that they like to use, with or without many controls. I haven't seen
anyone with a 5D saying "I'm not happy with total control of my camera", but I
heard more people say "Damn, I wish you could change this value much faster
and not go to the touchscreen"

~~~
Steve44
> That's what I actually like on the more "expensive" camera's, the ability to
> control everything just with single click/rotation

I use Nikon and have gone from D200, D300, and now a D700 because I love the
quick and direct access to a lot of the controls. The consumer bodies are
great cameras but once you become accustomed to the layout it is really useful
and logical. I presume the Canon pro range is similar.

~~~
matwood
Nikon is known to be one of the best at quick access through shortcut physical
buttons. The problem with Nikon is discoverability is bad, but once you're in
the know it's awesome. According to some, the shortcuts are better than what
Canon provides. I've never even held a Canon camera so I can't comment. :)

------
wjnc
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.

~~~
ekianjo
> 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.

The old corporations in the field (Canon, Nikon, Sony) should make you pay for
better firmwares (i.e. plugins or at least revisions) so that they have an
incentive to keep improving their existing DLSRs. I think on my previous body
there was only ONE update in x years and that did not bring anything new on
the table.

Thanksfully nowadays we have MagicLantern for Canon DSLRs at least, which
brings a ton of additional features for photo and video. It's still not at a
parity level with the software available on phones and the like, but it's a
big jump vs the base firmware nonetheless.

~~~
trm42
At least Fuji and Olympus have realised the new model cycle is getting longer
so they are releasing new firmware features until the replacing model is
launched.

Canikon aren't doing new features in firmwares, seems more like bug fixes and
Sony is somewhere inbetween at least with the A7-series...

Sony A7 series have also some kind of small apps you can buy and download from
their store to your camera. Haven't seen that many apps there =(

~~~
barretts
Finding, downloading, and using those apps is a whole exercise in pain
tolerance. Took me an hour-plus to download the timelapse app.

~~~
nogridbag
>> Took me an hour-plus to download the timelapse app.

Oh wow. I had the same experience. In my case I just wanted to update the
existing apps I had installed. Apparently you need a Sony entertainment
account to install apps (it must be a new requirement as I never had one when
I installed the apps in the first place).

I tried for 15 minutes to create an account using the camera.

    
    
        * My A6000 doesn't have a touch screen so I had to use the camera's wheels to operate the on-screen keyboard
        * The account creation page is non-responsive.
    

You would think Sony Entertainment Network's account login/creation webpage
would be responsive so it would be usable within the camera OR there would be
a completely different page. NO, it is the same desktop, non-responsive page
including Google's painful anti-bot script which requires me to select 10
images that represent street signs using the camera wheel.

Amazingly, I could actually use the A6000 to create an account, but it kept
erroring out when submitting. Finally, I realized it would be easier to just
use my laptop and to my surprise it still failed because their account
creation was down. About 10 attempts later it still failed with a slightly
different error, but I still received the account creation success email (?)
and was able to login fine after that.

Edit: Formatting.

------
smileysteve
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.

~~~
beezle
D500 owner. Clearly the original post was directed at the high end and reads
much like first world problems and to the extent that much of his wish list is
not on all cameras can be attributed to profit margins.

I agree with the raw stuff and perhaps the focus as well (though what he asks
is just a function of modern day laziness).

I disagree with the wifi and usb issues. I can count how many times I have
used wifi. And only at home. Really do not want to be having to set up wifi
access at every location, do not want the security risk of wifi, and most
imporant - do not want the battery drain of wifi.

As to USB - give it a couple years and the usb connections will be type C.
Camera companies are very conservative and won't punt on the traditional until
they are certain it won't be a hardship. USB 3.0 is already available on the
d500 and d850.

The d500 and d850 for sure have UHS-II, I'm sure similar Canon models do as
well.

Which brings up another point - I don't transfer files over USB either. For
the most part, I take the card out and use a reader with laptop or desktop.
The USB is nice to have when using other equipment but I find it no
inconvenience to use the card manually.

~~~
kayfox
Agree on battery drain, I can leave my D300s on for days and it still has
battery left.

If it had WiFi it would be a matter of hours.

------
l33tbro
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?

~~~
Steve44
I think a lot of the problems relate to the experience of the person behind
the camera.

Often you can see the choppiness when things are moving. That to me looks like
they are using a high shutter speed which is inappropriate for cine work. In
still photography if you take a picture of a waterfall on a bright day at
1/1000 you'll see every crisp drop, shooting at 1/30th will give a little bit
of smoothing motion blur. Using a DSLR shooting at 25 frames a second and
leaving the shutter speed on auto can result in a sequence of 1/1000 second
shots which will look choppy. What they should be doing is using Neutral
Density filters so they can choose the appropriate aperture for the shot
whilst keeping the shutter speed at 1/30 or there abouts. This will give the
smoother motion images but does take skill and time.

My other bugbear is many cameramen appear to have forgotten what a tripod is.
The camera wobbling about can occasionally add to the atmosphere but most of
the time it is just annoying and distracting. Again a combination of lack of
skill and production values.

~~~
jrimbault
Maybe someone here can answer my question:

During panning shots (horizontal, vertical), in recent films the image is
blurry and uncomfortable (for me). Similar panning shots in earlier films seem
cripser and more "comfortable".

Is there a technical reason (shutter speed fashion) ? Or is it in my head ?

~~~
dharma1
[http://www.red.com/learn/red-101/global-rolling-
shutter](http://www.red.com/learn/red-101/global-rolling-shutter)

~~~
Steve44
Interesting looking article, thank you & I'll read that later.

An example of a different shutter mechanism producing an odd effect, this
picture
[https://www.flickr.com/photos/sorenragsdale/3192314056/](https://www.flickr.com/photos/sorenragsdale/3192314056/)
shows that what the camera sees isn't always the truth!

~~~
shezi
There are really nice video explanations for rolling shutter effects on very
fast things by Smarter Every Day[1] and standupmaths[2].

[1]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNVtMmLlnoE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNVtMmLlnoE)

[2]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nP1elMR5qjc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nP1elMR5qjc)

------
rrauenza
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.

~~~
luckydude
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?

~~~
jsjohnst
Magic Lantern proves it’s possible to show it too, but alas, Canon can’t seem
to follow their lead.

------
dheera
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.

~~~
thinkMOAR
At the time that was my deciding factor picking between canon rebel something
vs nikon d80 (2006, when it was brand new). Photo quality-wise they were so
well matched, until i read a review where the author said, the canon is
plastic and the nikon metal and the metal makes you feel you have a real tool
in your hands instead of toy. (also i'm not the most careful person metal
stronger then plastic, typically)

~~~
bryanlarsen
Given that you're often hand holding a camera, being lighter is a significant
advantage, it can often be the difference between a stable or a blurred shot.

And good plastics are plastic in the traditional sense of the word: if you
drop them, they'll absorb the force by deforming and then spring back into
place. Metals deform permanently. In a car that's an advantage, you can just
hammer it back into place. With a precision instrument a bent tool is just as
bad as a broken one.

I don't know how a Rebel compares against a Nikon in a drop test -- I've
dropped my Rebel without issues, but no major drops, luckily. But I can
compare the pre-unibody MacBook Pros with Thinkpads from the same era. In the
store, the original MacBook Pros felt and looked a lot more solid, but they
were really crappy cases. OTOH, the ThinkPad's were tanks. Their plastic cases
had a magnesium frame, giving them the best of both worlds. Of course, once
Apple switched to unibody and ThinkPad's have started to compromise to compete
on thickness the story hasn't been so clear.

~~~
CrystalGamma
> And good plastics are plastic in the traditional sense of the word: if you
> drop them, they'll absorb the force by deforming and then spring back into
> place.

That's not what I was taught plastic meant. I was taught both plastic and
elastic materials deform under force, but the elastic ones (not the plastic
ones) return to their original form once the force is gone …

~~~
jorvi
If you drop an iPhone hard enough it wil dent. Drop a polycarbonate phone: no
problem. Windows phone wasn't a great OS, but the Lumia line were absolute
tanks.

~~~
dom0
PC is a very impact resistant material, but you can also form it cold, a bit
like mild steel, actually.

~~~
occultist_throw
So is nylon. But nylon is hydroscopic, and thus not well suited for
electronics applications.

I do prefer ABS-PC or ASA for a lot of my more-adverse condition cases.
They're much more heat resilient, and chemical/UV resistant in ASA's case.

~~~
dom0
Well, a great many connectors (even, or rather, especially industrial ones)
are made from PA6 or 66 with some glass fiber fill; including the actual
contact carriers (if they are a separate part). FR4 is somewhat hygroscopic as
well; moisture expansion causes real problems for some applications. Never
heard of issues with PA connectors.

------
rplnt
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...

------
web64
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.

~~~
alkonaut
If you are a tinkerer, you could (most likely, depending on model) use a
custom firmware such as Magic Lantern. Gives you basically anything you could
imagine, but that Canon couldn't imagine.
[http://www.magiclantern.fm/](http://www.magiclantern.fm/)

~~~
musage
Magic lantern truly is, well, magic. When my 30D died, I bought an 50D with
some ambivalence; I wanted a "real body" and can't justify the price tag any
of the #D series, but the 50D can't record video. Then I installed magic
lantern, and now it can record video and so much more. Didn't end up shooting
much video, but the photography features are _so_ numerous and useful.

------
codingdave
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.

------
stefanve
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

------
rb808
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.

------
cm2187
I'd add to the list geotagging. It is extremely useful to embed in the Exif
the coordinates where the picture was taken.

~~~
Viper007Bond
My point and shoot did that like 5-10 years ago. Crazy that DSLRs don't.

~~~
tolien
They do (or at least, my Canon EOS 7D mark 2 does). However, leaving the GPS
switched on _significantly_ reduces battery life.

~~~
throwanem
My D5300's GPS doesn't hurt battery life.

Of course, it also doesn't _work_ , because the camera sleeps it along with
everything else when it goes idle, so it never has time to get a good lock.

The way you solve this is by disabling idle sleep. That doesn't hurt the
battery, either; it _kills_ it.

This is legitimately frustrating, unlike a lot of the frankly scattershot and
silly business in the article. (XQD on entry-level cameras? Five times the
media cost? Yeah, the market wasn't small enough already...)

~~~
arethuza
I bought a Canon point and shoot a few years back to use in situations where
I'd be worried about losing the camera (e.g. on a ski lift) and I got one with
GPS - it has to be the crappiest GPS in existence, it does work but takes
about 30 minutes to get a fix, which is pretty much unusable.

------
sethx
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.

------
dkrich
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.

~~~
barretts
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?

~~~
dkrich
Agreed. The Alpha software reeks of "design by committee" for the entire mass
of camera users to allow anything to be controlled with equal weight. It's a
major problem.

------
spiderfarmer
I'm just a consumer ofcourse but I don't get it.

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
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.

------
buildbot
It’s funny, but for several of the authors main criticisms an old camera of
mine would have done well:

A 60mp leaf credo on a Rollei HY6 body.

Histogram and blinkies processed from the raw image, the lenses where all made
of extremely solid metal, it had a built in arca Swiss like tripod play on the
bottom, a giant 3.5 inch touchscreen, USB 3 transfer and tethering, could
charge the batteries from USB and run off USB power, and the lenses all had
great depth of field and distance scales.

And the viewfinder was ludicrously massive!

Downside, it weighed ~2.5kg total or something and ate batteries, and hated
any iso over 200. And cost something like 30000 when new.

------
fulldecent
I just want to say when iPhone supports external flash I will probably never
use Canon again. And I've used it for 10+ years professionally in the studio.
Seriously, it's like Japan's products are moving at the same speed as their
economy, i.e. not at all in the past 20 years.

~~~
nakedrobot2
Most modern LED's are bright enough that you don't need a discrete "flashing"
type of external light for most such use cases, you know?

~~~
NickBusey
For me at least, having an external flash has very little to do with how
bright it is, and very much to do with where the light is coming from. A flash
coming from 1/4" away from where the lens is, usually doesn't look too great.

~~~
sroussey
He is talking about separate monolight on a boom or stand. Always on light
rather than flash. He’s not talking about the LED on the phone

------
no-such-address
From comments here, you can see the field of premium photography equipment is
about to undergo some kind of massive disruptive consolidation and
reorganization. Almost anyone who comments here is a prospective customer, yet
we see so much fragmentation. Some customers just ask for a box with a great
sensor, and plan to process the images elsewhere. Some ask for a retro-
experience, or an open source photography platform, or an incremental
improvement to existing products. Some ask for a high-end consumer experience
like a Smartphone, or tighter smartphone integration. Maybe a smart equipment
company would organize its products around those markets, instead of
struggling to segment too finely using old concepts of cost and performance.

The traditional photography equipment business is in a world of trouble
because, as others point out, software is replacing physics as well as the
familiar mechanical human interface. This requires a lot of expensive software
engineers and some computer science expertise, and the rate of change is only
increasing now. For example consider how machine learning is affecting image
processing, like this method of pixel-based image synthesis:
[http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~aayushb/pixelNN/](http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~aayushb/pixelNN/).
Having lost the low end, DSLR companies can't amortize the cost of ambitious
engineering projects over any significant volume of inexpensive products.
Agree with the article by Thom Hogan - if anything it doesn't go far enough to
convey the extent to which top line camera companies are out of touch with how
the digital world has changed.

------
snissn
I bought a GoPro - HERO5 Black 4K for $400 for a vacation - wanted to transfer
my videos to my laptop and i'm hit with USB2.0 speeds.. So what do I do? Set
up my camera as a wireless access point and use wget to transfer my files.
ugh.

~~~
kgen
Yeah, I found the same with my GoPro, but you don't have to go to the trouble
of setting up an AP, just get a UHS sdcard and pop it out and into a
compatible reader.

~~~
snissn
Totally! I do that now, but couldn't on vacation and had to free up space for
the next day of underwater videos!

------
paulgerhardt
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.

------
deepGem
My ideal camera is just a simple autofocus camera which has two modes of
operation. Standalone and paired with a phone. Standalone mode is built for
speed - just manual controls, snap and shoot. No screen, no buttons at the
back nothing. Just the PSAM dial, front and back wheels for shutter aperture
control. When paired with a phone - AF and all the gimmicky stuff to be done
using the phone's interface which will also act like a viewfinder. Of course
you can still use manual controls on the phone app. You can even edit the
images on the phone and like the OP says, bloody mount the camera somewhere,
sit in your tent and shoot. What all fancy stuff you can do - once you have
all the controls on the phone. Automatically fire when a bird takes off and
fun things like that.

------
whowouldathunk
The dumbest is that their "auto" modes aren't as good as phones. I bought a
Fuji X-T20 and am really disappointed with it; it is definitely capable of
much better results than my phone as long as you have the time to switch all
the knobs, which is way more annoying than I thought it would be and often not
possible depending on your subject.

I have no desire to do any post-processing and didn't realize that most of the
amazing photos I saw in camera reviews were the result of professional-level
post-processing.

~~~
jbarham
With a bit of effort it's possible to create very nice images without doing
any post-processing. See e.g. the book "In Camera" by Camera Labs editor
Gordon Laing ([https://www.cameralabs.com/in-
camera/](https://www.cameralabs.com/in-camera/)).

------
icanhackit
While this article focuses on DSLR type cameras, one that I find odd is the
lack of phase detection autofocus on compact/superzoom cameras that use 1/2.3"
(7.66mm x 6.17mm) sensors when we've had it in our phones for 3-4 years? The
only compacts/superzooms with fast/accurate contrast-detect AF are Panasonic's
cameras that use their secret-herbs-and-spices Depth from Defocus AF.

And what about the lack of IBIS (In-Body Image-Stabilisation) in cameras like
the D850? Many mirrorless cameras (and Pentax DSLRs...) allow you to use
unstabilised old glass like Minolta lenses with excellent results thanks to
IBIS. I understand Nikon has a wealth of stabilised lenses but it'd be nice to
have a bulletproof camera feature-wise. Plus you could pair lens barrel
stabilisation with IBIS as Panasonic does with the GH5 and G85 to create silky
smooth gimbal-like footage or crisp slow shutter photos while hand-held.

I'm sure these things will come in time but they seem like they should have
been here already. Everyone is playing musical chairs with features.

------
sdfjkl
My Nikon AW1 can't even charge its own battery. I have to take it out of the
camera and put it in a (huge, blocky, AC powered) charger.

------
agravier
Tangentially related: I find that being able to run android apps on my camera
(not my phone with its tiny lens) is extremely useful. I bought the Samsung
galaxy camera 2, but I don't know of any other such product.

~~~
pawelk
From a cursory Google search: Nikon COOLPIX S800c, Panasonic Lumix DMC-CM10.
So the big players are investing in Android.

This just shows how different users have different needs. I do not want my
camera to be "smart", I want it to measure the amount of light that comes
trough the lens, tell me if it's too much or too little, then capture and save
the data on some storage. I can take it from there.

My ideal solution would be something like the failed Siliconfilm project which
was a digital sensor you'd put into an analog camera 35mm film compartment.

~~~
agravier
Thanks for the search Pawel, for some reason these didn't appear in my
searches.

Yes, different needs. Actually the reason why I want android is mostly that I
automate the upload of new photos to Amazon.

------
aloukissas
A huge thing that's missing is a proper file system, especially with
undelete/recycle bin capabilities. It's amazing how in a consumer product like
this, "delete" is essentially `rf -f`.

------
anon1253
I just wish they would sell mono cameras more (e.g. without the Bayer mask).
Heck, I don't even need the camera. Just sell the chip and let companies like
Atik, StarlightExpress and QHY pick them up.

------
sgarg
One area where I think camera makers could really improve is in coaching
people how to take better pictures. I'm sure there are some good mobile apps
out there but as a casual camera user, I would love to take my camera off
auto-mode and actually learn how to use the advanced features. If I'm shooting
portraits or landscapes, it would be great if the camera could intelligently
let me know, "Why don't you try this exposure/aperture for a better picture".
Pretty soon I would start to learn on my own.

~~~
soared
I'd play a game like pokemon go, except you have to take photos of specific
scenes and get points for how good you're picture is. You can go back later
and take more pics once your photography skill has improved.

------
dceddia
Here's another one: the 30-minute recording limit for video recordings.
Apparently Panasonic fixed this in their GH4R [0], but it doesn't seem that
Canon and Nikon have.

I was looking for a camera to record meetup talks, and I almost bought a new
Canon 80d until I realized it couldn't go more than 30 minutes without
restarting.

[0]: [http://cameras.reviewed.com/news/panasonics-gh4r-finally-
kil...](http://cameras.reviewed.com/news/panasonics-gh4r-finally-kills-
the-30-minute-limit)

~~~
jemfinch
That's a heat-related issue; fixing it would require the ability to dissipate
heat much faster (fans, etc.). That's one of the reasons why cinematic digital
cameras are so much larger than DSLRs.

~~~
dceddia
I had read that it was tax-related, something about a higher tax on "video
cameras" in Europe, and "30 minutes" was the defined limit.

Heat would make some sense too, but it's interesting that Canon and Nikon
would both have the same heat issue that magically manifests after 29:59.

------
odbol_
> camera with Bluetooth

Enjoy your Blueborne security vulnerabilities. Because I'm sure you'll easily
get a firmware update from Nikon from your 5 year old camera.

Also, since Apple breaks Bluetooth in pretty much every iOS release, something
tells me you're not going to have fun trying to use your iPhone with your
camera. Especially since cameras are designed to last decades, not a 2 year
max like phones.

------
jwr
The problem is the lack of competition. Yes, you read that right: even though
we have several "major competitors", they have reached a state of equilibrium,
where they try to preserve the status quo as much as they can.

This isn't much different from the automotive market. All the cars are pretty
much the same, except for Teslas. The DSLR world is waiting for their Tesla.

~~~
ringaroundthetx
Sony's alpha series came out and disrupted this in some ways, breaking Canon
and Nikon's duopoly of releasing the same camera every year even though the
technology allowed for what they release 10 years ago prior.

I think Sony will continue innovating here, as long as people keep calling out
the user experience problems.

Otherwise they will go into the incremental improvement phase too.

------
shosko
This is where I think Snap Inc can innovate. Traditional camera companies will
never come up with a camera that shares well to any socially enabled device.
Our devices (phones) are built to be do-it-all computers, not cameras and will
never fulfill all the promises of new camera technology. What's missing is the
real future of the camera.

------
mschuster91
Tangentially related: I plan on buying a Sony a7s Mk2 this year. Aside from
the screwmount and the battery issues, how is this camera affected by the
other problems mentioned in the article (vibration, especially)? Is there
anyone here who regularly shoots video with this camera?

~~~
Terretta
If you didn't purchase yet, did you consider the a9 mentioned a few times in
this blog? You might not need the extra MP of the a7s II.

Comparison for video:

[https://www.dpreview.com/articles/2661726126/alpha-better-
so...](https://www.dpreview.com/articles/2661726126/alpha-better-
sony-a9-versus-a7r-ii?slide=9)

Field notes:

Used one on a trip in Europe. The light gathering is astonishing, both photos
and video. Street shooting at night in dimly lit rural towns, almost every
shot looks better than it did to naked eye.

Only took two very small lenses, FE 2/28 and FE 1.8/50, both gave results that
belie their size and cost. It autofocused down to light levels that would need
a 15 second exposure at f2 (candlelight is EV 4, autofocuses down to EV -3).
It autofocused on stars.

The main thing I can't get over is its uncanny ability to nail tack sharp
focus on the iris of either the main face in my image or the preferred
registered face among many faces, at arbitrary distances from face larger than
frame to far enough away focus doesn't matter.

~~~
mschuster91
Yep, and the A9 is, with ~3k4€ just for the body, outside of my price range
unfortunately :(

The A7s2 costs ~2k€, I'll have to spend at least a grand on lenses and another
grand for the XLR/mike head and the external battery pack... thanks for the
heads-up on the performance though, hope the A7S will live up to expectations
;)

~~~
petepete
I think that a more-realistic competitor of the A7SII is the Fuji X-T2. The
Fuji has a wonderful feel, the UX is _really impressively simple_ and just
'feels right'.

Had I not already invested in another system, I'd probably have gone Fuji.

------
fulldecent
1/4" mount with no anti-rotate hole.

I have a 80D and there is a 1/4" mount at the bottom. But if you take a photo
in portrait orientation with a long lens then the 1/4" bolt will not be strong
enough and the camera will twist out of it. It's a joke!

~~~
rrauenza
I eventually went with an L bracket on my camera -- the bracket has Arca Swiss
rails.

But now it's a little bigger and heavier :(

------
_Codemonkeyism
Funny, my Olympus, Panasonic and Fuji cameras have a lot of these issues fixed
(Wifi, Bluetooth, good app, excellent tripod collar, etc.) it looks more like
a Nikon problem.

Or as I tell people in my talks: Nikon is the new Nokia.

------
epigramx
And it's time movies started being high FPS. Low FPS is mainly a relic from a
time film was expensive and the technology to produce it tough. Their usual
excuse is that low FPS solutions do motion blur well.

~~~
musage
I wonder what, say, 100 fps video shot with an exposure of 1/25 would look
like. You'd need 4 cameras or a special camera to record it, but that could be
simulated. It would probably look bad, but maybe in an exciting new way? Has
anyone tried that yet in, say, Blender?

------
PaulRobinson
Somebody, somewhere, is planning a Kickstarter campaign off the back of this.

~~~
jaggederest
You aren't kidding, man. This is how Red got started if you substitute the
gripes for (functionally similar) ones from motion picture cameras.

 _$100k for a camera with a base sensor just barely better than a flip-phone
camera, and the size and shape of an old over-shoulder ENG rig. In 2006. What
happens if we put a 21 megapixel DSLR sensor in a box?_

I would be really interested to see a similar thing happening in reverse.
Gopro hits a niche, but not quite.

------
vkjv
If the author of this blog is here, there is a nice padding around the content
at most breakpoints, but not at 1200px. It makes it very difficult to read.

------
frankzander
And the "Why?" is explained in short words: They will have things they can
sell as new "innovations" for the next camera models.

------
FussyZeus
So many of these complaints can be leveled at manufacturers of pretty much
every piece of tech widely used. As soon as a company becomes big, it's a race
to the bottom for every silo manager to make his particular silo the leanest
which leads to less quality materials, cheaper parts, and an overall worse
product.

Dell and HP are the most brutal examples. Dell laptops I work on regularly are
put together so incredibly cheaply, it's infuriating.

------
visarga
The biggest problems in photography are dynamic range and low light. If they
can fix these, we're set.

------
Mikeb85
The dumbest thing they're doing is still making DSLRs. The mirror adds weight,
the assembly can be a source of leaking light, it vibrates and wears out the
camera, and offers no benefit of any sort. When the output comes from the
sensor anyway, you might as well have a digital viewfinder that gives you the
sensor's view.

------
tenukitime
This guy should write an article on technology in modern vehicles. (Excluding
Tesla)

------
cratermoon
I still shoot film using cameras and lenses built when my dad was a kid.

------
pasta
Profit margins on camera bodies are extremely low (for resellers sometimes
around 1%). All profit is made on accessories like lenses, bags and tripods.

So I can imagine that RnD is limited to chips and software instead of body
work.

------
lurker78
My Leica SL luckily doesn't suffer from most of these 'issues'. It still only
has 1 UHS-II slot though. It would be nice if it had IBIS though.

------
one_redolent
Oh god, don't get me started on this. Why can't we have modern day USB ports?

------
ultraviolet
I can't wait until I have to worry about bluetooth attacks on my DSLR too.

------
madshiva
1/4" tripod socket is the best common option. I use it. No point there because
the user don't use it. Don't undertand why remove a standard?

Optical remotes? I don't take selfie. I press the button.

Wifi? lol, no thanks. I want a camera not a phone and I don't want 1 hour of
battery.

Battery problem? where? just buy battery pack...

~~~
taejo
> Optical remotes? I don't take selfie. I press the button.

The OP had a specific complaint about cameras not having an IR receiver at the
_back_ , i.e., for non-selfies. Remotes are useful for bulb shots, for
reducing camera shake, and many other things.

~~~
arghwhat
I think he was mostly joking about it being for non-selfies.

Depending on exact location, the accepted angles should be slightly less than
180 degrees in front of the camera—you don't need to be anywhere near the
subject, unless you got a fisheye mounted.

It's just a bit silly that the default approach wasn't RF, rather than
optical, even if they put receivers on all sides of the camera. Some new
cameras have BLE though, which is nice and solves most problems (although I
prefer physical remotes to poorly written apps).

------
Animats
The camera people described are living in the past. They're talking about
rigid mounts and tripods, not active stabilization. They're talking about
aiming the camera, rather than taking a full spherical picture and selecting
from that.

Here's a 360 degree camera on a gimbal mount [1] and a video taken with a
similar rig.[2] View the video in 2160p, and click and drag the image to
change the direction of view. No need to focus. No worries about depth of
field. No need to aim. Not even that expensive.

Pointing the lens is so last-cen.

[1] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P69-mh-
Jw6k](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P69-mh-Jw6k) [2]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTcx0OHehdE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTcx0OHehdE)

~~~
heartbreak
That channel is ridiculously over-sexualized.

Also 360° video is as much a gimmic as 3D video.

~~~
Animats
That's just the capture phase. You pick 2D images from the stream when
editing.

