31 ms·

Dumb Things Camera Companies are Still Doing

• Mikeb85 9y ago
  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.
• dheera 9y ago
  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.
  • gt_ 9y ago
    Concerning arca mount, I would prefer the camera without it. I wouldn't want the extra bulk when using no mount. I'm not seeing the problem with screwing a mount plate on and leaving it there. If you really want it to be permanent, get some Super Glue. Modular design in camera equipment makes for compatibility, adaptability, reusability, etc. On this note, I am a professional photographer and have worked professionally with any form of digital, video, emulsion movie or still camera on the market and never have seen rubber on the bottom of a camera that i can remember. Maybe some have it but it's always on the plate if anything in my experience. Screw mount is lame design I agree but arca mount is not at all a replacement for it. It's a different mount option, which itself requires a modular attachment solution which the screw mount is.
    • stan_rogers 9y ago
      The Arca Swiss mount isn't even among the best quick-release plate systems, when it comes down to it. You could argue for a long plate back in the days when lenses were mostly unit-focus and the CG would shift; these days with just about everything being internal focus, a fully-captured plate is an immensely better solution than a dovetail plate (hopefully) captured with clamping pressure in one dimension. As for the GP' complaint about plastics, it just shows that there's no experience there with minor dents requiring major repairs that would have been harmless bounces with a filled polycarbonate. Probably never dealt much with focus shifts or lens element alignment problems in severe heat or cold either. They use appropriate plastics on the pro-grade stuff where they use it because it's better, not because it's cheaper.
  • thinkMOAR 9y ago
    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 9y ago
      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.
      • thinkMOAR 9y ago
        That's true an over years read many people that dropped their canon rebel and they were surprised it didn't shatter into a million pieces and often still worked as good as before. Some brought it to service centers just to be sure. I never dropped my camera though, but i do run into things a lot, doors, doorposts, fences and most of all tiny people. Though with a bit typical lens 70-200 or some people often bring, i doubt the difference in weight of the body plastic vs metal is really noticeable. (plastic rebel XTi 556 grams vs 668 grams metal nikon d80)
        • 9y ago
  • rangibaby 9y ago
    > 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. This is what I love about the Asahi Pentax Spotmatic-era cameras. The only dial on the camera sets shutter speed and the sensitivity of the light meter. If you go out on a nice day and practice shooting with "sunny 16" technique you don't even need a light meter, just set your aperture and shutter speed and get creative.
  • jfindley 9y ago
    On pro cameras, at least, although they have plastic outsides it's pretty strong plastic, and the actual chassis of the camera is cast alloy (usually magnesium-aluminium). A nikon D3/D4/D5 will withstand a huge amount of abuse - at least as much as my more obviously metal pre-digital SLRs did. Another issue to be aware of is when using large, heavy lenses, a lot of stress gets put on the mount point and that most modern pro-orientated DSLRs are actually stronger than their old film equivalents in this regard, as the engineering has improved over time. Re: arca-swiss plates - the reason camera companies don't do this is because of the licensing fee (source: I've talked to a bunch of them, and this is always their reply). I'm sure Thom is aware of this, but the licensing fee is not insignificant, and with extreme pressure to control costs it's not surprising that companies very rarely do this. Of course I personally would be very happy to see them included, but I know there are a bunch of people that don't use them, and would resent the extra cost to include them.
  • matwood 9y ago
    My D7100 is pretty tough and fairly new. My issue now is the weight. If I carry the D7100, 70-300, and wide angle it's a lot of weight to lug around. I do it because it takes amazing pictures, but I'm not going to pretend I like the weight.
• PaulRobinson 9y ago
  Somebody, somewhere, is planning a Kickstarter campaign off the back of this.
  • microcolonel 9y ago
    Perhaps Apertus° could be convinced this way to build a digital still[-focused] camera. Mirrorless is getting quite good these days too, so it might not be much different from a digital cinema camera. https://www.apertus.org/ https://www.apertus.org/
  • jaggederest 9y ago
    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.
• agravier 9y ago
  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.
  • microcolonel 9y ago
    Not saying this solves anything, but Samsung also did the Samsung Galaxy NX a year before the Galaxy Camera 2. It's sorta a DSLR-shaped detachable lens camera that runs Android.
  • amiga-workbench 9y ago
    My Sony A6000 has a limited Android Runtime on it, for some reason that thing has a bunch of "apps" available.
  • pawelk 9y ago
    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 9y ago
      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.
• clra 9y ago
  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.
  • leejo 9y ago
    > Sometimes you don't notice, and there goes your shot. That's because you're not using the EVF, which you should be. The single most useful feature combination I find on the x100 series cameras is the EVF combined with the exposure compensation dial. This relates to the following annoyance from the article: > No focus information in viewfinder Any need for this is negated by a well implemented electronic viewfinder. Fuji are killing it on this aspect. An EVF will give you: exact framing, exposure, white balance, focus, and depth of field. You get none of this in a traditional optical viewfinder. It completely removes the need to "chimp" and you can concentrate on shooting photographs rather than reviewing what you just shot.
• askafriend 9y ago
  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.
  • buildbot 9y ago
    They could buy Leica and build a new M series camera, it could be massively expensive and still be an insane hit.
    • askafriend 9y ago
      This is closer to what a real world vision of my description would look like. However as others mentioned, it’s an incredibly small category relative to everything else Apple do. Apple isn’t one for distractions. Beats worked because it built on their iPhone and music streaming strategy rather than replacing pieces of either.
      • nihonde 9y ago
        Leica Q is a really nice camera that compromises between ease of use and high quality optics. No need to bring Apple into the mix. I’ve owned many M series bodies and lenses but I still use the Q the most often.
    • abshultz 9y ago
      I don't think the majority of the traditional Leica clientele would appreciate a camera manufactured by a hip computer and phone maker.
  • pavlov 9y ago
    The profit potential isn’t there. Apple probably makes more money selling dongles than they’d ever make with a camera. Also, the Mac Pro fiasco makes me doubtful that Apple wants to be in any pro markets anymore.
• l33tbro 9y ago
  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 9y ago
    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.
    • jaggederest 9y ago
      > My other bugbear is many cameramen appear to have forgotten what a tripod is. The camera wobbling about can occasionally at to the atmosphere but most of the time it is just annoying and distracting. Again a combination of lack of skill and production values. With projection and home displays lagging camera technology, I'd be surprised if the opposite didn't happen. You can do a lot of shake reduction with 2x the pixels you intend to keep. Also I think a lot of the shake these days is added in post, partly to cover for production flaws and partly to add "atmosphere" as you say.
• cm2187 9y ago
  I'd add to the list geotagging. It is extremely useful to embed in the Exif the coordinates where the picture was taken.
  • Viper007Bond 9y ago
    My point and shoot did that like 5-10 years ago. Crazy that DSLRs don't.
    • avh02 9y ago
      When I bought my most recent DSLR, I had to pick between a slighly older model with GPS or the latest model with wifi. They were essentially identical other than that I think, maybe touchscreen?
    • tolien 9y ago
      They do (or at least, my Canon EOS 7D mark 2 does). However, leaving the GPS switched on significantly reduces battery life.
      • matthewrudy 9y ago
        Same with the 6D. It seems even when power is off it runs the GPS, so you leave it switched off overnight, and the next day your battery is always dead.
        • tolien 9y ago
          Yeah. It takes absolutely ages to lock, so I can see why you’d want to keep going if the camera was switched off (for a short while) though.
      • throwanem 9y ago
        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...)
• madshiva 9y ago
  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...
  • arghwhat 9y ago
    1. 1/4" is a common, but terrible option. The suggestion is to replace it with a builtin plate for the current status-quo, the common Arca-Swiss mount. 2. Optical remotes aren't for selfies. Smartphones on stupid sticks are for selfies. 3. Most new cameras have WiFi. It doesn't affect battery life when you're not using it. They're just usually really slow, so picture upload/sync that should take 1 min tops take 1 hour instead. Remote live-view and exposure/focus control works quite well, though, as it doesn't need that much bandwidth. There's also BLE, which in my camera allows remote control from smartphone without affecting battery life in any measurable way (BLE consumption is negligible). 4. Camera batteries are insanely expensive (and no, they don't contain anything magic or special, unlike what they want you to believe—apart from DRM, they're completely standard batteries worth about $20 retail when branded), they're DRM'd to avoid third-party manufacturing (which leads to more recent battery copies being unable to show charge level due to skipping this circuitry), they're often change shape just to force you to buy new batteries and chargers instead of reusing them, they don't support common charging specs (USB and Qi, for example—it would be practical to be able to juice up the camera while its in the bag between shootings), ... There is nothing but battery problems.
    • petepete 9y ago
      Duracell make a really wide range of camera batteries that all come with a 3 year warranty. http://www.duracelldirect.co.uk/ http://www.duracelldirect.co.uk/
      • arghwhat 9y ago
        Others do too (Watson, Wasabi, ...), but they're all made by reversing the bloody DRM, and those companies state that they're having problems reverse-engineering the DRM of the newer batteries (the actual battery management/protection circuitry is entirely standardized, and costs nothing). LP-E17 is an example of a still non-reversed battery. Duracell doesn't have one, and those that do sell third-party clones pretend to be the DC adapter battery dummy to make things work, resulting in no battery gauge. Why would camera manufacturers do that? So they can force you into paying 60 USD for the extra batteries you need to have. Preferably multiple times, as you change camera bodies. I would imagine that if they lowered their crazy income margin, people would buy more original batteries, even if they kept the DRM. Instead, people buy good third-party batteries for 1/6th of the price, sometimes giving up on the battery gauge to do so.
• buildbot 9y ago
  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.
• frankzander 9y ago
  And the "Why?" is explained in short words: They will have things they can sell as new "innovations" for the next camera models.
• mschuster91 9y ago
  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?
  • arghwhat 9y ago
    Sensor- and lens-based stabilization takes care of the problem, as long as you don't kick your tripod. The problem isn't camera specific, and the long tele lens problem is more serious (although also pretty much fixed entirely by stabilization—some in-lens stabilization is hardcore enough that you can violently shake the setup with a tele mounted, and the image feed will still be perfectly stable).
  • Terretta 9y ago
    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-sony-a9-versus-a7r-ii?slide=9 https://www.dpreview.com/articles/2661726126/alpha-better-so... 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 9y ago
      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 ;)
• wjnc 9y ago
  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 9y ago
    > 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.
    • wjnc 9y ago
      Good point. That would be a camera as a platform-model. We're half-way there in re-assembling a market structure that can withstand the 'new' pressures. The only way for a truely decent product, would be a decoupling of 1. camera as high quality parts for making great pictures, 2. camera as a communications device, 3. software. Alas, I can think of exactly no digital examples of that market structure to work. Perhaps the old-school PC hit that mark. How many of those are still around? Perhaps we can see cloud computing as hitting that mark (separating 1,2,3), but still we need a complete device (1+2+3) to interact with the cloud.
• deepGem 9y ago
  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.
• spiderfarmer 9y ago
  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 9y ago
    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.
• sdfjkl 9y ago
  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.
• pasta 9y ago
  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.
• visarga 9y ago
  The biggest problems in photography are dynamic range and low light. If they can fix these, we're set.
• stefanve 9y ago
  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
• rplnt 9y ago
  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 9y ago
  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.
  • arethuza 9y ago
    Camera software reminds me a lot of car software (entertainment and nav stuff) in that its obviously a bit of an afterthought and its a checkbox exercise and they don't give much thought to the actual user experience. e.g. My wife has a lovely Audi but when I drive it I get very frustrated by how long the nav/entertainment system takes to start up...
  • alkonaut 9y ago
    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 9y ago
      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.
    • web64 9y ago
      Thanks! I will try out Magic Lantern!
  • Sharlin 9y ago
    Canon have finally added a builtin bulb timer to many of their latest-gen models, as well as an interval timer. Of course, the most likely reason for not doing it sooner had to do with wanting to sell remotes rather than any technical difficulty.
• epigramx 9y ago
  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 9y ago
    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?
• lurker78 9y ago
  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.
• brudgers 9y ago
  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).
  • shagie 9y ago
    As a Bogen hex plate user, I would be aghast at having an Arca Swiss mount on the bottom of my camera. Furthermore, a permanent Arca Swiss would prevent innovative designs such as the Really Right Stuff L brackets (which would be my choice if I were to ever switch QR plate systems). Furthermore, many QR plates are protected by patent. Having the classic screw isn’t.
  • matthewmcg 9y ago
    No kidding on standard components. When we have family gatherings and want to take a self timer group shot and I don't have a tripod, the shade attachment screw at the top of a lamp usually fits into my camera's tripod socket. The shade mount is sturdy enough to hold A small camera in place while also allowing enough pivoting and turning to frame up the shot.
    • matthewmcg 9y ago
      Update: clearly I am not the only person to notice this: https://books.google.com/books?id=nRsTBQAAQBAJ&lpg=PA57&ots=hErSToouUl&dq=lamp%20shade%20screw%20camera%20tripod&pg=PA56#v=onepage&q=lamp%20shade%20screw%20camera%20tripod&f=false https://books.google.com/books?id=nRsTBQAAQBAJ&lpg=PA57&ots=...
• codingdave 9y ago
  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.
  • deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
• FussyZeus 9y ago
  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.
• sethx 9y ago
  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.
• wazoox 9y ago
  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-your-device-of-face-extinction-1c9a228287e2 https://mondaynote.com/memo-to-camera-makers-put-android-in-...
  • planteen 9y ago
    If Android is on a camera, I want some sort of a hypervisor situation where it does not interfere with real-time operations. My Canon T4i will very responsively snap a picture once I have locked the focus, aperture, and shutter speed. I do not want to lose that and "gain" lagdroid.
    • NegativeLatency 9y ago
      Also battery life considerations. I wouldn't want to have to carry extra batteries/ wait for android to boot if I go on a hike and need to conserve battery
    • fhood 9y ago
      That would be pretty easy. Lazy solution would basically to just stick an extra processor in the existing hardware that would just poll the camera for data and time critical operations would be handled by the original system
      • arethuza 9y ago
        Would that "extra processor" not be better off just being your phone?
        • Piskvorrr 9y ago
          If I had a pair of extra hands, perhaps. Note that this goes double into the other issues - now you're worrying about compatibility with the other device, and the communication link.
• rrauenza 9y ago
  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 9y ago
    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 9y ago
      Magic Lantern proves it’s possible to show it too, but alas, Canon can’t seem to follow their lead.
  • mi100hael 9y ago
    I also wish split prism focusing screens were at least easier to get your hands on, if not the default. Makes it 10x easier to quickly tell when a subject is in focus instead of squinting & hoping.
    • sliverstorm 9y ago
      I believe split prisms work best at fast apertures. With the movement towards lower cost DSLR's and lenses, typical apertures are slowing down. Your typical Rebel might never see glass f/2.8 or faster. High end cameras like the 1D and 5D series have always had better focusing screens and several different replacement options available.
  • slantyyz 9y ago
    Some cameras do have this. The Fuji X10/X20 (and probably X30) had a focusing distance indicator on the screen, and I loved that feature. I can't speak for the other Fuji X models since I only had the X10 and X20. I really miss this feature on my other cameras.
• rb808 9y ago
  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.
• dkrich 9y ago
  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.
  • devmunchies 9y ago
    > The one thing I think could definitely be improved is the software interface This is me as well but its because I may go a whole month without using my Canon. There is a a 5-10 minute learning curve to remember how to do everything (ie changing aperture, shutter speed, etc.). I'm sure its not a problem for a professional who uses it regularly.
• fulldecent 9y ago
  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 9y ago
    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 :(
• fulldecent 9y ago
  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 9y ago
    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 9y ago
      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 9y ago
        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
  • rrauenza 9y ago
    ...sounds like a fun project to trigger an external flash on manual from the iPhone flash! I wonder if those lightning triggers would be sensitive enough. Ah -- but the iPhone would need manual exposure settings or you'd likely overexpose.
  • techolic 9y ago
    Here's to hope you don't shoot wildlife.
• aloukissas 9y ago
  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`.
• shosko 9y ago
  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.
• _Codemonkeyism 9y ago
  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.
• dceddia 9y ago
  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-kills-the-30-minute-limit http://cameras.reviewed.com/news/panasonics-gh4r-finally-kil...
  • jemfinch 9y ago
    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 9y ago
      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.
• no-such-address 9y ago
  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.
• anon1253 9y ago
  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.
• paulgerhardt 9y ago
  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.
• cratermoon 9y ago
  I still shoot film using cameras and lenses built when my dad was a kid.
• sgarg 9y ago
  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.
  • mrisoli 9y ago
    I share the same sentiment, cellphone cameras improved so much but because point and shoot is such a simple concept which serves most people companies don't really care about user onboarding. Some builtin tutorials and gamification(such as trying to get better low-light photos) could help people like me go a long way with current equipment.
  • soared 9y ago
    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.
• snissn 9y ago
  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.
  • Synaesthesia 9y ago
    And was it faster?
    • snissn 9y ago
      Oh yes - I should have included that - 2mbs on usb vs 40 mbs on wifi
  • kgen 9y ago
    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 9y ago
      Totally! I do that now, but couldn't on vacation and had to free up space for the next day of underwater videos!
• smileysteve 9y ago
  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 9y ago
    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.
• jwr 9y ago
  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 9y ago
    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.
• Animats 9y ago
  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 9y ago
    That channel is ridiculously over-sexualized. Also 360° video is as much a gimmic as 3D video.
    • Animats 9y ago
      That's just the capture phase. You pick 2D images from the stream when editing.
• nradov 9y ago
  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 9y ago
    While GPS chips might seem like an obvious addition, it might negatively affect other camera functions like battery life.
    • nradov 9y ago
      GPS can be turned off.
      • brudgers 9y ago
        GPS based on solely on satellite signals tends to require several to tens of minutes before it can provide an accurate location. Cell phone geolocation tends to much much faster because it utilizes terrestrial radio signals from cell towers and wifi networks and who knows what else...a database of such signals is part of the what else.
        • nradov 9y ago
          My old point-and-shoot camera with a built-in GPS receiver can go from completely powered off (battery out) to an accurate GPS fix in under 4 minutes as long as it has an unobstructed view of the sky. So your time estimate is way too high in most cases. Cell phones are even faster because they pick up an initial approximate location from the cell phone tower and also automatically download GPS satellite ephemeris data.
• vkjv 9y ago
  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.
• one_redolent 9y ago
  Oh god, don't get me started on this. Why can't we have modern day USB ports?
• Thesauruus 9y ago
  Every other electronic in the world has GPS, but not DSLR's. What is up with that?
• ultraviolet 9y ago
  I can't wait until I have to worry about bluetooth attacks on my DSLR too.
• PostThisTooFast 9y ago
  Wireless charging? NO. That is so off-base that it undermines the guy's credibility. You want the fastest and most efficient charging possible, and that's never going to be wireless. Not to mention that you'd never want to use the camera to charge the battery, or (worst of all) have a non-removable battery in the camera. Meanwhile, he fails to point out the most ridiculous omission from modern cameras: AN INTERVALOMETER. This is essentially FREE to implement! The camera is nothing if not a big timer already. No digital camera, at any price, should lack built-in time-lapse capability. And that means real pictures, not some bullshit time-lapse "movie" mode that produces compressed junk.
• whowouldathunk 9y ago
  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 9y ago
    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 9y ago
  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.
• odbol_ 9y ago
  > 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.
• tenukitime 9y ago
  This guy should write an article on technology in modern vehicles. (Excluding Tesla)