5 ms·

cmd-f "software." Nada. Any story that doesn't note that camera makers should've begun adopting Android at least a decade ago, and that doesn't note how poorly

cmd-f "software." Nada. Any story that doesn't note that camera makers should've begun adopting Android at least a decade ago, and that doesn't note how poorly cameras integrate with smartphones, is missing a big part of the story. I have a Fuji mirrorless camera, and only people who are very interested in final image quality will tolerate the poor software. There are other forms of malinvestment too: the article says "While Olympus has doggedly pursued the Four Thirds format since the 2003 release of the E-1, small sensors have largely been ill-fated with APS-C both more popular and a better-understood quantity by the consumer." It's not just about image size: Olympus has had sub-par autofocus relative to relevant competitors since at least 2016 or 2017, if not longer, and Panasonic has similar problems. But these are sideshows relative to software quality.

hcarvalhoalves 4y ago
> Any story that doesn't note that camera makers should've begun adopting Android at least a decade ago Cameras have a very tight energy budget. It’s not uncommon for current mirrorless camera to not get even 300 shots per batt charge. I’m not sure running a full-fledged multipurpose OS like Android would help that? And why is the software a problem exactly? I don’t care running apps on my camera.
- squokko 4y ago
  Software is a problem because software is what lets the dinky smartphone camera get a near-mirrorless-level result. If the mirrorless body had the smartphone's software, the image quality would be mindblowing.
  - aikinai 4y ago
    Smartphones are nowhere near mirrorless level. Maybe if you only look at the thumbnail? Actually even then they would only be similar in extremely bright environments. I agree mirrorless cameras could do more, but I’m not sure if it’s worth the compromises (power, cost, etc). The cameras don’t need all the processing since they have plenty of real signal to work with. If they did use a bunch of processing, it would need to be entirely new techniques from what phones do since those are pointless when you already have a quality image.
  - Wowfunhappy 4y ago
    Is there a reason the cameras can't capture the raw data to be processed later? That would also provide more artistic control, which is desirable on a professional/prosumer device. (I'd also question the "near-mirrorless-level" statement. My iPhone's camera is quite good, but my Nikon D750—admittedly not mirrorless, but a professional camera—is still on another level.)
    - Zak 4y ago
      The main software tricks phones are using are HDR and noise reduction by means of stacking. Your D750 has an exposure bracketing feature and many image editors have stacking functionality. Of course it's hard to get perfectly aligned shots without a tripod or a very good image stabilizer, though I imagine some software can align and perspective-shift them enough to get decent results.
      - _aavaa_ 4y ago
        Funny you mention that. I recently stumbled onto software that does just that [1]. It implements Google’s stacking algorithm that it uses for the pixel line. It’s Mac only, but fantastic. Even a two photo stack produces much better noise reduction than I could get from software. [1] https://burst.photo/ https://burst.photo/
        totoglazer 4y ago
        It’s neat. I think it falls short on the comparison to the Google paper where they provide comparisons. However they get major points for the clarity and honesty on the tech.
        _aavaa_ 4y ago
        It's hard to tell exactly since while their comparison image is the same (the taxi cab) it looks like they've increased the exposure on their comparison. The app also says it uses a "simplified" version of the approach google lays out, but doesn't provide more details about what was simplified out. (and I haven't dived through the code)
- nl 4y ago
  Moving parts (autofocus!) will dominate the energy budget, and cameras can fit much bigger batteries than phones. Running 24 hours+ isn't a problem for phones, and most cameras won't need network to be on most of that time. > I don’t care running apps on my camera. I'm sure that's true, but people love their image editing apps on their phones, and love being able to post clips directly to TikTok.
  - fomine3 4y ago
    Sony A7IV uses 16.4Wh battery that is equivalent to 4432mAh/3.7V. It's on par to latest smartphones. It's true that it could have bigger battery but it's not everyone want.
  - formerly_proven 4y ago
    > Moving parts (autofocus!) will dominate the energy budget, I've never noticed a difference between AF and MF lenses in battery use. What matters most by far is how long the EVF/display is on. Distant second is how many shots you actually take.
- sudosysgen 4y ago
  Sony cameras actually used to run Android. You could even sideload apks.
  - freetime2 4y ago
    Can you provide more details/source for this? I didn't see any evidence for this in a quick Google search.
    - alistairSH 4y ago
      I don’t recall a Sony, but Samsung def had one at one point. And today there’s a Chinese company named Yongnuo that produces them.
    - shawn-butler 4y ago
      Recent Sony cameras[0] include an Android subsystem used to run apps from the proprietary Sony PlayMemories Camera App Store (PMCA). Sony utilizes both Linux and the AV real time operating system (µITRON RTOS) on its arm cores. Some of the nikon coolpix I believe were full android devices but are just a glorified phone / p&s not a dslr. Nikon also uses µITRON RTOS on its proprietary expeed ASIC cores. Canon has a proprietary inhouse OS named DRYOS for its DIGIC ASICs. [0]: https://openmemories.readthedocs.io/devices.html https://openmemories.readthedocs.io/devices.html
- hef19898 4y ago
  The battery life difference seems to be mostly on paper so (never tried it, but based on the meassurement method). Testing requires the cameras to be on for a certain time between shots, mirrorless obviously consumes more power with screens and EVFs powerd, DSLRs don't use any power at all when not shooting. Propably wouldn't make difference for me, my cameras are always off when not on my eye. The time it takes from getting them up there is enough for them to boot (Nikon bodies), so the difference between an EVF and a DSLR should be marginal in that case.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
radicaldreamer 4y ago
Android would only slow these cameras down, they need to integrate ML models into their existing realtime OSes (utron etc.)
- aikinai 4y ago
  Agree. And this is what they’re doing. Sony’s just announced camera leans heavily on ML for autofocus.
- dboreham 4y ago
  Cameras have used "ML" since the Nikon FA in 1983.
  - radicaldreamer 4y ago
    They have, but the current generation of ML is far more sophisticated than what cameras have specialized in -- which is why you're seeing phone cameras punch so far above their weight. We haven't seen the same class of improvements for standalone cameras yet.
Infinitesimus 4y ago
It's amazing so watch so many organizations ship poor software and fail to understand that there is a lot of value in starting a product from a simple user experience. I don't think adopting Android would have helped them (they'd still be on 4.0 right now and a security nightmare, let's be real). Same with many device manufacturers as well (something something most car infotainment systems and companion apps). Apple isn't for everyone (I'm an Android user) but they're one of the few organizations that is trying to think of software and hardware as components that should work well together even though they also make some hilarious missteps. At this rate, mirrorless and DSLR cameras will keep getting a smaller slice of users and phone photography will keep improving for the 99% of people out there. Maybe that's okay. I do wish my Sony AIII had great Google Photos integration.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
Zak 4y ago
I'm not sure that's fair to Olympus. For one point of comparison, the Mirrorless Comparison birds in flight test[0] rates the OM-1 better than everything in its price range. The Canon R6 and Sony A7 IV appear only a little more expensive at a glance, but comparable lenses for them cost more - considerably more in the case of long telephotos. Of course, the OM-1 came out after the sale. Going back to 2016, the E-M1 II is, unsurprisingly not as good as newer cameras. It's notable, however that everything above it on the list is newer with the Sony A6500 (2017) and Fuji X-T3 (2018) being the oldest competitors to perform better. Panasonic, on the other hand does have a problem with autofocus because it insists on using only contrast detection, while other manufacturers use contrast and phase detection in combination. [0] https://mirrorlesscomparison.com/best/mirrorless-cameras-for-birds-in-flight/ https://mirrorlesscomparison.com/best/mirrorless-cameras-for...
- LeoPanthera 4y ago
  Olympus (or "OM System" as it's now called) has a bigger problem, and that's the software that runs on your computer. Unlike almost any other manufacturer, in order to do a firmware update, you have to install a special application on your computer. If you have a Mac, that application requires a kernel extension. For what reason, I can't even imagine. The software is just awful. Why they can't just go with "put the updated firmware on the SD card", I have no idea.
  - Zak 4y ago
    That's awful, but it evidently is possible to just put the firmware on the SD card, and somebody made a website with instructions and download links. https://lightsnowdev.com/Olympus/index.html https://lightsnowdev.com/Olympus/index.html
    - LeoPanthera 4y ago
      That's cool, but it seems to only work with older bodies. Mine, the E-M10 IV, is not listed.
      - 4y ago
fomine3 4y ago
A problem of Android for embeddeds is mismatch of software/hardware lifecycle. Android can't be secure for a decade. Even if manufacturer want to maintain, SoC vendor don't support version up so long, and SoC become significantly underpowered for latest OS/apps. Security is important since it's useless to have Android without networking.
freetime2 4y ago
I agree that software on cameras is terrible, and I would love for it to improve. But I'm not necessarily sure that good software would give a huge competitive advantage. Camera sales seem to be largely driven by technical specs, and I'm not sure that most buyers would choose to put their money toward better software over better specs. Even things like ergonomics (button layout, whether it has a fold-out display) seem to get more attention in camera reviews than software. The emphasis seems to be on getting the shot with the best image quality possible rather than what you do with it afterwards. I do think that computational photography features (e.g. snapping a lot of photos and merging them) have the potential to be a big driver of camera sales for whoever is able to integrate them first into a large sensor camera. But this isn't just a matter of software but also processing power. I personally would love to see Apple put out an interchangeable lens camera, but I'm not holding my breath as I don't think the market is large enough for them to bother. Also I'm not sure I could afford to buy one even if they did...
- JALTU 4y ago
  100% And um, may I include Adobe in this generalization?
- hef19898 4y ago
  Interchangeable lense cameras already have their "Apple", Leica. Maybe Apple could just buy them...
genmud 4y ago
I would hard disagree with that. I can’t think of a single way that Android would improve my experience on any of the DSLR or mirrorless cameras I own.
Lammy 4y ago
Yongnuo are on their second generation of Android+MFT camera with the YN455: https://www.hkyongnuo.com/productinfo/660161.html https://www.hkyongnuo.com/productinfo/660161.html https://www.yongnuomall.com/product/detail/16254 https://www.yongnuomall.com/product/detail/16254
Espressosaurus 4y ago
Android (and iOS) has nothing I want on my camera. I don't want or need an app store, I don't want or need messaging, and for god's sake please don't put an internet connection with a cell baseband chip in my camera. I need that battery life already. Better integration? Sure. I'd like to see it. Snapbridge works acceptably but is slow. But at the end of the day taking the picture is usually step one before culling, cropping, and editing so while it's a small irritation it's far less important than things like being able to get the shot in the first place (so autofocus, IBIS, etc.).
stonogo 4y ago
Android is the exact opposite of what I want in my camera. Sometimes when I'm out I need to swap batteries -- now I get to wait five minutes for my camera to boot? I know Android can boot faster, but do we really want octo-core cameras with 8GB of RAM? A friend of mine has a pet complaint about the camera industry: in the 1980s if you bought a 110-film camera you could pull it out of your pocket aim at a subject, and take a picture, and the slowest part of that from 'cold boot' is pulling it out of your pocket. No digital camera can replicate that (unless you walk around with an 'on' camera in your pocket at all times). Your suggestion immediately made me think of him, and how not only have we lost something we had in the past, we're marching firmly away from it.
- jimktrains2 4y ago
  I have an old Canon t2i and can flick it on while pulling it up to my eye and it's on before it gets there. Honestly it's faster to shoot with it than to double tap the power button on my Pixel, even if the phone is already in my hand. Edit: Even more so when autofocus speed is taken into account.
  - actionfromafar 4y ago
    I usually carry a film SLR and the best camera is the one you have with you, true. But the shots missed with my phone before I get it out of the pocket and get the camera app out, are many. I'm faster with a manual focus SLR than the phone.
- hef19898 4y ago
  The Nikon DSLRs I used so far could be carried in your hand at the side of your body, turned off. By the time you had the view finder in front of your eye, they are ready to shoot, and focused, in case you don't mind composition for a quick snapshot. No idea how the mirrorless ones stack up to that, I don't see a reason why they should be any slower so... Maybe EVF and displays need more time to switch on, I don't know.
  - Espressosaurus 4y ago
jjav 4y ago
> camera makers should've begun adopting Android at least a decade ago That would be horrible. So now my camera would need a constant stream of security patch updates (which the manufacturer will stop supplying). And surely use a lot more battery. What I love about Nikon DSLRs is the firmware is just for taking photos, hyper-optimized for that. There's no baggage. And it will keep working forever.

hcarvalhoalves 4y ago

> Any story that doesn't note that camera makers should've begun adopting Android at least a decade ago Cameras have a very tight energy budget. It’s not uncommon for current mirrorless camera to not get even 300 shots per batt charge. I’m not sure running a full-fledged multipurpose OS like Android would help that? And why is the software a problem exactly? I don’t care running apps on my camera.

squokko 4y ago
Software is a problem because software is what lets the dinky smartphone camera get a near-mirrorless-level result. If the mirrorless body had the smartphone's software, the image quality would be mindblowing.
- aikinai 4y ago
  Smartphones are nowhere near mirrorless level. Maybe if you only look at the thumbnail? Actually even then they would only be similar in extremely bright environments. I agree mirrorless cameras could do more, but I’m not sure if it’s worth the compromises (power, cost, etc). The cameras don’t need all the processing since they have plenty of real signal to work with. If they did use a bunch of processing, it would need to be entirely new techniques from what phones do since those are pointless when you already have a quality image.
- Wowfunhappy 4y ago
  Is there a reason the cameras can't capture the raw data to be processed later? That would also provide more artistic control, which is desirable on a professional/prosumer device. (I'd also question the "near-mirrorless-level" statement. My iPhone's camera is quite good, but my Nikon D750—admittedly not mirrorless, but a professional camera—is still on another level.)
  - Zak 4y ago
    The main software tricks phones are using are HDR and noise reduction by means of stacking. Your D750 has an exposure bracketing feature and many image editors have stacking functionality. Of course it's hard to get perfectly aligned shots without a tripod or a very good image stabilizer, though I imagine some software can align and perspective-shift them enough to get decent results.
    - _aavaa_ 4y ago
      Funny you mention that. I recently stumbled onto software that does just that [1]. It implements Google’s stacking algorithm that it uses for the pixel line. It’s Mac only, but fantastic. Even a two photo stack produces much better noise reduction than I could get from software. [1] https://burst.photo/ https://burst.photo/
      - totoglazer 4y ago
        It’s neat. I think it falls short on the comparison to the Google paper where they provide comparisons. However they get major points for the clarity and honesty on the tech.
        _aavaa_ 4y ago
        It's hard to tell exactly since while their comparison image is the same (the taxi cab) it looks like they've increased the exposure on their comparison. The app also says it uses a "simplified" version of the approach google lays out, but doesn't provide more details about what was simplified out. (and I haven't dived through the code)
nl 4y ago
Moving parts (autofocus!) will dominate the energy budget, and cameras can fit much bigger batteries than phones. Running 24 hours+ isn't a problem for phones, and most cameras won't need network to be on most of that time. > I don’t care running apps on my camera. I'm sure that's true, but people love their image editing apps on their phones, and love being able to post clips directly to TikTok.
- fomine3 4y ago
  Sony A7IV uses 16.4Wh battery that is equivalent to 4432mAh/3.7V. It's on par to latest smartphones. It's true that it could have bigger battery but it's not everyone want.
- formerly_proven 4y ago
  > Moving parts (autofocus!) will dominate the energy budget, I've never noticed a difference between AF and MF lenses in battery use. What matters most by far is how long the EVF/display is on. Distant second is how many shots you actually take.
sudosysgen 4y ago
Sony cameras actually used to run Android. You could even sideload apks.
- freetime2 4y ago
  Can you provide more details/source for this? I didn't see any evidence for this in a quick Google search.
  - alistairSH 4y ago
    I don’t recall a Sony, but Samsung def had one at one point. And today there’s a Chinese company named Yongnuo that produces them.
  - shawn-butler 4y ago
    Recent Sony cameras[0] include an Android subsystem used to run apps from the proprietary Sony PlayMemories Camera App Store (PMCA). Sony utilizes both Linux and the AV real time operating system (µITRON RTOS) on its arm cores. Some of the nikon coolpix I believe were full android devices but are just a glorified phone / p&s not a dslr. Nikon also uses µITRON RTOS on its proprietary expeed ASIC cores. Canon has a proprietary inhouse OS named DRYOS for its DIGIC ASICs. [0]: https://openmemories.readthedocs.io/devices.html https://openmemories.readthedocs.io/devices.html
hef19898 4y ago
The battery life difference seems to be mostly on paper so (never tried it, but based on the meassurement method). Testing requires the cameras to be on for a certain time between shots, mirrorless obviously consumes more power with screens and EVFs powerd, DSLRs don't use any power at all when not shooting. Propably wouldn't make difference for me, my cameras are always off when not on my eye. The time it takes from getting them up there is enough for them to boot (Nikon bodies), so the difference between an EVF and a DSLR should be marginal in that case.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

radicaldreamer 4y ago

Android would only slow these cameras down, they need to integrate ML models into their existing realtime OSes (utron etc.)

aikinai 4y ago
Agree. And this is what they’re doing. Sony’s just announced camera leans heavily on ML for autofocus.
dboreham 4y ago
Cameras have used "ML" since the Nikon FA in 1983.
- radicaldreamer 4y ago
  They have, but the current generation of ML is far more sophisticated than what cameras have specialized in -- which is why you're seeing phone cameras punch so far above their weight. We haven't seen the same class of improvements for standalone cameras yet.

Infinitesimus 4y ago

It's amazing so watch so many organizations ship poor software and fail to understand that there is a lot of value in starting a product from a simple user experience. I don't think adopting Android would have helped them (they'd still be on 4.0 right now and a security nightmare, let's be real). Same with many device manufacturers as well (something something most car infotainment systems and companion apps). Apple isn't for everyone (I'm an Android user) but they're one of the few organizations that is trying to think of software and hardware as components that should work well together even though they also make some hilarious missteps. At this rate, mirrorless and DSLR cameras will keep getting a smaller slice of users and phone photography will keep improving for the 99% of people out there. Maybe that's okay. I do wish my Sony AIII had great Google Photos integration.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

Zak 4y ago

I'm not sure that's fair to Olympus. For one point of comparison, the Mirrorless Comparison birds in flight test[0] rates the OM-1 better than everything in its price range. The Canon R6 and Sony A7 IV appear only a little more expensive at a glance, but comparable lenses for them cost more - considerably more in the case of long telephotos. Of course, the OM-1 came out after the sale. Going back to 2016, the E-M1 II is, unsurprisingly not as good as newer cameras. It's notable, however that everything above it on the list is newer with the Sony A6500 (2017) and Fuji X-T3 (2018) being the oldest competitors to perform better. Panasonic, on the other hand does have a problem with autofocus because it insists on using only contrast detection, while other manufacturers use contrast and phase detection in combination. [0] https://mirrorlesscomparison.com/best/mirrorless-cameras-for-birds-in-flight/ https://mirrorlesscomparison.com/best/mirrorless-cameras-for...

LeoPanthera 4y ago
Olympus (or "OM System" as it's now called) has a bigger problem, and that's the software that runs on your computer. Unlike almost any other manufacturer, in order to do a firmware update, you have to install a special application on your computer. If you have a Mac, that application requires a kernel extension. For what reason, I can't even imagine. The software is just awful. Why they can't just go with "put the updated firmware on the SD card", I have no idea.
- Zak 4y ago
  That's awful, but it evidently is possible to just put the firmware on the SD card, and somebody made a website with instructions and download links. https://lightsnowdev.com/Olympus/index.html https://lightsnowdev.com/Olympus/index.html
  - LeoPanthera 4y ago
    That's cool, but it seems to only work with older bodies. Mine, the E-M10 IV, is not listed.
    - 4y ago

fomine3 4y ago

A problem of Android for embeddeds is mismatch of software/hardware lifecycle. Android can't be secure for a decade. Even if manufacturer want to maintain, SoC vendor don't support version up so long, and SoC become significantly underpowered for latest OS/apps. Security is important since it's useless to have Android without networking.

freetime2 4y ago

I agree that software on cameras is terrible, and I would love for it to improve. But I'm not necessarily sure that good software would give a huge competitive advantage. Camera sales seem to be largely driven by technical specs, and I'm not sure that most buyers would choose to put their money toward better software over better specs. Even things like ergonomics (button layout, whether it has a fold-out display) seem to get more attention in camera reviews than software. The emphasis seems to be on getting the shot with the best image quality possible rather than what you do with it afterwards. I do think that computational photography features (e.g. snapping a lot of photos and merging them) have the potential to be a big driver of camera sales for whoever is able to integrate them first into a large sensor camera. But this isn't just a matter of software but also processing power. I personally would love to see Apple put out an interchangeable lens camera, but I'm not holding my breath as I don't think the market is large enough for them to bother. Also I'm not sure I could afford to buy one even if they did...

JALTU 4y ago
100% And um, may I include Adobe in this generalization?
hef19898 4y ago
Interchangeable lense cameras already have their "Apple", Leica. Maybe Apple could just buy them...

genmud 4y ago

I would hard disagree with that. I can’t think of a single way that Android would improve my experience on any of the DSLR or mirrorless cameras I own.

Lammy 4y ago

Yongnuo are on their second generation of Android+MFT camera with the YN455: https://www.hkyongnuo.com/productinfo/660161.html https://www.hkyongnuo.com/productinfo/660161.html https://www.yongnuomall.com/product/detail/16254 https://www.yongnuomall.com/product/detail/16254

Espressosaurus 4y ago

Android (and iOS) has nothing I want on my camera. I don't want or need an app store, I don't want or need messaging, and for god's sake please don't put an internet connection with a cell baseband chip in my camera. I need that battery life already. Better integration? Sure. I'd like to see it. Snapbridge works acceptably but is slow. But at the end of the day taking the picture is usually step one before culling, cropping, and editing so while it's a small irritation it's far less important than things like being able to get the shot in the first place (so autofocus, IBIS, etc.).

stonogo 4y ago

Android is the exact opposite of what I want in my camera. Sometimes when I'm out I need to swap batteries -- now I get to wait five minutes for my camera to boot? I know Android can boot faster, but do we really want octo-core cameras with 8GB of RAM? A friend of mine has a pet complaint about the camera industry: in the 1980s if you bought a 110-film camera you could pull it out of your pocket aim at a subject, and take a picture, and the slowest part of that from 'cold boot' is pulling it out of your pocket. No digital camera can replicate that (unless you walk around with an 'on' camera in your pocket at all times). Your suggestion immediately made me think of him, and how not only have we lost something we had in the past, we're marching firmly away from it.

jimktrains2 4y ago
I have an old Canon t2i and can flick it on while pulling it up to my eye and it's on before it gets there. Honestly it's faster to shoot with it than to double tap the power button on my Pixel, even if the phone is already in my hand. Edit: Even more so when autofocus speed is taken into account.
- actionfromafar 4y ago
  I usually carry a film SLR and the best camera is the one you have with you, true. But the shots missed with my phone before I get it out of the pocket and get the camera app out, are many. I'm faster with a manual focus SLR than the phone.
hef19898 4y ago
The Nikon DSLRs I used so far could be carried in your hand at the side of your body, turned off. By the time you had the view finder in front of your eye, they are ready to shoot, and focused, in case you don't mind composition for a quick snapshot. No idea how the mirrorless ones stack up to that, I don't see a reason why they should be any slower so... Maybe EVF and displays need more time to switch on, I don't know.
- Espressosaurus 4y ago

jjav 4y ago

> camera makers should've begun adopting Android at least a decade ago That would be horrible. So now my camera would need a constant stream of security patch updates (which the manufacturer will stop supplying). And surely use a lot more battery. What I love about Nikon DSLRs is the firmware is just for taking photos, hyper-optimized for that. There's no baggage. And it will keep working forever.