4 ms·

I've never had a problem with Sony cameras' ergonomics. The menu is just as straightforward as Canon's, though I suppose if one is familiar with Canon there's a

I've never had a problem with Sony cameras' ergonomics. The menu is just as straightforward as Canon's, though I suppose if one is familiar with Canon there's an overhead to switching. All I really need is the ability to map each aspect of the exposure triangle to a knob, change shooting speed, and push button AF. I never fiddle with the various creative styles or anything, I always shoot raw. The poorer ergonomics stems from the more compact form factor: but that's part of the advantage, too. Harder to hold in the hand, but a lot easier to mount on a gimbal. In this sense, Sony is recognizing the shift towards video and are seeking to delivery truly hybrid cameras. I think the biggest issue leading to sore hands is the weight of modern top-tier lenses. It looks like everyone these days is shooting with super fast f/1.2 and 1.4 50mm and 85mm lenses. I have an EF mount Sigma 85mm f/1.4 and that does take some effort to hold. Looking back on it I think most lenses faster than f/2.8 are overkill unless you're doing sports or bird photography. I'm often stopping down to at least that much or even f4.0. At f/1.4 someone's eye will be in focus while their nose is not, and if they're not perfectly aligned with the camera only one eye is in focus. People often cite bokeh ad a creative choice, but software has gotten good at simulating that. I find myself taking out smaller lenses more and more often just for convenience.

chem83 4y ago
Easiest way to spot lazy journalism is the mandatory empty criticism to the ‘dreadful’ Sony menu system. Sure, the original one had flaws, but the new one leaves very little to be desired relative to the modern Nikon and Canon alternatives. It’s that much improved. Sane hierarchy, handy finding of options and eye-candy color coding/iconography etc. And it’s not like it’s immune to criticism, but people don’t substantiate their claims. They say it’s bad, but never expand on what needs to be improved, which is often a sign of people who actually don’t know what they’re saying. Or, like o said, lazy journalism.
- Manuel_D 4y ago
  With Rockwell in particular, he seems to have a very particular workflow: never shoots raw, heavy use of the in camera image settings. He also says he takes several thousand pictures on a given work day. I think his criticisms are earnest and valid for his particular workflow, but that's not very representative of how most people use their cameras.

chem83 4y ago

Easiest way to spot lazy journalism is the mandatory empty criticism to the ‘dreadful’ Sony menu system. Sure, the original one had flaws, but the new one leaves very little to be desired relative to the modern Nikon and Canon alternatives. It’s that much improved. Sane hierarchy, handy finding of options and eye-candy color coding/iconography etc. And it’s not like it’s immune to criticism, but people don’t substantiate their claims. They say it’s bad, but never expand on what needs to be improved, which is often a sign of people who actually don’t know what they’re saying. Or, like o said, lazy journalism.

Manuel_D 4y ago
With Rockwell in particular, he seems to have a very particular workflow: never shoots raw, heavy use of the in camera image settings. He also says he takes several thousand pictures on a given work day. I think his criticisms are earnest and valid for his particular workflow, but that's not very representative of how most people use their cameras.