How can cameras be improved in the future? (Page 10): In 1984, my prime multi-image slide production year, I was paying $6.50 a roll for slide processing at a pro lab that used a...

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

IBM wrote:

I payed $6 a roll that includes printing to slides , if I wanted prints I bought fugit colour film , I did my own black white , my slide
Projector was a top line , I have a lot of carssells for slides , projectors were only about $125 for a Kodak, nothing ever stopped working ,never had to take a piece of any camera gear in for a fix ,

In 1984, my prime multi-image slide production year, I was paying $6.50 a roll for slide processing at a pro lab that used a Refrema dip-and-dunk processor (NOTHING touched my film). Film cost about $5.00 a roll then.

I had a dozen Kodak Ektagraphic E2 projectors with 4”-6” zooms and 7” fixed focal length lenses. Those pro models cost more the the cheesy consumer models... around $300 each.

The prices I quoted above for film and processing are current at B&H.

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

burkphoto wrote:

You must be stuck in Film World. I don't know about yours, but my digital camera has dozens of controls on it.

Dozens of controls to control just three controls. My camera is the same - dozens of controls. There is something that seems just so wrong about. But if you think for a moment that I am willing to give up any one of those buttons or dials, guess again. Of course, if it gets too confusing for whatever reason, one can always drop back to the film era manual control. It still works the same as it did back then.

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

wdross wrote:

Dozens of controls to control just three controls. My camera is the same - dozens of controls. There is something that seems just so wrong about. But if you think for a moment that I am willing to give up any one of those buttons or dials, guess again. Of course, if it gets too confusing for whatever reason, one can always drop back to the film era manual control. It still works the same as it did back then.

All of that discussion - just prompted me to hold my most advanced DSLR (a77II) and count just how many buttons it had.
Dang me!! ... But - I could not find "dozens" ... I found only ONE dozen, along with one button for a light, and one to engage movie mode. Another button locks the dial. There are only two other dials - one for setting Aperture, on the front, the other for setting Shutter Speed on the back. There's no other controls, except the DOF button on the right front, and the lens release button on the front left. Where do you get all this "DOZENS" business? ... Or are you including the menus?

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

ChrisT wrote:

All of that discussion - just prompted me to hold ... (show quote)

Just a quick count on the E-M1 mrII is either 15 or 18 buttons depending on whether or not one counts the four way as one button or four buttons. And then there are all the dials that can be added in. Also, the buttons mentioned above are related to actual photographic function buttons. There are more buttons on the camera than just those.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

ChrisT wrote:

All of that discussion - just prompted me to hold ... (show quote)

On my GH4, most of the buttons and dials are programmable or reassignable. There are quite a few virtual buttons on the touch screen. All of the menu items are touch-sensitive. And since the camera has an even balance of video, audio, and still photography features, there are extra controls for those. Then, there’s the smartphone app for remote control.

The new GH5 gets even crazier. These things are more computer than camera! But plenty of folks overlook that about modern digital cameras... and other devices.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

deleted

wj cody Loc: springfield illinois

JPL wrote:

Cameras are getting better in most ways. Focusing is fast and accurate, resolution is high, low light capabilities are good, etc.
How can cameras be improved in the future? Can we find some new functions for cameras or is future development only about lowering the price?

What do you think or wish for?

it's not the cameras which need improving.

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

wj cody wrote:

it's not the cameras which need improving.

Are you implying that people need to learn how to use the tool?!? The tool doesn't run itself perfectly?!? What a concept!!! (LOL!)

Darkroom317 Loc: Mishawaka, IN

wj cody wrote:

it's not the cameras which need improving.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

wdross wrote:

Dozens of controls to control just three controls. My camera is the same - dozens of controls. There is something that seems just so wrong about. But if you think for a moment that I am willing to give up any one of those buttons or dials, guess again. Of course, if it gets too confusing for whatever reason, one can always drop back to the film era manual control. It still works the same as it did back then.

Yes, the Pentax K-30 I purchased in 2015 has a few more controls than the Pentax Super Program I purchased in 1984 does, but,

(1) some of the extra controls are ones I never use and are placed out of my way, so they don't affect me

(2) one of the extra controls is for auto-focus, which the old camera didn't have

(3) one of the extra "controls" raises the built-in flash, which the old camera didn't have

(4) the controls for adjusting aperture and adjusting shutter speed are easier to operate with the newer camera up to my eye than it was with the older camera up to my eye

(5) the information provided in the viewfinder is both more comprehensive and easier to read in the newer camera than in the older camera

So, considering all, I find the older camera more awkward to use when I do use it these days {and, no, that is not just from a lack of practice, it is from an improvement in ergonomics

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

burkphoto wrote:

deleted

Deleted, huh, Bill? ... Was it THAT bad?

You know what I'd like to see, Bill ?

That little icon, representing the state of the battery charge ... useful only to a point ... it'd be better, if it read a percentage left ...

Also, in the same vein ... one for the SD card - indicating storage space remaining - also - shown as a percentage ...

And, yes - this would also have to reflect any number based on a changed max res .... is either of these - do-able?

JohnFrim Loc: Somewhere in the Great White North.

Chris T wrote:

Deleted, huh, Bill? ... Was it THAT bad?

You know what I'd like to see, Bill ?

That little icon, representing the state of the battery charge ... useful only to a point ... it'd be better, if it read a percentage left ...

Also, in the same vein ... one for the SD card - indicating storage space remaining - also - shown as a percentage ...

And, yes - this would also have to reflect any number based on a changed max res .... is either of these - do-able?

My 2012 vintage Sony A57 does what you seek.

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

JohnFrim wrote:

My 2012 vintage Sony A57 does what you seek.

No, really, John?

I have an a58 ... didn't remember it doing that ....

See - what I'd like to see is - a continuous icon - such as the one for battery charge - which is prominently the first one you see - as soon as you switch on. But, this new one - would also show the storage room left on the card ... so you don't go on blindly shooting ... and chancing corruption of the entire card ....

jmvaugh Loc: Albuquerque

Dramatically lighter lenses for full frame with well-balanced, rugged, weather-sealed, tough as nails camera bodies.

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

jmvaugh wrote:

Dramatically lighter lenses for full frame with well-balanced, rugged, weather-sealed, tough as nails camera bodies.

I think there ARE, already, some - just like that, JM ... they call 'em Pentax !!!!