A video I shot of how the Canon buttons work

[inTempus]

Why does memorizing the function and location of 6 buttons seem easier to you than memorizing the location and function of 3 buttons?

I think you missed my point. Canon's "main" buttons on the top are all physically the same. The only thing to vaguely distinguish them is their location.

Nikon's controls are placed and shaped in such a way that they just make sense. So, I don't necessarily have to remember all of them because their function is instantly obvious.

That seems to imply there is some logical and universally accepted location for camera buttons. If that were true, I could pick up a Nikon right now and instantly know where all the function buttons are. Since we both know that's not the case, that means there's a learning curve. You must learn the location and function of each button, and Nikon's have no shortage of buttons and switches. The few times I have shot with them I found them to be cluttered and unintuitive. But then others, like you, think they are so intuitive that people automatically know where things are without having to learn anything about them.

OK, fair point, my camera is always on unless I'm changing batteries. I still find Canon's power switch annoying

I like it, because it's out of the way and not hovering around my shutter button... the last place where I want unnecessary levers and switches. Now, if it were replaced with an ISO button I would be more inclined to say "that's better than Canon". But a power switch? No thanks. I'll take mine in an out of the way place.

 

[epp_b]

That seems to imply there is some logical and universally accepted location for camera buttons.

Yes and no. There are better and poorer ways of doing certain things.

For example, I'm pretty sure we can all agree that a dial is far better than an "up/down" button for setting the shutter speed.

I would argue that changing the AF area mode with a dedicated switch is better than changing with a digital menu.

I like it, because it's out of the way and not hovering around my shutter button... the last place where I want unnecessary levers and switches.

Nikon thought this out very well. It never gets in the way and I don't think you'll ever find someone who says that it does.

 

[inTempus]

For example, I'm pretty sure we can all agree that a dial is far better than an "up/down" button for setting the shutter speed.

Not sure if you're saying Canon's use an up/down button to select shutter speed or not - but just in case - they use a dial.

I would argue that changing the AF area mode with a dedicated switch is better than changing with a digital menu.

I'm not sure what Canon cameras you've used, but my 40D, 50D, 5DMk2 and 1DMk3 don't require you to go into the menus to change AF points. There's a dedicated button on the back of the body you depress, then you select the point with the wheel under your index finger.

Nikon thought this out very well. It never gets in the way and I don't think you'll ever find someone who says that it does.

That's not my point, my point is that I see no reason to clutter the shutter button area with a switch we both agree sees (or should see) little use while shooting. Why not put your DoF preview button there? It's used even less than the power switch by most people. It's not as logical of a location for it IMHO as you seem to think.

It's also a moot point since we both agree there's no need to have instant access for repeated use of the power button while shooting. If you like it there, great. But I don't think it's some grand design revolution. It's really kind of an odd place for it IMHO.

 

[epp_b]

Not sure if you're saying Canon's use an up/down button to select shutter speed or not - but just in case - they use a dial.

No, that's definitely not what I'm saying, I was just making an example for example's sake.

Why not put your DoF preview button there?

See: Pentax

 

[musicaleCA]

I would argue that changing the AF area mode with a dedicated switch is better than changing with a digital menu.

I'm not sure what Canon cameras you've used, but my 40D, 50D, 5DMk2 and 1DMk3 don't require you to go into the menus to change AF points. There's a dedicated button on the back of the body you depress, then you select the point with the wheel under your index finger..

Same deal on the XXXD series.

 

[vd853]

Canon buttons are not difficult to use at all. I just wish that hitting the delete button twice will delete the image, like Nikon's.

 

[Overread]

I still don't understand the despiration to delete shots in the field. I find LCDs in general to be very poor for image reviews (even if they do have good sharpness when zoomed in its veyr hard to get a feel for the shot as a whole).
For me though I keep it as a policy not to delete when in the field - mostly as most of my shooting is done outside and I just know that if I did field delete, then one cold winters day my finger (gloved or not) might very well hit the delete key at the wrong time!

Memory cards are cheap (especially cheap if your get them online) so its far easier to just keep one more around for when its needed

 

[iamacyborg]

BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH. With my manual film camera I can change the aperture with one hand while changing the shutter speed with the other, while seeing all the changes in my viewfinder. All this from a camera made in the late 70's and with both hands correctly placed to support the camera.

 

[epp_b]

^ Haha, good point

 

[inTempus]

I still don't understand the despiration to delete shots in the field.

I agree, most experienced photographers will tell you that you should shoot now and review later. Deleting shots in the field is bad form.

I don't delete individual shots, I delete the entire card when I'm done with it. I also don't delete my cards in the field, I delete them back at the office as part of my workflow.

 

[c.cloudwalker]

I still don't understand the despiration to delete shots in the field.

I agree, most experienced photographers will tell you that you should shoot now and review later. Deleting shots in the field is bad form.

I don't delete individual shots, I delete the entire card when I'm done with it. I also don't delete my cards in the field, I delete them back at the office as part of my workflow.

Most experienced photogs of a certain age (like mine maybe) will tell you to delete before you shoot. If that photo is to be deleted later, it was not worth shooting.

Someone recently asked on this forum why wedding photogs today are shooting around 800+ photos per. Very good question considering that a wedding has not changed in the last 15 years. There are only so many photos that sell.

 

[inTempus]

Most experienced photogs of a certain age (like mine maybe) will tell you to delete before you shoot. If that photo is to be deleted later, it was not worth shooting.

There's nothing wrong with that approach, certainly we would all like to shoot 100% perfect "keepers" every time we touch the camera, but I suspect even an old pro such as yourself has more than a few OOF, not so hotly composed, lighting sucked, shots.

Someone recently asked on this forum why wedding photogs today are shooting around 800+ photos per. Very good question considering that a wedding has not changed in the last 15 years. There are only so many photos that sell.

Simple, because they can. It doesn't cost anymore to shoot 800 digital pics than it does to shoot 200. Back in the film days each shot you took had a upfront cost and a processing cost. You were also limited to X number of shots before you had to do a film change - which meant you had to be more careful so you didn't waste film and time things poorly thereby missing a critical moment.

With digital those old concerns are out the window. So photogs can shoot more. I don't see it has being a bad thing. I can see how an old timer might use it as a cudgel to batter the new whipper-snappers and to ramble on about the "good old days"... but in reality I don't see what the fuss is about. It sounds like sour grapes to me when I hear the issue brought up (not saying your post is sour grapes).

I shoot with a 13 year veteran of weddings and he shot for many of those years using film. He's an amazing photog. Today he shoots 800+ shots at a wedding.

 

[fiveoboy01]

It doesn't cost anymore to shoot 800 digital pics than it does to shoot 200. Back in the film days each shot you took had a upfront cost and a processing cost.

There is still processing cost, and the photographer's time to go through the extra images, and of course he should be charging for that time. Digital equipment(cameras, memory, processing software and computers, etc) also costs $.

The costs may be incurred differently than they would be with film, but they're still there.

 

[itznfb]

I still can't figure out how to change the ISO on my D300s with one hand

 

[epp_b]

I imagine you can map it to the FN button.