At 15:31 -0800 20/12/01, Ken N wrote:
snip...
Why digital ISN'T better:
The Canon A1 changed our comfortable little world. It
indicated, with LEDs, the shutter speed and aperture. This
camera gave the user the additional capabilities of multiple
auto modes, including program mode where both shutter speed and
aperture were set by the camera. Suddenly the relationship
between light and exposure was broken. Now as the light level
changes, numbers will increase, decrease and even go opposite
directions at the same time. Nearly every camera developed
since the A1 has used this new display. There are rare
exceptions, but photographers have been led to believe that
digital readouts are better and provide more accurate
information.
The Canon A1 also had almost unintelligible annotations for those
wonderful auto modes. You could not use it intuitively...
Accurate information it may be. Usable information it may not
necessarily be. Light is analog. The movement of a needle (or
digital scale emulating an analog meter) notes to the
photographer that the light is increasing or decreasing a rate
and a relationship to other readings. Since our measurement
systems of F-Stops and shutter speeds are based on mathematical
equations, we continue to display data in that fashion.
However, if the digital readouts were to be truely intuitive and
not require translation by the photographer, lens openings and
shutter speeds would be shown in Metric. One must KNOW that F8
is twice the aperture of F11.
Most digital information is anti-intuitive. In modern aircraft's
head up displays (HUDs) the engineers have put in an analog
indication to provide trend information alongside the accurate and
easily read digital readouts. Altimeters are a case in point, but
airspeed indicators are best read for trend in analog terms, but for
absolute speed in digital. Digital only instruments are very
difficult to scan quickly.
But if camera makers did not make newer displays, they would not be
able to market the latest and the greatest technology; turnover is
life for these companies and building stuff that is anything more
than ephemeral would reduce their turnover. This is presumably why a
large software company based in Seattle has just brought out yet
another flawed product - people buy it and then have to buy another
version that really will work :>).
The OM series could very well be the prototype of future
c
ameras.
We can dream, can't we?
Ken N.
AG-Schnozz
We can indeed...
Chris
--
<|_:-)_|>
C M I Barker
Cambridgeshire, England.
+44 (0)7092 251126
mailto:imagopus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
... a nascent photo library.
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|