New Features?

[Andyt]

Hello All!

The latest issue of "Lighter Reading" has for this months competition asked readers to send in thier suggestions for one new feature that they would like to see developed for thier camera in 25 words or less.

I thought it would be interesting with the "depth of experience" available on this forum what our responses would be.

For me, I would like to have an audible warning when the CF card reaches 90% capacity, as I have been caught out a few times and have had to do a quick card change to continue shooting.

So, what would you like to have as an additional usefull feature

[moz]

As a Canon user I'd love to have the "writing to CF pauses when door opens" feature, rather than "buffer is dumped and you lose".

Being able to use camera batteries in the flash would rock. I have no problem buying a stack of generic batteries if I means I can just carry a couple of one hour chargers with me, and get the capacity boost from lithium batteries into the bargain. Lugging ridiculous quantities of AA's bugs me.

In terms of software/in-camera features, more configurability would be great. Ideally plugging the camera into the PC and being able to make my own assignment of buttons to functions. That way I can turn the useless "direct print" button on my 30D into a "just delete it" button. Ditto for any other functions I don't use or want in different places. Yes, a support nightmare, and you'd definitley need a "reset to default" option on the camera.

If they could whack the focus-assist grid projector off my flash onto the camera I'd be thrilled. Even a lower-powered version would be ok, but best would be a center spot only high power one. Using a laser pointer is too tricky for me.

An IR receiver on all their cameras, like the cheap Canon cameras have would be good. That way any universal remote can be used as a remote trigger, and we can buy the tiny $40 Canon remote instead of the non-Canon $US90 wireless model that's wild overkill for most people but beats the 10s timer for many situations.

(ooops. How many goes do we get?)

[Andyt]

*Bump*

(Maybe a set of inter-changeable brand names for the body and lens, so as to enable the owner to go for a walk on the "dark side" without having to remorgage the house!)

[gstark]

Being able to use camera batteries in the flash would rock. I have no problem buying a stack of generic batteries if I means I can just carry a couple of one hour chargers with me, and get the capacity boost from lithium batteries into the bargain. Lugging ridiculous quantities of AA's bugs me.

That is a seriously good suggestion.

[Alpha_7]

Being able to use camera batteries in the flash would rock. I have no problem buying a stack of generic batteries if I means I can just carry a couple of one hour chargers with me, and get the capacity boost from lithium batteries into the bargain. Lugging ridiculous quantities of AA's bugs me.

That is a seriously good suggestion.

I second that, only 1 type of battery would really simplify things.

[phillipb]

Being able to use camera batteries in the flash would rock. I have no problem buying a stack of generic batteries if I means I can just carry a couple of one hour chargers with me, and get the capacity boost from lithium batteries into the bargain. Lugging ridiculous quantities of AA's bugs me.

That is a seriously good suggestion.

I second that, only 1 type of battery would really simplify things.

Assuming of course that all cameras use the same type of battery.

[Alpha_7]

Phillip, good point. Pity you don't have the choice for lithium ion, or wacking some AA batteries in it, like the battery adapter thingy for the D70 (you have both options).

[gstark]

I think that Phillip's point was more along the lines of pointing out that the D70 uses different batteries than the D200 which uses different batteries than the D2x, and Canon has similar battery model differentiation across its model range.

Thus it becomes a point of which camera battery within the flash unit for each of Nikon and Canon, rather than having Nikon and Canon use the same battery, although that too, would be good.

[phillipb]

I think that Phillip's point was more along the lines of pointing out that the D70 uses different batteries than the D200 which uses different batteries than the D2x, and Canon has similar battery model differentiation across its model range.

Thus it becomes a point of which camera battery within the flash unit for each of Nikon and Canon, rather than having Nikon and Canon use the same battery, although that too, would be good.

Exactly.
Maybe they could redesign the flash to be more modular with interchangeable battery packs.

[moz]

I think that Phillip's point was more along the lines of pointing out that the D70 uses different batteries than the D200 which uses different batteries than the D2x, and Canon has similar battery model differentiation across its model range.

It's actually annoying since so many cameras use the same cells internally and only change the mounting plate (and my dodgy 12V StirlingTek charger comes with plates for several of them). With a minor mod my Apacer Disk Steno will accept a Canon 511 battery

But for Canon users it's not too bad - there's the 511-ish batteries, any of which fit the G-series and 300D..5D. It's only the 350D and 1D series that are odd (and you really don't want a 1D series battery pack on your flash).

I'm iggorant of Nikons - do you suffer a similar plethora of battery choices as you do lens mounts?

[Glen]

I'm iggorant of Nikons - do you suffer a similar plethora of battery choices as you do lens mounts?

Moz, its not that bad at Nikon, the F type has been in use since 1959, with just about everything since AI (1977?) fitting up to current. Interchangability for 30 years isn't too bad

There are a few battery choices though

[sirhc55]

I would love to see (hear) an audible ’in focus’ alert when focussing manually

[DaveB]

I'm iggorant of Nikons - do you suffer a similar plethora of battery choices as you do lens mounts?

Moz, its not that bad at Nikon, the F type has been in use since 1959, with just about everything since AI (1977?) fitting up to current. Interchangability for 30 years isn't too bad

Why then does each new model of Nikon body that comes out have a detailed matrix of which lens types work with it in which mode? Whenever anyone tries to sell me on the "F-mount continuity" story I have to laugh!
Since 1987 you bought an EOS body (which has an EF mount) and all of your EF lenses will work on it. Ok, some functions such as IS might not work with a couple of the really old bodies, but otherwise the lens Just Works. Some of the newer EOS bodies accept EF-S lenses as well as EF, but that's as complicated as it gets!
Being able to physically mount the lens is only half the problem. Having the camera behave normally with the lens on is important too for some reason.

Having a Canon 5-series flash that took BP-511 batteries could be great! Note that the WFT-E1A wireless LAN unit that bolts onto the base of 20D/30D/5D/1DsMkII/1DMkII/etc cameras already uses that battery type.

Having mirror lockup more-easily accessible in EOS bodies would be great! (rather than a minimum of 4 button-presses down the menu). The ability to re-map the DPOF button could be linked with this...

[Glen]

Dave, maybe because the Nikon glass is worth keeping


AF was introduced in 1986 and since then it really just works. Maybe a few oddballs which are still current, eg 6mm fisheye, but generally it just works



Dave, I think those matrix are for the people who believe you can put the 1959 lens on

[gstark]

Why then does each new model of Nikon body that comes out have a detailed matrix of which lens types work with it in which mode?

The matrix is basically to tell you which features will or won't be fully functional.

For instance, my non-AI, non-AF fully manual Nikkor 55mm micro, that's around a late 60's vintage, fits and permits us to make images using each and every Nikon body that we have in this house.

Every one.

From the equally old Nikkormat FTn, through my AI bodied FE2, the fully auto and AF F801, all the way through to the D70.

And it also will work on the D200.

The matrix, however tells us that the current crop of G-series lenses will work on a 15 year old F801 body, but not on a significantly older FE2, while the 80-400VR and 24-120VR will work on everything except the FTn, although I suspect that with a minor modification, that issue, too, can be overcome.

Out of curiosity, the A1/AE1/AV1 series is a similar age to the FE2; what current Canon lenses fit those?

Since 1987 you bought an EOS body (which has an EF mount) and all of your EF lenses will work on it. Ok, some functions such as IS might not work with a couple of the really old bodies, but otherwise the lens Just Works.

And an EFS lens on a 5D?

But it's not any different, really, except that in the Nikon system there's a much greater depth of lenses in terms of the age of the lens pool available.

[DaveB]

Ok, so the newer bodies can cope with older lenses as well as the 'G' lenses, but an older body may be stuck with a 'G' lens. Can anyone name the most-recent Nikon model that can't cope with 'G' lenses? Don't get me started on the AF compatibility matrices when looking at Nikon TCs, extension tubes, and various telephoto lenses!

I notice the DPR D200 review notes the "new" AI aperture ring connector that supports the older AI lenses. Sounds like Nikon's at least improving the compatibility a bit. But even so,

If AF 80-200 mm f/2.8S, AF 35-70 mm f/2.8S, new-model AF 28-85 mm f/3.5-4.5S, or AF 28-85 mm f/3.5-4.5S is zoomed in while focusing at minimum range, image on matte screen in viewfinder may not be in focus when in-focus indicator is displayed. Focus manually using image in viewfinder as guide.

Weird...

By the way I forgot to mention: all the EF lenses are AF. If we want to split hairs, the manual-focus tilt/shift lenses are TS-E (which happens to be compatible with EF for everything including aperture control). The weird body was the 1991 "EF-M" which didn't have AF sensors!

I do like some of the Nikon gear, but I think Canon's decision in the '80s to go entirely electronic was a wise one in the long term. Unfortunately for 3rd-party manufacturers (e.g. Sigma) they don't publish the interface specification (not even with the application of yen and NDAs).


Am I off-topic yet? Lessee...

I would love a camera system that supported modular software. Basically an open-source platform, where people could develop their own firmware extensions. I have given serious thought to building one myself using an existing DSLR as the basis, but the continued development and support would be significant, and in the end I'd rather be out taking photos! But consider what the Russian hackers were able to do to the crippled EOS 300D firmware...

Another camera I'd love to see would be a body with an EF (or F or K, I suppose) lens mount but not an SLR: one with a good electronic viewfinder (LCD and/or eye-level as is found on the Canon Pro1). Using today's technology that might have an APS-C-sized 6 or 8 Mp sensor. Unfortunately without a physical shutter the dust problems would be significant, but it could open up quite a few options as a photographic tool!

[DaveB]

And an EFS lens on a 5D?

That's an EF-S lens, not an EF lens!

It physically won't fit onto a body with an EF mount (as distinct from fitting but not working properly). In fact the only difference is physical (speaking as someone who's modified an EF-S 18-55mm lens to fit onto an EF-mount).
Mounting an EF-S lens requires a camera with an EF-S mount (which happens to be a superset of the EF mount).

Ok, ok, so the finer points could be confusing for some...

[gstark]

Ok, so the newer bodies can cope with older lenses as well as the 'G' lenses, but an older body may be stuck with a 'G' lens. Can anyone name the most-recent Nikon model that can't cope with 'G' lenses?

Not quite, but the F801 came out in about 1988 (I'd need to look up the actual year) and it certainly has no issues with a G series lens. I don't have an (earlier) FA body to check against, so I can't comment on that, but it's within that period that we're talking about this sort of thing.

Don't get me started on the AF compatibility matrices when looking at Nikon TCs, extension tubes, and various telephoto lenses!

That's certainly more confusing than our Income Tax Act.

I notice the DPR D200 review notes the "new" AI aperture ring connector that supports the older AI lenses.

And I was quite surprised on Saturday last to find that DPR were wrong.

Adding the old AI ring is indeed a great idea, and yes, it is on the D200.

But it's not exactly new in terms of Nikon's digicams though: my surprise was in seeing it on the D2X and the D2H, and given that the D2H has been around for quite a few years now, calling this "new" in digital terms is hardly correct.

Another camera I'd love to see would be a body with an EF (or F or K, I suppose) lens mount but not an SLR: one with a good electronic viewfinder (LCD and/or eye-level as is found on the Canon Pro1). Using today's technology that might have an APS-C-sized 6 or 8 Mp sensor. Unfortunately without a physical shutter the dust problems would be significant, but it could open up quite a few options as a photographic tool!

Within that sort of realm, let's return to the FM/FE/FA/F801 in the Nikon camp, or the A1/AE1/AV1 etc bodies from Canon, all of which had easily replaceable backs. Let's modify those backs so that the pressure plate becomes a sensor, and somehow you add onto the back the appropriate circuitry and hardware to process and capture the images to either CF or SD card. Suddenly you have a FF camera.

Obviously there's a lot of issues to be resolved in attempting this, but I think that this methodology cold produce some interesting results.

[gstark]

And an EFS lens on a 5D?

That's an EF-S lens, not an EF lens!

Yep. I said that, although I omitted the dash.

It physically won't fit onto a body with an EF mount

Exactly my point.

Ok, ok, so the finer points could be confusing for some...

Exactly my point.

[birddog114]

And an EFS lens on a 5D?

That's an EF-S lens, not an EF lens!

It physically won't fit onto a body with an EF mount (as distinct from fitting but not working properly). In fact the only difference is physical (speaking as someone who's modified an EF-S 18-55mm lens to fit onto an EF-mount).
Mounting an EF-S lens requires a camera with an EF-S mount (which happens to be a superset of the EF mount).

Ok, ok, so the finer points could be confusing for some...

DaveB,
Those are things I don't want to see in any camera bodies, though one lens can be fitted onto all bodies (same brand) are more convenience and useful.

[Aussie Dave]

I'd like to see manufacturers come up with some sort of sensor cover, that only opens when taking a photo. This way, the sensor is covered from attracting dust 99.9% of the time and is only open to the environment during an exposure.

Imagine all the dust-bunnies that it would save !

[birddog114]

I'd like to see manufacturers come up with some sort of sensor cover, that only opens when taking a photo. This way, the sensor is covered from attracting dust 99.9% of the time and is only open to the environment during an exposure.

Imagine all the dust-bunnies that it would save !

Do you mean the bag similar inside the vacuum cleaner?

[DaveB]

I'd like to see manufacturers come up with some sort of sensor cover, that only opens when taking a photo. This way, the sensor is covered from attracting dust 99.9% of the time and is only open to the environment during an exposure.

What, you mean like the physical shutter that covers the sensor in your DSLR?
Did I miss something?