Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Dumb Things Camera Companies are Still Doing

dslrbodies.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 393 posts

Re: Dumb Things Camera Companies are Still Doing

#311

Post by mozumder »

wazoox wrote: post #164

As said in this [1] article, one of the worst thing camera makers are guilty of is not slapping Android on their cameras to open up th instant publication, photo manipulation, etc. It's a shame that a professional camera is 90% of the time simply not as useful as a smartphone, even ... as a camera. [1]: https://mondaynote.com/memo-to-camera-makers-put-android-in-...

Android isn't really designed for fixed-function devices like cameras. The App model isn't suitable here.

What you really need is an API set that attaches to each function of the camera that third-party developers can use process/publish photos.

So, instead of turning on the camera and seeing a grid of apps, each one you have to figure out separately, you should turn on the camera and see the camera interface. Apps can then add additional functionality to this interface. And when it comes time to review the photo, a third-party app can enhance this section as well, perhaps to post on Instagram or other effects.

But the grid-of-apps is a horrible model for a fixed-function device like a camera. You're ALREADY in the camera, don't need to add another separate layer to interface to it. Just add the ability to enhance these sections.

Re: Dumb Things Camera Companies are Still Doing

#312

Post by oasisbob »

Finnucane wrote: post #174
brudgers wrote: post #149

I love 1/4-20 sockets. Attach my camera to a flash bracket? Yep. Attach an eyebolt to attach a carabiner to attach a neck strap? Yep. Attach a hand strap or a 40mm, 80mm, or 200mm Arca Swiss plate. Yep. Yep, Yep and Yep. There's nothing stopping a photographer from permanently attaching an Arca-Swiss plate to the bottom of a camera body with a bit of cyanoacrylate or some screws if it makes better photographs. For me…

It's like the old phone jack that Apple wants to be rid of--a common and cheap standard that attaches to every known thing in the universe already. And replace it with what? A proprietary system that may be better in some ways, but reduces your choices. Now, I also use the Bogen hex pads--which means if I am out with my Nikon, or my Hasselblad, or my Fuji 6x9, or even my Wista VX, I am good to go.

Comparing the 1/4"-20 tripod mount to the 1/8" TRRS jack isn't a great comparison.

The tripod mount has been a standard for decades and decades.

The phone headphone jack fractured into competing standards years ago. Works fine for listening, but once you want to use a microphone you're dealing with different pinouts for different manufacturers, balkanized auto detection and signaling, incompatible plugs sizing, grounding issues with the phone case, etc. It wasn't a pristine situation when Apple left it behind.

Re: Dumb Things Camera Companies are Still Doing

#313

Post by mod »

chiph wrote: post #303
nakedrobot2 wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By the way, some cameras do run linux, and they take 5-15 seconds to start up. If a camera does take long to startup, it is because it's running linux. These are typically security cameras, which are switched on basically only once, or as a periodic power cycle. Consumer cameras always use a RTOS. Ambarella makes chips for both cases. for example the H2 is for linux, while the S5 is the same chip but for RTOS.

My first digital camera was a Kodak DC220 [0] and it ran the Digita operating system. [1] Boot time was in the 20-30 seconds (good for the time) but you would often miss shots. "Spontaneity" wasn't in it's vocabulary. Photos were surprisingly good for a 1 megapixel camera with fixed-focus. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kodak_DC_Series [1] http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/DC220/DC220Acgi.HTM

Flash memory, wow.

I'm almost certain my first digital camera wrote to floppies.

Re: Dumb Things Camera Companies are Still Doing

#314

Post by ricardobeat »

ISL wrote: post #302
snowwrestler wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're missing the point. If camera manufacturers just molded an Arca Swiss dovetail into the bottom edge of their cameras, then you could have both solid, easy QR compability and the 1/4 socket--simultaneously. The way it works now, you have to use the 1/4 socket to get QR compatibility.

A dovetail would change the way a camera feels in-hand. For all the non-Arca-Swiss users, a dovetail would forever be caught on things without adding utility.

It doesn't have to stick out - think two ridges on the underside, but the whole bottom is still flat.

Re: Dumb Things Camera Companies are Still Doing

#315

Post by mark-r »

ekianjo wrote: post #67
dflock wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a fairly small and rapidly shrinking market - mostly because of camera phones, so this is incredibly unlikely, obviously

The Full Frame and above DLSR market is not really shrinking though. It's certainly not a huge market, but it's ripe for disruption since the pace of innovation of the current incumbents is very, very slow.

The DSLR market is shrinking, simply because everyone who wants one already has one and there are no compelling reasons to upgrade. There was a golden period of a few years where if you wanted a decent camera a DSLR was the best option, so the market expanded quickly. Those days are over.

Adding the features identified in the post would cure the "no reason to upgrade" problem, at least temporarily. But the market for serious cameras is pretty much fixed and easily saturated.

Re: Dumb Things Camera Companies are Still Doing

#316

Post by Mikeb85 »

The dumbest thing they're doing is still making DSLRs. The mirror adds weight, the assembly can be a source of leaking light, it vibrates and wears out the camera, and offers no benefit of any sort. When the output comes from the sensor anyway, you might as well have a digital viewfinder that gives you the sensor's view.

Re: Dumb Things Camera Companies are Still Doing

#317

Post by nradov »

Pxtl wrote: post #296
nradov wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The camera doesn't need to run Android itself, and Android is probably too slow and power hungry to make sense in dedicated cameras. Instead think of the camera as a peripheral to the user's existing smartphone. There is a lot of room to improve connectivity and usability for that mode.

In that case the question becomes how? Bluetooth? USB? A proprietary solution like Moto Mods?

Bluetooth is probably the best option now since the bandwidth is high enough now to allow fast transfer of images and videos. Some cameras use WiFi, but that tends to be worse because then you have to drop your smartphone's WiFi connection and connect specifically to the camera's access point. USB cables are too fragile and awkward.

Re: Dumb Things Camera Companies are Still Doing

#318

Post by recursive »

oasisbob wrote: post #312
Finnucane wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's like the old phone jack that Apple wants to be rid of--a common and cheap standard that attaches to every known thing in the universe already. And replace it with what? A proprietary system that may be better in some ways, but reduces your choices. Now, I also use the Bogen hex pads--which means if I am out with my Nikon, or my Hasselblad, or my Fuji 6x9, or even my Wista VX, I am good to go.

Comparing the 1/4"-20 tripod mount to the 1/8" TRRS jack isn't a great comparison. The tripod mount has been a standard for decades and decades. The phone headphone jack fractured into competing standards years ago. Works fine for listening, but once you want to use a microphone you're dealing with different pinouts for different manufacturers, balkanized auto detection and signaling, incompatible plugs sizing, groun…

It is a good comparison to make with TRS connectors, which got hit in the crossfire. It's been a standard for decades and decades. As you say, it works perfectly for listening. And for those of us that don't want remote controls or microphones on our headphones, the connector is an unfortunate casualty of "progress".

Re: Dumb Things Camera Companies are Still Doing

#319

Post by Mikeb85 »

askafriend wrote: post #7

I could only imagine if Apple took all of their camera expertise from the iPhone and all of their existing Chip expertise and all of their Operating Systems expertise to create a Semi-Pro Mirrorless camera. Imagine full iOS integration, super fast A-11 Bionic chip (same as iPhone), high throughput wireless components, custom OS (like WatchOS), developer API, W2 chip for Bluetooth pairing, OLED screen, and beautiful l…

> That would completely change the market. But we can only dream.

No, it really wouldn't. Look at the heavyweights right now, they all either have a ton of expertise in optics or in sensors. That market cares more about glass selection, sensors and taking pictures than bells and whistles like iOS would provide.

Re: Dumb Things Camera Companies are Still Doing

#320

Post by mark-r »

1_2__4 wrote: post #184
clra wrote: post #6

Great article. I was hoping that the author would add something about the UIs of these cameras. The bodies of modern DSLRs are jampacked with every kind of knob, control, button, dial, and dongle that you can possibly think of. To a large extent, that's kind of the whole point — these cameras are for professionals and professionals ostensibly need to be able to adjust every aspect of their picture. But in practice, 9…

Maybe they HAVE thought of these things, and what you think consumers want in cameras is wrong? I disagree with almost everything you want for cameras and would consider them worse products if they implemented them. Not everything should be a shitty tap-screen mobile interface awash in whitespace and crappy icons. Physical controls are better, when you don’t have time or attention to fiddle with displays. That you do…

There are actually very few controls that you need to fiddle with while you're taking the picture. Take white balance for example - you only need to set it when lighting conditions change, it's very unlikely that you need to change it on every shot. A touchscreen for that would be better than having to scroll through the choices with a control wheel or buttons.

The modern trend of replacing descriptive text with icons needs to die.

Post reply on HN