[monochrome]

This recent discussion raises an issue that has bedeviled me since I got my K10D - changing analog layouts, i.e. the locations of various buttons on the camera. It's bad enough they change when switching from a flagship to a midrange (K-3 to K-01, in my case). It's even more frustrating to fall into the upgrade cycle trap. I barely have time to develop good mental and muscle memory for fingers on the controls when the next body arrives, always with at least slightly different functions and button locations.

IMHO, at least some of the incessant negative commenting on all brand forums has to do with physical interface dissonance. I try to stay with a camera as long as possible not so much to be conservative with money as to stay familiar with its controls.

[y0chang]

This recent discussion raises an issue that has bedeviled me since I got my K10D - changing analog layouts, i.e. the locations of various buttons on the camera. It's bad enough they change when switching from a flagship to a midrange (K-3 to K-01, in my case). It's even more frustrating to fall into the upgrade cycle trap. I barely have time to develop good mental and muscle memory for fingers on the controls when the next body arrives, always with at least slightly different functions and button locations. .

I find with pentax, they keep their interfaces close at least in the k3/k5 and that is what makes them easy to pick up and use. Even the 645z has a similar interface. This different than the Canon and Nikon consumer and prosumer models, where buttons are rearranged and menu items change year to year in the same model line. We will see on the FF how many extra buttons will be added or will they stick with their tried and true scheme. I think Pentax has done something right because seems that every person who has used the 645z coming from years with Canikon, goes "I started using it, and started to fall in love"

[gazonk]

I saw a Tamron 24-70 in a shop today. Now that's a big chunk of glass!

[cali92rs]

I saw a Tamron 24-70 in a shop today. Now that's a big chunk of glass!

People like to complain about the size of the 16-50mm and the 16-85mm.
I think those folks are in for a rude awakening when it comes to the size of performance FF glass.

[gazonk]

People like to complain about the size of the 16-50mm and the 16-85mm.
I think those folks are in for a rude awakening when it comes to the size of performance FF glass.

Indeed. OTOH, a 24-70 f/2.8 is like a 16-50 f/2, so it's more versatile than the 16-50.

[Alizarine]

finally, we're back to discussing lenses. The 16-50 isn't that big, unless compared to a Limited prime.

[pathdoc]

Heh.The only "big Pentax lens" in my collection, or which I have even handled, is the DA 18-250 f/3.5-6.3. I find myself looking at the specs of all the other "big lenses" and comparing them to that. And quite frankly, if I'm going to carry something bigger and heavier, I want performance to match - constant wide aperture, or longer reach (at either end) or something to make the weight and bulk worthwhile. No wonder I've gravitated so heavily towards primes recently.

[ElJamoquio]

Different strokes, I suppose. I agree that Canon (and Soy for that matter) have hands-down the worst interfaces, but I found the Nikon interfaces to be middle-of-the-pack at best, not to mention the Nikon ergonomics, which IMO are the worst among serious DSLRs.

Indeed! I think Sony interface is the best, followed by Pentax, then Nikon. Never seriously used Canon, not enough to judge the interface.

Nikon's ergonomics range from great IMO (hand-hold-ability) to silly (lens release button, switching modes A/M/S).

[cali92rs]

This goes to show that when people say "Brand X's interface is THE BEST" to take it with a huge grain of salt and another example of people stating opinion as fact. I for one think Canon and Pentax are neck and neck, and I do not like Sony's at all. Nikon, IMHO, used to be great. The D90 was my first DSLR and I loved its interface. But, as Monochrome noted above and Thom Hogan has noted in numerous articles, they just could not leave well enough alone and kept tweaking and tweaking

[Kharan]

This goes to show that when people say "Brand X's interface is THE BEST" to take it with a huge grain of salt and another example of people stating opinion as fact. I for one think Canon and Pentax are neck and neck, and I do not like Sony's at all. Nikon, IMHO, used to be great. The D90 was my first DSLR and I loved its interface. But, as Monochrome noted above and Thom Hogan has noted in numerous articles, they just could not leave well enough alone and kept tweaking and tweaking

"Nikon has moved the cheese AGAIN" Hahaha! It's true, and that's one area that Canon handles a bit better. Pentax at least keeps the dials and the D-Pad stable, which form the backbone of the interface. The newer Sony cameras are muuuch better at this, though, becoming increasingly similar in control layout and operation.

[Eagle94VT]

I saw a Tamron 24-70 in a shop today. Now that's a big chunk of glass!

Yup. I use it with my canon eos 1v (still no canon digital equip here). The pictures come out great - I bet the pentax version will be too. The weight and size in orders in magnitude more than my K3.

[thibs]

Yes, I had this exact discussion here when I tested / reviewed the K-3. I found its interface nice, and with familiarity it really does work well. However I still found it not as customizable and adaptable as Nikon's prosumer and pro cameras. Nikon puts more effort into allowing advanced customization of both menus and physical buttons, in areas that most all others do not. (Including Canon, by the way)

Part of this is obviously entirely subjective, because it does have a lot to do with familiarity, and how people's brains / shooting habits are wired. I'll be the first to admit that.

However, I maintain that it is indeed possible for one camera / system's customizability and interface to actually, quantitatively be at an advantage over another, definitely beyond the ambiguity of personal preference.

For example on prosumer Nikons, face-detection is built into the image playback so with the twirl of a command dial it can scroll from face to face at 100% zoom, allowing portrait photographers to verify sharpness / blinking with incredible speed that saves quite a few seconds per click while on the job.

=Matt=

You're most likely right. I've never been into it enough to judge about advanced customization, I flew way before (again this was on low-mid range cams).
I was more specifically speaking about buttons, rings and in general how easy it is to find a specific feature you wanna change (when not knowing the cam): Nikons are disaster (IMO). Canon low end I dunno. Canon 5D etc. I don't like but at least I can find my way in there.

That Nikon face-detection you mention is quite nice IMO. Not essential but that could be of some use.

[derekkite]

I rarely go into the menus when I'm shooting. I've got the user modes set up for a variety of shooting situations, the other modes keep the last settings, and buttons change the things I need to change on the fly.

Do any of the others need menu access for common shooting adjustments?

[Qwntm]

Nikon's interface superiority?
I dunno about their high end cams but D3xxx to D7000 (7100/7200 I dunno), their interface laughable, badly designed and without any apparent logic (to me).
Yes is this strongly subjective

I hope (for the owners) their D700+ cams are better thought.

It's not THAT subjective.


I picked up a 3500 or 5500 at Best Buy one day and spent about 10 minutes trying to figure out how to adjust the shutter and aperture in manual mode. I've been a pro photographer for over 30 years. THAT's a BAD INTERFACE. Nothing subjective about that.


On the other hand, the D810 is almost as good as a K5...

[Tom S.]

B&H are now taking orders:

Pentax HD Pentax-D FA 24-70mm f/2.8ED SDM WR Lens 21310 B&H

$1,296.95