Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] "bad" OM-4 ergonomics?

Subject: [OM] "bad" OM-4 ergonomics?
From: William Sommerwerck <williams@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 20:40:14 -0800
The person who complained about the "bad" ergonomics of the OM-4 doesn't
know much about ergonomics, nor has he thought much about why the camera
is designed the way it is. The very things that make the OM-4 a unique
camera that stands out from the "me-too" designs of other companies are
precisely the things he dislikes. I've rarely seen such a lunk-headed,
parochial product "evaluation."

In the following, when I say OM-4, I also mean the OM-4T.


"You can't see the shutter speed looking down at the camera, because the
prism housing obscures it."

True -- IF you hold the camera perfectly vertical. You only need to tip
it very slightly to see the speeds. To paraphrase the Chinese shopkeeper
in "Gremlins" -- "To see, one has only to look."

Besides, you can see the shutter speeds in the viewfinder. It's a shame
you can't see the f/stops, but that will never happen until Olympus puts
a maximum-aperture pin on the lens. (It's unlikely they'd ever change
the lenses to move the aperture ring near the body, a la Minolta, so you
could see the aperture through a prism.)


"In manual mode, an LCD number line is shown in the viewfinder, but it
is *backwards* from mathematical convention. + is to the left, and - to
the right!"

Many Jews and Arabs (not to mention some Japanese) would disagree.
Regardless, the layout chosen _is_ ergonomically correct. Here's why.

On Olympus lenses, turning the aperture ring clockwise (that is, to the
right, as seen from the viewfinder) gives a smaller aperture and _less_
exposure (and vice-versa). The movement of the bar graph is therefore
matches the movement of the aperture ring.

If the + were on the right, you would have to move the lens _opposite_
to the movement of the bar graph. This would be _bad_ ergonomics.


"The exposure compensation dial is likewise backwards from expected,
with + proceeding anticlockwise."

True, we normally assume that increases (like higher volume) are
associated with clockwise movement. But the dial is clearly marked with
+ and - signs.

(The reason for this arrangement is that exposure compensation actually
changes the film speed, by moving the speed-setting mechanism. The film
speeds are also "backwards," so correcting the latter would also fix the
former.)


"An LCD bar graph is much harder to use than an analogue swing needle.
There have been scientific studies done in the avionics industry to
prove this. If the reading is between two values on the LCD scale, the
last block blinks in a very distracting way. The LCD is just a
cost-saving by the manufacturer -- on what was supposed to be the top of
the range model."

Ugh. Analog good. Digital bad. Ugh.

You're overlooking a number of things. The complex LCD and the circuits
to drive it probably cost more than a meter movement. Also, the LCD
shows many things you could not show on a meter. Not to mention the fact
that the LCD is essentially shock-proof -- the camera would probably
suffer severe mechanical damage _before_ the electronics failed.

By the way, the bar graph is digital, not analog. I've been arguing this
with Burt Keppler for years, but he just doesn't understand.


"There is no [continuously operating] spot metering manual mode. You
have to start in centre-weighted manual mode and push the "spot" button.
Then you centre the bar graph (drawn, per (2), backwards, from right to
left)."

One reason for switching to manual is to select a fixed exposure for a
series of shots of the same subject. (If you were going to shoot
different objects, you'd probably stay in automatic.) The fraction of a
second it takes to tap the Spot button represents "zilch" in terms of
the time it takes to set the exposure manually.

Furthermore, the Spot button memorizes the exposure (even in manual). If
you have to move the camera to some odd position to take the spot
metering, you can then go back to a more comfortable position to
actually set the exposure (ie, turn the shutter dial and/or aperture
ring to center the bar graph).


"Meanwhile, a second moving diamond - the next spot reading, which the
camera is not using - is blinking away, distracting you. There has to be
a SPOT button in order for multi-spot to work, but I'm only interested
in a single spot reading."

Wow -- YOU'RE distracted by the second diamond, so let's REMOVE
multi-spot metering, making the OM-4 like every other spot-metering
camera. Isn't it nice to know that, because YOU don't like a feature, no
one else should be allowed to have it?


"The camera gets sick of you after 120 seconds and unilaterally throws
away all your work. If you are using the spot meter manually, it also
changes the mode back to centre-weighted, with very little in the
viewfinder to warn you."

Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong. WRONG! If you're in manual, the
_exposure_ doesn't change (because it was set manually).

If you memorized the exposure in auto, the memory LED blinks, and you
need only touch the shutter button to restore the previous display.

In spot mode, there is a prominent SPOT annuciator in the viewfinder. It
might be "very little," but for me and 50,000 other users, it's more
than enough.


"You have to read the instruction book from cover to cover to figure out
how to stop the camera from beeping. Beeps are *always* evidence of poor
interface design."

Is there something _wrong_ with reading the manual all the way through?
(I write manuals for a living, and I expect the reader to eventually
work through the manual.)

A beep is an additional confirmation that what you wanted to happen (or
something that you didn't expect to happen) has really happened. For
example, the beep when you remove the lens is a reminder that a
memorized exposure has been lost.

I find the beeping unnecessary. But since you can shut the beeper off,
what difference does it make?


"The highlight and shadow buttons are pointless features, since there's
already a compensation dial. I don't happen to agree with 2 2/3 stops
for shadow with the film I use, but that's a moot point, since I can't
actually push the button with my fat finger."

The nice thing about the buttons is they eliminate the need to fiddle
with the compensation dial -- which is still available, if you want it.
Sorry to upset you, but I use the highlight button quite often. (The
shadow button is more problematical, since the relationship between
correct exposure and the shadow density is not "fixed" (more or less)
the way it is with highlights.)


"The TTL socket is exactly where I like to rest a finger. When a cord is
attached to it, it tends to drift into the field of view for macro
work."

35mm cameras are usually held with the left hand cradling the lens --
not grasping the body. Although you might have a valid reason for
holding the camera this way, it is not the way most people hold it.


"The MEMO mode looks deadly. If you should accidentally bump this
switch, *every* exposure from then on will be wrong. I am so afraid of
doing this I have taken to pressing CLEAR (which cancels MEMO) every
time I pick up the camera and between every frames. More mental
overhead."

It's rather hard to accidentally "bump" the MEMO button. It takes quite
a bit of force to move it -- enough to "dent" the skin of your
fingertip.


"The instruction manual actually says to remove the batteries between
sessions. They have to be joking."

Page 9: "If you are not likely to use the camera for a long period of
time, remove the batteries before putting it away." It does _not_ say
"between sessions."

This is a standard warning for any and all electronic equipment that
uses removable batteries. Although modern cells rarely leak, they can
deposit fuzzy stuff on the contacts. (Which can usually be removed with
household ammonia, by the way.)


"I spent quite a while centreing the dioptric adjustment, even though I
wear contacts and don't need it. This knob doesn't lock securely enough
to prevent it being moved in use. Even after this, the viewfinder is not
as clear as that of the OM-1 and OM-2N, although mercifully smaller."

Are you kidding? The knob locks firmly in place. Either the camera is
broken, or you didn't push the knob.

A lot of people would _object_ to a "smaller" viewfinder. I wish the
camera had a _larger_ viewfinder image.


"I know now that it wasn't lack of marketing or keen pricing which lost
Olympus the SLR market. They no longer *have* a product worth marketing.
I would not buy this camera new at any price."

Althought the OM-4 has automatic exposure and a motor drive, it was also
designed for photographers who want to think a bit before they snap
away. Its "unusual" features were designed for this type of photography.
I don't see how they detract from a more casual use of the camera. (Like
most photographers, I shoot both ways.) It's really a shame you can't
appreciate the imagination that went into this camera. And it's rude to
suggest that the other people in this group don't know a good product
when they see -- or use -- it.

< 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 >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz