Decades ago, camera manufacturers used to illustrate the correct way of holding cameras and the correct way to turn them to Portrait orientation.
Last edited:
Are classic SLR ergonomics comparable to newer bodies?
-
A
- Thread starter Cacatfish
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
Sold SOLD!
- Started by B.S.Kumar
-
For Sale Very nice 300mm f/6.3 Komura Commercial in Copal 3S
- Started by Steve Goldstein
-
For Sale Very clean 90mm f/5.6 Super-Angulon in Copal 0
- Started by Steve Goldstein
-
Want to Buy Folding Pocket Kodak Plate Holders, Cut Film Sheaths, and Ground Glass
- Started by trichrome
Forum statistics
Decades ago, camera manufacturers used to illustrate the correct way of holding cameras and the correct way to turn them to Portrait orientation.
I agree 1000000 times with this.
Those classic cameras are to be held that way. The right hand side grip is almost useless for me. In fact, i owned the Canon A-1 mentioned above and the first thing I did was to remove the right-hand-side grip. I used my A-1 without grip and it was better that way for me.
I insist, for classic cameras one should use the "left hand support" technique. It is also the best for minimizing camera shake as well.
Olympus, as usual, got it slightly wrong. The grip depicted is unsteady, it is grabbing the lens with only two or three fingers, without using the left palm. What else could you expect from a SLR designed by a guy (Maitani) that did not use SLRs, being a rangefinder guy?
CANON shows you how to properly hold the camera, by resting it on the left palm.
EDIT: I see you already included the Canon A-1 manual. So Canon tells you how to properly hold the camera. Also, proper photographers grow beards.
Also, vertical grip is all wrong in the OM-1 manual.
For the record, i love Olympus non-reflex cameras and my favorite compact camera is the Olympus Pen S. But i can't help to see how many things are not quite right with the initial OM system... Even the user manual!
The A-1 manual showed me the best vertical grip for such cameras, triggering the camera with the right thumb. This is what I use and it has helped me a lot. In fact once i got a portrait done at 1/2 sec by using this technique on a Nikkormat FT2. It was not "tack sharp" but it wasn't blurry, so a success.
It is clear. For SLR shooting, use a leather jacket, beard, and a Canon A-1. Which was exactly my clothing, facial style and camera 15 years ago.
For the record, i love Olympus non-reflex cameras and my favorite compact camera is the Olympus Pen S. But i can't help to see how many things are not quite right with the initial OM system... Even the user manual!
The A-1 manual showed me the best vertical grip for such cameras, triggering the camera with the right thumb. This is what I use and it has helped me a lot. In fact once i got a portrait done at 1/2 sec by using this technique on a Nikkormat FT2. It was not "tack sharp" but it wasn't blurry, so a success.
It is clear. For SLR shooting, use a leather jacket, beard, and a Canon A-1. Which was exactly my clothing, facial style and camera 15 years ago.
Well, there's how you hold it while making a photo and there's how you hold it while walking around. My focus, so to speak, was on the latter.
While making a photo, almost any camera or shape works for me (*); I like the extended grip surfaces for holding the camera while walking around.
(*) the exception being a Retina IIa - my hand just cannot find the focus lever when I'm looking through the viewfinder.
While making a photo, almost any camera or shape works for me (*); I like the extended grip surfaces for holding the camera while walking around.
(*) the exception being a Retina IIa - my hand just cannot find the focus lever when I'm looking through the viewfinder.
That statement is my statement based on my experience. I was also told that my sales people at Bel Air Camera and Samys Camera. All cameras can be worn out. All cameras can be abused. All cameras can be misused. All cameras can be dropped. Your search is hardly scientific and eBay sellers are not a collection of experienced photographers. I serious doubt that you would have found that experience at well established camera store and their websites.
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2015
- Messages
- 6,678
- Format
- 35mm
After lugging around my C3 for a week I was glad to be back to my plasticy EOS. I can't even get a strap on the Argus!
Actually both work, but for different reasons.
When shooting sports, I was taught to ALWAYS use BOTH eyes, to avoid being splattered as you are tracking the quarterback or receiver (American football). And basketball is almost as dangerous as American football. The vertical with right hand up will keep your left eye clear to see to the left.
But for safety we shot horizontal, so both eyes could see around us.
I was down on the sidelines or the court floor, so safety/survival was a concern.
Comment about the right side pix, the guy's hand is not on the lens. He can't track focus this way, so the position is not usable for action shots (like kids at a birthday party), as the focus is always changing. And for a medium or long lens he has to hold the lens with his left hand, not the left side of the body, for weight balance/support.
I generally shot SLRs right side up. I can support pretty steady with the left under the body with my fingers on the focus ring, or for long lenses under focus/zoom ring, and with the right I can work the film advance lever easier and faster. If I really had to get steady then I would go right side down, to tuck in better, but film advance was slower as I used my thumb for both the shutter release and film advance lever. When I shot with a manual flash, then it was right side down, as I had to use my left hand to hold the flash above my head.
I shoot my DSLR vertical with right side down, because I can tuck better for a steadier hold, and I don't have to worry about a film advance lever. But if the position feels better to go right side up, I will do that.
IOW I use whatever method/position that gives me the best results in the situation.
BTW, I do not use a motor drive, because of the added bulk and weight of an already heavy camera. And as I get older the weight becomes more of a factor. So I hand crank the film advance lever. If I want to shoot FAST, I will shoot my DSLR, where I also don't have to worry about the cost of shooting all that film in a few seconds.
When shooting sports, I was taught to ALWAYS use BOTH eyes, to avoid being splattered as you are tracking the quarterback or receiver (American football). And basketball is almost as dangerous as American football. The vertical with right hand up will keep your left eye clear to see to the left.
But for safety we shot horizontal, so both eyes could see around us.
I was down on the sidelines or the court floor, so safety/survival was a concern.
Comment about the right side pix, the guy's hand is not on the lens. He can't track focus this way, so the position is not usable for action shots (like kids at a birthday party), as the focus is always changing. And for a medium or long lens he has to hold the lens with his left hand, not the left side of the body, for weight balance/support.
I generally shot SLRs right side up. I can support pretty steady with the left under the body with my fingers on the focus ring, or for long lenses under focus/zoom ring, and with the right I can work the film advance lever easier and faster. If I really had to get steady then I would go right side down, to tuck in better, but film advance was slower as I used my thumb for both the shutter release and film advance lever. When I shot with a manual flash, then it was right side down, as I had to use my left hand to hold the flash above my head.
I shoot my DSLR vertical with right side down, because I can tuck better for a steadier hold, and I don't have to worry about a film advance lever. But if the position feels better to go right side up, I will do that.
IOW I use whatever method/position that gives me the best results in the situation.
BTW, I do not use a motor drive, because of the added bulk and weight of an already heavy camera. And as I get older the weight becomes more of a factor. So I hand crank the film advance lever. If I want to shoot FAST, I will shoot my DSLR, where I also don't have to worry about the cost of shooting all that film in a few seconds.
Also, vertical grip is all wrong in the OM-1 manual.
The A-1 manual showed me the best vertical grip for such cameras, triggering the camera with the right thumb.
...so that the hand that provides the support ADDS to the shakey platform created by having to press the shutter with the same supporting hand?!
I am not defending what Olympus published, but I am questioning the wisdom that Canon display as an ALTERNATE to what they mimic...on page 24 of the A-1 user manual they DO show the same support method as Olympus did, which you are conveniently ignoring to make notice (right hand up, triggering)!
Last edited:
I'm conveniently ignoring it because:
a) I'm a Canon fanboy
b) The method in which I trigger the camera using my right thumb (as depicted above) actually has worked very well for me providing a steady support. Maybe because my cameras have very gentle triggers.
There is not much weight supported by either hand really. What is happening when you have the camera in its "normal" position.?
Your right hand is supporting part of the weight and is also triggering the camera in that most common scenario also.
At the shutter speeds i use, the thumb of my bottom hand does not create any problems.
Your right hand is supporting part of the weight and is also triggering the camera in that most common scenario also.
At the shutter speeds i use, the thumb of my bottom hand does not create any problems.
Of course none of those "proper camera holding techniques" apply to the Canonflex . . . 
Interesting how each brand envisioned what their first SLR would look like.
Interesting how each brand envisioned what their first SLR would look like.
Out of curiosity, I went back to look at some of my old images, and I shot my vertical formats BOTH right side up, and right side down.
So it was indeed a case of whatever felt better and more stable to do at the time, with whatever lens was on the camera.
The particular orientation (right side up, and right side down), may also depend on the layout of the individual camera and lens.
The situation also affects the orientation. As I mentioned earlier, rapid shooting events, required right side up, so I could work the film advance lever fast.
Your body may also affect this. I can hold steady both right side up and right side down, because I was trained to. Someone else may not be able to hold steady right side down. So you do what works for YOU.
IMHO, the main thing is that the supporting hand (left or right) be supporting the weight of the camera+lens at the appropriate place for balance and max stability, be it under the body (with left or right hand) or the lens (with left hand), with fingers on the focus ring to do focus tracking. And using proper technique to hold steady.
Oh, my father's Exakta had a WLF, so shooting vertical was a real PiA, so I very rarely did it. Think about it.
My opinion, do whichever works best for YOU and YOUR GEAR, and shoot film
So it was indeed a case of whatever felt better and more stable to do at the time, with whatever lens was on the camera.
The particular orientation (right side up, and right side down), may also depend on the layout of the individual camera and lens.
The situation also affects the orientation. As I mentioned earlier, rapid shooting events, required right side up, so I could work the film advance lever fast.
Your body may also affect this. I can hold steady both right side up and right side down, because I was trained to. Someone else may not be able to hold steady right side down. So you do what works for YOU.
IMHO, the main thing is that the supporting hand (left or right) be supporting the weight of the camera+lens at the appropriate place for balance and max stability, be it under the body (with left or right hand) or the lens (with left hand), with fingers on the focus ring to do focus tracking. And using proper technique to hold steady.
Oh, my father's Exakta had a WLF, so shooting vertical was a real PiA, so I very rarely did it. Think about it.
My opinion, do whichever works best for YOU and YOUR GEAR, and shoot film
Woaaa! Those early SLRs are so appealing.
It really is fun.
Flavio,I'm conveniently ignoring it because:
a) I'm a Canon fanboy
b) The method in which I trigger the camera using my right thumb (as depicted above) actually has worked very well for me providing a steady support. Maybe because my cameras have very gentle triggers.
We all already know you don't like OM.
No need to vent and fabricate facts that don't exist.
BTW, what is really your experience of the OM system?
Does it cover a dozen bodies and a dozen of lenses or is it really just a couple of ones?
I've shot with OM-2 and OM-1 with OM 55/1.2, 28/3.5 and 135/2.8. A loaned kit. OM-3 and 4 are really rare here and i don't care for the OM-10.
Certainly a nice camera I found fine to use, but when compared to other SLRs then it does not become my favorite or "the best", nor i did find the viewfinder a huge advantage. I wonder how many SLRs different to the OMs have Olympus die-hard fans used. Because i like the viewfinder on the Canon F1N, Nikon F2 and F3HP more; and those cameras are tougher and mechanically far smoother, and quicker to use. I can mention an even longer list of cameras that i'd pick over an OM-1 or 2. I'd even prefer a Spotmatic which is more ergonomic and, something people forget nowadays, has really compact lenses available.
You are too worried by my opinions on the OM system
I"ve also stated that my favorite compact cameras are mostly by Olympus: Olympus Pen S, Pen EE-S 2, Trip 35, 35RC. I own all of them plus the regarded 35SP. I also own the extremely rare Olympus Pen W, a prized camera in my collection.
The issue I have with newer (i.e. digital) bodies is the smattering of small buttons close together on the back. My D700 isn't too bad in this respect, but my Fuji X-Pro1 (which is like a classic rangefinder) has quite a few buttons on the back.
On newer film SLRs, like the Canon Plan 7NE or Maxxum 7, I like their soft contours.
From my personal POV new cameras have too many functions, to me the Spotmatics were the pinnacle of simplicity and ease of use, the F was the best as it had full aperture metering, the MX was it's sucessor another excellent camera. Of course other manufacturers had their equivalents.
I rarely shoot 35mm these days, I cut righ nack around 20 years ago because I just wsn't using the negative. When I do it's a Spotmatic F, SPII or SP100, and for fun an Exacta Varex IIb.
All the program modes make cameras (film and digital) harder to use, they take the skill away and substitute mediocracy.
Ian
Modern cameras are sometimes like a word processing program that thinks it knows what you want to do (when you don't) or a photocopier that thinks it's smarter than you.
It all depends on how one learned photography initially. It would be difficult to change in either direction.
I guess I'm an old school curmudgeon.
It all depends on how one learned photography initially. It would be difficult to change in either direction.
I guess I'm an old school curmudgeon.
Those are two classic peeves of mine as well.
But, as with cameras, there was a point in the evolution of those products where a pinnacle of interaction was reached.
Consider the Nikon F and F2. The F2 had numerous ergonomic and functional improvements. By the time of the F5 all the external single-function controls were gone.
You could argue a case for single mode automation, like aperture priority + manual for example. It frees you up for a grab shot if there isn't time alter the settings. After that development there was a huge degree of redundancy built into cameras, and many owners wouldn't move out of their favourite modes for the life of the camera. This is taken to it's nadir with modern digital cameras which never move out of P mode, but have numerous alternatives that are effectively dead circuits.
The problem with later SLRs is it became more difficult to perform a simple task like underexposing, than it was in match needle metering days. The Canon A-1 has a lot to answer for. From the mid-1990s cameras have included the kitchen sink because it's cheaper to include modes than leave them out.
The problem with later SLRs is it became more difficult to perform a simple task like underexposing, than it was in match needle metering days. The Canon A-1 has a lot to answer for. From the mid-1990s cameras have included the kitchen sink because it's cheaper to include modes than leave them out.
The ultimate abyss that camera ergonomics will fall into is voice activated controls.
"camera, move focus point left"
"camera, underexpose one stop"
"camera, take picture"
We're doomed.
"camera, move focus point left"
"camera, underexpose one stop"
"camera, take picture"
We're doomed.
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |