Yet ANOTHER new half-frame 35mm camera

[MFstooges]

Yes, because it's a phone and made to be held that way. Did you ever pick up the receiver of a regular old telephone and hold it sideways? The speaker is at the top, the microphone is at the bottom. The entire design of the smart phone was built around that - not to mention it is generally meant to be held with one hand.

"phone camera"

 

[MattKing]

I find that when cel phones are being used as a camera, their design tends to discourage use in landscape orientation.
They are harder to hold still, and I am more likely to get a finger in the way of the lens.
They could probably be easily re-designed to improve usability in landscape orientation without making them more difficult to use as a phone or pocket computer.
But they aren't.
I have similar complaints about cameras that are much more difficult to use if one is very left handed.
Such is life I'm afraid.

 

[Don_ih]

"phone camera"

My point is the design was based around it's use as a phone. It wasn't designed as a camera or as a television - or it may have a different natural orientation. But it was originally designed to be held up to your ear, not to your eye.

Also, you mention "videos that are supposed to be viewed on landscape monitor." If you look at what YouTube, Facebook, and Instagram are heavily pushing, it's short videos in portrait orientation. Most cell phone videos only get viewed on cell phones or tablets, in portrait orientation.

So the design dictates the use, which influences expectations. Almost no one now finds it odd to watch a portrait-oriented video. That has an impact on photography, also. A half-frame camera produces a photo that naturally fills the entire screen most people are using (phone screen), the way people are using it.

 

[Chan Tran]

Such a camera is a waste of valuable film.

 

[xkaes]

I have similar complaints about cameras that are much more difficult to use if one is very left handed.

 

[MFstooges]

My point is the design was based around it's use as a phone. It wasn't designed as a camera or as a television - or it may have a different natural orientation. But it was originally designed to be held up to your ear, not to your eye.

Also, you mention "videos that are supposed to be viewed on landscape monitor." If you look at what YouTube, Facebook, and Instagram are heavily pushing, it's short videos in portrait orientation. Most cell phone videos only get viewed on cell phones or tablets, in portrait orientation.

So the design dictates the use, which influences expectations. Almost no one now finds it odd to watch a portrait-oriented video. That has an impact on photography, also. A half-frame camera produces a photo that naturally fills the entire screen most people are using (phone screen), the way people are using it.

Wrong. It is designed based on the display. See how the zombie hands unnaturally adapted to the non-phone form factor even though it is held vertically? But that is the most secure and firm position to hold a rectangular display.
Also the YT, Facebook and Insta's portrait format are the effect not the cause. All the serious videos and the longer ones are still in landscape format. YT call it "shorts", why? Because they are short. And TikTok is actually the pioneer. They found out from their study that the demography of the vertical shooters have very short attention span. YT just copied the idea to compete with TikTok.

If the display is not the main factor then we will see smartphones with design like Nokia 6260

 

[Don_ih]

It is designed based on the display.

It is designed around the display, which is chosen due to the design of a telephone (mic at the bottom, speaker at the top).

 

[fstop]

Such a camera is a waste of valuable film.

The cheapskates that used them in the old days thought they were getting more for their money with half frame.

If you take a picture of a donkey with a half frame camera is the picture half....?

 

[Chan Tran]

The cheapskates that used them in the old days thought they were getting more for their money with half frame.

If you take a picture of a donkey with a half frame camera is the picture half....?

I am not talking about the half frame although I don't like the half frame but I am talking about fixed focus, fixed exposure thus can't result in good pictures and wasting valuable film.

 

[MattKing]

It is designed around the display, which is chosen due to the design of a telephone (mic at the bottom, speaker at the top).

I guess it could have been worse:

 

[fstop]

I am not talking about the half frame although I don't like the half frame but I am talking about fixed focus, fixed exposure thus can't result in good pictures and wasting valuable film.

oh yeah that too.
I can't see losing the resolution using the half frame.

 

[fstop]

I guess it could have been worse:
View attachment 379722

The original Smart phone....

 

[Donald Qualls]

I am not really sure just what these cameras do for us but at least they are out there.

What do Holgas do for us? How about Brownie Hawkeye Flash?

What they do is give an easy entry to film photography for folks who haven't been at this for a half century or more like many us.

 

[Dali]

Such a camera is a waste of valuable film.

Is your comment the result of an extensive experience with such cameras or just a baseless remark?

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Yep - like this:
View attachment 379602

I never figured out how to hold a cellphone in one hand and release the shutter button. I say "Smile" or "Shoot".

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

My point is the design was based around it's use as a phone. It wasn't designed as a camera or as a television - or it may have a different natural orientation. But it was originally designed to be held up to your ear, not to your eye.

Also, you mention "videos that are supposed to be viewed on landscape monitor." If you look at what YouTube, Facebook, and Instagram are heavily pushing, it's short videos in portrait orientation. Most cell phone videos only get viewed on cell phones or tablets, in portrait orientation.

So the design dictates the use, which influences expectations. Almost no one now finds it odd to watch a portrait-oriented video. That has an impact on photography, also. A half-frame camera produces a photo that naturally fills the entire screen most people are using (phone screen), the way people are using it.

Very observant Don. ALso, since most people take portraits with the cellphones, the vertical format fits as well.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Wrong. It is designed based on the display. See how the zombie hands unnaturally adapted to the non-phone form factor even though it is held vertically? But that is the most secure and firm position to hold a rectangular display.
Also the YT, Facebook and Insta's portrait format are the effect not the cause. All the serious videos and the longer ones are still in landscape format. YT call it "shorts", why? Because they are short. And TikTok is actually the pioneer. They found out from their study that the demography of the vertical shooters have very short attention span. YT just copied the idea to compete with TikTok.

View attachment 379704


If the display is not the main factor then we will see smartphones with design like Nokia 6260

Actually she's not holding it but rather leaning it on three fingers plus one support finger.

 

[gbroadbridge]

most people hold cell phone camera in portrait orientation for everything they shoot including videos that are supposed to be viewed on landscape monitor.
Only Motorola can give a solution.

Just mount your TV on the wall in a portrait orientation. :-|

 

[Don_ih]

Just mount your TV on the wall in a portrait orientation. :-|

Lots of tv mounts can rotate the screen to portrait.

 

[xkaes]

Actually she's not holding it but rather leaning it on three fingers plus one support finger.

No wonder so many cell phone are broken.

 

[Chan Tran]

Is your comment the result of an extensive experience with such cameras or just a baseless remark?

I know what kind of image quality a camera can deliver with fixed exposure and focus regadless of how good the lens is.

 

[Don_ih]

I know what kind of image quality a camera can deliver with fixed exposure and focus regadless of how good the lens is.

Image "quality" is not the point of these cameras, though - at least not the usual idea of quality, People who enjoy cameras such as these like the quality of the images it produces - specifically that it's not as good as a real camera. Not everyone is looking for the same result.

 

[xkaes]

Image "quality" is not the point of these cameras, though

You have to add in the fact that modern consumer film has extreme flexibility in exposure -- especially over-exposure. Decent photos can be pulled out of way-off exposures. And even simple lenses with small apertures have good results, and plenty of DOF for the typical run-of-the-mill photo. I've seen lots of photos from the bare-bones Kodak Ektar H35, and they are very impressive -- lots of them are on the FORUM if you do a SEARCH.

Not many of us will run around with 4x5" cameras in search of ultimate quality.

 

[Dali]

I know what kind of image quality a camera can deliver with fixed exposure and focus regadless of how good the lens is.

By image quality, you mean optical quality (sharpness, lack of distorsion, etc) or optical fidelity to the subject, right?

 

[Donald Qualls]

I know what kind of image quality a camera can deliver with fixed exposure and focus regadless of how good the lens is.

I've seen many very good photos made with simple cameras -- fixed focus, exposure, singlet meniscus lens. Made a couple of those myself.

The tool provides capability or limitations; the user creates the end result by working within the limitations or using the capability.