The long-awaited Nikon feature request list - part one

I believe Nikon took it out of the D800, then various people (myself included) kicked up stink and a firmware upgrade restored it. I might have my revisions confused and it was the D810.

 

If you put the Df in back-button focus (a4: Focus Activation = AF ON only) and focus priority (a2, AF-S Priority Selection = Focus), be in AF-S mode (apparently on the D500 and later you can do it in AF-C too with a1 appropriately set - I've not tried on my D850, and I'm not sure if this is true for the Df) then you should be able to trap focus (hold down the shutter button and it'll release when it sees focus). You need to be in single-point AF, and IIRC you need an autofocus lens - that is, the camera needs to think it can autofocus. This is annoying, it would be more useful if it worked on all lenses; it means that a "chipped" lens (a manual focus lens with the electronics of an AF lens bolted on) is actually better at this than a genuine AI-P lens.

 

Should I add a request that it work with manual focus lenses? (I can give it a go to find out whether it does already first...)

OK! So set the back button focus so that the camera won't AF when you press the shutter release. Set the camera on AF priority so that the shutter won't release unless it achieves focus. Right? I thought it ought to have such a setting in menu. Simply arms it and press the shutter release. When something is in focus the shutter trips.

I have no idea why you are so resistant this this request. But so be it. I don't need it. Just thought it would benefit some people.

Sorry, Mary I'm really not! I just still don't understand it.

I understand the logic of going to internal storage rather than memory cards, I just think it has down-sides that would outweigh any advantages. I understand the logic of wanting social media posting support, I just think it's not the best way to solve the problem. Those both have slides.

The dedicated mode for auto-ISO has a slide too, I just don't really understand why (assuming the latest Nikon button layout) it's easier to turn ISO in manual mode on and off by changing mode than it is to use the ISO button to do it, like you do in other exposure modes. To me it would be moving something I can change easily with my right hand to something I'd have to use both hands to change, depending on what I'm doing with the movie rec button. I toggle fixed and auto-ISO fairly frequently, so I quite like being able to get at it without taking my eye from the finder. I understand everyone's different, I just don't understand how doing this by mode is in any way more ergonomic.

I do understand that it might be logically easier if you like to think in terms of Pentax's TAv mode - that "auto-ISO + manual aperture and shutter" is an exposure mode that's different from "manual ISO + manual aperture and shutter". I get the exposure triangle - that all of shutter, aperture, ISO and exposure compensation are under the user's control, and in a sense it's independent which ones are altered. Unfortunately that way lies:

• Manual shutter, aperture, ISO; exposure changes (EC adjusts readout only). (M mode)
  
• Manual shutter, aperture, exposure compensation; ISO changes automatically. (M + auto ISO)
  
• Manual shutter, ISO, exposure compensation; aperture changes. (S mode)
  
• Manual shutter, exposure compensation; aperture changes, ISO changes at limits of aperture. (S + auto ISO)
  
• Manual aperture, ISO, exposure compensation; shutter changes. (A mode)
  
• Manual aperture, exposure compensation; shutter changes, ISO changes at limits or at set longest exposure. (A + auto ISO)
  
• Manual ISO, exposure compensation; shutter and aperture change (program shift). (P mode)
  
• Manual exposure compensation; shutter and aperture change (program shift) + auto-ISO at shutter speed/aperture limits. (P + auto ISO)
  

All of these are useful. I'm a bit wary of having to scroll through all of them when I want to get to a different one, though; currently two clicks of the dial will get me between any of S,P,A,M and another click toggles auto-ISO. Feedback was that auto-ISO should still be configured separately for S, P and A - but in that case M mode is "special", which is its own strangeness. If that's how you think, fine, we should have that mode; if it's not (for me) I still like being able to toggle auto-ISO the old way, so I'd like any special mode behaviour to be optional.

Nikon should absolutely do a better job of documenting the merits of manual + auto-ISO, though.

As for resetting the auto-ISO limit on entry to this mode - it still feels error prone to me for that to change (particularly that going to a different mode and back would reset whatever auto-ISO you'd been using), but I've added the option. I just wanted to know whether the real issue was the need for mode-specific auto-ISO limits or that manually-set ISO be different from the menu option for auto-ISO limits - these are both separate requests (and have separate slides). You did say you want the user to be able to set new limits after this resets - but I'm not sure how you want that to happen. If it's by changing the auto-ISO limit in the normal way, as described in slide 34, we don't need anything separate here. If you really want it reset, that's what I've currently stated.

If the goal is to report to Nikon what the actual issue is and then leave them to find a solution, I still don't know which of these issues, if any, is actually a problem, that "add a mode" is trying to solve. I'd leave it for Nikon to come back and say "does this implementation solve your problem?" - but I think it's vanishingly unlikely that they'll do that, so I want to be really sure that whatever we capture is explained as accurately as possible, even if we're not giving implementation suggestions.

OK! So set the back button focus so that the camera won't AF when you press the shutter release. Set the camera on AF priority so that the shutter won't release unless it achieves focus. Right? I thought it ought to have such a setting in menu. Simply arms it and press the shutter release. When something is in focus the shutter trips.

Yes - it's implemented as a consequence of the way the autofocus system is set up, not via an explicit option. That also explains why it won't work with manual focus lenses: presumably it was easier for Nikon engineers to ensure the AF system happens to work out the current way (and possibly not work, during the period where they'd "added a feature" and broken it) and they're too keen on people "upgrading" to AF lenses to be motivated to make it work with manual focus. (I'd have said "what about the f/1.2 lenses?", but these days they'd try to sell you a Z...)

Canon used to call it trap focus explicitly. I think they took it out around the 5D3 vintage, although I don't know if it got put back since.

Wait... I added a slide about manual focus lenses, then thought I'd better check. The D810 works as expected (it traps with a 50mm f/1.8 AF-S, it just releases with a 200mm f/4 AI). My D850 won't trap with the 50mm either. AF mode single, focus priority, back button focus, single AF point.

IIRC someone reported that the D500 traps properly. Would anyone with a D850/D5/D500 mind checking please? I may be behind on firmware, but I might also have a nut loose behind the viewfinder and just be doing it wrong. If Nikon killed it again, I'll complain again. It's infrequently useful, but it is useful.

Edit: Wait... Why is there a triangle by "AF-on only"? Ah - there's a new "out of focus release" menu option that you have to turn off for trap focus to work. I assume someone was confused and having to set the functionality in two places seemed like an improvement. (What was "focus priority" going to do if not this?) With that my D850 behaves. I can live with it. Still doesn't work with manual focus lenses, though.

in mode M, the camera will first use auto ISO sensitivity control to bring exposure as close as possible to the optimum and then bracket this exposure by varying shutter speed.

With AutoISO on, it appears the behavior is quite similar/identical between A and M mode.

Might there be a bigger request to what exactly can be bracketed and how?

Actually, yes. In M mode it would be nice to actually have the ISO vary and the shutter speed and aperture settings honored and not changed. Anything that moves causes trouble in HDR photography (which luckily I have to resort to less and less because of the larger dynamic range of the newer sensors); having the shutter speed change for the different exposures just makes the issue worse. Naturally, changing ISO for the different exposures will affect noise, dynamic and tonal range - but I feel the first can be dealt with and the two others aren't that relevant when I am doing HDR and tone-mapping anyway.

Andrew, I am now getting to the point where I appear to agree with Mary - just eliminate slide 32 altogether. Or modify it to read: add user-definable U1, U2, and U3 (or more) modes also to cameras that have a mode button and that allow to store and recall all relevant camera settings. Then I can create my own set and don't have to try to explain to Nikon why I want something a certain way. I never got used to the banks - not easily reachable and confusing on top of it. At the same time, they could allow the user to not display the modes they don't plan on using (in my case, P, S, A) - just like they allow for dynamic AF area modes.

We have gone around in circles about the M/M*(TAv) issue - you feel you can accomplish the same thing with the ISO button alone and that there is no difference in the approaches. That despite the fact that you see the confusing issue with the ISO value in M vs M with AutoISO. I rather change modes than running the risk that upon turning AutoISO off and back on again while making a change to the ISO value doesn't get me back to the exact same state before I turned AutoISO off in the first place. Your other suggestions (33 and 35 I believe) could address that issue - I am not sure at this point.

AutoISO is a great feature - but the more I think about Nikon's implementation of it (in essence forcing it on the existing SPAM modes) creates a whole slew of issues (like shutter speed limits and non-existing aperture limits, priorities and dependencies). Those eight modes you listed and that you don't want to cycle through are the result of this "forced marriage". I can no longer be sure I am in S or A mode - because AutoISO may alter the behavior and will have some other parameters set that I may not be aware of or forgot to change. And there I am trying to figure out why I can't do a 2s exposure (because somewhere a parameter has been set that limits the shutter speed to 1/4s). Worse even in M mode - it may not be totally under my control either - with AutoISO enabled. So let's just keep going down the path Nikon choose for us - rather than doing the sensible thing and add a new mode. As I said above - a few user defined modes U1 etc will solve the issue without Nikon needing to understand why a user would want those in the first place. But maybe that prevents a software engineer from writing the appropriate code.

Someone at Nikon seems to think that the D500 doesn't deserve a d9 AF area mode - despite the fact that they wrote the code to add it to the D5 (same AF module) and later implemented it in the D850. What on earth ever made me think Nikon could be convinced to do anything they haven't already decided to do in the fist place?

Sorry, Mary I'm really not! I just still don't understand it.

OK, no need to explain. I am not going to question why. And I don't have any interest in reading your non-photographic pretentiousness. Please take that ludicrous slide out.

With AutoISO on, it appears the behavior is quite similar/identical between A and M mode.

 

Actually, yes. In M mode it would be nice to actually have the ISO vary and the shutter speed and aperture settings honored and not changed. Anything that moves causes trouble in HDR photography (which luckily I have to resort to less and less because of the larger dynamic range of the newer sensors); having the shutter speed change for the different exposures just makes the issue worse. Naturally, changing ISO for the different exposures will affect noise, dynamic and tonal range - but I feel the first can be dealt with and the two others aren't that relevant when I am doing HDR and tone-mapping anyway.

I suspect both cases have advantages - you may want to stick to a base ISO level and let shutter speed float so you can stay at that base ISO, or you may be limited for shutter speed (for example with flowing water) where bracketing ISO is better. I've added a slide "Exposure - bracketing ISO in manual mode" that suggests making the choice optional - I hope that's okay. I don't think this is specific to whether auto-ISO is turned on.

Andrew, I am now getting to the point where I appear to agree with Mary - just eliminate slide 32 altogether.

I'm aware that I've taken a lot of time from both of you, and I'm grateful for it. I'm sorry to have been frustrating - if it makes you feel better, I'm equally frustrated. I currently still have "Exposure - add a new mode for manual + auto ISO" present in the hope that it reflects what you and Mary asked for, and that your suggestions to remove it come down to the difficulty communicating it to me rather than this slide actually not being what you want. If this slide is actively wrong - either because I've still misunderstood or because you'd rather the request change - then I'll happily remove it.

Or modify it to read: add user-definable U1, U2, and U3 (or more) modes also to cameras that have a mode button and that allow to store and recall all relevant camera settings. Then I can create my own set and don't have to try to explain to Nikon why I want something a certain way. I never got used to the banks - not easily reachable and confusing on top of it. At the same time, they could allow the user to not display the modes they don't plan on using (in my case, P, S, A) - just like they allow for dynamic AF area modes.

I agree about banks (now I've tried to use them more actively) - although this is clearly a different request. I've added it as "Exposure - configurable mode list". I've never used the D7x00-style user modes (I think my D90 doesn't have them? I've never tried...) but they do sound slightly better. My only concern is that Nikon may already have put "recall shooting bank" and/or "recall custom settings" as something that can be assigned to a programmable button on the D6, which may (or may not) be a better interface. The "recall shooting functions" mode on the D5 seems to be not quite as functional.

Just to be clear - Mary and Thom Hogan both suggested that it was better for me to express a problem for Nikon to fix than to focus on a specific solution. I think both are important, but if I've been pressing for "why do you want this?" it's because I was trying to meet the apparent request to flesh out that section.

We have gone around in circles about the M/M*(TAv) issue - you feel you can accomplish the same thing with the ISO button alone and that there is no difference in the approaches. That despite the fact that you see the confusing issue with the ISO value in M vs M with AutoISO. I rather change modes than running the risk that upon turning AutoISO off and back on again while making a change to the ISO value doesn't get me back to the exact same state before I turned AutoISO off in the first place. Your other suggestions (33 and 35 I believe) could address that issue - I am not sure at this point.

I can think of at least five separate "problems" which a dedicated "manual + auto-ISO" seems to address:

1. "Manual mode" sounds as though everything should be under direct control, and auto-ISO in manual mode is a different concept which can be argued to be worthy of a separate mode. (FWIW, I seem to remember Ken Rockwell suggesting that auto-ISO in manual was "broken" on this basis; I could be wrong. I do agree it's weird, but I think it's orthogonally weird with other auto-ISO modes so it doesn't bother me.)
   
2. There is an interaction between the currently set ISO and the auto-ISO range, and a desire to change the auto-ISO limits dynamically and independently from the explicit ISO value. (I agree, although since I believe this applies to all auto-ISO modes I prefer the solution suggested in "Exposure - auto ISO limit/native ISO independence".)
   
3. Mary wants "no limits" on the auto-ISO range on entry to the "manual + auto-ISO" mode, but still wants the user to be able to set a limit dynamically. I'm still not quite sure whether this means that every time you enter the "manual + auto-ISO" mode the auto-ISO upper limit should get reset, no matter how you last adjusted it, or whether the change in point 2 is sufficient.
   
4. It may be more convenient ergonomically to select this mode via the mode dial rather than using the ISO controls. (I believe that on most bodies I would find it easier to use the ISO interface. On the other hand, if the goal is to stop accidentally switching to/from auto-ISO, I agree that having a "mode" select this would have that effect. I don't know whether the "danger" of toggling auto-ISO accidentally goes away if point 2 is fixed another way - although point 3 may make it worse.)
   
5. Many users seem unaware of manual + auto-ISO as a valid way of working, and adding a mode would help. (This is probably true, but a bigger issue for Nikon's documentation and for educators than for the camera configuration. Nikon's D850 manual teaches you how to take videos before it tells you how to change exposure and starts out using the camera as a point and shoot, which tells me something about how effective they are at explaining photography.)
   

I don't know which of these may actually bother you, or whether I've missed something critical. I don't know whether the "Exposure - auto ISO limit/native ISO independence" proposal does completely fix your concerns regarding point 2, and whether you'd find such a solution preferable or worse. If Nikon are going to be left to get on with it and come up with their own implementation (as Mary reasonably advocates), their solution may fix only a subset of these unless it's clear what actually needs fixing.

I'm always prone to excessively long posts and emails, as you may have noticed. It's because I try to pre-empt the next few questions and answer them in advance. I would expect Nikon to guess rather than ask, so I'm even more inclined in this case.

(Eugh, hit the size limit again, just to prove it. Splitting.)

AutoISO is a great feature - but the more I think about Nikon's implementation of it (in essence forcing it on the existing SPAM modes) creates a whole slew of issues (like shutter speed limits and non-existing aperture limits, priorities and dependencies). Those eight modes you listed and that you don't want to cycle through are the result of this "forced marriage". I can no longer be sure I am in S or A mode - because AutoISO may alter the behavior and will have some other parameters set that I may not be aware of or forgot to change. And there I am trying to figure out why I can't do a 2s exposure (because somewhere a parameter has been set that limits the shutter speed to 1/4s). Worse even in M mode - it may not be totally under my control either - with AutoISO enabled. So let's just keep going down the path Nikon choose for us - rather than doing the sensible thing and add a new mode. As I said above - a few user defined modes U1 etc will solve the issue without Nikon needing to understand why a user would want those in the first place. But maybe that prevents a software engineer from writing the appropriate code.

Well, I've added the user mode suggestion slide. For what it's worth, the mode selection behaviour does bug me. It strikes me that it would be more orthogonal, assuming you've not swapped the dials, if:

• Mode + front dial (the one used to change aperture in A and M mode) toggled whether the camera sets aperture automatically (that is, changed between S/P and A/M).
  
• Mode + rear dial (the one used to change shutter in S and M mode) toggled whether the camera sets shutter speed automatically (that is, changed between P/A and S/M).
  
• ISO + front dial continues to toggle whether auto-ISO is enabled.
  

That would be a "modern dial interface" equivalent to having "auto" positions on dedicated dials (which is a solution that makes sense, but normally has the problem that it's tricky to get back to the "sensible non-auto value"). Given that I don't change mode (well, SPAM) that often, I'm not entirely sure this is useful - and I kind of like the idea of mapping the mode selection to somewhere incompatible with two-dial custom setting (such as the i button, which would occupy the thumb and rule out the rear dial) and being able to use the movie rec button for something better instead. But there's some logic to it. Or Nikon could just make a little square slider with "P" and "M" on one diagonal and "S" and "A" on the other - then a single push would set everything...

That said, your worries sound a little strange. In S and A modes, you can always set the parameter you're controlling - it's only the camera-controlled one that's affected by auto-ISO. If you're settings a 2s exposure (in S or M), you'll get a 2-second exposure - it's just that if you set a shutter limit of 1/4s the camera won't choose 2 seconds on its own. Manual mode is not totally under your control with auto ISO, except that presumably you enabled auto-ISO, and you can tell it's on by an indicator in the viewfinder (okay, if it's doing something). The mode descriptions certainly predate ISO being a dynamically configurable part of exposure, but there's still some sense to them - "shutter" and "aperture" priority still prioritise matching the shutter speed and aperture that you set.

Someone at Nikon seems to think that the D500 doesn't deserve a d9 AF area mode - despite the fact that they wrote the code to add it to the D5 (same AF module) and later implemented it in the D850. What on earth ever made me think Nikon could be convinced to do anything they haven't already decided to do in the fist place?

Agreed that the d9 thing is odd. Nikon have certainly sometimes decided to stick to something weird; possibly someone we don't know demands that it works a certain way (I suspect this of the trap focus behaviour) and either has a good reason, or is a senior VP and nobody wants to argue. Sometimes, though, they do listen. Things like making ISO accessible on the right did happen, and happened after I requested it. (They screwed it up slightly by removing quick ISO on the latest bodies, but still.) Newer cameras can trigger image review right-handed - that's useful. New bodies can select an AF mode and turn AF on right-handed, which used to be a problem when the AF area control moved to a dislocated left pinkie. I asked for a split live view to make tilt-shift shooting easier, and we got one on the D810 (although not the independent 4-way split I actually wanted).

Nikon are listening to someone. It absolutely may not be me, and correlation is not causation, but the purpose of this exercise is that if I come to them and say "twenty customers with high-end bodies and years of shooting Nikon think this thing is a problem and like this proposed solution", there's a better chance of them paying attention than if I just spam them with random thoughts. Certainly a better chance than if we never ask at all. Also I absolutely don't want to ask for something that would actively make matters worse for everyone else, and at the least it's educational for me to learn when I might be in danger of doing that.

OK, no need to explain. I am not going to question why. And I don't have any interest in reading your non-photographic pretentiousness. Please take that ludicrous slide out.

I'm really sorry you feel that way, Mary. I've removed the slide for "manual + auto ISO" mode, but I really made it my best effort to represent what was requested, despite my confusion; I'm sorry the result seemed ludicrous, and that presumably means that I failed. I certainly wasn't trying to be pretentious - I thought it was hard to be pretentious while still admitting that I was very confused, but clearly I was wrong about that as well. I'm sorry that I feel I've failed to communicate a genuine need. It didn't have to be a need that I have myself; if nothing else I trust the expertise of you and Dieter, and if you want it, you want it - I'm sure for good reason.

Last week, you proposed:

Exposure - add "Manual + Auto ISO" Mode

This Mode allows the User to control BOTH Shutter and Aperture values on the fly and have Auto-ISO provide the correct exposure, based on the User-selected Shutter and Aperture values. The default Auto-ISO limits may go from low (e.g., 100) to the highest available. However, the user will be allowed to change the default ISO limits to his/her liking. It will also be helpful to highlight the ISO value so the user is always aware of the ISO being used.

 

This best-practice feature allows the photographer to react to lighting and action changes instantly. This practice departs from the film-day fixation on a fixed ISO value.

I do think that's open to misinterpretation (clearly, I seem to have misinterpreted it, but it may just be me), but if you think I've only made things worse by trying to add clarification, would you be happy for a slide to contain just that wording (rather than any attempt by me to paraphrase it to elaborate or fit it to the form of the other slides)? I don't want to lose a good idea just because I can't get my head around it.

If one wants Nikon to listen, it would make sense to establish oneself as a credible photographer.

I'd love to, but I'm better as a software engineer. Even if I could muster the talent it would seem to be a time-consuming process, during which there would still be aspects of camera behaviour I wouldn't like. To be fair, a lot of credible photographers probably never change ISO dynamically or make much use of autofocus, because they honed their skills manually focussing film cameras - I would hope that a valid concern with current ways of using a camera is still valid no matter where it comes from. Also, some images used in Nikon's product marketing are distinctly iffy, no matter how established the source...

I was hoping some members of this forum would count as credible - I certainly make no claims above amateurhood, but I'm at least an enthusiast and care. If anyone wishes to take the list (ideally after we try polling so there's more information to go with it) and feels that Nikon considers them credible, please speak up. (Especially, if you have any ideas to add or wish to argue with anything here, please do that - I'm under no delusion of knowing what I'm doing.) I'd love someone with an "in" to Nikon to take this; all I was going to do was roll up to Nikon UK, look like I have something that might have value to the development team, and ask nicely to see whether it can get forwarded. Nikon do occasionally say they want input. If anyone has a greater chance of getting listened to, please take over.

The thread is getting a little long to read in detail, so apologies if I'm repeating or stepping on toes, etc.

I like the idea of keeping the modes down to the usual four, but adding more U settings, if it can be done without too much confusion. Settings made in the U mode are not carried over to other modes, nor changed by them. This includes Auto ISO limits. So you could set up M with Auto ISO while all the other modes have manual ISO, or even auto ISO with different boundaries. Of course this would not address the issue of people who simply haven't considered using M and Auto ISO together, but for those who have, I think (my photographic non-credibility notwithstanding) that it would provide the option that's been asked for.

I don't know how many U modes would be optimal. The usual is two, and I wouldn't mind three or four, but more could become confusing unless one had a way of naming them and having the name appear on the info display.

One of my kids has a Canon, and at least when he got it a couple of years ago, they had not re-enabled trap focusing, but it is available in the "Magic Lantern" software.

, a lot of credible photographers probably never change ISO dynamically or make much use of autofocus, because they honed their skills manually focussing film cameras

Based on what objective data please? Are you talking about prehistoric cameras? To my knowledge, based on camera clubs, where some outstanding photographers live, I have not heard anyone use manual focus, unless there is no choice under some condition.

Anyhow, I believe that we as users have no business telling Nikon engineers how to deal with user requests. They know their products, please let them understand what you want, and please let them do their job. Believe it or not, there may be a slight chance that they know more about Nikon cameras than you do.

Thanks, Matthew. Given the four available banks (for the shooting menu and for controls) that feels like a minimum to allow - but I see no reason not to offer as many as the user has configured with a mode button (up to some reasonably large number), since they won't get in the way unless they're enabled. I don't want to micro-engineer it though.

Mary: the AF thing was admittedly more historical, but a case where experienced photographers claimed it was unimportant only for the market to follow amateur demands (and then the pros started using it). I'm led to believe by several bloggers that some experienced photographers still do some manual tracking, but I can't back that authoritatively. I certainly didn't want someone to read this and go away claiming that pros don't use autofocus, so sorry if there was a risk of that.

Perhaps a better example would have been flash exposure? Many on this forum, and I believe several pros, seem to make little use of automatic flash calculation. It's still something amateurs will want to rely on though.

I only meant to say that people with lots of experience producing good results with their current hardware have found a way to work around any limitations or lack of automation - but that doesn't mean limitations aren't there or that it would be better not to have to work around them. Anyone can have a good idea, and triaging them is Nikon's problem. Nikon needs to care for amateur customers too - there are more of us. Absolutely some ideas are bad, too.

Anyway, I agree, I don't intend to try to do the job of a Nikon engineer (unless they want to pay me to). This process was only supposed to be about consolidating the issues and ideas which we've mentioned over the years; as others have said, it's not clear how many inside Nikon's design team are out shooting and finding their own problems to fix, but there have to be more users in the wild than Nikon engineers - and they've actively requested feedback sometimes.

Any queries I've made here just come from me wanting to be clear about requests (and especially problems to solve) where I saw a possible misunderstanding or thought I might have recorded it incorrectly. Nikon have made changes over time in areas relating to problems I've noted, and they've not always actually solved the problem, so I feel clarity has value. I don't mean to say "Nikon must do it this way" or disparage either their engineering or means of balancing user requests, though I'd love if they published the "why" of any fixes: I'd likely learn new ways to use the camera. If I seem to have overstepped into design or been dismissive of Nikon's own engineering, that's my fault - I didn't meant to.

If they ignore the entire list, so be it. Companies have their own priorities, and other demands to balance - but they also have corporate structures that can make it hard to get feedback to the right people, and things do get lost in the aether. All we can do is try.

Companies have their own priorities, and other demands to balance - but they also have corporate structures that can make it hard to get feedback to the right people, and things do get lost in the aether

Just to show how difficult it is to get a consensus on features and implementations - the Z6 and Z7 currently have user-defined modes and in a change request Mansurov from photographylife.com wants Nikon to NOT store shutter speed and aperture in those modes but preserve the current settings: https://photographylife.com/nikon-z7-firmware-update-wishlist#do-not-save-aperture-and-shutter-speed-for-u1-u2-and-u3-critical. All I can say is that Nikon should provide the option to preserve or store independently - leaving the choice to the user. The Z6/Z7 currently would allow me to set the camera the way I want - if Mansurov gets his way, that option would be lost to me and the user-defined modes become rather useless (to me). Who do you think Nikon is going to listen to - a bunch of amateurs from some web forum or a professional photographer in frequent contact with them?

I've never used the D7x00-style user modes (I think my D90 doesn't have them? I've never tried...)

The D90 does not have them. I never got around using them on the D7100/D7200 - just like I never seriously attempted to get used to the banks that graced almost all the other Nikon DSLRs I own(ed).

That said, your worries sound a little strange. In S and A modes, you can always set the parameter you're controlling - it's only the camera-controlled one that's affected by auto-ISO.

Well, try setting a aperture limit when in S mode. So that the camera does not open the lens fully or does not go beyond f/8 or f/11. Try remembering why your camera in A mode does not want to expose longer than 1/4s. Try to change the shutter speed limit in A mode on the fly. Not for nothing did I end up in M mode - because the parameters that need controlling are both shutter speed and aperture - and S and A make that a chore. Granted, I could probably spend a few days setting up banks and hoping I can remember which is which and what parameters are actually preserved and which aren't.

But I think the main issue now is the transition from DSLR to mirrorless and the UI interface changes that come along with it. And because of the significant changes in AF behavior and options, more and more the parameter selection and changes will happen via the back LCD or the EVF - initiated by programmable buttons. In the end, it might actually become easier to change settings on the fly with the camera up at eye-level and using right-hand-reachable controls only - even though the cameras most likely will become ever more complex and complicated.

I never understood Nikon feeling the need to maintain 3 or 4 different UIs. One-command dial cameras on the lower rungs, two-command dials above - but in two different variations - mode dial or mode button - and above all the "pro UI" with the single-digit D bodies. No wonder the customers who got in at the lower levels don't develop brand loyalty as it is as difficult to move up than it is to just learn a different brand.

Mary: the AF thing was admittedly more historical, but a case where experienced photographers claimed it was unimportant only for the market to follow amateur demands (and then the pros started using it). I'm led to believe by several bloggers that some experienced photographers still do some manual tracking, but I can't back that authoritatively. I certainly didn't want someone to read this and go away claiming that pros don't use autofocus, so sorry if there was a risk of that.

Of course people still use manual mechanism when it makes sense to do so. But this does not mean people who choose to use manual focus over autofocus are superior photographers. You should know better but I guess by your own admission, you are not a photographer. Re manual flash, that's a different story.

Of course people still use manual mechanism when it makes sense to do so. But this does not mean people who choosehe to use manual focus over autofocus are superior photographers. You should know better but I guess by your own admission, you are not a photographer. Re manual flash, that's a different story.

Andrew is not a photographer? He is not a professional photographer but I am quite sure he is a photographer.

I think we shouldn't have exposure modes at all. Instead, like the ISO, aperture and shutter speed should also have an "auto" setting. Enabling the "auto" mode on any combination of them would give the equivalent of different exposure modes:

none: M

shutter: A

aperture: S

ISO: M with auto ISO

shutter + aperture: P

shutter + ISO: A with auto ISO

aperture + ISO: S with auto ISO

shutter + aperture + ISO: P with auto ISO

Ideally there would be a third dial of some sort, so all three parameters could be set with their own respective dial. The auto mode could be engaged by pressing a button while turning the corresponding dial.

Sorry, been away, among other things, taking photos. I'm certainly not a professional photographer. I really wouldn't say I'm a good photographer - I've no reason to believe I'm especially talented. I definitely doubt I'd pass Nikon's "credible" test, at least in terms of becoming a Nikon Ambassador and having a direct line to their team. Although I've sometimes tried to get involved with Nikon Wednesdays, I'm very self-conscious about my photography - a lot of my images don't go beyond myself, but that doesn't mean I don't take them, even if I have more time to spend typing. I'm not going to criticise decisions others make in their photography, and I don't currently feel the need for much feedback because I'm still eliminating the obvious mistakes I can spot on my own. I absolutely won't go around telling people how to be better photographers. Spotting user interface problems doesn't need me to, though. Saying "this gets in my way" might lead to someone else showing me a workaround, or someone explaining how their technique avoids the problem, which can only teach me.

Like most on this forum, I know a pretty good amount about camera history, the customer-visible parts of Nikon's design decisions, and "standard" photographic technique. Bearing in mind how relatively easy it is to take digital images, I suspect I've captured substantially more photos in my time than Ansel Adams did over his life (as is true of most of the forum) - and however much the story surprises reporters, I'd be perfectly capable of guessing the correct exposure for a moonrise if I'd left a meter in the car (though unlike BeBu, I believe, I'd much rather rely on the meter most of the time).

Complete novices will come up with basic suggestions that really won't work for some reason that becomes obvious with experience; I'd say the oft-cited square sensor request is in that category, at least for a larger format dSLR. No matter our expertise, any of us may come up with an idea that Nikon can't implement for technical reasons, and if that happens, Nikon can ignore the suggestion; no harm, no foul. I think everyone here has the background to at least ask a sensible question, though.

Modern wildlife pros will, under some circumstances, fine-tune focus issues manually - for example when autofocus erroneously locks on foreground grass. They may have done this for years and be very good at it, and it may not bug them when 3D tracking mode changes so it doesn't lock where you point - working around it is already second nature. For me, manually tweaking focus is a pain (no, I don't have an instinct on the direction of turning my focus ring; I hop systems and use third-party glass just enough that I have to rely on visual feedback); it'll slow me down, and I don't trust my ability to judge focus perfectly in the viewfinder. I need the AF system to behave at least as much as a pro would, therefore. In the 1980s it was the pros saying telling Nikon that they didn't need (or trust) autofocus, and Canon that got a jump by giving amateurs the capability. I can drive a computer very effectively with a keyboard, but that doesn't mean I begrudge the existence of a mouse. If you've shot with fixed ISO for decades, you may not realise that putting the ISO button where you can't reach it on a dSLR is a limitation. You don't have to be an expert to have ideas.

All I can say is that Nikon should provide the option to preserve or store independently - leaving the choice to the user.

I strongly agree. Any decision which limits options to simplify an interface alienates someone, and photography is complex enough that we all have reasons for different defaults. Almost everything on the list I've written as "add the option of..." - otherwise how I'd like the camera set up will only make it worse for others. I think Nikon have gone too far to try to simplify things, and this list is the result.

Who do you think Nikon is going to listen to - a bunch of amateurs from some web forum or a professional photographer in frequent contact with them?

If they don't listen, they don't listen. But they definitely won't if we don't say anything.

...just like I never seriously attempted to get used to the banks that graced almost all the other Nikon DSLRs I own(ed).

Likewise, although I know how they work. I rarely want to toggle options in a way that corresponds to the banks. I've usually had a bank set up for trap focus, but use it rarely enough that it's hardly second nature. I now have my "awkward metering" bank (UniWB, flat curve, buttons for spot metering and AE Lock) and, more commonly, my "hard to focus" bank (auto WB, normal curve, buttons for 3D/d9/group/point AF). I'll see how much use they get. If I regularly toggled between particular uses (to be fair, I might need this for landscapes vs wildlife) I might use them more. I gather others do make heavier use of them, though.

Well, try setting a aperture limit when in S mode. So that the camera does not open the lens fully or does not go beyond f/8 or f/11. Try remembering why your camera in A mode does not want to expose longer than 1/4s. Try to change the shutter speed limit in A mode on the fly. Not for nothing did I end up in M mode - because the parameters that need controlling are both shutter speed and aperture - and S and A make that a chore. Granted, I could probably spend a few days setting up banks and hoping I can remember which is which and what parameters are actually preserved and which aren't.

Ah - I think of S as not having aperture limits (but my separate "configurable exposure modulation" mode could). Likewise I'd know that auto-ISO was limiting a shutter speed in A mode because I don't think of it as incidental - and I only really think of S and A as specifying the parameter under direct control. I absolutely agree that difficulty controlling the secondary parameters means I'm in Manual (with or without auto-ISO) when I "shouldn't be", though.

But I think the main issue now is the transition from DSLR to mirrorless and the UI interface changes that come along with it. And because of the significant changes in AF behavior and options, more and more the parameter selection and changes will happen via the back LCD or the EVF - initiated by programmable buttons. In the end, it might actually become easier to change settings on the fly with the camera up at eye-level and using right-hand-reachable controls only - even though the cameras most likely will become ever more complex and complicated.

Honestly I'd live with that (when I can afford to move to whatever mirrorless camera actually improves on my D850 more than the Z7). I don't think Nikon will autonomously fix the UI issues I see with the dSLR even though they still sell a lot of them - R&D has to have a focus on the Z series. On the plus side, a lot of the list applies to Z bodies as well. There's a "last camera syndrome" concern that many are in no rush up update their current bodies; giving Nikon a list of things that an intern could implement over a summer break, and for which people might pay (like the Z's ProRes Raw update) seems the least cost way to customers and Nikon. Or at least, I can hope.

I never understood Nikon feeling the need to maintain 3 or 4 different UIs. One-command dial cameras on the lower rungs, two-command dials above - but in two different variations - mode dial or mode button - and above all the "pro UI" with the single-digit D bodies. No wonder the customers who got in at the lower levels don't develop brand loyalty as it is as difficult to move up than it is to just learn a different brand.

I get that the single-dial cameras have a different interface - a dial potentially costs money to build in (although the D3x00 does still have a second dial for mode). Otherwise, I really agree. It's not just Nikon - I switched from Canon when I wanted to go from my 300D to something more serious, and "something more serious" would have a different interface (vertical rear dial, etc.); I was going to have a user interface change even if I hadn't switched system. Sony seem to be much more consistent (although they do have menu changes), but they're making their own UI mistakes.

I think we shouldn't have exposure modes at all. Instead, like the ISO, aperture and shutter speed should also have an "auto" setting. Enabling the "auto" mode on any combination of them would give the equivalent of different exposure modes:

 

none: M

shutter: A

aperture: S

ISO: M with auto ISO

shutter + aperture: P

shutter + ISO: A with auto ISO

aperture + ISO: S with auto ISO

shutter + aperture + ISO: P with auto ISO

 

Ideally there would be a third dial of some sort, so all three parameters could be set with their own respective dial. The auto mode could be engaged by pressing a button while turning the corresponding dial.

Some bodies have "auto" dial positions, but this means you lose the previous useful setting when you change back - like the auto-ISO/fixed ISO interaction. It may still be the least confusing way of expressing dials with fixed meanings, though. Did you have any opinions on my suggestion of using the front and rear dials (normally used for aperture and shutter) when the mode button is depressed to toggle auto-aperture and auto-shutter respectively, in the same way that holding the ISO button and turning the front dial toggles auto-ISO? I didn't feel strongly about it, but if you like the idea I can document it. Or if you'd really like to turn the dials to one end of their travel to engage "auto" instead, I can document that?

Some bodies have "auto" dial positions, but this means you lose the previous useful setting when you change back - like the auto-ISO/fixed ISO interaction. It may still be the least confusing way of expressing dials with fixed meanings, though. Did you have any opinions on my suggestion of using the front and rear dials (normally used for aperture and shutter) when the mode button is depressed to toggle auto-aperture and auto-shutter respectively, in the same way that holding the ISO button and turning the front dial toggles auto-ISO? I didn't feel strongly about it, but if you like the idea I can document it. Or if you'd really like to turn the dials to one end of their travel to engage "auto" instead, I can document that?

At first I thought an A position for each parameters make sense but after using the Df for a while I kind of enjoying the fact that whenever I switch from A to M the shutter speed settings in M is close to what I want as opposed to the F3 I would have to turn quite a bit to get there.

Andrew is not a photographer? He is not a professional photographer but I am quite sure he is a photographer.

That was harsh. I was just quoting him from one of his posts. Perhaps he was just being humble - in this respect.

Sorry that I've apparently come across as arrogant, Mary (and other readers whom I've offended). I have always intended to defer to the talents and expertise of others on this forum, and I really have only found the exchange on this thread confusing, which is to my detriment. It seems I've also somehow been misleading, which is worse.

I think there are cases where Nikon's designers haven't got everything perfect for every use. If that wasn't a common thought, we wouldn't previously have had the discussions that raised the ideas here. That doesn't mean they don't know what they're doing; I can point to many products far simpler than a dSLR with many more severe failings, and certainly many projects I've been involved with have problems. If a product isn't a good starting point, there's be no reason to advocate for refining it. If I didn't care about minor fixes, I wouldn't be frustrated that the designer of the current behaviour doesn't seem to have considered my needs.

All people are idiots - or at least, have moments of idiocy. In frustration, it's easy to point out when something seems stupid. I'm absolutely, and frequently, an idiot (and by most consensus an example of "people"). I hope it won't be held against me unduly.

Not that crowds can't also show group stupidity (trying not to drag politics into the discussion), but I hope a survey and collective opinion from the group will express a bit more wisdom than I could hope to alone.

I'll give raczoliver a chance to elaborate on whether and how a new kind of mode selection should go on the list, then perhaps we can progress to actually filling in the survey before I manage to cause further offence!