F4s control layout obsolete?

<p>I've been wondering for years why Nikon chose to abandon the F4 control knobs and buttons layout.<br>

I've owned numerous cameras over the years but the F4s is still my favorite, mostly because of its easy and intuitive controls. I can operate it with heavy gloves on and a lot of the controls can be set with one hand, which I often find myself doing when I have a lens in my other hand.<br>

I understand that modern SLR's have more functions and stuff but I see no reason that the basic controls can't be similar to those of the F4. The large LCD screens on the backs of dSLRs seem to render the top LCD superfluous.<br>

Becasue Nikon chose not to incorporate this control style in any cameras designed since (and Canon never did), I must assume that feedback from shooters was negative. <br>

So, that leads to a few questions I'd like to ask the readers here.<br>

1. If you have any experience with the F4, did you like the layout or not?<br>

2. If you liked it, would you like to see similar controls introduced on a pro-level dSLR?</p>

<p>I had a pair of F4s for some years and I really liked the layout. I think I'd rather like a digital F4 but I suspect it would be a niche product.</p>

<p>I have no experience of using the F4, but I use the top LCD all the time and would not buy a Nikon DSLR without one.</p>

<p>1. Yes, F4 has great layout. I love holding and shooting it, it is better compared to my D300.<br>

2. Yes, definitely!</p>

<p>Nope didn't like the F4. I like the F5 much better. And no I would not want that control layout on my D4. And having a top screen is very useful to me. I would be lost without one.</p>

<p>There are things I like on the F4, some others don`t...<br /> 1. I liked the layout for a (short) period of time, to be sincere I got rid of mine quite soon, while keeping some of the classic MF cameras. I`d say the layout is currently nice on the papers, but no so practical (it could be the nicest camera not to be used, I mean). It is certainly obsolete these days, there are <em>essential</em> functions that couldn`t be used with that design, or at least, are slowed down beyond my limits.<br /> For a MF camera, it could be nice, thought... (which IMHO, it is not at all, it is a transitional model, neither fish nor fowl).<br /> 2. No, by far I prefer the current DSLR layout, for many reasons. To be used with MF lenses <em>only</em>, maybe, I`d prefer the F4`s layout, but I also prefer any other MF camera to the F4.</p>

<p>I loved the F4 layout, but came to realize times were a'changing, and so were user demands. I liked the F5 just as well, and today there are so many more features to accommodate that it is overwhelming to keep them all straight. I just took a breather for several weeks and excepting for some work related photography, shot good old classics which had only a shutter speed and aperture controls....ah a breath of fresh air, with results at least as good as my present day digitals!</p>

<p>The F4 is on my "I should get one some time" list. I've played with one. I grew up in the digital age, though - I had a DSLR before I owned any film SLRs (and I <i>do</i> have several film cameras, including a rangefinder which I hope qualifies me to talk about manual controls).<br />

<br />

The big issue is that the F4 has no on-camera way to set aperture manually. Most notably, this means there's no <i>right-handed</i> way to set aperture. Using an aperture ring on a lens is a lovely and intuitive experience with a short lens when your left hand is under the camera. Trying to get your hand to that position when it's also supporting a big and heavy telephoto is not so good. If I had to shoot my 200 f/2 using an aperture ring to set the aperture (it doesn't have one - my 500 f/4 does, but that only lives on a tripod so it's cheating) then it would live permanently at one aperture. I couldn't change the aperture without putting the camera down. That's really unacceptable. I have exactly the same complaint about Nikon putting controls on the cameras where you can only reach them left-handed (AF mode selection and ISO spring to mind), but at least they're not the primary controls. (I'm assuming this is a theoretical discussion, and the inconvenience of using G lenses on such a camera is irrelevant.) Even with a moderate lens size, it's really useful to be able to hover over the zoom and AF controls with your left hand and still make aperture adjustments.<br />

<br />

In the digital world, there are four interrelated controls: aperture, shutter speed, ISO, exposure compensation - control three and the camera will control the fourth (or tell you that the exposure is wrong if it's the first three you control). It's already bad enough that we usually press a button to change at least one of these. Fixed-function dials are inconvenient when we have multiple possible camera behaviours.<br />

<br />

Then the dials have to have fixed indents, which means you can't choose between third-stop and half-stop indents if you want to. Use fixed dials for everything and you have a bulky and expensive camera in which the right control is never under the hand.<br />

<br />

To use the result with all the options of a digital camera, you'd want another dial of some sort (or a touch screen, or to swear at a lot of buttons), if only to allow quick setting of new options. Once you have one arbitrary dial, having another that's fixed is just inconvenient and a waste of space.<br />

<br />

For select purposes, I'd be happy using an F4, just as I'm happy using my Bessa R and I wouldn't turn down a Fuji X100. For all eventualities, I'll hang on to my F5 and D800, thanks. (And if you don't like it, just leave it in one mode and pretend there are numbers painted on the dials.)</p>

<p>I'm not surprised to see that the people wishing for a Digital F4 are the same people who liked the F4 controls.<br>

I think that it could be done on a dSLR without too much trouble. I don't see why a couple of dials to control aperture and ISO couldn't be added in the same positions that they exist on a D700 or D3.<br>

My other most used camera is an F100, which has a similar control layout to the new dSLRs, so while I do like it and I am comfortable with it I still prefer the F4s.<br>

This question was partially prompted by an experience I had last night when a friend handed me his new D3100. For record, the last amateur SLR I handled (I'm counting the F100 as a pro body) was an N80. It took me 5 minutes to figure out how to switch from matrix to spot meter. On every other Nikon SLR I've handled it took me a fraction of a second.</p>

<p>Wouldn't mind getting the frame rate selector back around the shutter release button. Nowadays, very much prefer the flexibility of the LCD display and two dial layout over the classic layout. Since G lenses don't have an aperture ring, the discussion is moot anyway since the F4 style would provide no means to control aperture. Flexibility when exposure bracketing is just one of the many things that the F4 layout cannot provide.<br>

While I liked the F4 in general, the F5 was ergonomically better (and shame on Nikon for crippling it when used with non-chipped lenses).</p>

<p>Nick: Really, three dials? Plus keeping exposure compensation as a fourth? (All the cool compact cameras have a dedicated exposure compensation dial these days - I've no idea why. Dial, yes. Dedicated, no.) And how do you dynamically hop between setting shutter speed and actually pressing the shutter button? I speak from no experience, but it feels as though you'd have to change hand position to do this. And possibly stop supporting the camera properly, as well. The F4 is a cool piece of technology, but just because something is labelled in paint doesn't mean it's in the right place. It's not like you can see the dial with your eye to the finder anyway - and if your eye is to the finder, you may as well use a reconfigurable dial.<br />

<br />

I do think that comparing a D3100 to an F4 is a little unfair, even if they're both "one dial" cameras. It's true that a camera with every function labelled is easier to learn to use - but I'd rather have a camera that I can use in a fraction of a second once I've found the controls than a camera which takes me longer to make any modifications because they're not under the hand. The D3100 hides everything in menus to simplify things for the novice (too many controls are scary) and for cost reasons; it does have an integrated help mode, which is more than you can say for an F4, however.<br />

<br />

This is where I bring up my experience using an Eos 620 in the field, and failing to change the aperture (or possibly shutter speed) because I had to use manual mode (infrared film, the meter was useless) and the button which is only ever used in manual mode was on the bottom left of the camera where I failed to spot it.<br />

<br />

Dieter: I hate to criticise everything about the F4, but having the light and power switch around the shutter is very convenient. I don't really want to think about the release mode to choose every time I turn the camera on. Putting it somewhere I can reach right-handed, however, I support wholeheartedly.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I don't really want to think about the release mode to choose every time I turn the camera on.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I don't either - since all my cameras are always on CH; not because I like to machine-gun all the time but it is easy for me to get single shots by just lifting the finger quickly enough - and with the camera always on CH, I am always ready to fire a burst if the situation arises. Might have to change that practice if I had a D3/D3S/D4 though as I might not be fast enough. I have no use for CL - can't remember that I used that setting ever. None of my cameras has the "quiet" setting - and with the newer ones I looked at, it doesn't seem to be necessary anyway.</p>

<p>Of course, moving the frame rate selector back around the shutter release would cause problems with the light switch - but I would prefer a button for that one anyway.</p>

<p>I have to agree that CL is a long way from being the most-used feature on my cameras. (I've probably used it, but then I've probably used nearly everything <i>once</i>.) I do use the timer release, mirror up, etc. though. And I use single shot most of the time, though I could get away with CH a fair bit too. I've used quiet mode, but it's not very quiet on a D800; I'm told it's better on a D600.<br />

<br />

So long as the light switch is really easy to find in the dark, and so long as the power switch is really quick to use, I'm probably not too fussed. The DSLR arrangement is pretty good - I need them more often than I need the ability to change release mode. (And more than I need a mode dial, for what it's worth.)</p>

I have only handled an F4 once, but it felt great and I did like the control layout. I have an F5 and an F6, and I like those

a lot as well. I began (serious) photography with a D70, so the F5 and F6 were very familiar and took almost no time to

get used to. I also have an F3, which I absolutely adore, mainly because of it's simplicity and light weight. With larger

lenses though, the F3 can seem unbalanced. I also have a Pentax 67II, and I love the simple control layout it has, it does

not impede shooting due to complex menus and such. I have a mint F4S on order and should be here tomorrow. I can't

wait to take it out for a spin. To me, I think the F4S is the most beautiful camera that Nikon has ever made and have no

doubt that it handles as well as it looks. I may even part with my F5, but I'm still undecided on that.

<p>I bought my F4 back in 1990 and then my F5 in 1997, a bit more than a year after Nikon had introduced the F5 in 1996. Originally, my plan was that the F4 would be my backup camera. However, the controls were so different that after using the F5 for 6 months or so, I realized that I couldn't, or at least I no longer wanted to, use the F4 any more. Eventually when the F100 came out, I bought one and used the F100 as my second body. The F5 and F100 have similar controls.</p>

<p>A few years later, I met well known photographer/author John Shaw for the first time, and it turns out that he had exactly the same experience as mine after he started using the F5, but in his case I think he bought multiple F5 bodies.</p>

<p>Since the F4 lacks command dials, both main and sub, its controls really aren't suitable with modern G lenses any more.</p>

I do own 1 G series lens which I do not use with my F4s because I use M or A mode 90% of the time, so I am aware of its

incompatibilities. I also use an F100 alongside my F4s and I don't really have trouble switching between them. It's not that

I don't like the modern (F5 and newer) layout it's just that I prefer the F4s'. The fact that Nikon chose to abandon it after

only 1 generation, and not include it in any of their amateur models, leads me to believe that active professionals didn't

like it at the time. It seems like many people who owned an F4 also liked the layout so I just wasn't sure if it really was

rejected by pros or if there were other reasons for going with the buttons and command dials type controls.

<p>For me the lack of right-handed aperture control is a killer. An aperture ring at the lens mount is absolutely incompatible with fast shooting with a large telephoto lens - it's simply infeasibly to reach the aperture ring while supporting, focussing or zooming anything bigger than a 70-200 (and even those are pushing it). However much better the F4 layout may be for some styles of shooting, this rules it out for professional sports shooters, which Nikon have always considered to be a major target (in the early days, not least because SLRs are a more convincing alternative to rangefinders as the lenses get longer). The interface is also a bit of a mess with a variable aperture zoom. Fuji came to exactly the same conclusion more recently after introducing lenses with aperture rings for their rangefinder-like systems, then needing an unmarked ring for variable-aperture zooms; none of their lenses are "big".<br />

<br />

Where dedicated dials work, they work well, and I'll concede that they arguably work slightly better than the configurable dial interface from the F5. The problem is that when they don't work - as with big telephotos - they <i>really</i> don't work.</p>

<p>I had not considered long telephoto lenses because my 300mm F/4 is the longest lens I own. I often use it with a 1.7 or 2x teleconverter but with them attached it is always on a tripod and the aperture is usually wide open because I need the speed.</p>

<p>I do not own an F4 so what I am going to say please take it with a grain of salt. <br>

I do own F3's and an F5. My take on the control layout of the F4 is that it has a number of advantages but also has disadvantages which have to do with the number of features expected on a modern camera. The advantages are first all the settings are dial position related so that you can look at the where the dials, aperture rings etc.. and know exactly what it is set at without turning the camera on. With the modern camera everything is memory related so you would have to turn it on and read the LCD to see what settings are in the memory. The layout also is quick as you can change from say 1 sec to 1/4000 sec shutter speed in a second which is not true with say an F5. The controls are familiar with older cameras so it was a good thing. <br>

Like many have said, the way the control layout on the F4 doesn't allow for controlling the aperture from the camera body for G type lenses. If Nikon were to put the same shutter speed dial on the F5 it would be difficult to make it works from 30 sec to 1/8000 sec and in 1/3 stop increment. Over 50 increments for the range. There is no program shift possible with an F4 as it only has program low and program high. You would have to add a dial for that. The increments on the F4 are not consistent with all controls. Shutter speed in manual can only be set at full stop interval and yet when in program or aperture priority mode the display are in 1/2 stop steps. The aperture ring are marked with full stop but can be set stepless and the display is nin 1/2 stop steps. Like others the ISO is in 1/3 stop and the exposure comp is also in 1/3 stops. With an F5 they are all 1/3 steps. </p>