Nikon Button Choice.

My D300 has three buttons on the left side. "ISO", "White Balance" (both reasonable choices), and "Quality". When would anyone need quick access to "QUAL" in the middle of a shoot? I guess they had to use it for something.

The DF, D7200 and D750 all have the same. Haven't used that one (Qual) much,because I usually shoot Large / Fine and have another button reprogrammed to switch to & from RAW on a press without looking at the monitor. Setting / switching to RAW is probably the most used function of that button. Edited February 9, 2019 by Sandy Vongries

I really like the recent change, moving the ISO button to just behind the shutter release. I tend to change ISO a lot and also engage auto ISO. With the ISO button near the shutter release, I can change ISO with only the right hand.

 

The D5, D500, D850, D7500, Z7 and Z6 have that change.

The DF, D7200 and D750 all have the same.

Not the same location as on the D300 (or any other Nikon camera with the "pro-body" style) where those buttons are on the left top deck and not alongside the back LCD (a much worse position actually).

"ISO", "White Balance" (both reasonable choices), and "Quality".

Whether or not any of those are "reasonable" choices depends on how one shoots. In my case, QUAL gets used exactly once to set the camera to RAW when I use it for the first time. And even then the button may as well not be there as I still have to dig into the menu to select 12- or 14-bit and what compression (if any) I want. About once every five years I feel the need to change WB off AUTO. With the ISO button it is now at least possible to change into and out of AutoISO - but I still have to menu-dive to change the shutter speed limit. Nikon's unwillingness to provide full programmability of all function buttons and their less-than-complete choice of changing parameters without having to dive into the menu are the main reason I shoot the way I do - M mode, AutoISO on (or off if required), exposure compensation as needed. So now the mode button (or dial) could go as well . Together with the "meter selector" - which I have on "matrix" 99.9999% of the time.

 

On my D500 I use three function buttons for different dynamic AF area modes - simply because Nikon doesn't provide a good choice to make a change on the fly.

 

To Nikon's credit - other manufacturer's make even worse choices - not that that is much of a consolation.

 

Z7 and Z6 have that change

They also drop the dedicated "bracketing" button - one that I use a lot more often than almost any of those these two camera actually do provide.

Part of the difference for the Z6 and Z7 are that they are small cameras, with less surface area for buttons. For example, like the Df, the two Z bodies have no two-button format memory card function; you need to go to the manu to format the card in camera. However, a lot of buttons are programmable to your preference.

 

Future Z bodies could be bigger, though.

Not the same location as on the D300 (or any other Nikon camera with the "pro-body" style) where those buttons are on the left top deck and not alongside the back LCD (a much worse position actually).

Don't have a D300 - simply followed Sanford's apparent description. I suppose whatever you become accustomed to works well enough. As to programming, there is quite a bit that can be set in advance without the irritation of working through the menu / monitor every time while shooting. Most useful are the U settings on the D 750 & D 7200 - one click to a pair of sophisticated presets. Unlike you, I use RAW only if I feel I can't get the result I want any other way - prefer to get the shot in camera rather than make it later - personal choice, I nearly always use Spot metering, and when it is necessary to bracket, I do it manually. Auto white balance doesn't usually work for me in terms of outcomes but it is easy enough to set WB. Considering the fact I have shot film Nikons many more years than digital, I'm sure my digital usage is still heavily influenced by old practices.

Though I get along pretty well with the D7100, I've never liked that row of buttons, which require a little too much attention especially in the dark. I solved most of the problem by enabling "easy ISO" but it's still a minor annoyance, since one still needs the ISO button when in manual mode, and I wish those buttons were not so neatly lined up. If they were even a little staggered or unevenly spaced, it would be easier to distinguish them hastily without looking.

If the photographer (a photojournalist, for example) has to send the images over a slow connection they may want to set the image size and compression settings so that it is sufficient for the application but can be transferred in a reasonable time.

I really like the recent change, moving the ISO button to just behind the shutter release.

I like this feature so much I reprogrammed the video button on my D810 to function as the ISO button during still photography. I wish my D7100 supported this change as well, since I can access it without taking my eye from the viewfinder.

Yes, the moving of the ISO button made little difference to me because I'd already got the record button acting as ISO on my D810. (I started whinging at Nikon that ISO was in an inaccessible place shortly after I first switched systems and got a D700. They sometimes listen, although it may or may not have been to me.) Since I've been known to switch mode while I've had a subject framed (typically to aperture priority if I realise the light is changing faster than I'll track in manual, or to manual with a higher shutter speed if the subject starts moving) my D850 has the record button programmed to exposure mode, so they've effectively just swapped for me.

 

My D300 has three buttons on the left side. "ISO", "White Balance" (both reasonable choices), and "Quality". When would anyone need quick access to "QUAL" in the middle of a shoot? I guess they had to use it for something.

 

I don't consider anything on the left side to be "quick access" - they're "put the camera down and prop the lens on something so I can get at them" access, by which point they're not significantly easier to access than the menu. YMMV if you're shooting with smaller lenses, but I can usually take my time more with shorter focal lengths anyway (telephotos tend to be for tracking action).

 

I know I ought to play with white balance, if only for metering, but I very rarely switch it to anything other than "auto". I tweak in raw fairly frequently, when the raw converter doesn't pick an obvious white balance on its own, or just for aesthetics. The exception is my IR-converted D90, which has a wacky white balance for effect.

 

"Quality" isn't quite what I'd want to change dynamically, especially since you can already program the programmable buttons to turn raw recording on and off (presumably if you're shooting a burst sequence and suddenly see something worthy of taking more space). I've not used it, but thought before that the dynamic image area option is useful (shoot small files when something is distant, expand the area when it gets close). I'd kind of like better control over switching to 12-bit raw (e.g. at ISO >400), but the quickest way seems to be to toggle photo shooting menu banks, which is a little more fiddly. That seems to be the way to turn JPEG (as opposed to raw) on and off, too. Why it wasn't easier for programmers, users and technical support to allow everything to be assignable to each button rather than an arbitrary subset, I don't know. FWIW, the reason I was messing with image size and raw depth recently (and turned off JPEG) was because I was running into buffer limits in action bursts.

 

Metering mode I more regularly override - my programmable buttons (give me more!) alternate these days between AF activation (mostly because 3D tracking on the D850 has a habit of snapping to an adjacent "helper" AF point when I don't want it to, so I have single-point set up; my D810 will focus where I tell it to in 3D tracking, so it stays there) and toggling between highlight-weighted/spot/matrix metering. If I trusted highlight-weighted to do what it's described as doing and avoid blowing highlights, I'd need this less.

 

Depending on what I'm doing, any or all of these get used with my eye to the finder. (White balance less so, although I guess I could swing from tracking a subject in sunlight to shade - but that's why I live in auto.) Not that "with my eye to the finder" makes accessing the top left cluster of controls useful. On the other hand, as it were, several of the back-of-camera controls that I actually could reach with my eye to the finder (i/info/live view) only make sense when I've already got my head far enough back to look at the LCD - though admittedly I'd still complain about dropping the camera when getting at them.

 

If I ever have a weekend not working and not ill, my master "completely redesign Nikon's interface" plan will be revealed to you all. Mostly it's just "let the user configure everything".

Andrew, I think most of your issues with the button placements would go away if you put the large and heavy telephoto on a tripod (or a monopod) like they're intended to be used. ;-)

 

I think it would be problematic if the user could reprogram everything, the button texts would no longer have anything to do with what happens from them. And then every camera would behave differently after users had their configurations implemented.

 

I do quite a lot of action photography with short lenses such as 24-70mm, e.g., at events often the best images are taken quite close to the subjects. Not that I touch those three buttons often, I don't. I do use white balance adjustment from time to time, especially when working with artificial light, or mixed light. For example, I might measure the color temperature at an indoor venue and then add filters on the flash to match the ambient lighting color temperature in so far as possible, and finally set a K temperature in the white balance settings accordingly. I might not remember the correct WB setting afterwards if I don't set it in the camera so I find that long term it's safest to use the WB control in the camera rather than shoot auto and fix later. Also in the studio I shoot with a fixed WB in the camera (daylight).

Edited February 11, 2019 by ilkka_nissila

Yes, the moving of the ISO button made little difference to me because I'd already got the record button acting as ISO on my D810. (I started whinging at Nikon that ISO was in an inaccessible place shortly after I first switched systems and got a D700. They sometimes listen, although it may or may not have been to me.) Since I've been known to switch mode while I've had a subject framed (typically to aperture priority if I realise the light is changing faster than I'll track in manual, or to manual with a higher shutter speed if the subject starts moving) my D850 has the record button programmed to exposure mode, so they've effectively just swapped for me.

 

 

 

I don't consider anything on the left side to be "quick access" - they're "put the camera down and prop the lens on something so I can get at them" access, by which point they're not significantly easier to access than the menu. YMMV if you're shooting with smaller lenses, but I can usually take my time more with shorter focal lengths anyway (telephotos tend to be for tracking action).

 

I know I ought to play with white balance, if only for metering, but I very rarely switch it to anything other than "auto". I tweak in raw fairly frequently, when the raw converter doesn't pick an obvious white balance on its own, or just for aesthetics. The exception is my IR-converted D90, which has a wacky white balance for effect.

 

"Quality" isn't quite what I'd want to change dynamically, especially since you can already program the programmable buttons to turn raw recording on and off (presumably if you're shooting a burst sequence and suddenly see something worthy of taking more space). I've not used it, but thought before that the dynamic image area option is useful (shoot small files when something is distant, expand the area when it gets close). I'd kind of like better control over switching to 12-bit raw (e.g. at ISO >400), but the quickest way seems to be to toggle photo shooting menu banks, which is a little more fiddly. That seems to be the way to turn JPEG (as opposed to raw) on and off, too. Why it wasn't easier for programmers, users and technical support to allow everything to be assignable to each button rather than an arbitrary subset, I don't know. FWIW, the reason I was messing with image size and raw depth recently (and turned off JPEG) was because I was running into buffer limits in action bursts.

 

Metering mode I more regularly override - my programmable buttons (give me more!) alternate these days between AF activation (mostly because 3D tracking on the D850 has a habit of snapping to an adjacent "helper" AF point when I don't want it to, so I have single-point set up; my D810 will focus where I tell it to in 3D tracking, so it stays there) and toggling between highlight-weighted/spot/matrix metering. If I trusted highlight-weighted to do what it's described as doing and avoid blowing highlights, I'd need this less.

 

Depending on what I'm doing, any or all of these get used with my eye to the finder. (White balance less so, although I guess I could swing from tracking a subject in sunlight to shade - but that's why I live in auto.) Not that "with my eye to the finder" makes accessing the top left cluster of controls useful. On the other hand, as it were, several of the back-of-camera controls that I actually could reach with my eye to the finder (i/info/live view) only make sense when I've already got my head far enough back to look at the LCD - though admittedly I'd still complain about dropping the camera when getting at them.

 

If I ever have a weekend not working and not ill, my master "completely redesign Nikon's interface" plan will be revealed to you all. Mostly it's just "let the user configure everything".

 

I certainly would like to see your interface. Nikon interface currently is basically a copy of the Canon interface. Of course there are differences but mostly a copy from Canon. So if your interface is a good one then Nikon may put it in their new flagship the Z1.

I have the Df for DSLR so it's OK for me. The only improvement is to put the ISO control where the EC control is. I never need the EC control. For the F5 which has the ISO hidden away but that doesn't matter actually a good thing as you don't change ISO until you change the film and you can also leave the ISO setting on DX.

I can't even do basic things with a Canon, so if there has been copying going on, it isn't clear to me where those things are. Yes, there are similar functions (who copied from whom isn't clear), but the terminology is different and many functions are selected from different places. It's as if the whole camera was in a different language. Edited February 11, 2019 by ilkka_nissila

Canon have a "put the dials where you have the greatest control over them" philosophy (as I see it) - front dial under the index finger, rear dial where you can spin it indefinitely with your thumb if you move your hand down a bit. Nikon have a "always keep your finger on the shutter" philosophy (the middle finger spins the front dial while the index finger stays on the shutter release, the thumb retains a grip on the camera while spinning the rear dial). I find that the biggest difference between them, and since the Nikon approach made more sense to me, I wasn't averse to the change when I switched (admittedly from a single-dial Canon); I can understand people to whom Nikon's approach seems weird. Nikon have moved away a little from that philosophy with some of their top buttons - generally ones where you'd want the front and rear dial to do something different in combination with them, although I'm not convinced they thought it out that thoroughly. Others (Pentax, Samsung) have split the difference.

 

I suspect the people responsible for understanding the design are no longer with the company. Nikon have long had "Easy ISO" (d8 on the D810) so you can turn the "unused" dial and change ISO without taking your finger off the shutter release. Now the ISO dial is officially on the right, that option has gone away (c.f. d3 on the D850), so (manual) ISO changes necessarily interrupt shooting. This despite "easy exposure compensation" (b4 on the D850 and D810) being available when the exposure compensation button has always been on the right.

 

On button behaviour, within the range both systems have bodies with buttons on the right of the LCD (notably 6D and Eos R but not 5D, apparently decided by the screen flip-out mechanism; D3500 - not D3400 - and D5x00). Canon have a better understanding of chording to give extra options, which I'd use if it were configurable.

 

And yes, if the user can reprogram everything, each camera could behave entirely differently. Until you two-button reset it, obviously. I don't think it would be unreasonable for a tech support person to say "do you know where feature X is on your camera?", then either "right, please use it" or "please see if it's in the default place" and "sorry, we need to reset your camera's control so I can guide you". Put the control settings in a menu bank (I think they are already, I've forgotten) and a reset can be temporary. Handing a camera to someone else and just expecting them to cope can cause trouble, but then those of us who've got rear-button AF configured are highly likely to have met that problem already. I'd like a lot of configuration options hidden by default so people who don't care don't get distracted, but those of us who configure everything can do so if we want to. And rather than (or as well as) having a list of things that can be assigned to each button, I'd have an "assign to button" option on each menu item. More to follow when I write it all up. :-)

 

All of which is a small subset of my (paid-for) software update request for the D850. If we're allowed hardware changes too, I'd like the thing that Sony/Fuji have been known to do where pressing and turning a dial is (optionally) different from just turning it. Exposure compensation and ISO (without the easy/fast modes) among others could then be done without taking a finger off the shutter - or could be combined with rear AF-On. Don't make this a mandatory part of the interface (even include a hardware interlock so you can't feel the dial move), but it's an obvious way to put extra control points exactly where you want them. I'm not sure I'd like this if I were using gloves (hence optional), but I've had a phone with a dial like this, and it was very efficient to use.

(Oh, and the problem with a monopod is tripping over it, or clouting people. Just because I'm using a big lens doesn't mean I'm not moving what, by my standards, is "quickly".)

I can't even do basic things with a Canon, so if there has been copying going on, it isn't clear to me where those things are. Yes, there are similar functions (who copied from whom isn't clear), but the terminology is different and many functions are selected from different places. It's as if the whole camera was in a different language.

 

I am quite sure that Canon came out first with the 2 control wheels that increment/decrement the settings. Primarily for the aperture and shutter speed. Also the idea of pressing a button and turning the control wheel to adjust less often used settings.

BeBu, I think it might be the other way around!

 

Canon have changed their physical interface A LOT since their earliest DSLRs. With switches and buttons moving around and crossing sides like no bodies business.

 

It might be an progressive evolution to regular Canon users but for a Nikon user to pick one up and find anything is a nightmare.

I am quite sure that Canon came out first with the 2 control wheels that increment/decrement the settings. Primarily for the aperture and shutter speed. Also the idea of pressing a button and turning the control wheel to adjust less often used settings.

 

I have an Eos 620 (1987) and it works pretty much like a Canon dSLR (for single dial), other than the aperture/shutter button being on the bottom left of the mount (where, yes, I've failed to find it in the field). The Eos 1 had two dials in 1989 (in the modern arrangement, a vertical circular rear dial - although a friend recently showed me his Eos 50 I think it was, and that dial is certainly higher and easier for me to reach than on a modern 5D). I couldn't vouch for "first", but certainly before Nikon SLRs.

Really, Mike? A few things changed, but I could go between my Eos 620 (1987) and Eos 300D (2003) without too much pain. Maybe more moved on the high end, and with digital. My biggest problem with a vertical dial Canon is dislocating my thumb, but it's just a different philosophy. My F5 isn't so different from my D8x0 bodies, but the D700/D800/D810 movements did throw (and sometimes annoy) me.

Pretty sure the first "hold the button and spin the dial" camera from anyone was the T90, while the first Nikons to sue this set-up were the N6006 and N8008(the N4004 does actually use a "two wheel" system, but the front always does shutter speed, the rear always aperture, and they have physical markings for the parameter that you're setting). The T90 is an evolution from the T70, which uses up/down buttons in place of the spinning wheel.

 

As someone who use to use a T90 pretty heavily, when I got my first DSLR-a Digital Rebel XS-I found the settings more or less intuitive aside from not having a top LCD and the fact that all EOS cameras have more things to control and digital cameras have a LOT more controls. Also, manual mode on any single wheel EOS camera is a pain IMO since, at least by default, the command dial changes the shutter speed and you have to hold down a button to change the aperture(Nikon is no better in this respect on low end cameras). The T90 also is a pain in manual mode-to the point where I never really have used it there other than in very tightly controlled situations where I kept the same exposure shot-to-shot as you use the aperture ring to change the aperture, but the camera just tells you what it THINKS it should be based on the meter but has no way of knowing what you've actually set(and your options are to either count clicks or take your eye off the viewfinder and look).

 

In any case, my first "control wheel" Nikon was a D70, which of course is a two-wheel camera. It didn't take me THAT long to learn how to use it coming from the Rebel, but there was a learning curve involved. After mastering that, though, I find that Nikons back to the N8008 and on up to the D850(which I've only played with in the store, not used more extensively) really are more evolutions and after I've spent a minute figuring out what is different from other cameras I've used I'm usually in pretty good shape. It's certainly a lot easier than jumping from Canon to Nikon or vice-versa.

 

Also, it's worth mentioning that Nikon now employs at least 4 control "languages." You can see where the single digit D cameras have evolved from the F5 in button placement, although of course now the D5 has moved the ISO button from below the small LCD on the back up to behind the shutter button. Similarly, you can pretty well trace the D850 control layout back through the D500-D810-D800-D700-D300-D200-F100-N90-N8008 although the F100 was probably the biggest "jump" with going to two dials. The D610, D7x00, and D70/80/90 all KIND of follow back to the N80, while the single dial cameras trace pretty well back to the D40 and N65.

I am quite sure that Canon came out first with the 2 control wheels that increment/decrement the settings. Primarily for the aperture and shutter speed. Also the idea of pressing a button and turning the control wheel to adjust less often used settings.

 

Two dials or levers were used to adjust shutter speed and aperture ages ago, first they both resided in the lens, later only the aperture ring in the lens and shutter dial in the body and finally now both often are found on the body. Nikon put both aperture and shutter dials on the body in the 1987 F-401. The first Canon with two dials on the body seems to be the EOS 1 launched in 1989 (correct me if I'm wrong). (Editing after finding errors) Canon T70 and Minolta AF 7000 had press button and one (Canon) or two (Minolta) pairs of up/down or arrow keys in 1984-5. The press button + dial functionality seems to be an evolutionary step from the up/down keys. But I can't really tell who copied whom.

Edited February 11, 2019 by ilkka_nissila

Two dials or levers were used to adjust shutter speed and aperture ages ago, first they both resided in the lens, later only the aperture ring in the lens and shutter dial in the body and finally now both often are found on the body. Nikon put both aperture and shutter dials on the body in the 1987 F-401. The first Canon with two dials on the body seems to be the EOS 1 launched in 1989 (correct me if I'm wrong). (Editing after finding errors) Canon T70 and Minolta AF 7000 had press button and one (Canon) or two (Minolta) pairs of up/down or arrow keys in 1984-5. The press button + dial functionality seems to be an evolutionary step from the up/down keys. But I can't really tell who copied whom.

You don't get my point. The old cameras before Canon used the wheels like a shutter speed dial or the aperture ring on the Nikon F or on most Canon FD works by their position. The current wheels do not indicate their position but only send the increment/decrement pulses when you turn it. The camera has to be on for them to work and you can turn them forever there is no end stops. These wheels work similar to up/down buttons first used in the Pentax ME but is much easier to use than the buttons.

I think it would be problematic if the user could reprogram everything, the button texts would no longer have anything to do with what happens from them.

Pretty much the way it is with Sony - though I wouldn't go as far as claiming that there one can "program everything". Certainly more than on any Nikon I know though.

I don't think it would be unreasonable for a tech support person to say "do you know where feature X is on your camera?", then either "right, please use it" or "please see if it's in the default place" and "sorry, we need to reset your camera's control so I can guide you".

My (luckily very limited) experience with Nikon USA indicates that a "two-button reset" is the first thing they do if you call their support with a camera issue.

I can't even do basic things with a Canon, so if there has been copying going on, it isn't clear to me where those things are.

Same here - probably could get used to it though if I tried hard enough.

Canon have a "put the dials where you have the greatest control over them" philosophy (as I see it) - front dial under the index finger, rear dial where you can spin it indefinitely with your thumb if you move your hand down a bit. Nikon have a "always keep your finger on the shutter" philosophy (the middle finger spins the front dial while the index finger stays on the shutter release, the thumb retains a grip on the camera while spinning the rear dial).

 

I don't understand the Canon thumb wheel positioning, does it not require one to twist the thumb down to reach? With Nikon the main command dial seems much easier to reach (and its position is ages old, from the F-801 from 1988). Also the 180-400's TC switch can be reached without lifting either left or right hand from their shooting positions.

 

I don't quite think one can keep the finger on the shutter always but with less adjustment of one's grip.

 

Handing a camera to someone else and just expecting them to cope can cause trouble

 

I just don't see the benefit of that extra level of configurability. If you have a car, for example, would you configure the steering wheel to be the accelerator, and perhaps turn left/right from the windshield wiper switch etc. How about touch screen for everything (which seems almost to be the Tesla 3 philosophy)? There are physical controls in certain places for a reason and it is so that people can drive reflexively and basically drive any car. The more critical the function is, the more same it should function in all cameras. The reflexes evolve over decades of shooting and this is why changing them is disruptive.

My point is just that it's not clear who copied whom. Similar concepts were implemented more or less at the same time by different manufacturers, with slight variations. It's more that the industry as a whole evolved towards this kind of a user interface. The major problem with the shutter dial (as it is implemented in manual focus cameras) is that it only gives full stop increments which is a royal pain if you want to set exposure precisely and e.g. stay wide open on the lens. The major problem with the aperture ring on the lens was that in variable aperture zooms the exposure was not constant as you adjusted the zoom, or focusing close / far using a macro lens. Thus the current system was reached to solve these two problems. Canon didn't get the idea that the macro lens should maintain constant exposure when distance is adjusted, by the way, maybe they eventually will copy Nikon here. One can always hope.