What's your take on hybrids/reflexes' new functionalities?

Created by Greg818 on Aug. 5, 2012, 3:54 p.m.
  • A couple of weeks ago I was shopping for a new reflex, and as I was browsing a bit, I was a little baffled by some of the new functionalities manufacturers add to their products. For instance, Samsung added social sharing to an hybrid. And it makes ABSOLUTELY no sense to me. People who buy hybrids supposedly have somewhat discerning tastes, so it's very unlikely they're going to release a picture without editing it on a proper display. So what's the point?

    But that's just one example off the top of my head, I've seen plenty of baffling stuff, and I was wondering:

    What do you guys think about the new features on those new hybrids? I'm I just too conservative?

  • @Greg818: There are a fair number of people who just "point-and-shoot", even with expensive cameras, and they're more likely to use those social features. I guess. I don't understand the need for this either, but everyone said the same thing when DSLRs first started doing video, and look where that has gone (not that these two are comparable; I definitely think video has its uses, whereas social sharing is mostly pointless). Basically this is a strategy to get more casual users to buy advanced cameras (even if they're not using the advanced photographic features).

  • Bonkers is what this is they should focus on finding a viable replacement for that mirror instead of adding nonsense like this in cameras especially since no social network site will let you upload a picture of that good quality.

  • @CROM: Well, basic video functionalities actually make sense for me, you have great optics, nice sensors, all you need is a little boost in CPU and an external mic and you're good to go. A camcorder with similar optics would set you back quite a bit. Plus because of the huge bump in image processing capabilities necessary for video, you also gain a lot for stills. So, to me, it's a win-win, you use more of your gear, and it gets better. So, even though I don't think I ever used an SLR for video, I still benefited from it being implemented.

    As for casual users, I don't really see it that way. For instance, my girlfriend, avid Hipstagram user, bough an (crap of an*) EOS600 (not actually sure about the number, but it's a sort of entry level Canon SLR, I think it's T3i), most of the time, she does just point and shoot, but more and more she's exploring (using priority modes, composing...). And I think that's exactly the point of those cameras (both hybrids and entry level DSLRs), make the transition from a point and brainless picture shooting, to photography. And also kind of a spring board for pricier SLRs a few years later.

    But I fail to see the added value of things like "Shoot WOW, share NOW", it's basically dragging users back, as opposed to video pulling the gear (and users) forward.

    First, you absolutely can NOT do any sort of editing on the back screen, you have pretty much no idea what your image looks like for real (or at least on a computer screen), and like @JoMate said, you won't have your picture in 1:1, so what's the point? Smartphones already have that ability (shoot crapy pictures that you upload in even crappier compression and size).

    And second, well you basically can't do anything with the picture AFTER, because it's already published. So either you're very good and know before hand what the picture's gonna look like (kudos!), or you suck and don't care about it.

    I kind of see that as a misguided marketing choice, they're running out of new functionalities to implement, that crammed just as much as they can that was photo related, now they're trying to find "new" stuff.

    * You'll have understood from that comment that I bought a Nikon. ;-)

  • @Skunkabilly: What Nikon were you using? Actually, what you're mentioning wasn't exactly what I was talking about, as those are just photo capabilities transposed to video (although the continuous focus is somewhat new....)

    Still, I don't really see the conditions one would use continuous auto focus on a full frame reflexes, as those are mostly used for semipro/pro gigs...


  • @Skunkabilly: Oh yeah, that's so dumb that it was completely out of my mind! WAIT! You forgot the "food" mode! Very important if not indispensable!

    Those are on the dial on the D90? Seems like an odd choice. On my ye olde Lumix TZ3 has that burried an a "Scene" mode (same for the L10 I think), never got in the way... and forgot it even existed until I read your message. Anyway, on a compact P&S, I'd understand those, but it baffles me they bother implementing those on (even low end) reflexes. I mean, people buy reflexes to have better picture quality and perfect control over the camera, not to have some BS taking over.

    On the D800, they had the brilliant idea of adding a "record" button next to the shutter (right in between it and the "mode" button), and not only is it useless, because in video mode you'd just hit the shutter to start/stop, but it gets in the way when trying to hit Mode... then you have a brilliant video of your stupid face while trying to figure out what went wrong ("damit! Got to press the button harder or... what the hell" directed by yours truly! In theaters August 24!).

    Well, when you think about it, those aren't any more stupid than crazy high ISOs which are basically useless.