[Raist3d]

Originally Posted by keepright

I absolutely agree about the three buttons on the left hand side. I don't know who let that design out the door. I don't know what the best option would have been, but making the middle lozenge-shaped or having a bump on it would make finding and identifying them much easier. They shouldn't have let the design past the prototyping stage until a random person off the shop floor could learn how to change the basic controls it in thirty minutes blindfolded.

But I also get picky about these things. That's a standard that no camera meets.

And good design and interface issues should cost nothing. It shouldn't be a matter of price point, it should be a matter of pride.

But that's not to say that I agree with the criticisms of the E-3. A lot of the comments look for "intuitive" design. The biofos article uses the word seven times. But an intuitive design is one that can be deduced by intuition. There's no such thing with a camera.

I don't think this is an all or nothing thing. I mean, for example, John could be making quite the valid point about X & Y and be wrong or too picky about Z for someone. I don't see why the all-or nothing.

Consider elevator buttons: It is intuitive that the call button to go "Up" is above the button to go "Down". There is a logical connection between their design and their purpose. It is intuitive that the higher floor numbers are at the top of the button panel, but putting the lower number on the left is not intuitive, it's based on convention. English is read left-to-right, but other languages are not. It makes sense to us because we're used to it, but it's not based on an inherent sensibility or logical relationship.

With the E-3, there's no inherent connection between which dial moves the cursor in a particular direction, or which dial changes which function with the AF and Drive buttons. It's an unintuitive design. But the positioning of the buttons is a question of ergonomics, not intuition, and ergonomics are subjective. I don't find the front control dial position difficult to reach with a normal grip, Mr. Foster does. Neither of us are wrong.

Well I think cameras have been out long enough that some degree of convention can be established. A dial for modes for example, is a well known convention in a camera. However, talking on more intuitive perhaps, is the example Wrotniak gave- say you press the AF upper left hand side button- now quick, do you change the AF with the front dial or real dial? And what does the other do?

If you look at the LCD, there is no readily available way to tell because both are the same color. A simple color change would make a step towards intuitive better as it is easier to learn/associate this difference, perhaps with an overlay of a key to the dials... I agree there's no perfect interface but this is an example where I believe something could have been done better.

The E-1's design makes sense because we're used to it.

Actually I am not used to the E-1 design. I never had one. But what I do know is that the few times I have grabbed one, it all fits in my mind and I know what I need to do pretty much. This is a feeling I never quite get with the E-3 and I have had it now since last year.

The E-3 follows some of its conventions and breaks others significantly. The play buttons are in the same spot, but that's radically different from where it is on the E-300 and E-510. People coming from different cameras in the Olympus lineup are going to have very different experiences with the same control layout. People trying to adjust from different brands are going to have a completely different set of expectations.

This is fairly understandable, but speaking for myself, I can say that I knew where most things were the moment I picked up the E-1. And the E-1 has the buttons with enough size and space that allows for operations with gloves. I don't want to even begin to imagine someone changing ISO and AF and metering by pressing those tiny buttons, at the angle you have to, with gloves, on an E-3. For a "flagship camera" which is all weather, wouldn't you think this is an oversight, more so in light of its predecessor that allowed for this to be better?

I've read many comments from Canon and Nikon owners saying that they chose their particular brand because of the user interface, which makes perfect sense. It also makes perfect sense that people like or don't like the E-3 for the same reasons. Look at Windows and Mac OS -- those two products are all about user interface, and they're still trying to get it right.

Well yeah.. the issue is that you want a tool to get out of the way and be pretty much invisible. If the interface is not agreeable to your feel, then the tool will make its presence known every time ... and at worst, "fight with you."

- Raist