FRIEZE ART FAIR NEW YORK 2012
MILAN 2012: SALONE INTERNAZIONALE DEL MOBILE
MILAN 2012: SATELLITE EXHIBITIONS
MILAN 2012: BRERA DESIGN DISTRICT
I was recently able to view some street photography of people walking around the city from the private collection of fashion/beauty photographer Michael Brandt. (Though his professional work is available at the link above, the street shots are unfortunately not available for us to print here.) I was struck by how well-composed the shots are, and how close they are to subjects that seem completely natural and unaware of the camera. When I asked him how he consistently manages to get such shots, he said he shoots literally from the hip, having precalculated the focusing distance and discreetly pulling the trigger when his moving targets step into the field of focus.
Shooting from the hip is a tricky proposition for most of us non-professionals, who can probably pull it off only with the help of a flip-out LCD on an angle that allows us to see what we're capturing. Designer Yaniv Berg's DSLR camera concept is designed specifically for the purpose, with a periscope-like form factor that forgoes the usual brick-and-cylinder body. We doubt it will take as the design seems to preclude eye-level photography, but we are interested to see younger designers rejecting a body shape that Cartier-Bresson was toting around in the '30s.
via cnet
Comments
Cartier-Bresson didn't use an SLR, he used a rangefinder, a fundamentally different design to the various SLR designs. Furthermore, this camera isn't an SLR either; it'd probably be most correctly called an EVIL camera.
This design is also more reminiscent of a camera design that predates Cartier-Bresson: the TLR or SLR with a waist-level-finder. It almost exactly duplicates the form factor and use style as a TLR/SLR with a WLF, except it actually looks less ergonomic.
Kudos, though, for offering an article on camera design. It's a field I'm very interested in, but it seems like most of the work in concept cameras seems to be done by aspiring industrial designers with little understanding of the mechanics of cameras or the history of their design. For example: Canon's recent "Wonder Camera" concept: http://www.engadget.com/2010/07/06/canon-wonder-camera-concept-promises-single-lens-perfection-vid/ promises things that would be fundamentally unappealing to anyone acquainted with photography and the process of photographing and shows a fundamental disconnect between what manufacturers are prioritising in order to make a camera appear more attractive on a spec. sheet and what seasoned photographers want and consider important to their work.
I'm curious as to how useful that screen is when shooting at eye level, or other angles; or even how visible it will be in direct sunlight.
More pretty "concept" crap that shows no thought for the actual workings of a camera, or the usability. The form looks uncomfortable and barely usable, with only an LCD screen that points one angle, which at most times will be pointing straight up at the sun, so you won't be able to see the LCD. Think about what a product needs to actually do before you arbitrarily make some "cool" looking shape.
in short, YUCK.
i love photography and I constantly check the rumor sites for new cameras (m43rumors, what!)
I appreciate the exploration but this feels like its being different for the sake of being different. Lets be honest, the camera in its current state has not changed for the past 100 years for good reason. I am actually quite opposed to this design because it eliminates an optical viewfinder which is an important tool that for some reason (cheaper to produce a body w/o an optical or electronic viewfinder) is being phased out. The design also eliminates the possibility for properly holding a camera in low light situations to prevent camera shake.
Good designers are aware of the subliminal connections the average person makes with certain aethetics - im mean come on this looks like a knob!
You can learn to shoot from the hip. What it takes is practice, practice, practice. That kind of practice was almost impossible to make useful in film camera days since you had to wait at least to develop the film before you could determine how successful you were. But with digital that kind of practice is easy and quick. Just don't try to do it with a lens longer than about 50 mm.
@ Russ:
So the design requires extra effort on the users part for no benefit - so WHY even consider this solution?
Some one just give me one good reason why this camera is superiore to the traditional format... even just one!
I've been using an old Sony f717 for this, the one with the rotating lensbarrel/body design. Works great although the resolution is a bit low compared to newer camera's (and phones....)