Thanks for my new title, and for your kind words. Please say hello to all my friends in Dublin.

Of course, I thought I was clear that I expected the old systems to remain. In mature markets, unwieldy systems can and are replaced with efficient ones

Thanks. I've been reading your comments in reverse, but have appreciated your interest in my videos, your kind words and your participation.

I appreciate your kind words, thanks for commenting.

How I wish I'd said that! Thanks for commenting and your kind words.

It was a real pleasure to read your kind words, thanks for taking the time to comment.

Thanks for the kind words, and I absolutely agree. I'm working to create an image, not to manage a set of numbers or calculations.

Thanks for taking the time to comment, your kind words are always appreciated. Stay safe in Singapore, but if you get the opportunity to say hello to my friends there, please do so.

Thanks for the kind words. This video was recorded with a Nikon Z7 using the Neutral profile with reductions in sharpening and saturation and a custom white balance that was tweaked in editing.

Happy to help! Always nice to know viewers respect my guidance.

My view is that those settings are fine until you realize that the camera doesn't understand what you want. If you just need to adjust the brightness, there's EV, otherwise you are lost.

Thanks for your interesting comments, I appreciate your time to post this.

An interesting viewpoint, thanks for commenting.

Thanks for the kind words. Fujifilm does indeed seem to get these kinds of ideas and is willing to change.

I don't mind canoeing solo, but I'd only do that if someone else was also soloing alongside. And its impossible to shoot a video of myself canoeing without a camera person. Otherwise, thanks for taking the time to comment. An interesting read.

Glad you enjoyed it! Always nice to know viewers appreciate my work.

Always my pleasure, thanks for the kind words.

Always nice to read that my videos are useful and appreciated. Thanks for commenting.

I appreciate your kind words, thanks!!!

Glad you like them! Thanks for the kind words, appreciated.

Glad you think so! I appreciate the kind words.

So nice of you to comment, your kind words are appreciated.

Fun to read your comments and memories. Thanks for taking the time to comment, things can be simpler.

@@MaartenHeilbron You are too kind, sir. Thank you!

It’s interesting what you say. I set up a series of interactive training sessions for my camera club, to try to encourage people to join the club. I didn’t start with the settings, the first session was on composition, and the second session on exploiting light. These two topics are important whether you are using either a phone or an expensive camera. Only after that did I go into settings.

@@jerry2357 Sounds great. I love results-focussed training.

Thanks for your thoughts. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/fM2PasVevMqqcnU.html

Yes, that's true - both Fujifilm and Sony have, on some models anyway, implemented a version of the depth of field slider. Thanks for joining this conversation.

Thanks and thanks. I shot this with the Nikon Z with the 24-70F2.8. You'd expect great results from this combination - but I have spent the last two weeks configuring the set and the lighting. I've also spent some time adjusting all of the picture control settings to my taste. Nice to read that those efforts paid off.

@@MaartenHeilbron Every video you make involve a great deal of effort, thus the worthy results. This one made somehow a difference. I would be very interested of knowing this Maarten Custom Z P Profile !! Sharing is Caring after all !! 😊

@@CaminoDidjeridu Neutral (not flat), turn down all the sharpening settings and colour saturation.

@@MaartenHeilbron Thank you for sharing the settings !! I appreciate all of you videos, even when I do not comment. As a matter of fact, every time I want to learn about a new camera, I go to your channel, because I know I will find a review that will be complete, accurate and fun to watch. Thank you again !

@@CaminoDidjeridu I'm happy to share just about anything - I have no secrets. Thanks so much for your very kind words, always appreciated.

That's very kind of you, thanks. Always nice to see your avatar pop up in the comments.

Thanks, it's good to hear that there are people who feel that the current system is understandable and manageable. Unfortunately, that's not true for all people. I'm sure you'll find some great photos even in your first 1000. And thanks, I appreciate your kind words.

A pleasure to read your kind words. Understood, as I said, you and I get it. But many people don't. I'm not suggesting that the fractions and ratios you understand be removed. Just hoping to find a way to make it simpler for those who are confused and frustrated.

I use three cameras regularly, and each has two or three lenses that I use.

Maarten Heilbron which are they?

@@Pankaj-rg6jf kzfaq.info/get/bejne/Z7p5ltWmq6qZeKM.html

I don't know about your interest in canoeing, camping, boating or photography - however, it's easier to rent a canoe (after all you don't up using it much) than a camera which you'd likely use more.

Well you'd still have something to show for your hard earned money if you dropped a canoe in the water as opposed to an X-T4...;-)

@@MrKikoboy actually laughed at this one, thanks for the chuckle. They're weather-proof though, right?

Thanks for the kind words. Of course, we're all learning and thinking. I think phones have shown many of us the value in simple interfaces for photography.

Good suggestion - was thinking the same thing myself. And thank you for the kind words. Now that I can dedicate a space to a studio setup, I've been able to fine tune all the parameters to get a shot that pleases me - glad to read that it meets your approval. Any thoughts on the items on the shelves? I'm starting to think some are too obvious (yellow submarine) and it may be too cluttered. Thanks very much for your kind words.

Maarten Heilbron No...not a bit of distraction in the shelf contents. Everything is so nicely out of focus that no item calls attention to itself. Yet, there’s just enough detail that it’s not a frustrating blob of blur.

@@mattcom2 Thanks for the check on that. Incidentally, it's shot with the Nikon Z7 with the 24-70 F2.8. It's here on quarantine loan. I'm not sure I'll be able to part with it. A couple more things I want to try - like F-log - on some upcoming videos.

It's complicated for everyone, however there are some who grasp the relationships between the terminology and the results more easily. Thanks for your kind words.

Yes, phones seem to be moving in this direction more quickly than cameras with larger sensors.

Yes, but in most cases, the settings behind the icons did little to assist.

@@MaartenHeilbron Perhaps merely calling for an artistic vocabulary vs a technical vocabulary.

@@robertstonephoto Good point, thanks!

The need to exchange settings would be an advantage of Tony's solution. However, I don't really see this as a requirement. Cameras are different, lenses are different - knowing my settings does not make it possible for you to recreate the photo I just took.

Please show me the blurred waterfall or the passing cyclist you took with full auto. Otherwise, thanks, I do always appreciate your contributions.

@@MaartenHeilbron The blurred waterfall is THE BEST!

Lovely.

might be interesting for someone to know which camera has the best auto mode

@@rotvonrat What an interesting topic. Noted for future reference.

I think that's a valid thought - take advantage of the things your camera can do so that you can concentrate on the creativity and vision that only you can bring. Thanks for commenting.

Thanks for the kind words. Sounds like a good approach - sounds similar to mine.

I'd love to recreate that scene in a video - thanks for sharing!

@@MaartenHeilbron Another one: I got out to Amsterdam from the UK to photograph a disabled pool lift for a brochure. I opened the Bowens Travleler case to find my assistant had forgotten to put back the three tripods - I sat the lights on the floor and bounced them up to the ceiling - which wasn't even white - the art director loved the shot and commended my creativity - I didn't tell him why I had done that. had to shoot a plate of food by a Michelin star chef. My Hass 503 didn't have a metered prism - and the batteries in my light meter had gone. I used 12 different exposures for 1 shot thinking well 1 of them must be right. and it was just that. I used to put my rolls of film back in any silver foil I had available, once I put all my E6 into C41 foils and they got crossed processed by my assistant in my lab - the client was overjoyed - now you can press a button in LR to do the same. Stay safe - thanks for the videos

@@nelsonclub7722 More great stories! Thanks. All would make great scenes in a video.

Thanks for your kind words. I think that the cameras in phones (with their lack of traditional photo terms) have already dramatically increased the number of photographers in our midst.

@@MaartenHeilbron I agree.

A lovely combination of quarantine-rant and memories of my own SRT-101. Thanks for commenting.

I'm glad to hear that you appreciate my videos, thanks for your kind words.

Thanks for the kind words. Yes, phones seem to be getting there faster than cameras.

I think you may be heading the wrong way. :-)

www.kickstarter.com/projects/samellos/im-back-35-new-version-with-manual-priority-function?.mirrorlessrumors.com& unfortunately it seems the sensor doesn't look like it's up to most modern standards...it also kinda looks like a kludge stuck on a lovely film camera...

You can already handle a camera like that if you want though

@@MrKikoboy Interesting nonetheless, thanks for sharing.

@@MaartenHeilbron maybe , most of my workflow was made with a Hasselblad 500CM from 1980 to 2006... no AF , no auto nothing, nice IQ , Never know about FF or BF issues , had my own B&W lab , the rest was Ekta or Kodakchrome, the hardest thing with her was to compose in square format. Never got the same IQ with digital backs. I discovered that I´m a dinosaur. Greetings from Málaga /Spain

What a great opportunity and a good camera to use, as its auto modes can help your granddaughters focus (sorry) on the image, the story and the mood they are trying to convey.

While that's true, in reality most of those icons aren't as helpful as they should be.

Thanks for the kind words and wishes.

Thanks, nice to hear from a viewer who understands and appreciates what I'm suggesting.

Please go to the front of the class! Exactly. "Until it doesn't work for me." If the camera can do the work while you concentrate on composition and timing, then you are taking full advantage of your camera.

Thanks for your kind words.

Excellent. Always nice to hear from a photographer who's happy with his kit.

I'm going to have to try that.

I'd suggest you go back and give it a fair audition, he makes interesting and valid suggestions. Granted, they're not for everyone, however its straightforward simplicity is very appealing. Please ask a non-photographer to read your second paragraph. As my family likes to say, "When are you going to do videos in English?". The skills a photographer needs to learn are composition and timing. The rest is mundane clerical skill and I'm happy to let the camera/computer do that work.

@@MaartenHeilbron Hello, to be clear, I did watch the whole video from Tony. I would say that for experienced photographers the suggested system is irrelevant since they are used to the current nomenclature and for the inexperienced photographer it takes just the same amount of learning than the existing system, so I find it a bit pointless.

@@markwith140 Thanks for being clear. When you said "I glazed over and switched off", I thought you hadn't watched it. While that's certainly true for experienced photographers, think of the generations of photographers yet to come.

Yes, exactly, thanks for the kind words.

Thanks for making those points. Yes, a discussion should follow. With an appropriate beverage to lubricate the thinking.

Gracias por las palabras muy amables, son apreciados.

You are very kind, thanks so much for your comments.

Do you have any scientific basis for these ridiculous claims? "diminish as you approach the equator"? What nonsense.

@@MaartenHeilbron The analogy, if you read carefully, is a play off of south of 100 and not suggesting a correlation with ones geographical location. Sorry for the sloppiness. The point is, the more complex or abstract technology becomes the fewer people are adept and/or interested in engaging such.

@@lcador9 I did read carefully. You were the one who admits to sloppiness. Be careful.

Yes! Exactly that. Thanks for your contribution and kind words.

Which would be English? Thanks for the kind words, appreciated.

While this sounds like a great idea, i think that technique and timing might not be in your favour in this application. It would be great to be able to say which exposure variable (aperture, shutter, ISO) is adjusted for an exposure bracket - and I do wonder why this hasn't been implemented by any manufacturer.

@@MaartenHeilbron , yes exactly, having the power to choose what will vary would be great. I for instance know that when I chose exposure bracketing in Aperture priority mode on my D810, the camera changes only the shutterspeed. The ISO remains the same. That's what I'm using to a certain degree to simulate my idea of a Shutterspeed bracket option. Yes, I will have different exposures from my existing solution, but it's better than missing a shot. Most underexposed images are recoverable so I always underexpose my middle exposure for a well-exposed "overexposure" (I hope you are following my logic here lol).

Reply to "While this sounds like a great idea, i think that technique and timing might not be in your favour in this application"... Most of us shooting action motorsports shoot in bursts, so that is the primary used technique. My idea is to have a burst mode with a variable shutterspeed duration of each consecutive shot. The timing in this technique is to decide the framing window you want to shoot in, so for instance if a car is going to go through a corner I will decide the entry and exit point for that move and shoot burst there with AF tracking on. If the distance from the camera to the vehicle is determined to be the same focal distance then I would prefocus and not use tracking at all.

@@stephenspiteri_zunkus Thanks for this insight - but it does make the challenges, as now you're combining burst and bracket, more clear.

Glad you like them! Thanks for the kind words.

Most scene modes are pretty primitive, but can be useful. Of course settings are fun, but for many who have a valid use for photography as a means of expression, they're just frustrating and because they don't understand them they feel they're missing out.

I am. On the Humber River in Toronto. Staying safe - you too! Canoeing expert video : kzfaq.info/get/bejne/oal3Y7Rzt6ypoHk.html

@@MaartenHeilbron Well nobody replied so quick! Oh I forgot you do reply to all relevant questions an civil comments.

@@sufsanin1917 I make it a point to stick around for a while after I post. Thanks for the kind words.

My favorite (no offense Tony) camera, no life through photography channel!

@@graphguy That's very kind of you to say. I"m fond of Tony also.

Thanks for your kind words, always nice to hear from my viewers.

I don't want to spoil anyone's fun - I certainly didn't advocate removing the existing complications we all love - just to add another system (or two) to help those who find it frustrating. Auto setting rarely gets a defocussed background portrait, a quickly moving object or a milky waterfall.

Yes, exactly that. I'm just not following why, after the wizard did what I wanted, I'd have to be told what it did. When I indicate to my car that I want to go at 60km/hr, it doesn't tell me what rpms are required so the next time I can adjust that setting.

@@MaartenHeilbron But you don't indicate to your car that you want to go 60 kph. You indicate that you want to go a little faster by pushing the pedal a little more down. You indicate that you want to go a LOT faster by mashing the pedal all the way down. Physics "calculates" the results of all that, based on the mass of the car, the efficiency of the engine, and wind resistance. Then the car shows you a numeric value to indicate the result. In this case, you need that numeric value for several reasons: A) There are laws about how high that numeric value can be. The laws don't tell you how far down your pedal can be. This is analogous to bumping up against the limits of the capabilities of your equipment. Contrary to your claim, there are many times when I do not attempt to take a photo because I know the results will be disappointing. After getting a lot of disappointing pictures in a specific situation, I learned not to waste my time until I could afford better equipment. B) You may want to compare your speed today with your speed yesterday. People are notoriously terrible at estimating their speed just from looking out the windshield. Ask any cop. This is analogous to just seeing how much bokeh is in your picture. It is very difficult to examine a picture and specify the exact "degree of bokeh" is in it for comparison. That is why people use vague terms like "beautiful bokeh" or "smooth bokeh" or "buttery smooth bokeh." Novices may not care about the exact degree of bokeh but, as one advances in skill, one may desire to replicate the amount of bokeh that was in a previous photo. Knowing the numbers allows one to replicate that better than moving some vague sliders until things "look about the same." C) You may want to compare your speed with that of your friend, who is also traveling to the same destination to ensure you will both get there at about the same time. You don't call each other and say, "I have my pedal half way down." Nor do you say, "The telephone poles are going by really fast." No. You report the numbers on the speedometer. (OK, these days you just report the time Google says you will arrive. But that is still a number calculated based on your speed and other factors. But Google calculates based on average speeds of everyone on that road. So, if you want a real estimate of your arrival time you have to calculate it yourself. This is analogous to your friend looking at your picture and wanting to replicate the bokeh. You tell them all the numbers, including the size of your sensor, then they can calculate what settings will give them the same bokeh. Then they can choose what equipment and settings they will need to replicate your bokeh. So, no, a complete novice with no desire to improve their skills would not need to see the numbers. But if someone wanted to advance their skills, they would eventually need those numbers. Yes, composition, timing, and storytelling are important. But, at a certain point, one learns that controlling things like bokeh and exposure and dynamic range helps with those first three. For a while, simply adjusting vague sliders will help with that. But all those sliders will be interdependent. Adjusting one will sometimes, but not always, move all the others. If a person does not understand why that is happening, they will get frustrated. My decades of experience supporting computer users tells me they will invent all kinds of incorrect theories and outright mythologies as to why things are happening. So, people will eventually need to know the actual numbers and how all those numbers affect their final result if they want to be able to replicate previous results, especially with different equipment.

A fascinating and interesting read. I appreciate that you are not willing to understand my view, have misinterpreted, jumped to conclusions and gone reductio ad absurdum on this. That said, I do always enjoy my interactions with my viewers - thanks very much for taking the time to chat, it is appreciated.

A interesting approach, but I'm happy to know that it works for you.

Yes, that would be an interesting addition. Physical controls are always preferred, but not always provided.

Storage for the winter. They don't make snow tires for canoes.

Thanks. Are you speaking of my presentation style or the idea I proposed?

Hey, thanks! Always nice to read kind words from around the planet. Please safely say hello to all my friends in Romãnia.

Thanks for your kind words and insight into my comments. 8:40 - that's exactly why I want the camera to take over here I don't think that citizens of the US find the metric system offensive, just mysterious. I don't think the photo industry has any interest in limiting their market to elite photographers. They'd like to appeal to everyone. Thanks again.

@@MaartenHeilbron yes you're right, I don't think they find it offensive per se, but nonetheless it makes my idea quite a hard one to implement! But another point you brought up is probably a more important one: the ability to have different firmware versions depending on your needs/preference. If Fuji's firmware were somewhat open, I could have gone in an tweaked the features that I saw as deficient and shared that with other users. Then interfaces like the Northup system and the excellent Heilbron system could be a reality!

@@MrJed_s Yes, good suggestion. Open source camera firmware. It's interesting to note that Sony tried that when their cameras had downloadable apps. They provided a limited set of the APIs, but although some developers (me included) had a look at it, the limitations meant that nothing interesting was possible.

Thanks, a pleasure to read your kind words. I would never propose to remove the flexibilty that experienced practitioners bring to their craft.

I appreciate your kind words. Canadians are like that - soft-spoken and diplomatic.

I thought it was interesting and would be a positive step.

@@MaartenHeilbron One small step for Tony, but one giant leap for mankind & the camera industry. :))

@@lorenschwiderski I thought it might be worthwhile to have a positive conversation about this, not just make snide remarks.

While I could suggest that your memory of the 70's is faulty, I do agree, interfaces are somehow needlessly complex even though they do now offer a great deal more functionality.

Maarten Heilbron No, my memory is fine as I sold film cameras for five years in the late 70s and early 80s. I owned a Canon A-1 in high school so I understand the UI. Of course, it is just dreaming that all of the camera manufacturers are going change camera settings any time soon as it would be a major disruption in the industry. Based on sales it MAY be worth it?

@@DavidCrooksPhotos I'm sorry that you missed the humorous intent in my remark.

Good point. Thanks for commenting.

True that. Thanks for commenting and your kind words.

Brochures like that are useful, insofar as they help you make a selection. And you're very right, those of us who've managed to get ourselves up to this level of understanding don't remember the struggles we've been through.

@@MaartenHeilbron I don't know about you Maarten but when I was learning ( on slide film ) there was an added encouragement to figure things out ( and quickly! ) after you had spent some good cash on quality film and developing only to pick up your long awaited slides from a guy who looked at you with pity in his eyes as he rang up your bill...;-) !

@@MrKikoboy As always, thanks for joining in - nice to see my friends. Added encouragement, but you had to remember what you'd done while you were on holiday. These days you can see your mistakes and fix them while you're still in France.

​@@MaartenHeilbron I actually used to keep a small notebook when I shot for that very reason - especially when I wasn't sure what I was doing...later on I got much better at predicting and visualizing...every shot would turn out exposed the way I wanted and 5-7 keepers ( compositionaly )from a roll of 36 seemed to be a good average...the delete button on digital cameras sometimes seems a bit of a crutch to me - I'm not an "action" shooter so it seemed like you should learn to recognize what you are looking for before clicking the shutter - although happy accidents have their places as well...;-)

@@MrKikoboy I had the notebook, but never remembered to write in it. Too caught up in taking pictures and enjoying the experience.

As I said, I wasn't advocating for this to be the only way to use the camera. I agree, there's lots of fun to be add playing with settings but it's a limited number of people who will want to explore the way you do.

@@MaartenHeilbron because lots of people don't want the hurdles to learn and give up early. I think that's one of the things that can separate the ones that make the effort and try to be better from who don't care enough... There's a book called "the dip" by seth godin that talks just about that

@@DiogoFilipeR Why do you need to judge? The vast variety of human experience on this planet means that there are very few people who share our interests and enjoy the things we enjoy. They spend their time and energy understanding and pursuing their own interests and passions.

@@MaartenHeilbron sorry if I sound judging, I read what I wrote and I didn't mean to sound like that! I meant to say that I don't want to lose the manual abilities because in a long future no one would be using them... For example smartphones, they are all super big now and people that like smaller phones (not me actually) don't have much offer to choose. The economy works in mysterious ways and can make the markets change direction to where the money is. Of course it's not possible to please everyone! Mirrorless cameras are changing the camera industry, let's see how it continues 😄

Yes, that's certainly an option for those who enjoy that kind of thing.

Thanks, yes, good suggestion and thanks for the kind words.

Yes, absolutely right. Thanks for commenting.

Absolutely, you have my 100% support on that - primarily for video, but also for stills.

How about just 'S' for Sensitivity rating even, and rate it from 1-10 +. 1 being the least sensitive for each individual sensor (today's ISO 100 equivalent = S1) and 10 being the most sensitive ISO 56,200 = S10? It would be like a decimalisation of the outdated ISO settings simplified by numerical sensitivity.

@@nowisthetime6093 I would not find that realistic. The lowest or base ISO just means no amplification to the signal coming from the sensor. I think I'd prefer gain, although I'll admit that sensitivity has some aesthetic appeal.

@@MaartenHeilbron defenetly gain. Like on my guitar. Input is normal signal from guitar and gain boosts that same signal but results in more noise (audio noise) more gain = more noise but more audible.

@@088Noir Thanks, however, in digital systems as the noise floor is very low, it takes a lot of gain before noise starts to be noticeable.

Good comment, although some have made tentative steps, and Fujifilm is showing some leadership, there is a great deal more that can be done.

Thanks for joining in. Happy Paddling. Stay safe.

PS yes debayering is already ubiquitous ... and I am glad I have been able to understand something about colour depth and moire in digital cameras ... I am wary of ‘proprietary’ terms and measurements.

@@peterwood1066 I have no idea where you're headed, but thanks for stopping by.

It's an interesting point, but I'm not sure I completely agree. I don't think computers were hard to use before the smartphone arrived and while the capabilities of both computers and smartphones have advanced, there are still a large cohort who find smartphones and computers difficult to use and impossible to master.

Thanks for the comments. The Noise value would be a reported number, not an adjustable setting in my view, to provide guidance for the photographer who might like to use a flash or possible change lenses.

While it's nice to see your avatar, and I suspect your being ironic - even a master of the settings is not going to take great photos. That requires a creative impulse to recognize good composition and timing to wait for the right moment. But you know that - as always, thanks for taking the time to comment and for your kind words.

@@MaartenHeilbron Which contemporary photographers do you find inspirational? Just want to expand my Instagram following list.

Here are a few I'd recommend: My friend Paul's bird feed: @birds_onthebrain Arienne Parzei - who can turn a most mundane shot into a spectacular image @seeusoontravel Neil Ever Osborne - my favourite eco warrior @neileverosoborne Kael Rebick's most interesting take on things @punkodelish Travel photography (mostly sponsored, but) with amazing colour and flair @zorymory Lois Greenfield's amazing dance photos @loisgreenfield Hopefully that's enough for now. Please do return the favour - who are your favs?

@@MaartenHeilbron A short list of my favorite photographers are English-Canadian, Adam Gibbs, Scotsman, Alister Ben, Dutch Photographer,Theo Bosboom Daniel Kordan, not sure where he is from German traveling writer Photographer Photography Viola. Adam Gibbs is my fav because he creates masterpieces from almost all scenes and subjects. Theo Bosboom is more of an abstract nature photographer however, his ability to spot engaging composition from nature is magical! Hope you can look-up and enjoy my list. Enjoy your summer, MH!

@@RickMentore Thanks, I'll have to review their posts.

I'm not seeking to destroy your fun. I'm trying to suggest how some techniques might be easier. However, I am intrigued. Which settings would you describe as weird? Also note that neither Tony or I are seeking to impose this on you. We are both suggesting that this be an alternate, exactly so that you can continue to play with the weird settings.

Always nice to hear from a viewer who understands and supports my suggestions.

Glad you enjoyed, thanks for commenting.

While I'm happy to have the benefit of your scientific and rational explanation, there are many people who, even if you explain this slowly and carefully, will not appreciate this nuance as you understand. They need something simpler, which is what Tony (and I) are advocating.

Good comments, thanks. While I agree that all learning styles are different and require teachers who are sensitive to that, for photography some of the settings have an unnecessarily obscure and arcane basis that could do with some rationalization. Tony's comparison to the metric system is spot on - for many people imperial measure remains incomprehensible, and that's not the fault of teachers.

Maarten Heilbron Love this conversation/argument.... I agree that the imperial system is the most absurd ever, specially when compared to the decimal system; it only makes sense from an historical perspective, foot from the Egyptian cubit, pounds (lb) from the peculiarity of quasi-constant wight of wheat grains etc., however there is a deeper level to it, the use of fractions, you can teach a 5 years old in minutes what 1/2, 1/4, 1/8 is the concept of breaking something into to equals is primeval, good luck trying to introduce 0.5, 0.25, 0.125.... fractions had been used for millennia before the concept of “zero” was even introduced, at least in the western culture. The decimal system is brilliant cause makes computation easy from an intuitive perspective, except between zero and one, where it becomes counterintuitive, in this case fractions are way more intuitive, a bit like doing calculations on an abacus in a certain way, where unknowingly, for the vast majority of people, you are actually using a binary system. Back to the main topic, photography, multiplay or divide by 2 is most intuitive with the decimal system for whole numbers and with fractions between one and zero, that’s shutter speed, a kid wants 4 cookies instead of 2 and prefers 1/2 a cookie versus 1/4; ISO is just a number, ISO 100 could be ISO 10 or whatever, as long as you don’t have to use numbers between one and zero if you want to avoid fractions,. When it comes to aperture values I agree that at first sight it looks completely nonsensical, however all you have to do is say that “f” means “1/“ so that f3.5 is bigger, gives you more light than f13, 1/3.5 is bigger than 1/13, unfortunately f2 doesn’t gives you double than f4, but you can’t change how light behave and it’s quadratic function, you will always have to introduce the idea of multiply a number by itself, going from 2,4,8,16.... to 2,4,16,256 which I still believe a lot more intuitive than 0,5,0.25,0.125,0.625... to 0.5,0.25,0.0625,0.0039. T stops are definitely more accurate and a superior quality of data, but more difficult to explain and understand compared to f stops, a second stage in the learning process, on the other hand it’s so easy to explain that f2 means that the size of the hole is 1/2 the length of the lens. The human being has used fractions for millennia way before basic numeracy has become a normal, last 100 years or so, it’s easy to understand and use for anyone on a daily basis. I sincerely hope that haven’t bored you to death...

@@nilofido411 Not bored, just confused. There is no historical basis to claim that fractions were used for millennia. And while half a cookie might make sense to a five year old, the same reasoning does not apply to photographic terms, particularly aperture. If you want half the light (a concept that's certainly a difficult one to grasp, as it's not something that we ever consider outside of photography) you do not have a dial that allows you to set the aperture to one half. Instead you have a dial that you have a turn from 5.6 to 11. How did you explain to the five year old that 11 is one-half of 5.6? What seems counterintuitive to you, makes perfect sense to me. How are T stops more difficult to explain? They relate to the amount of light, not the size of the aperture. The amount of light is what matters - no-one cares what size of opening is required . Please, let's end this conversation here.

Maarten Heilbron my Apologies, it wasn’t my intention to upset you, just an attempt to engage in an epistolary conversation and I will refrain to go any further; just a couple of points for clarification, it’s documented that the Egyptians were using fractions 2000 BC circa, the Greeks, Babylonians, Romans, Indians etc., you tell a kid that f5.6 it’s actually f 1/5.6 and it’s bigger than f1/11, T stops are the actual correspondent measured values of the f stops, that varies for each item coming out of the production line, they are accurate but they have the same theoretical math behind: ratio between focal length and physical size of aperture minus dispersions.

@@nilofido411 Thanks, a wonderful reinforcement to my original thesis.

Yes, that's a system that works for many people, and I'm not suggesting it be replaced or deprecated. However, a much larger group find it confusing, counter-intuitive and ultimately frustrating. We can do better.

​@@MaartenHeilbron You should do a review of the Nikon D3500 - it has "guide mode" where you can select "soften background" or "freeze motion"... maybe Nikon has made it all ready?

@@MrMichaelfalk Right. Somehow we never connected on the D3500. Nikon, Sony and Fujifilm have all provided similar novice systems.

Absolutely right. I like your approach, thanks for commenting.

Good suggestion - you can see examples of that on their phones, which certainly provide a more guided interface than cameras.