# Would Voice commands be useful



## RGF (Jun 6, 2016)

I would, at least in theory, be able to say commands to my camera such as "F8", or set the exposure compensation to +1/2 stop.

Of course there would be need to be a say to identify my camera vs other cameras / photographers. Some sort of voice recognition and or name would be required.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jun 6, 2016)

The only practical voice commends are actually done by transmitting the voice via internet or phone connection to a remote computer that is very fast and powerful. Thus, you would need a phone connection or Wi-Fi for that to happen. Take your smart phone, disconnect from Wi-Fi and the phone service, and try the voice command. My IPhone 6+ comes up with totally silly text. Without the connection, its worthless.

Just voice commands in a camera using the already overloaded processor might not work well at all.


----------



## pwp (Jun 6, 2016)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> The only practical voice commends are actually done by transmitting the voice via internet or phone connection to a remote computer that is very fast and powerful. Thus, you would need a phone connection or Wi-Fi for that to happen. Take your smart phone, disconnect from Wi-Fi and the phone service, and try the voice command. My IPhone 6+ comes up with totally silly text. Without the connection, its worthless.
> 
> Just voice commands in a camera using the already overloaded processor might not work well at all.



Not yet...Moores Law may catch up.

-pw


----------



## romanr74 (Jun 6, 2016)

Voice commands to your models are very useful...


----------



## LDS (Jun 6, 2016)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> The only practical voice commends are actually done by transmitting the voice via internet or phone connection to



Actually, that happens mostly because they want to know what you're telling to your device, extract data from it and use for building profiles over time.

While complex voice queries may need more power (and data) to be processed - but nothing a decent PC of today couldn't do - the biggest hurdle is to understand the real semantic meaning of a sentence among different possible ones.

But a simple and quite limited and fixed set of voice commands like "aperture f/8", "shutter 1/125", "compensation + 1 and 1/2", "ISO 400" (and you don't need really much more) could be easily processed by smartphones hardware - they did already in the pre Siri/OK Google/Cortana days, and worked well, even without training.

Don't know about camera processors. It would also increase power consumption a little.

How much useful it could be I don't know, there could be some use cases, but would be really faster than a well laid out dial and buttons interface?


----------



## d (Jun 6, 2016)

LDS said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > The only practical voice commends are actually done by transmitting the voice via internet or phone connection to
> ...



I think the utility of voice commands would be best realised when setting up exposure bracketing or complex intervalometer sequences, and like you was thinking the commands could be easily handled by smart phones.

The 1D bodies have traditionally been able to record voice annotations to go alongside an image; I'd find it much more useful if I could dictate a name or some key words and have that embedded as text in the image metadata. If I shot a sequence of images, and could literally tell the camera to attach some particular keywords to all images shot in last two minutes, or all images shot within 50m of my current GPS location, or meeting some other criteria, I'd definitely use the feature regularly.


----------



## IglooEater (Jun 6, 2016)

I dare say folks shooting wildlife, weddings, concerts, and the like would not find it useful...

Basic adjustments such as speed, aperture, and ISO are already so fast I'm unsure it would be useful. Maybe for changing more complex settings, or settings one would normally have to access the menus for. It would seem like a cool idea for setting up long bracketing sequences. Also might be nice for flash settings.


----------



## d (Jun 6, 2016)

Further thinking on voice control - it would also be useful for setting/adjusting flashes/cameras being controlled via Canon's wireless radio system.


----------



## LDS (Jun 6, 2016)

d said:


> I think the utility of voice commands would be best realised when setting up exposure bracketing or complex intervalometer sequences, and like you was thinking the commands could be easily handled by smart phones.



Basically, you have two ways to enable voice commands. One closely matches the UI navigation, and it is simpler to implement. The other tries to understand what a user wants, and acts accordingly. The latter is much more complex to implement (the software needs to "understand" what the user really means), and requires far more processing power and other resources.

If you want to say "camera, take a photo every ten minutes from dawn to sunset, then one every half an hour through the night, bracket two stops with 1/2 stop interval", well, this is complex enough, and camera will also have to compute what "dawn", "sunset" and "night" means for a given location and day of the year. It also has to understand "interval" is associated to "bracketing", etc.

IMHO voice commands would be more useful for quick settings which needs to be applied promptly (hoping commands are understood quickly and correctly...) instead of complex settings which anyway require planning and don't require quick changes.


----------



## d (Jun 6, 2016)

LDS said:


> d said:
> 
> 
> > I think the utility of voice commands would be best realised when setting up exposure bracketing or complex intervalometer sequences, and like you was thinking the commands could be easily handled by smart phones.
> ...



You're wrongly assuming I want to have a conversation with the camera - voice commands are one thing, using natural language is something else, and isn't necessary for how I see such a system working.


----------



## rfdesigner (Jun 6, 2016)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> The only practical voice commends are actually done by transmitting the voice via internet or phone connection to a remote computer that is very fast and powerful. Thus, you would need a phone connection or Wi-Fi for that to happen. Take your smart phone, disconnect from Wi-Fi and the phone service, and try the voice command. My IPhone 6+ comes up with totally silly text. Without the connection, its worthless.
> 
> Just voice commands in a camera using the already overloaded processor might not work well at all.



almost

I had a phone, a Motorola timeport (in year 2000) that had voice recognition, but it was limited, you needed to teach it. The system you're referring to allows anyone to talk to a device without training the device to your voice first.

A camera is usually personal so could use the trained method which vastly cuts the computational overhead.. especially if all it's looking for is "f8" or "ISO400".


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Jun 6, 2016)

Maybe instead of voice command, camera manufacturers could try using buttons.


----------



## Mikehit (Jun 6, 2016)

rfdesigner said:


> I had a phone, a Motorola timeport (in year 2000) that had voice recognition, but it was limited, you needed to teach it.



A friend of mine had a voice-recognition phone and spent the best part of an hour tagging all his contacts with a voiceprint. 
It wouldn't work the next day and after a long an tedious call to Support he realised he had recorded it after a session in the pub and the phone did not recognise his voice when he was sober.


----------



## MiamiC70 (Jun 6, 2016)

Just what I need Siri in my DSLR, lol. 

Why not go straight though commands?


----------



## The Supplanter (Jun 6, 2016)

IglooEater said:


> *I dare say folks shooting wildlife, weddings, concerts, and the like would not find it useful...
> 
> Basic adjustments such as speed, aperture, and ISO are already so fast I'm unsure it would be useful.* Maybe for changing more complex settings, or settings one would normally have to access the menus for. It would seem like a cool idea for setting up long bracketing sequences. Also might be nice for flash settings.



Haha! I was thinking the same thing....


----------



## Click (Jun 6, 2016)

MiamiC70 said:


> Just what I need Siri in my DSLR, lol.



;D LOL


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jun 6, 2016)

dilbert said:


> Dispense with the native language recognition and just use "voice activation" to select which custom mode and upload a speech pattern that is developed and uploaded into the camera using DPP. Then the camera only needs to match what it hears against the pattern files and is also only trained to your voice.
> 
> If it was too much for a PC (not likely) to build the pattern file then Canon could offering it as part of a "Canon Cloud Photography" package or feature.



I think a limited number of commands could be handled in a method you described, by limited, I mean specific commands not general queries.

I find Siri so bad that I am amazed that someone would embarrass themselves by releasing it. Google maps and browser work great, and almost always figure out what I am saying. I Have a Amazon Fire TV (Latest), it is very good at figuring out my voice commands about almost anything.

I attending a meeting last week for deaf and hard of hearing people (I'm having a Cochlear Implant next week). The meeting used Streamtext.net, and I was totally amazed.

http://www.streamtext.net/

I did not spot the microphone(s), but every person's voice in the room was picked up and translated into text and projected on a large screen. It was 100% accurate, I've never seen a voice to test that accurate, much less in a meeting with a fair amount of noise, and people scattered around the room. Its a pay to use service, but well worth it, even at its highest rate of .09/minute, a 2 hour meeting costs only $10.80. And, you can have up to 50 clients connected at various locations at no additional charge. Since its captured by a web browser, you can record the meeting and publish minutes later too. 

Because I will be totally deaf for a month after my implant surgery, I have been researching and testing voice to text for tablet and smart phone use so my wife can easily communicate with me. Many of the apps work, but only marginally, I currently have speak2see installed on my iPhone, it works well, but there is no control over text size, so it needs a large tablet, or I need to find a way to reduce the text size.


----------



## eli452 (Jun 6, 2016)

Wouldn't the mouth movements disrupt the focus, Add camera shake etc?


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jun 6, 2016)

dilbert said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...




It could just set C1... C3, but I like your idea better. Being able to pre program a large number of options for voice recall. 


The Cochlear implant business is a billion dollar industry now, but they are still relatively rare. In our fair sized city of Spokane, they only do about 40 a year. The low volume has led the implant makers to team up with hearing aid makers to take advantage of their research and their wireless accessories. (Advance Bionics was bought by Sonova who also owns Phonak) 

Implants still lag hearing aid technology by about 3 years due to the FDA approval process. These are medical devices that are inserted into your cochlea and hit the nerves with voltage pulses, with all kinds of potential side effects, so the FDA is careful. 

I've done a bit of research into available information about the technical workings before selecting the brand. However, the results from brand to brand are pretty much equal. I have attended two meetings with users and marveled at how much better than me they could hear. Music however is a issue, and telephone use is still difficult for many. 

Turning on the device for the first time is said to sound like everyone is breathing helium, high pitched and squeaky. Your brain learns to interpret the correct pitch after practice, so voices sound more normal. Some of the users I met have had a implant since the 1980's (one was 1982).


----------



## lion rock (Jun 6, 2016)

At a football game you're doing for a large newspaper, the announcer screams, "Touch down!, touch down!", and the camera heard "shut down" ...
Sorry, can't resist.
-r


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jun 6, 2016)

lion rock said:


> At a football game you're doing for a large newspaper, the announcer screams, "Touch down!, touch down!", and the camera heard "shut down" ...
> Sorry, can't resist.
> -r



Security would indeed be a issue!!

It could be partially addressed by the uploading of spoken command audio files from the camera user(s) which are then linked to the desired camera functions, or even a group of settings. This would incorporate some security, since the voice would have to match within certain parameters. That gets around language barriers too. The audio files could even be stored on a memory card but I doubt that the memory taken for a few dozen 2 second compressed audio clips is significant.


----------



## Mikehit (Jun 6, 2016)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I doubt that the memory taken for a few dozen 2 second compressed audio clips is significant.



I agree.
IIRC correctly a song takes up under 1MB per minute


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 6, 2016)

I can't speak for the rest of you, but I can't say "camera, take picture" at ten times per second, so I'll stick to the shutter button.....


----------



## lion rock (Jun 6, 2016)

Another:
"recalculating ... recalculating ..." coming from the camera like older GPS.
Just too many annoying quirks come to mind.
Just like touch screens on the M, just like LCD screens under bright sunlight. Good ideas, bad implementation. I'll pass on voice activation on any equipment. I turn off all sounds in computers; imagine a classroom with 40 students and everyone turns on their computer all at once. Or in a lecture and a late comer turns on the computer with Windows sound come up at full volume. 80 eyes are on you.
No thanks.
-r


----------



## unfocused (Jun 6, 2016)

This would be number 110 on my list of the top 100 things I want from a camera.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jun 7, 2016)

Brainstorming at its best.

For certain physical limitations, sounds useful.


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 7, 2016)

unfocused said:


> This would be number 110 on my list of the top 100 things I want from a camera.


I don't know..... could be fun.....

I'd probably try to configure it to recognize "squirrel" as press shutter, "mew" for aperture up, "MROW" for aperture down, "Woof" as shutter speed up, "Baaaa" as shutter speed down.......

Nothing says that you are a professional photographer like "mew mew mew baaa baaa mrow woof woof SQUIRREL!!! "


----------



## lion rock (Jun 7, 2016)

Don,
hahahahaha, best dessert after dinner.
-r


----------



## unfocused (Jun 7, 2016)

Imagine the marketing potential: "I see you are using a 17-40 f4 'L' lens. Are you aware that we currently have a rebate available for a 16-35 mm f4 IS lens? Your in-camera GPS indicates you are at zip code 82190. If you would like us to ship the lens to you overnight, you can pick it up at Old Faithful Lodge by 11 a.m. tomorrow. Say 'yes' to order and it will be automatically billed to your card on file and shipped today."


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jun 7, 2016)

unfocused said:


> This would be number 110 on my list of the top 100 things I want from a camera.



For me, with fingers that barely work, voice technology saves me a lot of pain, and really helps. Like anything else, some would benefit, some would never use it.


----------



## RGF (Jun 7, 2016)

After reading the comments like 110 on my list of top 100, tells me that this is an interesting and potentially useful idea.

To often novel ideas are panned - like who thought a phone in your pocket would ever be useful, just go to the neighborhood payphone


----------



## romanr74 (Jun 7, 2016)

MiamiC70 said:


> Just what I need Siri in my DSLR, lol.
> 
> Why not go straight though commands?



lol - a fun movie this was...!


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jun 7, 2016)

Thinking a little ahead, but feasible now, with face recognition, you could say "shoot (Insert name of politician here)". The camera could identify the face, focus on it, and *Wham*, you are tackled to the floor and handcuffed by those men in black with dark sunglasses.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Jun 7, 2016)

Now if the microphone would be in the front so that the person you are pointing the camera at can say "please don't take my picture" and the camera would not take the photograph, that could be a benefit to society.


----------



## retroreflection (Jun 7, 2016)

Voice commands are good for the digitally impaired, some remote actions, the gee whiz set, and the imperious set. 
Voice commands are slower than buttons. This is both in the machine (no words are milliseconds in duration) and in the human (muscle memory activations can approach reflex speeds rather than conscious choice speeds).
Voice commands force single lane data transmission, buttons can be paralleled.
Voice commands are poor at continuously variable inputs. Focus pulling by voice is unlikely to ever catch on.

The market for legitimate voice control of cameras is limited. Remote activations are better made via electronics, leaving the handicapped as the legitimate market. But, voice control is only useful for a fraction of that market. The critical thing about that market is the fact that design for the median human structures completely fails, and design for some other typical structure would also fail a large portion of the populace. 

A standardized camera control port (NO MANUFACTURER DEVIATION ALLOWED) so than custom systems could be readily designed and built for the individual needs of handicapped people would be the most effective solution. If you need voice, get a voice interface, if you can only control via puffs of breath...
Such is not the case. Magic Lantern might place Canon in the lead slot for a custom designer trying to address this, but the interface to arbitrary control systems does seem to be lacking.


----------



## Mikehit (Jun 7, 2016)

Not sure I would want voice commands, but it would help for it to share your pain

"Oi you stupid, pile of metalised ferret excrement! The focus point was right over its eye so why the bloody hell did you focus on the branch 50 feet behind it???"

"Sorry Mike. Will do better next time"

"That is good to know" 

"it is a shame bout the shot but maybe you would consider next time using spot focus with a wider aperture"

"YOU WHAT........!!!!!"


----------



## Click (Jun 7, 2016)

-"ISO 100, Speed 1/125, f/2,8 Focus on the eye"

-"I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that"


----------



## rfdesigner (Jun 7, 2016)

dilbert said:


> Dispense with the native language recognition and just use "voice activation" to select which custom mode and upload a speech pattern that is developed and uploaded into the camera using DPP. Then the camera only needs to match what it hears against the pattern files and is also only trained to your voice.
> 
> If it was too much for a PC (not likely) to build the pattern file then Canon could offering it as part of a "Canon Cloud Photography" package or feature.



Actually you might want to record the voice directly on camera.. (same mic, same positioning etc) then connect to the PC to piggy back the processing.


----------



## martti (Jun 7, 2016)

Hm...I tried the voice commands for the first time ever on my iPhone 6 yesterday.
So I called a lot of people I haven't been seeing lately. The responses were totally random.
Nice to know that Dr. Kolev has won a chess tournament in Lyublyana, though.
Without voice commands, that would have remained a secret.


----------



## unfocused (Jun 7, 2016)

retroreflection said:


> Voice commands are good for the digitally impaired, some remote actions, the gee whiz set, and the imperious set.
> Voice commands are slower than buttons. This is both in the machine (no words are milliseconds in duration) and in the human (muscle memory activations can approach reflex speeds rather than conscious choice speeds).
> Voice commands force single lane data transmission, buttons can be paralleled.
> Voice commands are poor at continuously variable inputs...



Thanks for intelligently and rationally articulating my concerns. 

Voice command is low on my list of desired features for the reasons you stated. In addition, I see it as a distraction in many cases. 

If taking a portrait, I want to be interacting with the subject, not the camera. In meetings and events, talking to a camera would be disruptive. It would be useless for wildlife photography and for sports, where it would be both disruptive and too slow. For landscapes, it is unnecessary. 

I suppose it might be of some use for astro-photography or other night-time photography, but that is not my field, thus for me, it remains 110 on my list of top 100 desired features.


----------



## DJL329 (Jun 7, 2016)

From my experience with phone menus, it's a helluva lot faster to enter a series of keystrokes than to get a voice-activated phone system to get me to the correct person.


----------



## AvTvM (Jun 7, 2016)

no. Voice commands would not be useful for me. Dont need it. Dont want it.

Would only be acceptable to me as an optional, payable module or a special, more expensive camera version. Dont see any reason why i should pay for it. 

If blind people need voice command in a camera to take great photographs, they shall pay for it. ;D


----------



## ishdakuteb (Jun 7, 2016)

I can not image what would be happen while I was trying to capture a landscape with voice activated camera, there was some loud voice saying "aperture f/2.8, blah blah blah" or "format card"... LOL... ;D


----------



## unfocused (Jun 7, 2016)

dilbert said:


> Whilst the comment says "button presses can be parallel", I'd like to see someone actually try doing that...



It is much easier to push buttons in parallel than it is to speak in parallel. (Although I would not rule out the possibility of persons with multiple personality disorder attempting to do so. Perhaps you have a greater familiarity with such conditions than the rest of us have.)



dilbert said:


> If you have no use for voice commands in the context that I'm referring to (as a way of selecting a custom setup) then I would also suppose you have no use for the "C" positions on the mode dial either (I have all three setup.)



I would be willing to wager a great deal of money that is is faster to change the positions on a mode dial than it is to speak the change and have an automated device recognize the command and respond.



dilbert said:


> As many would say, you're only limited by your imagination.



Unfortunately, many would be wrong. We are also limited by human physiology, which was retroreflection's point. Try reading th comment below again. Perhaps it will sink in eventually.



retroreflection said:


> Voice commands are slower than buttons. This is both in the machine (no words are milliseconds in duration) and in the human (muscle memory activations can approach reflex speeds rather than conscious choice speeds).


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 7, 2016)

retroreflection said:


> Voice commands are slower than buttons. This is both in the machine (no words are milliseconds in duration) and in the human (muscle memory activations can approach reflex speeds rather than conscious choice speeds).



It should also be mentioned that in order for voice commands to work, you have to enunciate clearly and distinctly. This results in those voice commands being given at a slower rate than one would ordinarily speak.


----------



## Kwwund (Jun 8, 2016)

I like the idea of being able to change aperture and speed settings without taking my eye off the viewfinder.

I have a VR system in my car for navigation, thought I'd never use it, but eventually found it very helpful. Very similar concept to what is described in this thread. Most of the negative comments here could be said about the car VR system as well, but I'd still find it useful.

I probably wouldn't pay a lot of money to have it, or accept other limitations/performance degradations to the camera either. But I'm still intrigued.


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 8, 2016)

To do a simple change of aperture or shutter speed, there is no way that voice commands are going to be as fast as the two control wheels in the hands of someone who has lots of time with that model of camera...... but that's only part of the story.....

Typically, we use a finger and a thumb to control those two parameters and never need top take our eyse off of the viewfinder. If that was all we controlled, then voice recognition would be a step backwards in efficiency.... but what happens when you want to change the ISO? In this case, you drop the camera down to see the shoulder display and ISO button, press it, twirl the wheel to the desired ISO value, then raise the camera back up to the eye....

With voice recognition, you keep your finger and thumb on shutter speed and aperture and say "ISO 640" and it works faster than just using buttons and wheels.... or "compensate plus 2".... This is not a case where you have to choose one method or another, it's pick from the best of the two methods as fits YOUR style of shooting....

If the 7D3 had voice recognition, I'd use it. Primarily I would use the buttons and wheels, but I can think of many cases where voice commands would simplify the task.....


----------



## LostBoyNZ (Jun 8, 2016)

Would it work like security camera footage in movies and TV? Saying "Enhance... enhance..." will keep zooming in and bringing out more amazingly hidden detail? If so, I might be keen for that.


----------



## Tyroop (Jun 8, 2016)

I've missed shots because of not being able to switch from One Shot focus to AI Servo fast enough. You are shooting static objects when suddenly a moving object comes into view and you can't achieve focus. I think it depends on the type of photographer and the camera body. People shooting all the time will have their cameras set up so that changes like this can be made instantly, and they will be very familiar with their cameras operation. With people who don't shoot so often and/or camera bodies that don't have many external controls and need to be adjusted through the menu system I think it would be useful to be able to switch back and forth between certain things, such as focus modes, quickly using a voice command. It would have to be reliable, though, and this could be difficult to achieve.


----------



## Ryananthony (Jun 8, 2016)

I'm sorry, but I don't see any possible way that voice command would be fast enough to change you from one shot to servo in that situation where you can't do it manually. You won't be able to just shout out AI SERVO and it change. I'm sure you would have to press a button and it would have to start listening to what your saying. Otherwise my camera is gonna be changing setting when ever I'm out with another photographer and any topic of setting comes up. 

This idea just seems rediculous to me.


----------



## Ryananthony (Jun 8, 2016)

LostBoyNZ said:


> Would it work like security camera footage in movies and TV? Saying "Enhance... enhance..." will keep zooming in and bringing out more amazingly hidden detail? If so, I might be keen for that.




Haha my girlfriend hates watching CSI with me because everytime they enhance a photo I lose my mind.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jun 8, 2016)

Don Haines said:


> It should also be mentioned that in order for voice commands to work, you have to enunciate clearly and distinctly. This results in those voice commands being given at a slower rate than one would ordinarily speak.



In my experience, talking too slow is a common mistake that users make. Speaking at a normal rate works far better for me.

For a system that is trained to your voice, simple 2 word commands work well. As far as speed, if a two word command executes the setting of several parameters, then you would still be digging thru menus long after the voice command was executed.

Properly done voice software is fast, there are lots of examples of poorly done software, but the good stuff works quickly and accurately. Don't think of Siri as typical, its only typical of the worst of the worst.


----------



## Mikehit (Jun 8, 2016)

Tyroop said:


> I've missed shots because of not being able to switch from One Shot focus to AI Servo fast enough. You are shooting static objects when suddenly a moving object comes into view and you can't achieve focus. I think it depends on the type of photographer and the camera body. People shooting all the time will have their cameras set up so that changes like this can be made instantly, and they will be very familiar with their cameras operation. With people who don't shoot so often and/or camera bodies that don't have many external controls and need to be adjusted through the menu system I think it would be useful to be able to switch back and forth between certain things, such as focus modes, quickly using a voice command. It would have to be reliable, though, and this could be difficult to achieve.



One some models you can assign a button for that switch. Or use the Custom Function settings on the mode dial. Quicker than a voice command IMO.


----------



## Tyroop (Jun 8, 2016)

> One some models you can assign a button for that switch. Or use the Custom Function settings on the mode dial. Quicker than a voice command IMO.


That's right. That's why I said it depends on the camera body.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Jun 8, 2016)

Perhaps a better solution would be to make more of the buttons with function customization and have more of them in better places on the body.


----------



## Mikehit (Jun 8, 2016)

Tyroop said:


> That's right. That's why I said it depends on the camera body.



I would have thought that the camera models on which they would put the voice command would be the models that would have the ability to assign it to buttons. My guess is that for lower end models implementation of voice commands (microphone/speakers/menu trees) would be more complex than software or adding a new button.


----------



## zim (Jun 8, 2016)

voice recognition? :-X

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOUTfUmI8vs


----------



## scyrene (Jun 9, 2016)

Kwwund said:


> I like the idea of being able to change aperture and speed settings without taking my eye off the viewfinder.



You can already do that, surely? I change aperture by turning the big circular dial on the back, and (shutter?) speed with the dial on the top. And ISO by pressing SET while turning the top dial. I can do all these (and do all the time) without moving my eye from the viewfinder, and the in-viewfinder info tells me what settings I've chosen...

On a general note, I love how people putting forward thoughtful reasons why something might not be useful, or might be less useful than its proponent thinks, are automatically 'unimaginative naysayers' :


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 9, 2016)

Voice commands useful? Yes, so the camera will know when I am cussing it out for not taking a good photo.


----------



## MiamiC70 (Jun 10, 2016)

Touch screen > voice command


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jun 10, 2016)

MiamiC70 said:


> Touch screen > voice command



Hardly. Your tough screen needs to shut off while your camera is at eye level so your nose does not activate a function, and you still need to dig thru trees of commands. For a Sony or Nikon user, that could be a nightmare.


----------

