4 ms·

I wonder if the "big on purpose" is because photographers got used to the size of previous generation cameras and would rather have a full-sized body to grip th

by mikece 4y ago

I wonder if the "big on purpose" is because photographers got used to the size of previous generation cameras and would rather have a full-sized body to grip than the miniaturized technical wonders like the Sony APS-C cameras which, while highly capable cameras feel like well-built toys. I bought my a6400 because of the reviews on the eye-AF which is flat-out amazing. But I absolutely hate the feel of the body and wish I could have the electronics of an a7-III or a7-IV in the body of a Nikon D700... something that feels like it was designed by a photographer and not an electrical engineer with a specialty in compact design.

bayindirh 4y ago
I shoot with an A7iii (and I owned a D70s before), and while it's small, it's not uncontrollable or unbalanced for my use. Bigger (mirrorless) cameras are bigger on purpose because you can fit more batteries inside and control heat better amongst other things, but I wouldn't want my A7iii to be the size of D70s or any DSLR, because it really hinders portability of these devices. I agree Sony's APS-C cameras maybe miniaturized a bit too much, but A7/A9 series' size is perfect IMHO (and they manage their heat really well).
- retcon 4y ago
  Reflex mirror assemblies require physical damping that smaller bodies seriously struggle with. Engineering reasons trump Japanese desire for smaller cameras;)
  - bayindirh 4y ago
    I meant bigger "mirrorless" cameras in my previous comment, sorry. Clarified that comment too.
tokamak-teapot 4y ago
The most important 'feature' that comes with a large camera body, for me, is that when I operate the controls, I don't lose my grip. This means I can operate controls at the same time, in quick succession, etc. When I'm wanting to use all the tools available to me to get the perfect shot, I want to be able to reach them and operate quickly. On my smaller-bodied Fuji mirrorless, there's no viewfinder and I almost always shoot in a fully automatic mode. This is great for holiday photos, where it's much more about the memory and much less about the 'art'.
fleddr 4y ago
I think this discussion is typically fuzzy because people do not separate weight and size. As for weight, no sane person wants to carry around more weight than needed. So there's a wide consensus that less weight is better. The counter point that extra weight helps with balance is a bit of a stretch. People often mention long heavy lenses but the truly heavy lenses you will not really support from the camera body anyway. Plus, we're not really talking about cameras where the "light" bodies really are that light as to make handling them unstable. As for size, if we were to ignore weight for a second, I strongly believe a largish camera body is ergonomically ideal for almost everyone. These cameras are often portrayed to be "huge", but they really aren't as it comes to holding them. A large deep grip allows you to hold it well. A large back plate allows for lots of buttons and room between buttons. I extend that remark to people with small hands. Even with small hands you can't fully "grip" a compact mirrorless camera. Don't get me wrong, for sure you can accustom yourself to deal with this compromise in ergonomics, I'm just saying that a largish size is the ergonomic ideal, if weight were not a factor. Of course, the problem is that size and weight do correlate. So you can pick between a large camera that is ergonomically ideal to handle yet heavy to carry or a lighter camera with poor ergonomics. In the end it's best to just try it. My main point is to keep an open mind towards largish cameras, they have some very strong pros.

by mikece 4y ago

bayindirh 4y ago

I shoot with an A7iii (and I owned a D70s before), and while it's small, it's not uncontrollable or unbalanced for my use. Bigger (mirrorless) cameras are bigger on purpose because you can fit more batteries inside and control heat better amongst other things, but I wouldn't want my A7iii to be the size of D70s or any DSLR, because it really hinders portability of these devices. I agree Sony's APS-C cameras maybe miniaturized a bit too much, but A7/A9 series' size is perfect IMHO (and they manage their heat really well).

retcon 4y ago
Reflex mirror assemblies require physical damping that smaller bodies seriously struggle with. Engineering reasons trump Japanese desire for smaller cameras;)
- bayindirh 4y ago
  I meant bigger "mirrorless" cameras in my previous comment, sorry. Clarified that comment too.

tokamak-teapot 4y ago

The most important 'feature' that comes with a large camera body, for me, is that when I operate the controls, I don't lose my grip. This means I can operate controls at the same time, in quick succession, etc. When I'm wanting to use all the tools available to me to get the perfect shot, I want to be able to reach them and operate quickly. On my smaller-bodied Fuji mirrorless, there's no viewfinder and I almost always shoot in a fully automatic mode. This is great for holiday photos, where it's much more about the memory and much less about the 'art'.

fleddr 4y ago

I think this discussion is typically fuzzy because people do not separate weight and size. As for weight, no sane person wants to carry around more weight than needed. So there's a wide consensus that less weight is better. The counter point that extra weight helps with balance is a bit of a stretch. People often mention long heavy lenses but the truly heavy lenses you will not really support from the camera body anyway. Plus, we're not really talking about cameras where the "light" bodies really are that light as to make handling them unstable. As for size, if we were to ignore weight for a second, I strongly believe a largish camera body is ergonomically ideal for almost everyone. These cameras are often portrayed to be "huge", but they really aren't as it comes to holding them. A large deep grip allows you to hold it well. A large back plate allows for lots of buttons and room between buttons. I extend that remark to people with small hands. Even with small hands you can't fully "grip" a compact mirrorless camera. Don't get me wrong, for sure you can accustom yourself to deal with this compromise in ergonomics, I'm just saying that a largish size is the ergonomic ideal, if weight were not a factor. Of course, the problem is that size and weight do correlate. So you can pick between a large camera that is ergonomically ideal to handle yet heavy to carry or a lighter camera with poor ergonomics. In the end it's best to just try it. My main point is to keep an open mind towards largish cameras, they have some very strong pros.