Why don't crop sensor cameras have crop weight bodies?

Discussion in 'Digital SLR' started by Wally, Feb 1, 2011.

  1. Wally

    Peter N Guest

    I doubt if you will ever see the review, or learn the name of the magazine.
     
    Peter N, Feb 2, 2011
    #21
    1. Advertisements

  2. Wally

    Allen Guest

    But a Lamborghini weighs less but cot more than a Ford Explorer.
    Allen
     
    Allen, Feb 2, 2011
    #22
    1. Advertisements

  3. Wally

    Ray Fischer Guest

    "If a sensor weighs just three grams then why does the
    camera weigh 900 grams?"

    A sensor is not a camera.
    A camera is not a sensor.

    Get a clue.
     
    Ray Fischer, Feb 4, 2011
    #23
  4. Wally

    John A. Guest

    Yup. Might as well ask why a film camera doesn't weigh much less when
    you load 12-exposure film instead of 24.
     
    John A., Feb 4, 2011
    #24
  5. Wally

    Alfred Molon Guest

    Still there are film cameras whose size is a fraction of the size of
    current full frame DSLRs. It should not be a problem to make very
    compact full frame DSLRs. The electronics can't take so much space, as
    the Sony NEX cameras demonstrate it.
     
    Alfred Molon, Feb 4, 2011
    #25
  6. Wally

    Savageduck Guest

    Alfred, are you and Rich cousins?
     
    Savageduck, Feb 4, 2011
    #26
  7. Wally

    Bruce Guest


    An interesting thought. Or perhaps not. ;-)
     
    Bruce, Feb 4, 2011
    #27
  8. Wally

    Peter N Guest

    Interesting theory. We have lossless compression. Do we now have
    weightless film?
     
    Peter N, Feb 4, 2011
    #28
  9. Wally

    George Kerby Guest

    They still make film for the Minox?
     
    George Kerby, Feb 4, 2011
    #29
  10. Wally

    Paul Furman Guest

    Nikon FE is an example of a small FX film camera, or Olympus (forget the
    model). For digital, I think the AF system requires quite a bit of space
    at the side(s?) of the mirror box, the rear LCD adds thickness on top of
    the sensor and even the sensor is thicker than film. The batteries are
    big and heavy, the flash is bulky... if you were willing to forego all
    that, it should be possible. Mirrorless APS is probably the closest
    thing today, or micro 4/3 if you don't need a real viewfinder or high
    ISO performance. The Hasselblad design could probably be adapted to 35mm
    but that would handle like a mini hand held slide viewer: a longish
    spice-box, maybe with a folding pop-up viewfinder so it's not
    top-viewing - hold it as if looking through a toilet paper tube.
     
    Paul Furman, Feb 4, 2011
    #30
  11. Wally

    C J Campbell Guest

    It is far worse than that. Why are full-frame cameras so much heavier
    than their predecessors? Why does a Nikon FM2 weigh 540g, while a D3x
    weighs 1220g? The D3x does not even need the stuff for handling film!
    Yet, despite all this additional weight, the pentaprism does not
    transmit light to the viewfinder as well as the FM2 and overall
    performance is arguably no better. Even a D700 weighs 995g. What on
    earth for?
     
    C J Campbell, Feb 4, 2011
    #31
  12. Wally

    Paul Furman Guest

    I was mixed up about that; I was thinking of the old style which is
    already flip-up and top-viewing but a more complex system could relay it
    to the rear for normal viewing and end up kind of like the new digital
    models. I'm really not familiar & shoulda kept my trap shut but there is
    probably a way to devise a folding system which would result in a
    compact 2" cube sized body, probably an inch or more longer in the
    viewing axis to hold a battery and LCD screen. AF could be a problem.
     
    Paul Furman, Feb 4, 2011
    #32
  13. Wally

    Alfred Molon Guest

    Why?
     
    Alfred Molon, Feb 4, 2011
    #33
  14. Wally

    Wally Guest

    Maybe the manufacturers pour cement into them to give them extra heft.
    Makes them feel more expensive and justifies the high price.

    Wally
     
    Wally, Feb 4, 2011
    #34
  15. Wally

    Me Guest

    No point comparing a D3x with an FM. Better comparison may be an F3
    with MD4, which with a set of batteries in the MD4 probably weighs more
    than a D3x.
    The "less bright" VF relates to semi-silvered mirror in phase-detect AF
    dslrs, there's a secondary mirror behind the main mirror that reflects
    image down to the AF unit in the bottom of the mirror box. The CAM 3500
    unit in the D3/700/300 series is hefty, with a very large lens. Less
    capable AF systems (low light/number of AF points) are also much
    smaller. That's probably why a D700 weighs more than a Canon 5DII, and
    why in comparison, the 5DII AF performance is lousy.
    Sure - they could probably make a "digital FM" (or IMO, a "digital FA"
    would be better with PASM metering modes). Some people have been
    whining about this for years, and so far none of the makers have come up
    with one.
     
    Me, Feb 4, 2011
    #35
  16. Wally

    Savageduck Guest

    Whoooosh!
     
    Savageduck, Feb 4, 2011
    #36
  17. Wally

    Paul Furman Guest

    Thanks for the better explanation. AF sensor (and AF motor). Where does
    the metering system go?

    The thing is; if you eliminated all that automation, it would be a
    pro-only camera, and many 'pro's' want high performance AF and other
    features for sports and wildlife so it really would only be useful for
    street shooting and certain kinds of photojournalism - a rather narrow
    market. Pro's who do the slow measured tripod type shooting would mostly
    not benefit from compactness, except backpackers and photo enthusiast
    tourists I guess. For the relevant segment, the new Leica is probably
    about right. If it were small and inexpensive with only manual
    functions, it would be great for students and enthusiasts with modest
    means but there's no money in that market. The closest match for that
    market is probably Russian medum format film cameras but no such thing
    for digital exists. If the world economy collapses for decades and
    everyone is poor with more time to learn how to shoot manual, we might
    see such a camera emerge. If you don't need super image quality or
    dynamic range, smaller formats are fine.
     
    Paul Furman, Feb 5, 2011
    #37
  18. Wally

    Guest Guest

    try comparing a nikon d40x with an fm2 - 522g versus 540g.

    don't forget the space needed for all of the film. a bunch of flash
    cards for the d40x will fit in a pocket and can hold thousands of
    photos and does not need any type of cooling for warmer days like film
    would. even a few rolls of film will take up quite a bit of space,
    nevermind enough for thousands of photos.

    and to be a fair comparison, you should also add a winder to the fm2
    since the d40x can shoot 3 fps until it runs out of space on the card
    (in jpeg mode).
     
    Guest, Feb 5, 2011
    #38
  19. Wally

    Ray Fischer Guest

    So what?
    I am never impressed by ignorant fools who think that even though they
    have no experience or training, they still believe themselves to be
    smarter than engineers with gradaute degrees and decades of experience
    designing cameras.

    Know anybody like that?
     
    Ray Fischer, Feb 5, 2011
    #39
  20. Wally

    Me Guest

    I don't know. Nikon introduced matrix metering with the FA model -
    before AF, even the F3AF. I think (but don't know) that metering must
    be with photosensors in the prism assembly, small enough and out of the
    focal plane enough so they can't be seen though the VF, and there's
    enough of them so that each focus point can be user selected as metering
    point for centre-weighted or spot, and approx spot diameter can be user
    selected on many models. That's 51 AF points /and/ 51 CW centre or spot
    points on D3/700/300 models. I've never seen documentation or stripped
    down a camera enough to see what really goes on. If someone knows, it
    would be interesting to see how it really works. But it works well, I
    had an FA, and the earliest matrix metering system worked really well
    most of the time. That also had spot and CW, but limited to the centre
    point.
    Yes - the Leica is in the boutique market. Breaking in to that market
    without a "name" and heritage isn't likely to happen. The major SLR
    makers could do it. It's a marketing issue - not a technical issue.
     
    Me, Feb 5, 2011
    #40
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.