Why are DSLR bodies bigger than film era SLR?

Started Jan 7, 2012 | Discussions thread
marcio_napoli
Contributing MemberPosts: 782
Like?
Re: Why can't they be even bigger than they are?
In reply to stuntmonkey, Jan 7, 2012

Hi Stuntmonkey,

As a second thought, what I actually meant was that despite the weight, a professional camera needs to be big and heavy.

It really does, after all.

It must weight more than 1 kg, to balance well with heavy lenses, and to ensure a steadier grip when you are holding heavy zooms, in order to prevent camera shake.

But at a more subject aprouch, pro cameras need to be big to impress!

It's a marketing gimmick that every single pro on this planet will agree, but very few will actually talk about that in public.

No matter how good your portfolio is, if you can manage to display a bit more of that pro level wow-factor, you will want it.

It's just silly marketing gimmick, but you know... that's how the World goes.

To your client, a big camera means serious business.

A good photographer can show up at an assignment with a D3100 and kit lens, but he/she will need to work harder to overcome that underwhelming first impression.

But hey! Isn't the talent and portfolio that matters? Yeah, but every little extra help helps.

So, pro cameras have a pro look, simple as that.

And at the end of the day, the weight of any camera is quite meaningless compared to a 2.8 zoom.

Attach a 28-70 to a D4 or to a D5100, and it matters very little since the lens is the heavy thing on the equation.

Cheers!

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow