When did big become bad?

  • Thread starter Thread starter illy
  • Start date Start date
This is something Canon needs to realize. I'm 6'1 and have large hands; the ergonomics on the E-520 are fantastic, e-420 and e-620 are a bit compromised in this regard and handle more like a vintage SLR. Nikon seems to be similarly doing ok, the ergonomics on the Canon XTi are rotten and seem designed for people with not only large palms, but short, stubby fingers.
--
http://www.photoklarno.com
 
is Brett Weston's "anything more than 500 meters from the car is just not photogenic" (or words to that effect). Big is bad when you don't feel like humping the gear far enough for a great photograph.

--
'And only the stump, or fishy part of him remained'

http://www2.gol.com/users/nhavens
A Contemplative Companion to Fujino Township
 
That speaks good of the A-380...

I am 5'8" and am pretty much in the same position on a transatlantic 747...
All depends on the airline configuration. There is a lot of space, but if the seating’s are optimized for the number of passengers there is no other way than squeezing the seats tight in economy class. Each company can configure them differently.
 
I really didn't think it was that big at ttime time , the winder was no bigger than a battery grip for Canon or Nikon.

http://www.whitemetal.com/olympus/om_md/index.htm

Body Only - 136mm x 83mm x 50mm (5 3/8" x 3 1/4" x 2"): 490 gr. (17.3 oz)

Winder - 1350 x 64 x 98mm (5" x 2.5" x 3.9") 290g (10.2 oz.) Excluding batteries
  • body 490g (OM2n is 520g actually)
  • winder 290g
  • 4 batteries 122g
  • film 33g (Kodak Gold 200 in box)
That's about 930g and no AF and only 2.5fps. My D300s weights 960g with battery and 2 memory cards, each capable of storing about 300 high resolution still images at a frame rate of 7fps. The total number of images I can take with one fully charged battery is about 500. With the OM you'd need at least an extra set of batteries to be able to drive the motor to get to about the same number of frames, which would be another 122g in your pocket. Add a 250 frame film holder and a data back to the OM body and you passed the weight of the D300s with a large margin, but even without that you are heavier...

Take any Oly DSLR (or almost any other cropped entry level body), except maybe the E-3 and a few others, like the 7D, and all of them would be considerably lighter than the OM, yet managing more fps and higher number of images. The E-3 and the 7D would probably end up in the same weight class of the D300s, which is still lighter than the OM system.

So, who says DSLRs are heavy? ;)

Then again, if you don’t need the fps and the 250 frame back you are of course lighter, but that’s really apples and oranges.
 
Hi,
i see lots of negativity towards the size of larger gear, but who decided 'big is bad' ?
I found another answer. If you can do exactly the same thing or more, with a user interface exactly the same or better, but the package is a lot smaller and lighter, then why bother lugging around more weight ?

The Olympus OM series was brilliant in that respect: it did everything most common cameras did back then, but it was much smaller and the later bodies offered an unequalled light metering system. The lenses were much smaller and at least the equivalent of the competition, too. There you go: all advantages, no disadvantages.

Peter.

--
gallery at http://picasaweb.google.com/peterleyssens
 
"Big" became "Bad" the day that women persuaded their husbands to pay for automatic washers, replacing hard labor on the washboard.

Luddites notwithstanding.
 
50D and 5D fit perfectly. As do the D70/D80/D90 Nikons.

While the E-520 is small, it doesn't seem to FEEL as small as the Digital Rebels.

I'm looking for a m4/3 as my next camera, but maybe the NEX might fit the bill.\

--
Al Patterson
 
I'm quite strong too.

But not so large or strong that I find carrying a huge, heavy bag around comfortable or convenient.

Small (and light) is good.

Nobody has yet made an SLR so small that I have any trouble whatever operating it.
The thing is that D3 (and the likes) is not a carry around camera. It is a specialized camera, that is used for specialized type of photography, like fast, with loads of dr, etc., etc ... The D300, as an example, is somewhere on the border between specialized and carry around camera, although in my book is is not a carry around setup either. More like get to the spot, do your shoot, and go home. The E-xxx, panasonics, lumixes, etc., on the other hand, are not specialized for any particular type of photography cameras (as the same images can be taken with anything larger and with ease), but either can be taken along to anywhere you go, and therefore be around when you think you need it. Personally, I always prefer fewer but better captured frames to loads of snaps that are forgotten as soon as they are copied, but tastes differ, and so the smaller and lighter cameras exist. What you do is comparing bus to a small car, and with regrets that one can not be what the other is. Well, it does not have to, and that is why we have each. ;)

You are a brave man if you carry you gear on the motorcycle. I do not put my lenses even into the trunk of the car.

--
- sergey
 
i figure this came about when some of your pals began to hit on some of the SHG glass about its size and weight....
no matter how good it was, the argument said it weighed 'too much'

then it became the distortions of the equivalence debate from both sides that made weight an enemy

ironic in a way huh, but of course you'd forgotten that or would like too

--
Riley

any similarity to persons living or dead is coincidental and unintended
 
I'm quite strong too.

But not so large or strong that I find carrying a huge, heavy bag around comfortable or convenient.

Small (and light) is good.

Nobody has yet made an SLR so small that I have any trouble whatever operating it.
The thing is that D3 (and the likes) is not a carry around camera. It is a specialized camera, that is used for specialized type of photography, like fast, with loads of dr, etc., etc ... The D300, as an example, is somewhere on the border between specialized and carry around camera, although in my book is is not a carry around setup either.
and the D300 weighs more than 5D and is within mm's of the same size. Yet it has the same Mp and cannot manage the same DoF control
More like get to the spot, do your shoot, and go home. The E-xxx, panasonics, lumixes, etc., on the other hand, are not specialized for any particular type of photography cameras (as the same images can be taken with anything larger and with ease), but either can be taken along to anywhere you go, and therefore be around when you think you need it. Personally, I always prefer fewer but better captured frames to loads of snaps that are forgotten as soon as they are copied, but tastes differ, and so the smaller and lighter cameras exist. What you do is comparing bus to a small car, and with regrets that one can not be what the other is. Well, it does not have to, and that is why we have each. ;)

You are a brave man if you carry you gear on the motorcycle. I do not put my lenses even into the trunk of the car.

--
- sergey
--
Riley

any similarity to persons living or dead is coincidental and unintended
 
You are a brave man if you carry you gear on the motorcycle. I do not put my lenses even into the trunk of the car.
Why not? If they are not visible no one knows what's in the trunk. I do it all the time all over, have also done it in Austria.

The only time someone broke into my car was once when I left my laptop in it's bag on the back seat while I run into a shop across the street to pick up a DVD I wanted to buy. It took me five minutes or less, but when I came back the computer was gone and the right rear door glass was in millions of pieces all over the back seat.
 
For me i need a reliable (weather/dustproof) slr which works under shitty conditions. it was my main reason to get the E3.

Would have loved a bit smaller/lighter format though less to haul around and less problems with my wrists on a long shooting day.

But as mentioned before too small is possible too, i've used a long tele with a canon IX APS SLR body approximately the size and model of a oly m43 with a lens the size of the 50-200swd and it realy gave me cramp in my fingers.

--
Olympus: E-3, 12-60SWD, EX25,EC20, FL50R, 50-200SWD
http://www.flickr.com/photos/iverhaar
 
and the D300 weighs more than 5D and is within mm's of the same size. Yet it has the same Mp and cannot manage the same DoF control
I was using D300 as the borderline weight reference (since it has been so much talked about). Same goes for 5D (and its younger brother II). It is not the camera than most people need, least to say haul around everywhere. Although it is an outstanding machine once mastered.

--
- sergey
 
You are a brave man if you carry you gear on the motorcycle. I do not put my lenses even into the trunk of the car.
Why not? If they are not visible no one knows what's in the trunk. I do it all the time all over, have also done it in Austria.
Where I live I leave my car windows open overnight, it is not a problem. What I meant was that there seem to be too much vibration in the trunk of the car when driving. I put my gear either on the back or the front seat only, and only when well packed (in a bag). I heard somewhere that precision optics do get out of calibration of continuously shaken, and so (right or wrong) I do not take chances. Attaching the bag to the motorcycle would be the last thing I'd ever do.

--
- sergey
 
You are a brave man if you carry you gear on the motorcycle. I do not put my lenses even into the trunk of the car.
Why not? If they are not visible no one knows what's in the trunk. I do it all the time all over, have also done it in Austria.
Where I live I leave my car windows open overnight, it is not a problem.
Where I live I can normally do that as well, but the laptop story happened in a shopping area, not on my drive way.
What I meant was that there seem to be too much vibration in the trunk of the car when driving. I put my gear either on the back or the front seat only, and only when well packed (in a bag). I heard somewhere that precision optics do get out of calibration of continuously shaken, and so (right or wrong) I do not take chances. Attaching the bag to the motorcycle would be the last thing I'd ever do.
I see. Well, some times there are no other options than the trunk but generally I keep my camera on one of the seats and all the lenses in the bag as well. The camera with one lens is some times beside me but if I am driving with the family on a family vacation there are no other options than the trunk. I do however understand the vibration issue, but that's different in different cars as well and it also depends on the road and the driving style. However, I never leave my lenses on their own in the trunk to roll around freely; they are always in the bag. With a motor bike it is different. I believe vibrations are stronger, but even there much of that depends on you and the bike model. In any case, if you are using a bike there are no other options, there is no back seat which can be used.

Regardless of which, I understand your point and I agree, but what can we do? However, generally I think lenses and cameras are well enough built and unless they are bumped around freely or rolling all over the trunk and are exposed to extreme situations like a Paris - Dakar race, I don't think they get hurt.
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top