DPReview.com is closing April 10th - Find out more

100D/SL1 is not that small

Started Mar 21, 2013 | Discussions thread
brightcolours Forum Pro • Posts: 15,885
"Only a few mm" ¬_¬

tkbslc wrote:

RedFox88 wrote:

tkbslc wrote:

I am not saying you should buy a 1000D/XS. It is definitely limited for a 2013 camera because it was released in 2008.

I said 1000D series. The T3/1000D was launched 2 years ago in 2011 so we're not talking about a 2008 camera. But the T3 was still limited.

Again, not saying this is a bad camera or that you shouldn't buy it. It's just really the 1200D and 3rd in a line of smaller/less featured rebels.

Giving it a new name, starting a new model line always gets more attention. Plus it's the smallest and lightest dSLR ever. That is news.

It's the smallest ever by a few mm which only makes a difference in marketing and paper spec wars. That's the point of the thread.

Of course it is "only a few mm" when the camera size is only a few cm itself. However, it is really quite a lot smaller than the XS/1000D.

The camera has shrunk 10% in height compared to the XS, that is a big deal. The camera shrunk 11% in width too, that is a big deal too.

It simply is smaller by quite a margin.

In comparison: the 60D is 6% bigger in height than a T4i/650D. And 8% in width.

Or another example to show it really is a big deal: the 6D is 5% smaller in height than the 5D mkIII, and 5% in width.

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