Since when did "Pro" become synonymous with Big?

Started 1 week ago | Discussions thread
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Flat view
tjuster1 Senior Member • Posts: 1,955
Since when did "Pro" become synonymous with Big?
6

Serious question.

I see lots of justifications for the size of the  G9 and now EMX based on the notion that these are "pro" cameras (putting aside for now the reality that the vast majority of owners are certainly not actual pros). But why?

I'm not a pro, but I like to think I take the same kinds of pictures as pros: action (sometimes), landscape (sometimes), street, creative, etc. And for much of the photography I do, a big camera is a hindrance, not an asset. I don't want to carry it all day, not do I want to carry a big heavy bag around my shoulder packed with heavy "pro" lenses.

Now I acknowledge that there are probably some types of photography for which a larger camera wouldn't matter,or even help--very long telephoto shots, for example, where the camera is attached to a lens that is so big that the attached camera size/weight doesn't really matter.

But there are certainly many other types of photography, enjoyed by both pros and amateurs, that don't require a large camera and for which a smaller camera is a decided advantage. IMO it's a shame that neither Olympus nor Panasonic seems interested in producing "pro" cameras for this purpose.

 tjuster1's gear list:tjuster1's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Olympus OM-D E-M10 II Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +5 more
Panasonic Lumix DC-G9
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Flat view
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow