Is there a scientic reason for must have a metal body

[Trevor Carpenter]

I would have thought that modern plastics were probably stronger than most metals. They tend to be more resistant to dents and scuffs and probably bounce better. Surely this should be one case where there is a right answer of which is better.

 

[Asla]

Hi!

Interersting, I have not thought about that. Not that I were scientific photographer anyways. I so have no evidence based answer for this question.

I however think that they have both their pros and cons, metal construction and plastic. I guess I have both plastic and metal camerad, but that does not necessarely affect to my photography, what they are made of.

A s l a

 

[Adrian Harris]

I would imagine plastic is more temperature stable and thus good for accuracy, but metal is a good heat conductor.

So the right materials in the right place is best - until it comes to marketing, then all logic fails.

 

[TomFid]

Not really, but if you don't engineer your plastic properly, you get this:

Loading…

www.dpreview.com

 

[aayjay]

Especially with newer cameras capable of high data rates for video...YES! Metal acts as a heat sink to help cool the electronics of the camera.

 

[Asla]

Not really, but if you don't engineer your plastic properly, you get this:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/63532318

Or of course like this:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/61481639

A s l a

 

[Wu Jiaqiu]

i think it depends on the kind of use and how long you're going to use it, never had a problem with "plastic" cameras i must admit despite some of them feeling pretty flimsy

 

[grsnovi]

It isn't just a question of material strength - it also involves the cost of manufacturing. When cameras were wooden boxes holding a glass lens in a brass cylinder, the notion of an entirely metal SLR body was far fetched. Once metal forming and manufacturing procedures matured, so did camera manufacture - following on the heels of improvements to the whole wet plates to films.

If the cost of a camera were no object and there was a reason to build a one-off you might find the material make-up of the camera to be much different from what is mass produced.

Just to muddy the waters, shouldn't the lens be glass rather than plastic? When you count the number of photos taken with cells phones...

 

[whumber]

Not really, but if you don't engineer your plastic properly, you get this:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/63532318

Sheesh, that doesn't even seem like so much of a problem with the plastics as much as just a really poorly designed tripod plate. Usually cameras will have a burly steel plate running almost the entire width of the camera base. This seems like Olympus designed the tripod plate for this body toward the primary goal of reducing camera weight. I wonder if the E-M1ii and/or E-M1X use a similar design.

5D4 tripod plate

 

[Henry Falkner]

Especially with newer cameras capable of high data rates for video...YES! Metal acts as a heat sink to help cool the electronics of the camera.

I have pocket zooms with plastic bodies. Although I have WiFi switched off (no cell phone), drone operators nearby were still affecting the operation of my camera.

Metal shields from other RF sources.

Not all plastics used in photo related gear maintain their consistency over years.

I had a tripod base plate shatter when I dropped the carbon fiber Cullman from a hight of 1 foot on the car floor.

Henry

 

[Bobby J]

Trevor, the only plastic camera I've ever owned was the E-30. I really liked the camera, it was light and made beautiful images. I used it a good bit. However it was not reliable. One day it simply quit working. I did all the things you'd do to get it started again to no avail. It was still under warranty so I sent it to Oly and in a week they had returned it and it worked just fine....until it went out of warranty and it did the same thing. That time Oly nailed me for 175.00 to repair it. Not long afterward I bought an EM1 and decided to switch to m4:3. I sold all my 4:3 equipment. After my experience with the E-30 I would NEVER buy another plastic camera. That's not scientific I realize, but it's my response to plastic cameras.

 

[ata3001]

My scientific reason is "because it feels better in my hands" than a piece of plastic. This even goes for my rarely used Sony RX100iii. In 35 years of photography, I've only ever had one fully plastic camera body, a Nikon D610. That's a scientific enough reason for me, lol....

 

[NCV]

Metal usually has a higher Youngs modulus and thus for the same thickness is much less flexible than most common plastic materials.

Metals usually have better resistenze to bending, compression and traction.

Most metals deform less with heat.

"Plastic" covers an infinity of materials each with its own characteristics.

The tripod mount ripped out of the EM5ii in another thread shows the result of poor engineering and understanding of materials.

 

[C-L-P]

I would have thought that modern plastics were probably stronger than most metals. They tend to be more resistant to dents and scuffs and probably bounce better. Surely this should be one case where there is a right answer of which is better.

How much of F1 is built using composite materials? The issue isn't which is better it's a question of marketing. As mentioned previously the correct materials for the correct jobs are the way to go, but when marketing don't use the word "plastic", instead use "composite".

Plastic can be used to state a fact, "this is made of plastic", or in a negative way, "this feels so plastic".

 

[Lacko]

Not really, but if you don't engineer your plastic properly, you get this:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/63532318

And if you don't engineer metal (or anything else) properly, will it be OK? Improper engineering is not about material, it is about bad engineering.

 

[Asla]

My scientific reason is "because it feels better in my hands" than a piece of plastic. This even goes for my rarely used Sony RX100iii. In 35 years of photography, I've only ever had one fully plastic camera body, a Nikon D610. That's a scientific enough reason for me, lol....

Hi!

And boy, does that D610 feel good in hand!

A s l a

 

[Walt Palmer]

I am thankful that your question elicited a decent percentage of actual science-based responses. Perhaps there is hope for the world to pull out of this free fall with recoverable damage.

Bravo for members willing to actually respond to the OP's question rather than merely repeat their tired litany of stock phrases! Bravo and thank you!

 

[Tyrbiter]

Materials science is a complex field, the material you need to use depends a lot on the exact use and environment.

For a camera the body has a number of requirements, it must be light tight, as light as possible, have adequate strength to support in use loads such as lenses, be able to cope with impacts that do not pass damage from the outside to the inner components, withstand both heat and cold without appreciable changes in dimensions and no doubt others such as absorbing heat from internal electronics and radiating it into the surrounding air and having the appearance of adequate quality and feeling right to the user.

Everyone has a different opinion on what they like. Plastic is a great engineering material, but it doesn't have to be used on its own, it can have internal metal parts with plastic moulded around them.

One plastic that impressed me was developed by ICI to be used in intrinsically safe tools on oil rigs, these were made of a plastic called Verton that was phenomenally strong but could not strike sparks if dropped on, or slipped off, metal parts in an atmosphere with flammable gases around.

Ask an engineer, get an answer about engineering.

 

[TomFid]

Not really, but if you don't engineer your plastic properly, you get this:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/63532318

And if you don't engineer metal (or anything else) properly, will it be OK? Improper engineering is not about material, it is about bad engineering.

Totally agree, as I said in the other thread. If the exploded view on the Oly page is complete, it would appear that Oly screwed this up.

https://asia.olympus-imaging.com/product/dslr/em5mk3/index.html

 

[AllFlawed]

I would have thought that modern plastics were probably stronger than most metals. They tend to be more resistant to dents and scuffs and probably bounce better. Surely this should be one case where there is a right answer of which is better.

Probably not as if people were not told it was plastic how many would even notice.

People imagine the crystalline fatigue prone metals are the strongest things on earth.