I almost just brought a DSLR but !

Entry levels are exactly that - entry level - made a price point (and therefore build and feature wise) to attract entry level buyers. I started with a Canon 350d which by comparison to the 5dii i use now, prob does feel a bit like a toy - but flimsy and vulnerable? No i do no believe so - I used it for a part time job where it was put thru it's pace constantly for 2 days straight and it coped very well. I've not used it lately but i don't consider it past it's sell by date & it was 2nd hand in 2006.
 
Ed Sutton said:
It's strange how making things smaller and lighter is seen as progress in many areas of product design and manufacture, but photography gear nerds see it as a bad thing.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily, I imagine most of us who started in the film era didn't exactly dream of owning a Zenit or a FED, and they were like a brick outhouse! :whistle:
 
Mr Badger said:
Not necessarily, I imagine most of us who started in the film era didn't exactly dream of owning a Zenit or a FED, and they were like a brick outhouse! :whistle:
Click to expand...
Mind you: the Kievs were pretty good, at least until they started adding plastic knobs. :thinking:
 
Ed Sutton said:
It's strange how making things smaller and lighter is seen as progress in many areas of product design and manufacture, but photography gear nerds see it as a bad thing.
Click to expand...

There's an optimal size for everything. Some cope well with a small camera densely covered in buttons and wheels, but many don't. Likewise many struggle with the weight of some 'pro' cameras and prefer a smaller, lighter alternative.

Thing is, in the days of film the number of possible controls on a camera body were very limited, so it was fine to have tiny instruments like the OM1 etc. Now our cameras are computers with a sensor and lens attached, and we almost need a keyboard & mouse.
 
ancient_mariner said:
Thing is, in the days of film the number of possible controls on a camera body were very limited, so it was fine to have tiny instruments like the OM1 etc. Now our cameras are computers with a sensor and lens attached, and we almost need a keyboard & mouse.
Click to expand...
It depended on the camera, something like the Nikon F2AS had so many knobs and dials they were stacked up on top of the deck to the extent the camera looked like a first world war battleship! The last of the 35mm film cameras (such as the Canon EOS 30v) look very similar to today's DLSRs, with a similar array of buttons and switches, complete with a rotating dial switch on the camera (data)back. It's only the lack of a large LED screen on the back that gives away its identity as a film camera.

I'm with you on size though, I think a camera can be too small and compact to be comfortable. With hands the size of mine I wouldn't want to go any smaller than something like a Canon 6D or EOS 30. I think weight tends to become more important as people get older, when you're young you don't tend to notice it as much.
 
Last edited:
Ed Sutton said:
It's strange how making things smaller and lighter is seen as progress in many areas of product design and manufacture, but photography gear nerds see it as a bad thing.
Click to expand...

Smaller/lighter is not always better or a design goal. Someone might be able to design a car that would fit inside a 3' cube box. But, try using it to get around town :-) Sometimes weight is needed to add stability to items (e.g. tripods). On the other hand, I'm sure glad my computer is smaller than the 1960 versions :-) And isn't it interesting that mobile phones have actually been getting bigger over the past 2-3 years?

Part of good design is figuring out the use of the product and determining the optimal size, weight, control placement, etc. I opted for Nikon when I bought my first DSLR because the body was bigger than Canon and was easier to hold given that I have large hands.
 
ruckers said:
Smaller/lighter is not always better or a design goal. Someone might be able to design a car that would fit inside a 3' cube box. But, try using it to get around town :) Sometimes weight is needed to add stability to items (e.g. tripods). On the other hand, I'm sure glad my computer is smaller than the 1960 versions :) And isn't it interesting that mobile phones have actually been getting bigger over the past 2-3 years?

Part of good design is figuring out the use of the product and determining the optimal size, weight, control placement, etc. I opted for Nikon when I bought my first DSLR because the body was bigger than Canon and was easier to hold given that I have large hands.
Click to expand...
I didn't say it's always a design goal. :rolleyes:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5HhwecdCQw
 
Ed Sutton said:
I didn't say it's always a design goal. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I know :-). That wasn't directly linked to your comments, I just used the quote as a starting point. I was directing my thoughts more to what seems to be a fairly persausive view in photography to smaller/lighter is better, as shown by the regular comments about mirrorless being better because it is lighter and smaller than DSLR.
 
BADGER.BRAD said:
I don't doubt for a second that these cameras take great photos in the right hands in fact I've seen the results. Maybe the demo models are extra battered but I would have expected better quality even at the entry level end of the spectrum. Even the cheap end of the Mirrorless cameras seem much more more robust. But everyone so far has missed the original question is there a big difference from the cheap end to the higher range cameras ? are they all plastic and is the quality of the lenses more up to build quality of the old SLR gear ? I don't think quality has anything to do with weight or size for that matter !

"No photographer is as good as the simplest camera"
Edward Steichen

I guess we have all been fooled !
Click to expand...

All cameras were simple when Steichen wrote that.

During his working life, Some were cardboard, some Bakelite, most were wooden. at the end of his life in the 70's most were metal and plastic.
 
Last edited:
ruckers said:
I know :). That wasn't directly linked to your comments, I just used the quote as a starting point. I was directing my thoughts more to what seems to be a fairly persausive view in photography to smaller/lighter is better, as shown by the regular comments about mirrorless being better because it is lighter and smaller than DSLR.
Click to expand...

(y)

As you said, there's a balance to be struck and one size doesn't fit all. :)
 
The Canon 4000D has a plastic lens mount and a stripped down hot shoe, which does not have a centre pin. Strobes can't be triggered and only Canon brand flahes will work, That's cost cutting gone a little too far and some new owners might just find out the hard way that a third party flash won't work at all. As a Canon shooter myself, the EOS xxxxD series would be firmly on my not recommended list if somebody twisted my arm to actually write one.
 
Last edited:
HarveyM said:
That's cost cutting gone a little too far.
Click to expand...
On the other hand it's possible that Canon have identified a market sector in which they can do well. In 2017 they were the top seller in both the compact camera sector (27.9%) and SLR sector (with a whopping 61.1%). They were beaten into second place in the mirrorless sector taking 21.3% against Olympus's 27.7%. These numbers are for the Japanese market so there may be variations elsewhere. (source: https://www.canonnews.com/japan-bcn...ll-in-there-at-2-for-mirrorless-over-who-sony)

These are the latest figures I've found so far but things may have changed in the last 18 months.
 
HarveyM said:
The Canon 4000D has a plastic lens mount and a stripped down hot shoe, which does not have a centre pin. Strobes can't be triggered and only Canon brand flahes will work, That's cost cutting gone a little too far and some new owners might just find out the hard way that a third party flash won't work at all. As a Canon shooter myself, the EOS xxxxD series would be firmly on my not recommended list if somebody twisted my arm to actually write one.
Click to expand...
Sounds like an opportunity for one of those enterprising companies in China to come up with an adapter/convertor that allows "normal" flashguns to be used with the new models. Probably available soon on eBay at a suitably modest price.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top