If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Why don't crop sensor cameras have crop weight bodies?
Wally wrote:
The Canon 7D with its 1.6-factor sensor weighs 900 g with battery -- the Full Frame Canon 5D2 weighs 907 g. What the hell? "If a sensor weighs just three grams then why does the camera weigh 900 grams?" A sensor is not a camera. A camera is not a sensor. Get a clue. -- Ray Fischer | Mendacracy (n.) government by lying | The new GOP ideal |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Why don't crop sensor cameras have crop weight bodies?
On 2011-02-03 23:03:58 -0800, Alfred Molon said:
In article , Ray Fischer says... Wally wrote: The Canon 7D with its 1.6-factor sensor weighs 900 g with battery -- the Full Frame Canon 5D2 weighs 907 g. What the hell? "If a sensor weighs just three grams then why does the camera weigh 900 grams?" A sensor is not a camera. A camera is not a sensor. Get a clue. Still there are film cameras whose size is a fraction of the size of current full frame DSLRs. It should not be a problem to make very compact full frame DSLRs. The electronics can't take so much space, as the Sony NEX cameras demonstrate it. Alfred, are you and Rich cousins? -- Regards, Savageduck |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Why don't crop sensor cameras have crop weight bodies?
On 2/4/2011 1:42 AM, John A. wrote:
On 04 Feb 2011 06:30:20 GMT, (Ray Fischer) wrote: wrote: The Canon 7D with its 1.6-factor sensor weighs 900 g with battery -- the Full Frame Canon 5D2 weighs 907 g. What the hell? "If a sensor weighs just three grams then why does the camera weigh 900 grams?" A sensor is not a camera. A camera is not a sensor. Get a clue. Yup. Might as well ask why a film camera doesn't weigh much less when you load 12-exposure film instead of 24. Interesting theory. We have lossless compression. Do we now have weightless film? -- Peter |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Why don't crop sensor cameras have crop weight bodies?
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Why don't crop sensor cameras have crop weight bodies?
George Kerby wrote:
Alfred Molon wrote: Ray Fischersays... Wally wrote: The Canon 7D with its 1.6-factor sensor weighs 900 g with battery -- the Full Frame Canon 5D2 weighs 907 g. What the hell? "If a sensor weighs just three grams then why does the camera weigh 900 grams?" A sensor is not a camera. A camera is not a sensor. Get a clue. Still there are film cameras whose size is a fraction of the size of current full frame DSLRs. They still make film for the Minox? Nikon FE is an example of a small FX film camera, or Olympus (forget the model). For digital, I think the AF system requires quite a bit of space at the side(s?) of the mirror box, the rear LCD adds thickness on top of the sensor and even the sensor is thicker than film. The batteries are big and heavy, the flash is bulky... if you were willing to forego all that, it should be possible. Mirrorless APS is probably the closest thing today, or micro 4/3 if you don't need a real viewfinder or high ISO performance. The Hasselblad design could probably be adapted to 35mm but that would handle like a mini hand held slide viewer: a longish spice-box, maybe with a folding pop-up viewfinder so it's not top-viewing - hold it as if looking through a toilet paper tube. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Why don't crop sensor cameras have crop weight bodies?
Paul Furman wrote:
The Hasselblad design could probably be adapted to 35mm but that would handle like a mini hand held slide viewer: a longish spice-box, maybe with a folding pop-up viewfinder so it's not top-viewing - hold it as if looking through a toilet paper tube. I was mixed up about that; I was thinking of the old style which is already flip-up and top-viewing but a more complex system could relay it to the rear for normal viewing and end up kind of like the new digital models. I'm really not familiar & shoulda kept my trap shut but there is probably a way to devise a folding system which would result in a compact 2" cube sized body, probably an inch or more longer in the viewing axis to hold a battery and LCD screen. AF could be a problem. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Why don't crop sensor cameras have crop weight bodies?
On 2011-02-04 13:34:45 -0800, Alfred Molon said:
In article 2011020323161482327-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, Savageduck says... On 2011-02-03 23:03:58 -0800, Alfred Molon said: In article , Ray Fischer says... Wally wrote: The Canon 7D with its 1.6-factor sensor weighs 900 g with battery -- the Full Frame Canon 5D2 weighs 907 g. What the hell? "If a sensor weighs just three grams then why does the camera weigh 900 grams?" A sensor is not a camera. A camera is not a sensor. Get a clue. Still there are film cameras whose size is a fraction of the size of current full frame DSLRs. It should not be a problem to make very compact full frame DSLRs. The electronics can't take so much space, as the Sony NEX cameras demonstrate it. Alfred, are you and Rich cousins? Why? Whoooosh! -- Regards, Savageduck |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Why don't crop sensor cameras have crop weight bodies?
Alfred Molon wrote:
Ray Fischer Wally wrote: The Canon 7D with its 1.6-factor sensor weighs 900 g with battery -- the Full Frame Canon 5D2 weighs 907 g. What the hell? "If a sensor weighs just three grams then why does the camera weigh 900 grams?" A sensor is not a camera. A camera is not a sensor. Get a clue. Still there are film cameras whose size is a fraction of the size of current full frame DSLRs. So what? It should not be a problem to make very compact full frame DSLRs. I am never impressed by ignorant fools who think that even though they have no experience or training, they still believe themselves to be smarter than engineers with gradaute degrees and decades of experience designing cameras. Know anybody like that? -- Ray Fischer | Mendacracy (n.) government by lying | The new GOP ideal |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Why don't crop sensor cameras have crop weight bodies?
On 2/5/2011 1:18 AM, Ray Fischer wrote:
Alfred wrote: Ray Fischer wrote: The Canon 7D with its 1.6-factor sensor weighs 900 g with battery -- the Full Frame Canon 5D2 weighs 907 g. What the hell? "If a sensor weighs just three grams then why does the camera weigh 900 grams?" A sensor is not a camera. A camera is not a sensor. Get a clue. Still there are film cameras whose size is a fraction of the size of current full frame DSLRs. So what? It should not be a problem to make very compact full frame DSLRs. I am never impressed by ignorant fools who think that even though they have no experience or training, they still believe themselves to be smarter than engineers with gradaute degrees and decades of experience designing cameras. Know anybody like that? Perhaps the poster (Molon) has hands the size of those on a shrunken Barbie doll. Does he not understand that for most shots cameras are hand-held and the "shutter" release is pushed by a normal-size human finger. This sort of logic is one of many examples of why I see his posts only when quoted by others. Allen |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Why don't crop sensor cameras have crop weight bodies?
On 2011.02.05 14:37 , Alfred Molon wrote:
Go ahead and keep talking nonsense. The reality is that compact cameras dominate the market. Size matters. Markets have segments. -- gmail originated posts filtered due to spam. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Why don't crop sensor cameras have crop weight bodies? | Wally | Digital SLR Cameras | 59 | February 13th 11 12:52 AM |
Pentax K-X, best 1.5 crop sensor going? | Ray Fischer | Digital SLR Cameras | 8 | March 4th 10 04:33 PM |
Pentax K-X, best 1.5 crop sensor going? | SMS | Digital Photography | 1 | March 2nd 10 10:35 PM |
Pentax K-X, best 1.5 crop sensor going? | SMS | Digital SLR Cameras | 1 | March 2nd 10 10:35 PM |