A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

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.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital SLR Cameras
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Why don't crop sensor cameras have crop weight bodies?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 1st 11, 08:06 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Wally
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 231
Default Why don't crop sensor cameras have crop weight bodies?

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?

Why aren't the smaller-frame bodies significantly smaller than the
bigger frame models, as used to be the case between 35mm film cameras
and the medium format models like the RZ and the Hasselblad?

The small frame normal zoom for the 7D is the 17-55mm lens, and it
weighs 645 g. The corresponding model for the 5D2 is the 24-105mm, at
670 g -- only 25g heavier.

Put body and lens together and the bigger format weighs only 2% more.
The difference in price is around $1000. But for that extra cash, I'm
getting so much more camera.

The 24-105 lens has a smaller aperture, but considering the size of
the sensor, gives about the same DOF as the 17-55mm lens for the same
composition with both lenses wide open. I can compensate for the
slower speed of the 24-105 lens by dialling in one stop more ISO. I
won't get more noise because the pixels are larger. So DOF and noise
are roughly equal, after making these adjustments.

But the bigger format gives me better resolution. The lens has a 4.4x
zoom, instead of only 3.2x for the smaller camera. The 5D2 is less
limited by diffraction. And all reports suggest the 5D2 produces much
better IQ than small frame models.

All this for a diff of a thousand bucks.

What am I missing here?

Wally
  #2  
Old February 1st 11, 09:25 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Mike[_23_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 44
Default Why don't crop sensor cameras have crop weight bodies?

On 01/02/2011 07:06, 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?

Why aren't the smaller-frame bodies significantly smaller than the
bigger frame models, as used to be the case between 35mm film cameras
and the medium format models like the RZ and the Hasselblad?

The small frame normal zoom for the 7D is the 17-55mm lens, and it
weighs 645 g. The corresponding model for the 5D2 is the 24-105mm, at
670 g -- only 25g heavier.

Put body and lens together and the bigger format weighs only 2% more.
The difference in price is around $1000. But for that extra cash, I'm
getting so much more camera.

The 24-105 lens has a smaller aperture, but considering the size of
the sensor, gives about the same DOF as the 17-55mm lens for the same
composition with both lenses wide open. I can compensate for the
slower speed of the 24-105 lens by dialling in one stop more ISO. I
won't get more noise because the pixels are larger. So DOF and noise
are roughly equal, after making these adjustments.

But the bigger format gives me better resolution. The lens has a 4.4x
zoom, instead of only 3.2x for the smaller camera. The 5D2 is less
limited by diffraction. And all reports suggest the 5D2 produces much
better IQ than small frame models.

All this for a diff of a thousand bucks.

What am I missing here?

Wally


They have the same size lens mount is the most obvious answer and the
sensor it a tiny fraction of the overall weight and size. I dare say it
has many similar components as well.

If the weight is so important attach a couple of 100g weights via the
tripod socket.

Mike
  #3  
Old February 1st 11, 11:37 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Me
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 796
Default Why don't crop sensor cameras have crop weight bodies?

On 1/02/2011 8:06 p.m., 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 am I missing here?

You're comparing about the lowest spec 35mm format dslr camera on the
market with one of the highest spec crop sensor dslrs.
  #4  
Old February 1st 11, 02:45 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Ron
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 29
Default Why don't crop sensor cameras have crop weight bodies?


"Wally" wrote in message
...
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?

Why aren't the smaller-frame bodies significantly smaller than the
bigger frame models, as used to be the case between 35mm film cameras
and the medium format models like the RZ and the Hasselblad?

The small frame normal zoom for the 7D is the 17-55mm lens, and it
weighs 645 g. The corresponding model for the 5D2 is the 24-105mm, at
670 g -- only 25g heavier.

Put body and lens together and the bigger format weighs only 2% more.
The difference in price is around $1000. But for that extra cash, I'm
getting so much more camera.

The 24-105 lens has a smaller aperture, but considering the size of
the sensor, gives about the same DOF as the 17-55mm lens for the same
composition with both lenses wide open. I can compensate for the
slower speed of the 24-105 lens by dialling in one stop more ISO. I
won't get more noise because the pixels are larger. So DOF and noise
are roughly equal, after making these adjustments.

But the bigger format gives me better resolution. The lens has a 4.4x
zoom, instead of only 3.2x for the smaller camera. The 5D2 is less
limited by diffraction. And all reports suggest the 5D2 produces much
better IQ than small frame models.

All this for a diff of a thousand bucks.

What am I missing here?

Wally


As far as I am concerned if I were to change from my 7D to 5D2 I would lose
140mm of zoom. That is, my 100-400mm zoom lens would show the same field of
view as it would on a 35mm camera. With the 1.6 crop factor on the 7D my
field of view is the same as a 160-640mm on a full frame sensor camera and I
can hand hold the 7D and lens when I shoot. Try hand holding the 5D2 with a
160-640mm zoom lens! I don't really care what the "normal" lens is or what
a wide angle lens is on the 7D as my 100-400mm lens is the only lens that I
have had on my 7D.

Ron

  #5  
Old February 1st 11, 04:23 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Why don't crop sensor cameras have crop weight bodies?

In article , 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?


now compare it with the canon 550d, which weighs 530g, just over half
the weight.

Why aren't the smaller-frame bodies significantly smaller than the
bigger frame models, as used to be the case between 35mm film cameras
and the medium format models like the RZ and the Hasselblad?


they *are* smaller & lighter, depending on which model.

The small frame normal zoom for the 7D is the 17-55mm lens, and it
weighs 645 g. The corresponding model for the 5D2 is the 24-105mm, at
670 g -- only 25g heavier.


now compare a 18-200mm crop lens versus canon's 28-300 full frame
version. one is a *lot* bigger, heavier and more expensive.
  #6  
Old February 1st 11, 08:41 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default Why don't crop sensor cameras have crop weight bodies?

On 2011-02-01 10:53:03 -0800, Peter said:

Are you now or have you ever been a sock
puppet for one purporting to be Rich who appears
to have an interest in some things plastic?

Pete


Have you always been an ass?

From: Peter
Newsgroups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Subject: Why don't crop sensor cameras have crop weight bodies?
Followup-To: uk.rec.ufo


--
Regards,

Savageduck

  #7  
Old February 1st 11, 09:28 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Me
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 796
Default Why don't crop sensor cameras have crop weight bodies?

On 2/02/2011 7:17 a.m., Alfred Molon wrote:
In , Me says...
On 1/02/2011 8:06 p.m., 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 am I missing here?

You're comparing about the lowest spec 35mm format dslr camera on the
market with one of the highest spec crop sensor dslrs.


Since when is the 5D2 the lowest spec full frame DSLR?

Since the D3/D700/D3s/D3x, 1dsIII, - perhaps also the A900.
It has a slow frame rates (and faster frame rates with short blackout
time need a faster / stronger mirror assembly), and an old and fairly
limited AF system, it also doesn't have a popup flash with wireless, nor
a fully weatherproofed body design. The D700 weighs about 200g more
than the 5dII.
  #8  
Old February 1st 11, 11:30 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Charles[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 695
Default Why don't crop sensor cameras have crop weight bodies?

Not much difference in the actual size and weight of the silicon sensors.
Not a good idea to try to remap old film facts, in this case. Analogies
tend to fail miserably in high-tech replacements.

Those little Si sensors are a marvel of modern technology and tend to be
near the cutting edge (when first released). With the rapid change we now
enjoy(?), they tend to be boring after just a few years.

  #9  
Old February 2nd 11, 02:41 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Wally
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 231
Default Why don't crop sensor cameras have crop weight bodies?

On Tue, 1 Feb 2011 07:45:16 -0600, "Ron" wrote:


"Wally" wrote in message
.. .
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?

Why aren't the smaller-frame bodies significantly smaller than the
bigger frame models, as used to be the case between 35mm film cameras
and the medium format models like the RZ and the Hasselblad?

The small frame normal zoom for the 7D is the 17-55mm lens, and it
weighs 645 g. The corresponding model for the 5D2 is the 24-105mm, at
670 g -- only 25g heavier.

Put body and lens together and the bigger format weighs only 2% more.
The difference in price is around $1000. But for that extra cash, I'm
getting so much more camera.

The 24-105 lens has a smaller aperture, but considering the size of
the sensor, gives about the same DOF as the 17-55mm lens for the same
composition with both lenses wide open. I can compensate for the
slower speed of the 24-105 lens by dialling in one stop more ISO. I
won't get more noise because the pixels are larger. So DOF and noise
are roughly equal, after making these adjustments.

But the bigger format gives me better resolution. The lens has a 4.4x
zoom, instead of only 3.2x for the smaller camera. The 5D2 is less
limited by diffraction. And all reports suggest the 5D2 produces much
better IQ than small frame models.

All this for a diff of a thousand bucks.

What am I missing here?

Wally


As far as I am concerned if I were to change from my 7D to 5D2 I would lose
140mm of zoom. That is, my 100-400mm zoom lens would show the same field of
view as it would on a 35mm camera. With the 1.6 crop factor on the 7D my
field of view is the same as a 160-640mm on a full frame sensor camera and I
can hand hold the 7D and lens when I shoot. Try hand holding the 5D2 with a
160-640mm zoom lens! I don't really care what the "normal" lens is or what
a wide angle lens is on the 7D as my 100-400mm lens is the only lens that I
have had on my 7D.


Right -- for long lenses, the 7D would be much better, because the 7D
has much higher pixel density.

Wally
  #10  
Old February 2nd 11, 02:53 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Alan Browne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,640
Default Why don't crop sensor cameras have crop weight bodies?

On 2011.02.01 2:06 , 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?

Why aren't the smaller-frame bodies significantly smaller than the
bigger frame models, as used to be the case between 35mm film cameras
and the medium format models like the RZ and the Hasselblad?



1. Many are smaller/lighter than the 7D/5D2.
2. The lens mount is a size constraint.
3. Some people have big hands in any case.
4. Hasselblad? It's not that big at all compared to full feature
SLR/DSLR's
http://gallery.photo.net/photo/9471512-lg.jpg

The RZ is a bit beefier - really a studio camera.

--
gmail originated posts filtered due to spam.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
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 SLR Cameras 1 March 2nd 10 10:35 PM
Canon 40D... on a 1.3x crop sensor? [email protected] Digital SLR Cameras 4 September 9th 06 11:33 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.