Bigger may be better, but it sure is heavy.

[Grandpa Ron]

First let me say I like a camera with a view finder. My phone and Kindle take fine picture but I just do not like looking at a camera screen, especially in bright light.

For decade I used an Olympus C-740 digital with video view finder. It had a 10x zoom, a 6.3 - 63 mm , 2.8 - 3.7 lens. At the time the 3.2 Megapixel as state of the art. It measures 4" x 2 1/2" x 3" (camera back to the 35 mm lens front. It weighs 12 oz. Beside the 3.2 megapixels, it was limited by the lack of interchangeable lenses and the 1"x 1 1/4" view screen.

I recently purchased a Canon T6 Rebel. With its 18 -55 mm zoom, 3.5 -5.6 lens, and 14 or so megapixels and a host of other bells and whistles. It is a fun camera to experiment with. However, it measures 5" x 4" x 6" back to front of the 58 mm diameter lens, it has a 2" x 2 1/4" view screen and weighs in at 1 lb, 10 oz. This is almost a pound more than the Olympus.

Given the plastic "entry level " lens, the weight is mostly in the camera body 1 lb. 3 0z. Surely the larger view screen and electronic chip inside the plastic body cannot weight that much. So my question is, do the cameras really need to weigh that much, or is it a perception thing, where heavier must be better?

 

[Soocom1]

If your into engineering, yes bigger is better.
if your a fan of quickie trends and gadgetry, then the lighter stuff is in.

 

[tirediron]

Geeezzzzzzzzzz and your complaining????? My D850, grip, and 24-70 amount to a bit over 5 lbs; if I mount the 70-200, it's 6 1/2!

This is in fact quite light; it's much heavier than what you're used to, but it's not heavy in the DSLR world. Even the most entry-level DSLR body has quite a few moving parts and a fair amount of metal; the lens mount, shutter, etc. This all adds up, and it needs to be contained in a strong polycarbonate or magnesium chassis.

 

[dxqcanada]

hmm, in the better good old days ... the Canon F-1 with motor drive (3.5fps) weighed about 4 lbs ... that's without a lens.

 

[Derrel]

1 lb and 10 oz is quite light for a 35 mm Style digital single reflex and lens.... and a 19 Oz camera body is quite light. Look up some of the weight statistics For lenses like a 24-70mm f/2.8 zoom...

 

[pocketshaver]

simply cut weight where you can.

in the lens. modern lenses with all the motor drives and whatnot. weigh MORE then a lens from the old days. SO my old FD manually controlled lens weighs a lot less then your equivalent ... ie my 75-210 weighs FAR less then your equally sized lens.

 

[ac12]

First let me say I like a camera with a view finder. My phone and Kindle take fine picture but I just do not like looking at a camera screen, especially in bright light.

For decade I used an Olympus C-740 digital with video view finder. It had a 10x zoom, a 6.3 - 63 mm , 2.8 - 3.7 lens. At the time the 3.2 Megapixel as state of the art. It measures 4" x 2 1/2" x 3" (camera back to the 35 mm lens front. It weighs 12 oz. Beside the 3.2 megapixels, it was limited by the lack of interchangeable lenses and the 1"x 1 1/4" view screen.

I recently purchased a Canon T6 Rebel. With its 18 -55 mm zoom, 3.5 -5.6 lens, and 14 or so megapixels and a host of other bells and whistles. It is a fun camera to experiment with. However, it measures 5" x 4" x 6" back to front of the 58 mm diameter lens, it has a 2" x 2 1/4" view screen and weighs in at 1 lb, 10 oz. This is almost a pound more than the Olympus.

Given the plastic "entry level " lens, the weight is mostly in the camera body 1 lb. 3 0z. Surely the larger view screen and electronic chip inside the plastic body cannot weight that much. So my question is, do the cameras really need to weigh that much, or is it a perception thing, where heavier must be better?

Go Micro 4/3
Like with the Olympus EM10-mk3 (14.4 oz) + a light lens like the 14-42 (4 oz) = total 18.4 oz / 1 pound 2.4 oz

As I am getting older, the weight of my kit has become an issue.
I've basically switched from APS-C/DX to m4/3, to reduce the kit weight and bulk.
I switched from an APS-C/DX Nikon D7200 + 18-140 lens to a m4/3 Olympus EM1-mk1 + Panasonic 12-60.
Weight reduction was about 45%, and significant bulk reduction.

 

[zombiesniper]

Just wait until you hit your head and think you want to take wildlife photos.

 

[ronlane]

If weight is a big concern, then look at the new mirrorless cameras. They are considerably lighter weight but take amazing photographs. Just about all the major players in the dslr game are producing some good mirrorless bodies that have adapters for their current glass. (But the glass Canon is putting out of their R system is getting great reviews)

There are tons of people going this route and getting rid of the big dslr's. The main ones that aren't are the sports and wildlife photographers. But even at that with Canon and Nikon's development announcement of their new flagship models, they are going to be what some are calling a hybrid dslr/mirrorless camera.

 

[RVT1K]

Carry this for a while and everything else will seem light...

 

[Dao]

The weight of the camera body is not a big concern for me, the weight of the lens is. Especially good lens made for full frame. I just do not enjoy too much if I need to carry the heavy stuff in my bag let alone holding them in my hand for a long time. I can still do it, but I prefer a lighter system. Maybe at one point, I will just carry 4 primes. 24mm, 35mm, 85mm and 200mm ... or maybe skip the 200mm LOL

To be honest, sometimes I prefer just bring the Sony RX10 (1 inch sensor) camera instead. Tug that inside a small shoulder style camera bag and no more heavy stuff.

 

[jcdeboever]

If it has a mirror its gonna be bulkier.

 

[RVT1K]

If it has a mirror its gonna be bulkier.

Personally I like a bigger camera. If I were to design one just for my hands, it would be shaped a little differently and it would be quite chunky where I held on to it.

 

[Winona]

Having neck and back problems there are times I don’t bring my camera on hikes, etc. or talk my daughter into carrying it. The pros using mirrorless are producing some real nice photos. I’ll be looking at them someday. For traveling, family and landscapes.

 

[ac12]

Having neck and back problems there are times I don’t bring my camera on hikes, etc. or talk my daughter into carrying it. The pros using mirrorless are producing some real nice photos. I’ll be looking at them someday. For traveling, family and landscapes.

Go smaller and lighter.
I have basically switched from APS-C to micro 4/3 to reduce my kit weight and bulk.