Why are FF Mirrorless, bigger, heavier and cost more than DSLRs?

[astroNikon]

hahahaha .. right, yup.

I ran across this article which shows just that with FF cameras with a video !!
What is the most expensive full frame camera set? (Canon vs. Sony vs. Nikon vs. Pentax) | Nikon Rumors

from the above link:

• Pentax: $7,579
• Canon: $10,608
• Nikon: $10,631
• Sony A: $12,736
• Sony E: $13,240

• Sony A: 5064g
• Pentax: 5162g
• Nikon: 5196g
• Canon: 5215g
• Sony E: 5396g

so flame away !!

 

[Ysarex]

Try listing all the different manufacturers that make and sell the FF mirrorless cameras and see if you can get any insight from there.

Joe

 

[Gary A.]

Economy of Scale on the $.

 

[pendennis]

Not just the $, but the entire market. Mirrorless is very nearly boutique at this point. The manufacturers have to recapture R&D, manufacturing, marketing costs over a much smaller base. Same reason why the "Pro" line SLR's, Nikon D5, etc., cost more than the "prosumer" models.

 

[petrochemist]

I'm sure the actual figures will depend significantly on what options are used to build up the kit. the title doesn't exactly suggest the budget options where being considered!
Even sticking with the choices they've made Mirrorless (Sony A) comes out lightest.

 

[fmw]

Since "FF" is not necessary for great photography, it seems silly to put it in a big, heavy mirrorless. It defeats the advantages of mirrorless.

 

[jaomul]

Since "FF" is not necessary for great photography, it seems silly to put it in a big, heavy mirrorless. It defeats the advantages of mirrorless.

I agree that if size and weight saving is your thing, FF mirrorless is not really the best solution once you add in those lenses.

I'd consider mirrorless just a term, couldn't really care less how the cam works once it does the job, EVFs can be as good as OVF in some ways, I could live with either again once they are up to the job.

It makes sense to me though that if one doesn't want dslr size, going smaller on the sensor and the lenses is the way to go

 

[Peeb]

Since "FF" is not necessary for great photography, it seems silly to put it in a big, heavy mirrorless. It defeats the advantages of mirrorless.

Not sure if serious...

Not 'necessary' for WHO to have great photography shooting WHAT kind of photos WHERE and WHEN and WHY?

This seems to be quite a stretch even for the generalities-laden world of the interwebz. Why not just stick with a smartphone?

 

[Derrel]

The article omitted the Leica SL (Typ 601), which is a large mirrorless camera, with BIG and HEAVY lens options. It has a 24-MP CMOS sensor, shoots at up to 11 frames per second, ISO range from 50 to 50,000, dual SD card slots, and shoots 4K video. Leica SL Review
And, contrary to what beagle continually spews, the lenses for this thing are not smaller, and are not lighter, than comparable lenses made for d-slr cameras, but instead are positively huge lenses. And heavy too.

Oh, and since it's a mirrorless that uses an EVF, it has that pathetic battery life of 400 shots per battery...which is far better than the Sony competitor and its 200 shots-per charge "performance" (as listed above).

 

[fmw]

Since "FF" is not necessary for great photography, it seems silly to put it in a big, heavy mirrorless. It defeats the advantages of mirrorless.

Not sure if serious...

Not 'necessary' for WHO to have great photography shooting WHAT kind of photos WHERE and WHEN and WHY?

This seems to be quite a stretch even for the generalities-laden world of the interwebz. Why not just stick with a smartphone?

Quite serious. Full frame is simply not necessary for great photographs any more than medium format is. Click on this site. Every image was made with an APS-C sensor and mirrorless camera. Are the results not great photography?

 

[fmw]

Since "FF" is not necessary for great photography, it seems silly to put it in a big, heavy mirrorless. It defeats the advantages of mirrorless.

I agree that if size and weight saving is your thing, FF mirrorless is not really the best solution once you add in those lenses.

I'd consider mirrorless just a term, couldn't really care less how the cam works once it does the job, EVFs can be as good as OVF in some ways, I could live with either again once they are up to the job.

It makes sense to me though that if one doesn't want dslr size, going smaller on the sensor and the lenses is the way to go

It was certainly the way to go for me.

 

[astroNikon]

I'm sure the actual figures will depend significantly on what options are used to build up the kit. the title doesn't exactly suggest the budget options where being considered!
Even sticking with the choices they've made Mirrorless (Sony A) comes out lightest.

Actually, if you watched/listened to the video you would find out that they did use budget options.

 

[Peeb]

Since "FF" is not necessary for great photography, it seems silly to put it in a big, heavy mirrorless. It defeats the advantages of mirrorless.

Not sure if serious...

Not 'necessary' for WHO to have great photography shooting WHAT kind of photos WHERE and WHEN and WHY?

This seems to be quite a stretch even for the generalities-laden world of the interwebz. Why not just stick with a smartphone?

Quite serious. Full frame is simply not necessary for great photographs any more than medium format is. Click on this site. Every image was made with an APS-C sensor and mirrorless caImera. Are the results not great photography?

I'm not suggesting that FF is necessary for ALL great photography- I'm suggesting that dismissing FF as "NOT necessary" in every situation is overly inclusive. I can capture breath-taking images on my iPhone in certain situations and certain contexts for certain uses, but that doesn't render larger format sensors "not necessary" for other uses. Sensor formats are merely part of the toolbox that great photographers use. Automatically dismissing the larger formats (whether FF or medium format, or even crop sensors) is the only thing as see as "not necessary".

Perhaps the subject of a different thread?

 

[fmw]

Since "FF" is not necessary for great photography, it seems silly to put it in a big, heavy mirrorless. It defeats the advantages of mirrorless.

Not sure if serious...

Not 'necessary' for WHO to have great photography shooting WHAT kind of photos WHERE and WHEN and WHY?

This seems to be quite a stretch even for the generalities-laden world of the interwebz. Why not just stick with a smartphone?

Quite serious. Full frame is simply not necessary for great photographs any more than medium format is. Click on this site. Every image was made with an APS-C sensor and mirrorless caImera. Are the results not great photography?

I'm not suggesting that FF is necessary for ALL great photography- I'm suggesting that dismissing FF as "NOT necessary" in every situation is overly inclusive. I can capture breath-taking images on my iPhone in certain situations and certain contexts for certain uses, but that doesn't render larger format sensors "not necessary" for other uses. Sensor formats are merely part of the toolbox that great photographers use. Automatically dismissing the larger formats (whether FF or medium format, or even crop sensors) is the only thing as see as "not necessary".

Perhaps the subject of a different thread?

I haven't dismissed FF nor have I said it can't engage in great photography. I have just said that it is not necessary for great photography. I'm right about that. Sorry.

 

[Peeb]

Since "FF" is not necessary for great photography, it seems silly to put it in a big, heavy mirrorless. It defeats the advantages of mirrorless.

Not sure if serious...

Not 'necessary' for WHO to have great photography shooting WHAT kind of photos WHERE and WHEN and WHY?

This seems to be quite a stretch even for the generalities-laden world of the interwebz. Why not just stick with a smartphone?

Quite serious. Full frame is simply not necessary for great photographs any more than medium format is. Click on this site. Every image was made with an APS-C sensor and mirrorless caImera. Are the results not great photography?

I'm not suggesting that FF is necessary for ALL great photography- I'm suggesting that dismissing FF as "NOT necessary" in every situation is overly inclusive. I can capture breath-taking images on my iPhone in certain situations and certain contexts for certain uses, but that doesn't render larger format sensors "not necessary" for other uses. Sensor formats are merely part of the toolbox that great photographers use. Automatically dismissing the larger formats (whether FF or medium format, or even crop sensors) is the only thing as see as "not necessary".

Perhaps the subject of a different thread?

I haven't dismissed FF nor have I said it can't engage in great photography. I have just said that it is not necessary for great photography. I'm right about that. Sorry.

Ha ha. OK- I'm glad you feel that way. Be well.