Just a thought...

[StuartR]

...but probably not original.

I was thumbing through some old photography magazines the other day and I noticed how often the small size of the 350D was commented on negatively or appeared in the list of "cons". I think it was in every review (I buy a lot of magazines!).

Having recently handled a friend's Nikon D40x I thought it was about the same size but I don't recall seeing this point portrayed as a negative point in magazine reviews.

A while back I handle a Pentax *1st DL and an Olympus (not sure of the model) and they didn't seem that much different in size to my 350D.

So was the 350D the forerunner in a trend to smaller bodies or just unfairly singled out for criticism?

For my hands at least, the 350D is a bit small but fitting the battery grip sorted that.

[spl]

Re: Just a thought...

When I bought my ist DL2 I was told that it was a small light model for a dslr. But when I took it home to my parents place in Cape Town my Dad exclaimed how heavy it was compared to his Nikon (didn't notice what particular model he had). He let me hold his camera and it was quite a bit lighter - he put it down to the fact that the Pentax uses 4 AA batteries.

[Bearface]

Re: Just a thought...

Try a Canon 1D Mk2 with a 24-70 or a 70-200 lens fitted......you quickly develop superb muscle-tone in your camera arm

Seriously, I tried holding a Canon 350D last year and it was so tiny I was frightened of breaking something. If your Pentax is a similar size, I'd be wondering how DSLRs could get any smaller without becoming either too fragile or just too small to operate...

[Ian]

Re: Just a thought...

...but probably not original.

I was thumbing through some old photography magazines the other day and I noticed how often the small size of the 350D was commented on negatively or appeared in the list of "cons". I think it was in every review (I buy a lot of magazines!).

Having recently handled a friend's Nikon D40x I thought it was about the same size but I don't recall seeing this point portrayed as a negative point in magazine reviews.

A while back I handle a Pentax *1st DL and an Olympus (not sure of the model) and they didn't seem that much different in size to my 350D.

So was the 350D the forerunner in a trend to smaller bodies or just unfairly singled out for criticism?

For my hands at least, the 350D is a bit small but fitting the battery grip sorted that.

The problem I have with both the EOS-350 and 400 (Rebel XT and XTi) is that there is so little room between the grip and the lens. My fingers feel squashed in there as a result. The actual size of the camera isn't a problem for me - just that grip.

Ian

[spl]

Re: Just a thought...

Try a Canon 1D Mk2 with a 24-70 or a 70-200 lens fitted......you quickly develop superb muscle-tone in your camera arm

Seriously, I tried holding a Canon 350D last year and it was so tiny I was frightened of breaking something. If your Pentax is a similar size, I'd be wondering how DSLRs could get any smaller without becoming either too fragile or just too small to operate...

I am not actually complaining about it - its just an observation that size and weight don't always have a direct relationship when it comes to cameras. Anyhow its really the lenses which add the significant weight and I bought that camera precisely because I wanted to keep my old lenses. But I think the next thing I am going to get is a really good monopod.

When it comes to camera size its horses for courses really - I should imagine its well nigh impossible to do good candid shots with a big pro camera but then pro's don't really have to do that as people are only too willing to pose for them and they have the experience to put people at their ease etc. etc. For the like's of us amateurs that's not always the case

[Bearface]

Re: Just a thought...

I am not actually complaining about it - its just an observation that size and weight don't always have a direct relationship when it comes to cameras. Anyhow its really the lenses which add the significant weight and I bought that camera precisely because I wanted to keep my old lenses. But I think the next thing I am going to get is a really good monopod.

I know you're not complaining . You're right about size relative to weight - my 5D with grip isn't as heavy as the 1D Mk2 body, and yet their similar in size.

Good call on the monopod. Don't be tempted by cheap ones - a quality, metal head and an inflexible leg will cost a little more, but it'll be worth it.

When it comes to camera size its horses for courses really - I should imagine its well nigh impossible to do good candid shots with a big pro camera but then pro's don't really have to do that as people are only too willing to pose for them and they have the experience to put people at their ease etc. etc. For the like's of us amateurs that's not always the case

Stephen and I went through a phase of shooting candids with our pro DSLRs and of course people see you coming, so you have to take a different approach. You either ask for people's permission (for which the shot inevitably suffers, as it's no longer a candid...), or you set the camera to a central focus point, mark up a decent shutter speed / aperture combo and then hold the camera to your side and learn to compose shots while appearing to be doing nothing. We got some incredible stuff from close range using this technique.

As for people being willing to pose, well other than when I'm in the studio working with models either for their portfolios or on a specific job, the only people I shoot are for candids, so they're unaware of it. I'd like to travel the world and photograph obsure people in the context of their cultures or environments, but my status as a pro wouldn't grant me that right - literally anyone with a camera can ask people to pose for them...

[spl]

Re: Just a thought...

That's interesting what you say about candid photography with a big camera - will try it some time.