Bruce with a Canon Loc: Islip

Mens Canon :)
Ladies Nikon :/


RUNNING AWAY FAST!

Grammieb1 Loc: New Orleans

Run very fast. I am not planning on giving up my 7D or 5Dlll anytime soon. Both are good, really love my 5Dlll. Bab

BHC Loc: Strawberry Valley, JF, USA

Well, i guess you've gotten some flack over that one sentence. Actually, you have to wonder why places like Walmart sell so many pink cameras or cameras encrusted with bling.

But it does remind me of a piece of journalistic history. It's a known fact that war correspondents used small cameras like Canon, Contax and Leica RF's. post war photographer HCB used a Leica and, for a small camera Ansel Adams favored the Contax. A little less known fact is that Life correspondent and photojournalist Margaret Bourke-White eschewed the smaller range-finder camers for a couple of reasons. First, she did not like to have a camera separating her gaze from that od the subject. Secondly, she wanted a larger, more detailed picture. So what did she choose? The vast majotity of her photographs, including her iconic series on Mohandas Gandhi, were taken by a full size Rolleiflex Twin Lens Reflex. And because the Rolleilex did not have interchangeable lenses, she often carried three camera at one time.

JR1 Loc: Tavistock, Devon, UK

You know I am happy simply because as a "forum" it got people talking

Larrie Loc: NE Ohio

Still the DSLR's and compatible lenses are a lot larger then my old film cameras. My LowePro Magnum AW was ideal for packing several FD bodies and assorted lenses and a flash for a wedding. Now it barely holds my 7D with grip a flash and two lenses

Michael O' Loc: Midwest right now

I had battery bases on my EOS-1, both 3Ss, and now on my 5DMarkII
simply because the bodies were too small for me to hold properly without the extra height. My 2 PowerShots are a pain because they are so tiny, and thus I only use them for trips -- travel photos.

JR1 Loc: Tavistock, Devon, UK

That's true, when I look at my 60D against my Nikkormat FTn

hb3 Loc: Texas

Sorry, I assumed that you were complaining about the relative smallness of the D7000 when I read in your ordinal post the following:

"However why manufacturers insist on making smaller and smaller DSLRs amazes me, I don't want a Bridge or 4/3 camera I WANT a camera I can hold that is large-ish.

The 2 D7000s I bought are smaller than the 60D."

Oldvolvoman Loc: Northamptonshire, England

Last year I took the plunge and went from P&S to a Panasonic Lumix GF3. Daunted by the larger models that looked so complicated, I opted for the smaller 4/3 type to start on the DSLR. The smaller models are ideal starting on the DSLR ladder, we don't want to buy professional cameras costing thousands. A very good smaller DSLR with a few whistles and bells is fine!

Dun1 Loc: Atlanta, GA

I shoot with a 7D gripped and consider it a good fit even without the grip. My guess with the smaller bodied DSLRs is that maybe the camera makers are trying to get more of the point and shoot owners to either switch to smaller DSLR bodies.
Camera body size is an important feature if the camera body does not fit in your hands you may hate the camera from the start, so going to a store a taking the camera body in your hands is important.
I have a couple of point and shoot cameras that I seldom leave home without to take photos quickly without having to get the body out of the bag, select a lens and take photos.
I guess given the economy trying to downsize and crank out a new body that is smaller, but had some of the features of larger bodies is a trend,
I feel strange when I do get a smaller body in my hands now. In many instances the user controls in smaller DSLRs are harder to set.

JR1 Loc: Tavistock, Devon, UK

This is it.

I am used to the 60D, when I bought two D7000s even with grips they are smaller, it feels odd