"Why are Camera Lenses So Big and Heavy?": My title is the title of a good article on How-To Geek. Google will help you find it. Just because a camera is smaller than a DSLR, that...

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

My title is the title of a good article on How-To Geek. Google will help you find it. Just because a camera is smaller than a DSLR, that doesn't mean the brand's whole photo system will be small and light.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

jerryc41 wrote:

My title is the title of a good article on How-To Geek. Google will help you find it. Just because a camera is smaller than a DSLR, that doesn't mean the brand's whole photo system will be small and light.

Very good article and explains why M4/3 lenses can be fast and small with the effective focal length double a FF camera of the same mm.

Mac Loc: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia now Hernando Co. Fl.

jerryc41 wrote:

My title is the title of a good article on How-To Geek. Google will help you find it. Just because a camera is smaller than a DSLR, that doesn't mean the brand's whole photo system will be small and light.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Architect1776 wrote:

Very good article and explains why M4/3 lenses can be fast and small with the effective focal length double a FF camera of the same mm.

It's too bad I wasn't allowed to post the link.

chrisg-optical Loc: New York, NY

jerryc41 wrote:

It's too bad I wasn't allowed to post the link.

https://www.howtogeek.com/393047/why-are-camera-lenses-so-big-and-heavy/

...but appears at the top of a google search.

Ah yes the laws of physics....lens makers try to optimize with material choice (metal v plastic) and choice of maximum aperture. Maybe someday there will be a material to replace glass (other than plastics, maybe a crystalline form of graphene - diamond, or "transparent aluminum" ?) and will be significantly lighter. In the meantime, we have smaller formats such as M43, and gyms to workout for the larger formats

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

chrisg-optical wrote:

https://www.howtogeek.com/393047/why-are-camera-lenses-so-big-and-heavy/

...but appears at the top of a google search.

Yes. It helps when you have the exact title. : )

Toment Loc: FL, IL

jerryc41 wrote:

My title is the title of a good article on How-To Geek. Google will help you find it. Just because a camera is smaller than a DSLR, that doesn't mean the brand's whole photo system will be small and light.

VERY true...🙁, good article!

olemikey Loc: 6 mile creek, Spacecoast Florida

It's complicated!!!

tomad Loc: North Carolina

So if I understand the article correctly, I think I have the answer to smaller, lighter lenses on FF cameras. Put the sensor in the lens with connections to the cameras electronics like now for autofocus, etc. With the sensor in the lens it can be very close to the inner element eliminating much of the "flange focal distance" plus making the lens shorter so a low light aperture would also require a smaller front element. Of course lenses would be more expensive.

olemikey Loc: 6 mile creek, Spacecoast Florida

tomad wrote:

So if I understand the article correctly, I think I have the answer to smaller, lighter lenses on FF cameras. Put the sensor in the lens with connections to the cameras electronics like now for autofocus, etc. With the sensor in the lens it can be very close to the inner element eliminating much of the "flange focal distance" plus making the lens shorter so a low light aperture would also require a smaller front element. Of course lenses would be more expensive.

Sounds like an interesting approach, but I'm no optical/electro engineer or designer - the sensor makers would also love you!!!

adm

Just a few random thoughts. I recently watched another one of Tony Northrup's videos saying that "Micro 4/3 is Dead." I think he is wrong and the dramatic reduction in size and weight of the lenses with M4/3 is one of the reasons why. I have a few Nikon film cameras along with some "D" lenses. The increase in size and weight between the D and G lenses at a given focal length is striking. I think it has something to do with putting the AF motor inside the lens. A Nikon shooter can experience a reduction in lens size and weight by using the older D lenses if he or she is willing to put up with slower autofocus.

CaptainBobBrown

The day has come when there is at least a partial replacement of traditional heavy glass in a lens system. Nikon some time ago came out with a 300mm lens with a fresnel lens component. Now they've just come out (released 9/13/2018) with a 500 mm. lens containing a fresnel component. The 500 is about the same size and weight as a Canikon 70-200. I've been using one for about 2 weeks now and it is a fine lens for fast moving BIFs, small birds, wildlife. I've been shooting with it every day for about two weeks and find it is so much easier to walk around with no tripod, hand-held and great VR. A real advance in optics so I expect there will be future improvements along the same lines of reduced size, decreased weight and, hopefully speed. Even with my 300mm 2.8 prime I rarely shot below f 4.0 so 5.6 isn't too much of a sacrifice.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

adm wrote:

Just a few random thoughts. I recently watched ano... (show quote)

Problem is the screw drive lenses are painfully slow (that is why even Nikon had to go with the in lens AF system 25 years later) and the system is now all but dead in new cameras as you can see from the Z system that does not have any support for screw drive AF. So you will be needing to stick to old Nikon cameras with the archaic and obsolete screw drive AF system.
I agree that the M4/3 is in no way dead but appears to be alive and well so far. And yes the lens size is a big factor.

zzzynick Loc: Colorado

If you can't hold a camera and a lens, hit the gym. Muscle up. Buy a tripod, or you could always take up knitting.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

zzzynick wrote:

If you can't hold a camera and a lens, hit the gym. Muscle up. Buy a tripod, or you could always take up knitting.

There are some with physical disabilities that limit the weight that can be held. Also a tripod is not always a viable answer as they are even prohibited in some locations.