fullstop said:
They love to claim that compact/small cameras are only possible with small(er) sensors. So I was proving that some existing FF MILCs and lenses in a certain focal length range are just as compact as crop sensor cameras with an equivalent lens - all the way down to some mFT gear.
Nobody said this, ever. Listening to those voices in your head again? You didn't have to prove anything. The evidence is already there with Sony.
What anyone is saying against mirrorless is that what is currently out there in FF is crap to hold, would be ungainly with "L" glass, has all the buttons and dials crammed together, etc. The ergonomics suck. Really suck.
You showed the FF Sony next to an Olympus m43 camera of about the same size. I actually have one. I have actually hold one every few days. I have an Olympus pro lens. Even with that small lens and light weight, it sucks! The ergonomics suck! By the looks of it, Sony sucks too. Add to that heavier glass (a la Sony) and the suck would suffocate.
I mean really, AvTvM, you are obsessed with an idea in your head that has absolutely no basis in reality: That Canon would sell more stuff if only Canon would do what you think Canon should do. They'd sell a lot more Cameras and Lenses if they would only tap your wisdom listen to you. You have your finger finger on the pulse of the market... because in your mind,
you are the market. Anyone who doesn't see that must be daft, in your opinion.
Paraphrase: "I want *
this* and millions of other people do too. They are all just too dense to see that they will love my idea if they will just obey and follow. The people at Canon are also too stupid to see my vision."
Here's what your comparison photos don't show: That the savings would be in the lens size
not the camera body size. All the smaller body really does is cramp and %#@* things up. So keep dreaming. Keep deluding yourself into thinking you know better than we (and your millions of friends that you personally know) want to have. Of course, I have yuge hands. A tiny camera would fit you better. I can guess why a FF Canon is cumbersome to you.
The Canon fits me. The tiny camera? Nope. It's actually harder to handle and manipulate. I pray you never get what you want.
Tell me again, what is a tiny bodied camera going to do for us? Allow us to fit another filter in the bag? BTW: The last photo shows a FF (M42 screw on) to M43 adapter. Sort of like the adapter we'd have to use with your fantasy camera while we wait for our EF glass to die on the vine.
I don't believe that Canon will make a tiny FF camera. It would really suck.