Hacker News Reader

Comment by dheera | Hacker News Reader

Another thing I hate about a lot of recent camera hardware is the move toward cheap plastic, everywhere.

I shoot pretty much only with old manual-focus lenses from days of yore. Most of my lenses are older than I am. They're all made of metal, built like a tank, and way easier to use. No fidgety UIs or menus to manipulate, perfectly calibrated infinity focus (slap the focus ring to the end until it stops and landscapes are perfectly sharp 100% of the time), rock-solid, don't break under pressure inside my bag, and they just work, no questions asked.

Totally agree about the lack of Arca-Swiss adoption by camera manufacturers. Camera bodies and heavy lenses could easily have a built-in Arca-Swiss shape at the bottom and still have a 1/4-20" screw hole for people who need it.

View on HN

On pro cameras, at least, although they have plastic outsides it's pretty strong plastic, and the actual chassis of the camera is cast alloy (usually magnesium-aluminium).

A nikon D3/D4/D5 will withstand a huge amount of abuse - at least as much as my more obviously metal pre-digital SLRs did. Another issue to be aware of is when using large, heavy lenses, a lot of stress gets put on the mount point and that most modern pro-orientated DSLRs are actually stronger than their old film equivalents in this regard, as the engineering has improved over time.

Re: arca-swiss plates - the reason camera companies don't do this is because of the licensing fee (source: I've talked to a bunch of them, and this is always their reply). I'm sure Thom is aware of this, but the licensing fee is not insignificant, and with extreme pressure to control costs it's not surprising that companies very rarely do this. Of course I personally would be very happy to see them included, but I know there are a bunch of people that don't use them, and would resent the extra cost to include them.

> I shoot pretty much only with old manual-focus lenses from days of yore. Most of my lenses are older than I am. They're all made of metal, built like a tank, and way easier to use. No fidgety UIs or menus to manipulate, perfectly calibrated infinity focus (slap the focus ring to the end until it stops and landscapes are perfectly sharp 100% of the time), rock-solid, don't break under pressure inside my bag, and they just work, no questions asked.

This is what I love about the Asahi Pentax Spotmatic-era cameras.

The only dial on the camera sets shutter speed and the sensitivity of the light meter.

If you go out on a nice day and practice shooting with "sunny 16" technique you don't even need a light meter, just set your aperture and shutter speed and get creative.

At the time that was my deciding factor picking between canon rebel something vs nikon d80 (2006, when it was brand new). Photo quality-wise they were so well matched, until i read a review where the author said, the canon is plastic and the nikon metal and the metal makes you feel you have a real tool in your hands instead of toy. (also i'm not the most careful person metal stronger then plastic, typically)

Given that you're often hand holding a camera, being lighter is a significant advantage, it can often be the difference between a stable or a blurred shot.

And good plastics are plastic in the traditional sense of the word: if you drop them, they'll absorb the force by deforming and then spring back into place. Metals deform permanently. In a car that's an advantage, you can just hammer it back into place. With a precision instrument a bent tool is just as bad as a broken one.

I don't know how a Rebel compares against a Nikon in a drop test -- I've dropped my Rebel without issues, but no major drops, luckily. But I can compare the pre-unibody MacBook Pros with Thinkpads from the same era. In the store, the original MacBook Pros felt and looked a lot more solid, but they were really crappy cases. OTOH, the ThinkPad's were tanks. Their plastic cases had a magnesium frame, giving them the best of both worlds. Of course, once Apple switched to unibody and ThinkPad's have started to compromise to compete on thickness the story hasn't been so clear.

That's true an over years read many people that dropped their canon rebel and they were surprised it didn't shatter into a million pieces and often still worked as good as before. Some brought it to service centers just to be sure.

I never dropped my camera though, but i do run into things a lot, doors, doorposts, fences and most of all tiny people.

Though with a bit typical lens 70-200 or some people often bring, i doubt the difference in weight of the body plastic vs metal is really noticeable. (plastic rebel XTi 556 grams vs 668 grams metal nikon d80)

>I never dropped my camera though, but i do run into things a lot, doors, doorposts, fences and most of all tiny people.

Huh?

I'm not the most careful person with my camera gear. All my bodies and lenses have taken some blows here and there from, as i said, doorways, people, brick wall corners etc, flew through the car once, i just never let it slid from my hands on the ground or something.

Typical i have a shoulder or wrist strap, ads (no im not affiliated) peakdesigns' or blackrapids' straps and wrist bands

If any reading this still use the neckband with their cams, checkout black rapids systems or peak designs. It's so much more comfortable then 2+ kg dangling from your neck.

Mostly referring to the "tiny people".

Kids

Oh sorry, i meant kids indeed, they are about head height of where i carry my camera, waist height. (im 2m tall)

A heavier camera can be steadier to hold, just by sheer mass. Micro shakes in muscles can make a light camera body move more.

Plus a heavier body can better balance a heavy telephoto lens.

> Given that you're often hand holding a camera, being lighter is a significant advantage, it can often be the difference between a stable or a blurred shot.

Lighter camera ~ more vibrations.

Not when you hold it in you hands, which is the clearly stated premise.

No. Hand-held a heavier camera gives you less shake, unless it is too heavy to hold continuously without quivering.

> And good plastics are plastic in the traditional sense of the word: if you drop them, they'll absorb the force by deforming and then spring back into place.

That's not what I was taught plastic meant. I was taught both plastic and elastic materials deform under force, but the elastic ones (not the plastic ones) return to their original form once the force is gone …

If you drop an iPhone hard enough it wil dent. Drop a polycarbonate phone: no problem. Windows phone wasn't a great OS, but the Lumia line were absolute tanks.

PC is a very impact resistant material, but you can also form it cold, a bit like mild steel, actually.

So is nylon. But nylon is hydroscopic, and thus not well suited for electronics applications.

I do prefer ABS-PC or ASA for a lot of my more-adverse condition cases. They're much more heat resilient, and chemical/UV resistant in ASA's case.

Well, a great many connectors (even, or rather, especially industrial ones) are made from PA6 or 66 with some glass fiber fill; including the actual contact carriers (if they are a separate part). FR4 is somewhat hygroscopic as well; moisture expansion causes real problems for some applications. Never heard of issues with PA connectors.

"Plastic" actually stands for "thermoplastic", meaning they can be easily deformed when hot. At normal temperatures, a thermoplastic material can be pretty elastic.

In mechanical engineering, plastic deformation does refer to permanent/non-reversible changes (as opposed to elastic deformation) past the elastic limit. That said, plasticity is more commonly used to suggest malleability.

Elastic deformation is reversible with a release of the driving force, plastic deformation isn't.

Typical metals will have an elastic zone, where they act like springs, and a plastic zone, where they don't, and then they fracture. Brittle materials have a relatively small plastic zone, ductile materials will have a large one.

I carry my camera all the time, so I'm not super upset about it being made of plastic rather than metal. The plastic of which it's made has a higher tensile strength than any casting-grade aluminum; machined aerospace aluminum would be stronger, but would also cost a lot more to make and thus to buy, and I don't mind having paid an entry-level price for my entry-level DSLR.

DSLR camera bodies aren't cast aluminium; they're cast magnesium (which contain 10 % aluminium or so).

Which DSLRs? All the ones I've seen and handled have been PC-GF30 or something very similar.

The low-end ones are wound around some folded sheet steel core; but higher end DSLRs have cast cases. Gripping surfaces are rubberized.

I beat the crap out of a Canon Rebel XT for about 12 years before finally replacing it. Still worked fine, no issues, I just wanted better high ISO performance.

Concerning arca mount, I would prefer the camera without it. I wouldn't want the extra bulk when using no mount. I'm not seeing the problem with screwing a mount plate on and leaving it there. If you really want it to be permanent, get some Super Glue. Modular design in camera equipment makes for compatibility, adaptability, reusability, etc.

On this note, I am a professional photographer and have worked professionally with any form of digital, video, emulsion movie or still camera on the market and never have seen rubber on the bottom of a camera that i can remember. Maybe some have it but it's always on the plate if anything in my experience.

Screw mount is lame design I agree but arca mount is not at all a replacement for it. It's a different mount option, which itself requires a modular attachment solution which the screw mount is.

The Arca Swiss mount isn't even among the best quick-release plate systems, when it comes down to it. You could argue for a long plate back in the days when lenses were mostly unit-focus and the CG would shift; these days with just about everything being internal focus, a fully-captured plate is an immensely better solution than a dovetail plate (hopefully) captured with clamping pressure in one dimension.

As for the GP' complaint about plastics, it just shows that there's no experience there with minor dents requiring major repairs that would have been harmless bounces with a filled polycarbonate. Probably never dealt much with focus shifts or lens element alignment problems in severe heat or cold either. They use appropriate plastics on the pro-grade stuff where they use it because it's better, not because it's cheaper.

My D7100 is pretty tough and fairly new. My issue now is the weight. If I carry the D7100, 70-300, and wide angle it's a lot of weight to lug around. I do it because it takes amazing pictures, but I'm not going to pretend I like the weight.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com