Camera Density

I wonder if weight is really so important with cameras, or if the issue is really density. Thom Hogan mentioned this recently (I've been reading about the Z8, and Thom is the go-to Nikon guy). I have no data to back this up, of course, but there must be a density range that people instinctively feel is appropriate for a camera of a given size. If you take a very heavy small camera and find a large camera that's the same weight, you might feel that the former is "too heavy" while the latter is "flimsy" or not substantial enough. It's the density you'd be reacting to.

Size...and quality too! I was surprised when I made the nostalgia purchase* a few years ago of a mint Nikon N8008 (1988). I rented an N8008 when I was waiting for my F4s order to be filled. Then, after a year of lugging around the ungainly and not-very-satisfying F4s, I shelved it and bought two N8008's to use instead (that was during the seven years when I made my living as a professional photographer). What surprised me on our re-acquaintance was its density—I didn't remember it as being that heavy, probably because it was much lighter than the F4s. But it's heavy for its size by today's standards.

Although the N8008 was superbly designed—still one of the most comfortable cameras to hold and look through that I've ever used—it had a lot of polycarbonate for its day, so it still managed to feel a little cheap. That's another aspect of density—it connotes high quality. A Leica M9 with a simple 50mm ƒ/1.4 (or not so simple actually) isn't a paperweight, but it's very solid. The lens especially is a little lead brick. A pleasing density is part of what gives the equipment the aura of the deluxe.

No matter how much we humans seem to love extremes, many aspects of camera design are a matter of balancing conflicting parameters. Part of what makes the Nikon Z cameras so special is that their ergonomics, haptics, and hand-feel are so good. The Z8 is too big for my tastes. My idea of the perfect size and weight is the Fuji X-T1 with the large hand grip. The Z8 weighs more than double what the X-T1 alone weighs, without the hand grip. But it's bigger, too, so perhaps the density is what people should pay attention to. Any lighter and it might not feel right; you'd have to heft one to see for yourself. Like a lot of things, the size and weight of a camera are as much a matter of our perception as anything.

Mike

*I should really stop doing that.

Original contents copyright 2023 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. (To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below or on the title of this post.)

Featured Comments from:

Jeff1000: "I think you’re on to something with 'density.' When I finally located and purchased my 2023 Subaru Crosstrek Premium 6MT, my reaction was that this made in Japan, jewel-like, very affordable little CUV was very dense feeling, like a miniature Sherman tank. But it could just be my imagination since I’m smitten with the car."

psu: "For the life of me I can't figure out why digital camera bodies are so gigantic. Put a D700 and an old N8008s (or F100, or maybe even the smaller hand grip version of the F4) next to each other and compare. The 8008s looks and feels more like an Olympus Micro 4/3 body than something that captures pictures on a full 35mm frame. And it has a motor in it! Even the Nikon Z bodies are kind of chunky and heavy compared to the N8008s...and the whole system is made to feel more bloated by the fact that the Z mount and lenses have a larger diameter than the F, so everything is all around just bigger. I dabbled with the Z cameras (Z6) but have mostly decided to go back to the Olympus...just for the size."

Tom Duffy: "I always felt that way about the Leica M camera. Very heavy for its size. Maybe its not being easy to hold had a lot to do with it. Now the Mamiya RZ67, that was just heavy."

Brian: "Same for headphones. A high-end (maybe by name only) manufacturer added weights to its product to make them feel better quality."

Dave Jenkins: "The first time I held a Fuji X-Pro1 it felt 'hollow' to me. I learned to love it, though, and still have and use one. The Leica M3 has always seemed about perfect for density to me."

Nigel Voak: "I guess we do expect a certain grade of camera to have a certain feeling of weight in our hands. My D850 weighs what I expect it to weigh, whilst when I pick up my Z7, I unconsciously take into account the missing heft of the glass prism. I suppose this is just because I have been handling cameras since 1975. Your mention of the Nikon N8008, called the F801 in Europe, brings back fond memories of the times when I was shooting performing arts for our provincial theatre. I bought two, to replace my FM2 bodies, and the crystal-clear viewfinder was a big step forward. I still have these bruised and battered bodies that worked faultlessly for ten years or more."

Kye Wood: "The Miata was notably first of all cars to have haptic balance on all controls. That being that the brake pedal feel matched with the resistance required to turn the steering wheel and even all other minor in cabin controls as well. Haptic consistency plus density equals greater than the sum of those parts."

Comments

[Stan B.]

I abandoned all previous, traditional criteria for judging camera quality when I signed on to the GR. All I know is that that little brick disappears in your hand and produces great results….

[c.d.embrey]

Size matters, the smaller the better, for me. I'm 6'2+ and the US Army issued me XL gloves. So I'm larger than many people. I really, really, really dislike add-on grips! What's the point? From my POV an APS-C Canon is the right fit for my XL hands. YMMV.

[Roger Bradbury]

I think density is often the indicator of quality; of solidness. But here's a thing; I often make brackets or similar out of metal or sometimes wood.

Rough cut, when I hold the bracket it seems to be a certain weight, but once filed and smoothed, it seems to lose weight out of all proportion to the material I've just removed.

I think this is a function of apparent density; the completed bracket resting more gently in the hand.

[Albert Smith]

I'm physically able to tolerate weight, so that isn't my primary consideration. These days, the size of the camera is more important simply based on my experience with my Fujifilm bodies, which is that there is no real quality sacrifice by going small.

I just don't wish to be seen as a guy with a giant camera since that can lead to confrontations or paranoia in some social situations.

If my Nikon D700 weighed a pound and my Fujifilm X-T3 weighed 10 pounds, I'd have the Fuji in my hand on most outings. Size trumps weight for me.

[Dave Jenkins]

Different strokes! The Nikon 8008 is the camera that made me a Canon user for 25 years.

[John Krumm]

I wish camera companies would figure out how to make lighter cameras that are still large enough and a good quality. I would not want a heavier camera than my Z6/7 cameras. But I'd happily shoot a larger one like the Z8 if they just used more polycarbonate or carbon fiber or something, and made it the same weight.

The main reason I stopped shooting the K1 was total weight. It was heavy, and I only forgot that when I was totally immersed in shooting. Walking around with it casually was a chore.

[Allan Ostling]

Your comments on camera density echo what I have been thinking every time I pick up my new Fuji X-T5 with XF 23mm f/2. The combination is compact, hefty (740 g), and feels just right. It is heavier than my Fuji X-E4 with thumb grip and 27mm f/2.8 (450 g), but the densities feel about the same. I love both cameras, paragons unmatched by any from my past (including Leica M3).

[F. Hall]

Weight, balance and density matter to me for how the camera feels in the hand and that is an important aspect for how much I enjoy using it. If I have a pancake lens on a large body I don't feel I can hold it steady. A heavy long lens on a small body tires my hands faster than a combination that is nicely balanced.

Density makes me feel the equipment is better made. I think that was one of the things Leica gets right. Their equipment feels well made even though of all the cameras I have owned, my two Leica bodies have spent more time in the repair shop than all my other cameras combined and I have owned quite a few cameras.

[Dan Khong]

In physics, density is defined as mass/volume. There is no such a thing as the perfect density.

Similarly in the world of cameras, there is no such a camera as one with the perfect density. Cameras serve different purposes. That is why we own more than one camera.

The Hasselblad SWC is a dense camera but I bear with it because there is none other like it to serve a purpose.

[Glenn Allenspach]

There is definitely something to this density issue, or as I call it, Visual Weight vs. Physical Weight. I’m a potter also, wheel thrown stoneware. I teach my students to make the walls of their pots nice and thin, which makes a bigger pot from a given amount of clay. When the user picks up a pot, the eye will tell that user what to expect, and the hands will confirm or contradict the eyeball. A generous, well crafted pot using 16 ounces of clay feels light as a feather, while a thick walled, smaller pot with the same amount of clay feels like a brick.

[Zyni]

Think it is weight, My friend was at fair with me last week. He used Minolta CLE which is 400g. He (aged 60) can carry this all day (say 10-12 hrs) in one hand. M9 (600g) he is not sure about; M3 is same. Z8 (900g) he would not even consider for this. Perhaps young men can manage I (not man) or he (not young) ... no. Perhaps on low-gravity planet?

[Kirk W.]

I will be interested in your opinion of “density” of the K3 Monochrome should you get one in your hands. My 1st generation K3 has the feel that it could be used to pound tent stakes in a pinch. I like the solidity but I could see where others would be put off by the heft. I worry more about it hurting me than vice versa!

[alan sailer]

I'm biased (since my photo ended up in the final selections).

But is the Blur "Contest" still in the pipeline?

Cheers.

[BARRY D BRAUNSTEIN]

I was talking today about how Nikons have always felt just right in the hand. I just switched from my trusted d850 to the z8 and the Nikon tradition continues (for me). It’s slightly smaller than the d850, a bit lighter, and well constructed. If you want something smaller try the z6ii - it’s sensor size is closer to your Fuji, and when combined with Nikon’s excellent 24-120 lens makes for a compact yet excellent ff kit.

[Bear.]

IMO, weight, density and balance all relate to grip strength. The greater the weight or density, the more important the ergonomics and balance of camera and lens combination becomes, as the greater the grip strength that is required. Not being able to use all of one's fingers because a camera is either too small or too large for a user affects the strength required to grip the camera so that it's just harder work simply to hold the camera. That is, it's physically harder to hold a small dense object between two fingers and a thumb than a larger object of the same weight where all the fingers can grip the object. Obviously, the heavier or denser the camera and lens, the more important the issue.

The same is true of balance. For example, my D3 is comfortable to use with a long zoom hand-held to my eye because of great ergonomics for my grip and the balance of the combination in my hands - but is terrible for me to carry on a camera strap (ie. without a dedicated bag) not because I cannot hold the weight but because the combination is entirely unbalanced and therefore uncomfortable.

Good design would dictate that the best combination of size, weight, density and ergonomics applicable to the majority of users - so it will always be horses for courses...

[Roger Bartlett]

This phenomenon is quite tricky to understand until you experience it yourself. Which weighs more, the aluminium in an empty intact soda can or the same empty soda can once crushed?
On a scale they are the same - to the mind of the person holding the items in hand it is the crushed can. Visual perception trounces in hand perception every time.

[Tom Burke]

You say that on re-acquaintance with the N8008 you were surprised by its weight, and you suggest that’s because, back in the day, you were returning to it from something heavier. That may be so, but also don’t ignore your age! I found that things started getting heavier from about the time I was 60. Aircraft luggage, for example - my wife and I have become more efficient packers for long-haul holidays because there’s no way we can possibly lift a fully-loaded 23kg bag. 16kgs or 17kgs is our limit these days.

In general, though, I think you’re right. We have a view on how heavy, how substantial, an object ought to feel when we pick it up, and if it’s significantly lighter then we tend to interpret that indicating that it’s unsatisfactory.

[David B.]

If you opened up a Nimslo - remember those? ..a plastic camera with four lenses on the front - you'd find two pieces of steel nestling in there.

Just to give it heft, or 'density', to make it feel as if you had a 'quality', 'value-for-money' camera in your hands!

[Dave Jenkins]

Sorry! One more comment. My Fuji 55-300 lens feels just right on my X-H1, but way out of balance on my X-T20.
Great discussion, BTW.

[Pierre Saget]

I was surprised going from a Fuji X100S to X-Pro1. The X100 series cameras have a pleasing, solid density. The X-Pro1 feels pretty hollow by comparison. I preferred the X100S density at the time, but now that I have an X-Pro3, which is larger, denser and more polished than the X-Pro1, I sometimes like picking up and using the X-Pro1 for the older, boxier design aesthetic. None are bad, just different.