Why can't (or won't) Canon make cameras like this anymore?

I want to see a return to these solid, metal bodies.

What gives?

Image below is public domain, per Wikipedia:

MikeFairbanks wrote in post #12800023
Image below is public domain, per Wikipedia:
(image used by permission per Charles Lanteigne):

Are you afraid of being sued?

MikeFairbanks wrote in post #12800023
I want to see a return to these solid, metal bodies.

What gives?

Image below is public domain, per Wikipedia:

If they could have film that was 35mm long on one side, why not a full-frame sensor in the same package?

If Leica can do it, why can't (won't?) canon?

I'd be all over something like that. Heck, look at Fuji. Those things are hard to get. People love a solid, metal body that is compact (instead of puffed out like the 5DII).

Does a full-frame or crop camera really need to be so big?

(image used by permission per Charles Lanteigne):

LOL you are on the wrong forum. Bigger and heavier = better on POTN

No, but it's just common courtesy to follow copyright procedures. I didn't take those images, so it's my responsibility (especially the second one) to attribute the photos.

That really isn't the point, however.

Makes no difference how it works and how long it lasts.
But minimizing production costs a lot.
I'm not willing to pay extra few hundred $ for retro look.

Dawie wrote in post #12800055
Are you afraid of being sued?

Most likely afraid of those who are always quick to point out that you can't post a photo in this forum if it's not yours.

It's pretty simple: if people would buy them, Canon would make them.

It its day, the AE-1 was the biggest selling camera in the world. But eventually, sales petered out to nothing. People stopped buying them and began to buy compact cameras. There has been a resurgence of SLR camera buyers in the last few years, but people want sleek black bodies with video in them right now.

Have you checked Leica pricing or unit sales lately??

I prefer a camera that I can hold/grip comfortably any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

Rangefinder-style cameras just aren't terribly comfortable to hold, especially if you try and mate heavier telephoto lenses on them. And rangefinders really aren't small enough to pocket anyway.

When I received my first dSLR (Canon Rebel) I was surprised that it wasn't built like my Olympus OM-1n. Thought I had bought a toy camera or something. Now I don't mind the difference.

If you look at what is in modern SLR bodies, they are quite full.

So what is the same? The mirror box and pentaprims should be about the same size. Then the dSLR needs quite a bit of extra space under the floor for the AF system.

The AE-1 has a roll of film in it, while the dSLR as a very large battery that takes up even more room.

And then the rest of the space in the dSLR fits all the electronics. And fundamentally, there is a lot of buffer and computing required for a functional dSLR.

The Leica M9 shows that a large format digital can be somewhat small, but it lacks the mirror box and pentaprism which is the main place it gains space. It also has very poor buffer and write speeds compared to most dSLRs which shows it has cut down some on the processing. Finally, it has lessor battery capacity.

I suspect most dSLR buyers are more interested in buffer capacity and shot to shot time than they are interested in absolute package size, especially since quite a few of them actually prefer a little bit of size in a camera for the ergonomics.

The big plastic chunky cameras started in the late 80s, so it isn't like it is a digital thing.

MikeFairbanks wrote in post #12800023
If they could have film that was 35mm long on one side, why not a full-frame sensor in the same package?

The film might have the same height and width as a sensor but it certainly doesn't have the same thickness...

MikeFairbanks wrote in post #12800023
I want to see a return to these solid, metal bodies.

What gives?

Image below is public domain, per Wikipedia:

If they could have film that was 35mm long on one side, why not a full-frame sensor in the same package?

If Leica can do it, why can't (won't?) canon?

I'd be all over something like that. Heck, look at Fuji. Those things are hard to get. People love a solid, metal body that is compact (instead of puffed out like the 5DII).

Does a full-frame or crop camera really need to be so big?

(image used by permission per Charles Lanteigne):

SPeak for yourself. I love my 5D Mark II, and think in no way you can compare it to a Fuji X100. Also, given the size of good lenses, actually prefer to have one with a battery grip so it doesnt feel like I'm trying to hold a 5 pound weight on the end of a stick. I think it has a lot to do with ergonomics.

And what's up with these cell phone now days? Tiny little multi-tasking devices. Give me the big old brick, something you could bash a head in with.

That cell phone analogy seems to work in reverse. The new SLR cameras are bigger and uglier than the old stuff!