Originally posted by Cynog Ap Brychan This thread has grown since I last visited it, and I haven't read all the intervening posts, so please forgive me if someone has already raised similar points. Am I the only one who would see no problem in a mirrorless camera with a similar size and form to current DSLRs, particularly the Pentax K-3, which I find a very agreeable size and heft? This would make retaining the K mount a no-brainer. I haven't held a Fuji XT-2, but from looking at one in a camera store window, it doesn't seem much smaller than a K-3, apart from the thickness of the body, and one needs to add the battery grip to get a fully functioning camera it seems to me, which greatly adds to its size. I bought the Olympus M1 and M5 a couple of years ago, and although they were reasonably capable cameras, I hated them for their small size and fiddly buttons. I don't have large hands, so that has nothing to do with it. Perhaps a DSLR-type mirrorless would be a hard marketing sell, but I would love to see one.
+1
There is some temporary degeneration at work I think. The forms of current DSLRs with good grips have not evolved over time from the poorly designed cigarette boxes of old times for no reason.
The grip of a K-3/K-1 is just perfect for anyone who wants to hold a camera longer ("enthusiast") with comfort.
And part of the reason is that it is about 7 cm deep.
And that is deeper than the FF body between mount and display.
So whatever space you can save on a mount does reduce the overall z-axis camera dimension by ZERO if you do not want to tolerate a sub-par crippled grip such as you have to on pretty much all modern mirrorless cameras.
Olympus, Sony and Fuji have poor and sub-par designs there. Only Panasonic and Samsung (when they were in the game) had learned that lesson.
I do predict that those makers slowly over time revert the degeneration and build DSLR style/size bodies again for the enthusiasts. Look how Sony improved the size to larger from a7 to a7r2.
Compare camera dimensions side by side
And then compare the depth of a mFT camera versus an APSC DSL:
Compare camera dimensions side by side. No differences left.
This also is one of the reasons, why so few enthusiasts ever have gone fully mirrorless, but always keep a second "real" system. And it is limiting their growth to stagnation.
If you are a "casual" shooter = upgrader from a smartphone with only a kit lens or two and take less than 500 images in a year obviously ergonomics requirements are irrelevant and you can go for any exterior design that looks good on your bookshelf. Since Fuji seems to cater mostly for the style geeks and retro grandpas with a wish for photo toys and not for any serious photographers, they are most likely to continue to focus on outer looks with priority over usefulness. Actually rather surprising you can not buy Fujis in a bling-bling swarovski edition.