Why flat (gripless) cameras?

[L0n3Gr3yW0lf]

Hai, I have been growing curious about this question lately, ever since the launch of OM-3. I hope I can ask for personal opinions and experiences from out community about Why do some photographers like/prefer flat or almost gripless cameras?
Its been a trend, not recently but since the Mirrorless inception, of making cameras with complete flat front or just tiny amount of grip to wrap your fingers around. The likes of Pany GM and GX being the smallest cameras but the Oly E-P series as well.
Newer are the Nikon Zf, OMD's OM-3 and the entire like of Fujifilm X-T, X-PRO, X-E series too.

The reason I ask is that the camera will always have the mount bulging out when you have very flat or small front right side. So making it that "small" doesn't do any good since you have to put a lens on and the camera will "stick" out no matter what:

Even with the smallest lenses mounted its mot exactly flushed to the camera so why not just add a bit of grip to the same length as the smallest lens you offer?

Cameras that do this pretty well like Pany GX-8 or Sony a6700 (I know Sony is not seen as a leader in ergonomics) are still small cameras with the grip. Even a little grip like X-T5, OM-5 and NX500 still offer some comfort with lenses that are not under 4 cm long or weighs less then 200 grams.

So where is the point of this soap bar shaped cameras besides harkening back to the film era. I understand that Leica has its own kind of fascinations but a camera can still look beautiful or sexy even if its not a 1960-80s copy or inspired design.

While I did briefly owned a Nikon J1 (gave it to my mom), twice a Pentax Q (couldn't find a specific thing it could excell at so I sold them), Panasonic GF6 (gave it to a friend for Xmas) and none of them were as comfortable for their size as I fondly remember of my Pany GX-7, GX-8 or how much I love my Samy NX500.

The only thing I can think of is that to have a central EVF and lens mount the grip has to be sacrificed to keep the length reasonably small and to have room for the fingers. Even though the hand grip for the camera has to be claw time instead of cupping type. (Kind of like how some mice are designed for claw grip while others are for cupping grip).

 

[TNcasual]

When comes to small form factor cameras like the GM or EP cameras, lightweight is the goal. What little grip that is added will add a bit of weight. As the camera is already lightweight, the extra grip for handling is not necessary for many people. You can literally just pinch the tine camera in between two fingers.

I actually really liked the small grips on the Oly EM-10 and Em-5ii that I had. They were pretty lightweight cameras, that just the little extra point of a grip was all that was needed most of the time.

As cameras get heavier, though, a larger grip is really necessary to get as much purchase with our fingers and palm to hold steady. A camera the size of my K1 would be nearly impossible to hold without the wonderfully ergonomic grip. That extra body makes the camera easier to hold, even though it is so heavy.

In the end, everything is a compromise. To me grips should probably grow with the weight of the camera (plus lenses). There are advantages to small, lightweight, gripless, and advantages to heavier and large grip. There are also advantages/disadvantages over what the camera is to be mainly used to shoot. A sport of wildlife camera needs greater control over the body, which requires a larger grip. A landscape camera that spends most of its time on a tripod, may not. A pocketable, quick street shooter may not need one as to be fast for shooting and then put away just as quick.

Additionally, small gripless cameras allow for a bit more personalization with add on grips. I have a nice bottom plate with wooden grip for my fpL. It makes the camera handle better, and looks quite nice, IMO.

 

[Irene McC]

I've owned and used all types of form factors. I don't mind flat fronts at all

 

[fredlong]

The first thing I do with a body that has a tiny or no grip is to buy a grip. It ends up being bigger and heavier than if the grip was built in. I like to be able to hold AND operate the camera one-handed. I can't do that if I need to pinch it between my thumb and fingers.

 

[AlwaysOnAuto]

I'm interested in adding an A6700 to my collection at some point, simply because I don't have a 'small' camera at present and it takes the same battery as my 'big' cameras. I find my old hands tend to cramp up when holding a 'flat' camera.
If I want a truly pocketable camera I'll use one of my SD1000's.

 

[JensM]

Cant really blame the film era for flatfronts either, just the first 15ish years or so of the SLR era when people more often than not, shot small primes. After that bulges of some sort came to be a stayer...

 

[Richard]

A half-case is another approach - it adds thickness and heft to a camera which might otherwise be too slim and slippery, and it offers a degree of protection against minor knocks. A nice leather half-case can look really good too.

-R

 

[MarkoV]

It's all about ergonomics. Now there's a word many, if not most, people seem to associate with having a huge grip, but it's entirely the opposite for me! I need my camera to have a flat body to be able to hold it comfortably.

I have had cameras with big grips and I've hated them all. The last big grip I had was on the Olympus E-M1 Mark II. I thought it the technically best camera in the world – but the otherwise svelte body had that huge grip I just couldn't wrap my fingers around. Or, well, I could, but the day always ended with a sore hand. Ignoring the discomfort, I felt that the grip invited me to point a fist at things instead of an eye, if that makes any sense.

For me, the way to go is not to squeeze or grip (some pun intended) the camera in your right hand. You cradle it (or the lens) on your left palm. The right hand just lightly dances on the dials and the shutter release, maybe even gently steers the camera around.

Now if I were toting around a huge lens and body combination and needed two hands just to heft it, I probably would appreciate having a grip. In that rare event I'd get an add-on grip. But as you can never remove a built-in grip, I definitely, positively will always get my cameras as gripless as I can get. Soap bar shape rules! 🙂

 

[mfturner]

Completely flat bodies like my pm2 are slippery bars of soap for use as a camera, but are great for carrying or packing. I have used deeper grips (my old Canon 60D comes to mind) but my m5.3 is a good compromise.

I have learned that I carry a camera much more than I use it as a camera though, which has made the pm2 more appealing.

 

[rloewy]

I like big grips, and I can not lie.
You other brothers can't deny
That when a camera picked up with an itty bitty side
And a round thing in your hand, you get sprung
Wanna pull up tough 'cause you notice that grip[ was stuffed
...

 

[Bonneville]

Somehow I was ruined regarding camera body design after having my dear Leica 3G in my hands for so long. Getting back into photography after the scourge of work I bought an enormous Nikon Ftn, and loved it. But when I saw the Fuji X100 range it was all over, the feeling of the old Leica came back, first the Fuji T and now the F, and doubt I'll ever need another camera.

 

[John King]

I used my OM-1, OM10 for about 30 years, perfectly happily.

Neither had any kind of grip on the front.

Leaving aside left handed people entirely ...

 

[fredlong]

I used my OM-1, OM10 for about 30 years, perfectly happily.

Neither had any kind of grip on the front.

Leaving aside left handed people entirely ...

This is partially true for me. All my film cameras required two hands to operate. One to focus and cradle the camera and one to operate everything else*. The camera was almost entirely supported by my left hand. The one that's left with nothing to do with a modern camera with a good grip. I like to be able to use it to hold and point a flash.

And I often used to use an autowinder on my OM1 and OM4 set to single shot because it had a grip.

*Except Olympus bodies with the shutter dial around the base of the lens of course.

 

[agentlossing]

Flat front cameras are a bit easier to wear with a strap, and slip into a big pocket (providing you're not using a massive lens). The footprint of, for example, a Leica rangefinder with the typically small lens is built for compact carry (and inconspicuous usage) more than ergonomics.

Big lenses and heavy cameras call for big grips. I prefer the smaller, flatter type, when I can get them and they do what I want, but my two digital bodies are currently big honkin' Pentax DSLRs, so I'm obviously flexible...

 

[John King]

This is partially true for me. All my film cameras required two hands to operate. One to focus and cradle the camera and one to operate everything else*. The camera was almost entirely supported by my left hand. The one that's left with nothing to do with a modern camera with a good grip. I like to be able to use it to hold and point a flash.

And I often used to use an autowinder on my OM1 and OM4 set to single shot because it had a grip.

*Except Olympus bodies with the shutter dial around the base of the lens of course.

Fred, I've always used cameras two handed as well.
I was taught this very early on as being the only reliable way to get sharp photos. I also use Taekwondo fighting stance, as it's extremely stable. (One foot in front, other foot to the rear, at nearly right angles to the line of fire.

 

[PacNWMike]

I'll never buy a camera with a big grip. The one on my EM5's are plenty big enough. If you want a big grip you can always add one.

 

[e-light]

Today the form factor is at ever sensor size nearly the them formsize . .

Compact Camera Meter

Compare unlimited number of cameras with lenses, see how compact or bulky a camera is and sort by height, width, depth and weight.

camerasize.com

the smallest has not the smallest sensor . . the biggest sensor is not very much bigger than the sensor size a step down

Compact Camera Meter

Compare unlimited number of cameras with lenses, see how compact or bulky a camera is and sort by height, width, depth and weight.

camerasize.com

the same angle of the picturframe is not realy different at the optic size . . . .

So it is a question of haptics and the desired sensor format (IMO)

 

[OCBeyer]

So back in the days when we shot with the AE-1 and the OM-10 there was no grip and we never noticed, they felt great in the hand. But they were relatively light. Recently I've picked up my Canon Ftb and Tlb and they are HEAVY as bricks, they have no grips, and they also feel great in the hand. We never noticed any lack of a grip.

I like the flat front and the minimalist designs of those old cameras. And I like the bigger grips on my bigger cameras and the smaller grips on my smaller cameras. I really, really, prefer the smaller grips of the EM5, Fuji X-E2 and GX-7 but I appreciate the bigger grip on my EM-1 when using bigger, longer, lenses. So it's really a matter of preference and purpose. I doubt it ever impacts IQ all that much.

 

[JayOC]

I guess I would be considered a member of the flat camera society. Most of the cameras that I have owned have been flat. Only the Nikon D7000 and D7100 had built in grips. Instamatic 100, Retina IIa, Leica CL (digital) and Leica M10-R all flat. Even my brother’s Leica M3 that he would lend me was flat.

 

[e-light]

I'm definitely one of those "flat guys." ;-)
There have only been two grip cameras in the long line over the years.
The hint of a grip with the Olympus E-620 is quite timid. Yes, I even admit to having bought an additional battery grip...which was especially helpful in portrait format with the ZD 50-200.
The current 135mm format in the form of the Sony A7 has a grip that even offers some grip with the leather on it. Otherwise, the relatively heavy FD 135mm F2.5 would be too top-heavy in this combination.
Starting with the Agfa Parat i, the M3 the Summicron 5cm f2; the CL with the Summicron C 40mm up to the first own Canon EF with the 35mm f2 over the E-410 up to the Fuji X-A models
with the TTartsan MF lenses you always have the right one on the camera and the left one on the lens.
Which always felt intuitive in your hand.
I see the small "bumps" as a holding aid on the X-A, but never as a "grip"; they are also considerably smaller.