For the record, I have personally seen a VERY HIGH correlation between big, heavy cameras and rugged, reliable cameras. This does not exactly imply causality, however. The big, heavy cameras are usually older and thus better built (and more expensive than modern cameras, by the standards of their time), or modern but more expensive and thus better built.
Certainly for the average user a small, light, and cheap camera is preferable. Given modern technology, such a camera can be very capable--the Canon Rebel can run rings around the best of the Spotmatics in almost every way. Small, light, and cheap however is usually in direct opposition to rugged and reliable. I have never met a camera what was both (although a factory-new MX might have been, and rangefinders certainly could be). DJE
