I get that the lenses are huge, so setting that aside, why are the bodies so much bigger than a full-frame SLR? What does that size and heft get you that something like a Lumix S1-H doesn’t?
In: Technology
In Physics, the concept of “inertia” is the idea that the bigger and/or heavier an object is, the harder it is to change how it’s moving.
So a larger, heavier camera body is easier to stabilize and move in a controlled manner than a smaller camera body. A brisk wind can knock over a Lumix S1-H on a small tripod mount, but it’s not going to do much to an 80 pound camera mounted on a stand with a wide base.
It’s also easier to find the balance points on larger objects, so it’s easier to make pivots for moving it smoothly. And if you put a 2-pound lens on the end of a heavier camera, you don’t change how it behaves as much as if you try to mount it on a small phone-sized device.
Finally, there are a lot of other bits of hardware besides those related to filming that are nice to have. They might need big batteries, swappable batteries, modular lighting systems, radio receivers to do time-synced computerized movement of the camera, etc. The parts of the camera devoted to taking images are still the size of the phone, but the rest of the camera’s size is related to lots of other features!
Mostly the glass. TV cameras have to work in basically any situation, you don’t get to dictate the lighting, or the relationship of the camera to the action. This means you need a lens that works in low light, with a lot of zoom, that stays in focus as you zoom in and out.
This video goes into more depth: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RkTaMyatsTo
Adding to the other comments, big cameras can have big controls for many individual settings. DSLRs tend to require you to dig through menus on a touch screen for some of that, or push tiny buttons up and down instead of just turning a knob.
Latest Answers