1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. REMINDER

    Any content, information, or advice found on social media platforms and the wider Internet, including forums such as AP, should NOT be acted upon unless checked against a reliable, authoritative source, and re-checked, particularly where personal health is at stake. Seek professional advice/confirmation before acting on such at all times.

Let us talk of weighty matters...

Discussion in 'General Equipment Chat & Advice' started by SqueamishOssifrage, Jul 13, 2020.

  1. SqueamishOssifrage

    SqueamishOssifrage Well-Known Member

    I started to update my camera insurance list yesterday, deleting stuff below a certain value/age, and adding new items purchased in the last year. Everything I bought in the last year added up to completely new system, except for the body and VG, but lightweight. I have always had a second body, preferably the same as the first, so they can be rotated to balance shutter actuations, but the second body is no longer a spare - it has its own system.

    Item__________________Main system_________________Light system
    Standard zoom_______24-70mm f:2.8 (82mm)______28-75mm f:2.8 (69mm)
    Wide angle zoom_____15-30mm f:3.5-4.5___________19-35mm f:3.5-4.5
    Tele zoom____________75-200 f:2.8-3.5______________100-200 f:4.5
    Macro________________105mm f:2.8_________________Set of 69mm 'filters'
    Ubiquitous fifty_______50mm f:1.4__________________50mm f:1.4
    Teleplus DGX_________1.7x__________________________1.4x (primarily to cover gap from 75 to 100mm)
    Flashgun_____________Metz 44______________________Sony mini gn=20

    Everything from the 'Main' list I already had, and everything from the 'Light' list I bought new or new/old-stock (the wide and tele zooms chosen by high rating and weight).

    Now the crunch bit - I have lost 4mm at the wide end, and 60mm at the tele end - but have reduced my load from 6.5Kg to 3.1Kg, including the bags.

    Has there been a quality loss? Yes, but nothing that can't be fixed by stopping down a bit - lots of light out here - or 'in post'.

    Do my back, shoulders and legs appreciate it? Damn' right they do!

    Just so I don't feel too much like a wimp, has anybody else here done something this drastic, so they can continue to wander over the countryside looking for landscape shots, or along the seashore for the dawn or dusk seascape?

    Be a man/woman/other, and 'fess up - you'll feel better for it! :D
     
  2. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    Not in that way. I do now run a “light” system because it is easy to carry and doesn’t take up much room. It is 3 zoom lenses and a body (APS-C). Started when we went to a family wedding. I’ll take part or all of it if we are going out and might take pictures. The “heavy” system I’ll take a body and an appropriate lens, exceptionally two, if I am going out to take pictures but I don’t try to carry everything. I only carry flash if I will need it. Even the light system doesn’t fit in a pocket so I’m thinking of getting a compact again for use when out cycling as even the “light” system is too cumbersome.
     
  3. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    OK then, over the last two years I have reduced the weight of my main cameras by a massive 200g (100g each) does that count?
     
  4. SqueamishOssifrage

    SqueamishOssifrage Well-Known Member

    Er... no... not a helluvalot!
     
  5. MJB

    MJB Well-Known Member

    I've cut down my walkaround set up to a couple of ounces. I can also access the Internet from it. Rumour is it makes phone calls too.
     
    Footloose, Gezza, Fen and 4 others like this.
  6. SqueamishOssifrage

    SqueamishOssifrage Well-Known Member

    I have been caught out too often to not want to have a range of kit with me. For instance, I was once asked to take photographs of a horse show, quite specifically the competitors as they cleared the jumps. I took both bodies, one with a 70-210mm f:4 and the other with a 70-300 f:4-5.6. Then I gat asked to take photos of the horses in their boxes... Fortunately I had my 50mm f:1.4 in a pocket, so I got by, but then I was asked the do group photos of riders, owners and horses in a very small winners enclosure. This time, I was screwed, big time! Even just a standard zoom would have cracked it.

    Incidentally, it was a good thing I took both bodies, because after heavy use of the frame rate, the mirror came unstuck from its frame.
     
  7. SqueamishOssifrage

    SqueamishOssifrage Well-Known Member

    Sounds fantastic! Bet it's a crap doorstop though.
     
    MJB likes this.
  8. MJB

    MJB Well-Known Member

    It stops the coffee table wobbling though.
     
  9. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    Very much so. I have operated like this since film days, to be honest - I used to use pro-spec Canon bodies and L lenses for "serious" stuff, and low-end bodies and a cheap zoom or cheap primes for other stuff.

    Now, I have EOS 5 series bodies (and a full-frame R mirrorless) and L lenses for my pro work and serious landscapes, and Canon's APS-C EOS M series mirrorless cameras and lenses for travel, when I'm not actively expecting to take "serious" landscapes etc, and hill walking etc.

    Over the last few years, I've grown my M kit to the point where it covers 99.9% of any of my personal stuff I want to do, and I can carry an entire kit in a very small bag for about the weight of one DSLR and lens. Or I can carry a lot less and still have a pretty versatile setup. And yet I can still take my M6 II body on a pro job as a backup, using all my big lenses with a simple adapter.
     
  10. SXH

    SXH Well-Known Member

    Since I transferred my allegiance from Olympus to Fuji, my kit seems to have got heavier - especially with a decent grip replacing the stupid one that came with the X-T100.

    Once I sell off the Olympus kit, I think I may consider the XF 18-135mm to simplify my outfit for most work...
     
  11. Zou

    Zou Well-Known Member

    Not me - never went heavy in the first place. Even my MF and LF are 'toy'/box cameras and pinholes.

    35mm film body + 50mm f1.4 with hood (715g)
    Sony CSC + 35mm f1.7, with strap (401g)

    Difference is even less if I use the standard pancake zoom on the Sony.
     
  12. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    I actually quite like the idea of a smaller, lighter system but then I realise that a smaller body doesn't fit the hand so well. That rather reduces the options, the OM-D EM1X being about the right physical dimensions and the lenses are light, if not cheap. Other than that, the Nikon Z6 is too small and I would be using the same lenses even if it weren't. I'll keep watching and waiting.
     
  13. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    I seem to be the only person on the planet that likes it but a Fuji X-H1 with grip is nearly the same physical size as a Canon 1Div but weighs a lot less. They were being dumped new at <£900 recently.
     
  14. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    M43 suits me fine and gives far more bang for my kilo! This is my maximum effort outfit and the only real weight is in the big G9/100-400 combo...

    Cameras Panasonic G9 and GM5 A65 DSC03472.JPG
     
  15. ChrisNewman

    ChrisNewman Well-Known Member

    Not yet, although when I’m wearing a jacket, and walking locally with little expectation of good light or anything fresh to photograph, I just take my Panasonic LX100 in a jacket pocket!

    But next time I have a problem with my D800, or if I find the weight too much, I’ll probably replace it with the Z7 or a successor. I take most shots with my 24-70 f/2.8 (and unlike you, wouldn’t want to have it limited to 28 mm). So I guess I’ll get the kit with the 24-70 f/4, which will save lots of weight. But I might then be tempted by the reputedly superb 24/70 f/2.8, giving a slightly heavier alternative. The Z 14-30mm would be a huge improvement on my APS-C 8-16mm, and lighter, but I’m not sure I could justify the cost. I wait with interest to see what Z-mount macro lenses Nikon produce. But with any new Nikon camera I’d probably need to add a lightweight flash to my kit; currently my SB-900 usually stays in the cupboard unless I expect to want it, as I can use the D800’s built-in flash if I need to.


    Chris
     
  16. Craig20264

    Craig20264 Well-Known Member

    Fuji X100F.
    You're welcome.
     
  17. SqueamishOssifrage

    SqueamishOssifrage Well-Known Member

    I must admit, I do miss the 24mm end of the main standard zoom when I use the light kit, as it means a lens change to go that wide. Even with my ultra-light kit, which consists of the 28-75mm f:2.8 and DGX 1.4x, I carry a 24mm f:2.8 'fixy' for the bottom end. This gives me 24 - 105mm with a bit of lens swapping. I also have a light-weight 85mm f:2.8, but for some reason it doesn't focus with the DGX 1.4x, so there is little point in carrying it to extend the range to 120mm.
     
  18. Footloose

    Footloose Well-Known Member

    Since I use a wheelchair quite a bit, I let that take the strain by locating a bag within easy reach underneath the seat, which can hold up to 6 lenses and camera with the standard 12-40mm zoom; It's a selection of 4/3rds and m4/3rds lenses and the underslung bag is 38w x 25h x 15d (cm).

    From this, I'll select what's in my bum-bag, immediately available, on my lap.
     
    EightBitTony likes this.
  19. steveandthedogs

    steveandthedogs Well-Known Member

    Tiny? Light? Vito II

    S
     

Share This Page