Tired of lugging a DSLR around......

<p>My "walking around" bag has a Nikon D3 and a D3x with five lenses, a light meter, filters, extra batteries, memory cards and a note book computer.</p>

<p>I'm pushing 70.</p>

<p>Kids these days - Jeez!</p>

 

<p>I know how you feel. These days it is either a Mamiya 6 or a Leica M6 that leaves the house with me. Both cameras are light and easy to carry with very sharp lenses but they are film cameras. The big heavy electronic slr stays home.</p>

When I want to travel light i use a belt. Biking for a week with it, containing 3 lenses (say a Sigma 17-70, Nikon 70-300 and an otherlens, It is always a difficult choice from 10 lenses),a monopod, filters (all 77mm), batteries and loader, camera D90 and some other needed stuff. What doesnot fit with the belt i cannot take, because all others things (like clothes) are in the bags attached to the bike.In the this way i (55 years) am still able to climb mountains, and ride (and fotograph) some 60 miles a day. So you should make choises when you cannot (or want not) take everything, The big mistake is to take all your stuff, to be ready for every possibility, and conclude that you did not use a lot of the stuff you have been carrying. But i am not feeling bad for the opportunities i misted, that is life, i just look for the next one.

<p>'Kids these days - Jeez", says it all. Goodonya Greg!</p>

<p>I have gone through spells of not wanting to lug the DSLR (and before that the SLR) around. I have gone through a series of P&S cameras over the years... got started when my photo unit was encouraged to keep a small camera pocketed so we could hold it up over the gaggle of crowd to get "the shot" when it wasn't possible to get in with the "real" cameras.<br>

My current pocket camera is a little Canon SD870 with IS, but I would recommend a little better quality for most... the image quality - sensor noise especially - out of these tiny cameras is a drawback. Some kind of image is better than no image at all!</p>

<p>Greg Peterson your my hero! Compared to you, I'm only a pup at 55 and in good shape (I'm an RN and put on about 100 miles a day at a dead run) and still have serious doubts about lugging a big honkin setup around.</p>

<p>In my forties I had a F100, 5 lenses, tripod, and all the other goodies I thought I couldn't live without in a big backpack and go for mile and not think about it. Even a scaling down with the equipment I have seems like too much stuff. I am going to try the free 7 day trial with the Ricoh and then go from there. I will be sure to report back to everyone.</p>

<p>I have been a regular visitor to this forum (daily RSS feed) and there are lots of folks that responded that I have the utmost respect for. Thank you all for your comments.</p>

<p>Any others?</p>

<p>With a BIG film slr you get more film area per pound.</p>

<p>The Graflex 5x7 slr here weights 10 Lbs.</p>

<p>ie you get 3.5 square inches of film per pound.</p>

<p>A 35mm slr is about say 1x1.5 thus 1.5 square inches; it would have to weight 7 oz; maybe possible with a P&S stylus.</p>

<p>In the pure film era my Rolleicord IV was used alot; a lighet weight rig than my E3 flex.</p>

<p>Greg Peterson your my hero! Compared to you, I'm only a pup at 55 and in good shape (I'm an RN and put on about 100 miles a day at a dead run) and still have serious doubts about lugging a big honkin setup around.</p>

<p>In my forties I had a F100, 5 lenses, tripod, and all the other goodies I thought I couldn't live without in a big backpack and go for mile and not think about it. Even a scaling down with the equipment I have seems like too much stuff. I am going to try the free 7 day trial with the Ricoh and then go from there. I will be sure to report back to everyone.</p>

<p>I have been a regular visitor to this forum (daily RSS feed) and there are lots of folks that responded that I have the utmost respect for. Thank you all for your comments.</p>

<p>Any others?</p><div></div>

<blockquote>

<p>You would not want to give up Image Quality to something with less IQ, that's the price we pay to use good gear.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>do i assume correctly then that you are shooting 8x10 field cameras?</p>

<p>I too have a D300.<br>

1. Yes, I also get tired of schlepping it around sometimes. Then I just grab my Leica C-Lux2 (see below).<br>

2. I too long for an APS-C compact. But I stick to the small-sensor Leica until they come up with something absolutely irresistible.<br>

Do not sell your D300. It is a versatile camera with top IQ. Put a 35/1.8 DX on it, you could carry that combo for a whole day.</p><div></div>

<p>(double post)</p>

<p>Hi Jeff,<br>

If cost was not a factor, and I could only have one camera, it would be the Rolls Royce M9... perfect for what I do (landscapes, artistic work, and maybe a little street). Now, as one of your responants put it, back to reality! (Reality so sucks sometimes!) :o)<br>

I've been using a m4/3's G1 for the last several months, and I am so impressed with it. If you have to have high ISOs, it's not going to cut it for you. If you have to have high-burst action capability, it's probably not going to suit you. If you have to have poster-size prints, it probably won't cut it for you either. But, if you're like the majority of users out there, it will do you just fine, and you can still find new G1s in the $600 range. They will also take a boatload of lenses with adaptors. And, it's two pounds lighter than a straw hat... easy to haul around all day.<br>

To go one step further... if it has to be easily pocketable, go with the GF1 and the 1.7 pancake. Also get a zoom and stick it in your fanny pack. You just don't get a much better combo than that! You will be amazed at the quality! Slide on over to the four-thirds forum and ask some questions. You'll get an earfull! I know a few professionals (actually selling prints and making money) using their G1s! Remember, that ASP-C sensor is just not that much bigger than the 4/3s. <br>

I wouldn't at all mind having a D700 for my indoor (and close outdoor) work. But on the go, it will be the Lumix every time! Good luck!</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Hi Jeff,<br>

If cost was not a factor, and I could only have one camera, it would be the Rolls Royce M9... perfect for what I do (landscapes, artistic work, and maybe a little street). Now, as one of your responants put it, back to reality! (Reality so sucks sometimes!) :o)<br>

I've been using a m4/3's G1 for the last several months, and I am so impressed with it. If you have to have high ISOs, it's not going to cut it for you. If you have to have high-burst action capability, it's probably not going to suit you. If you have to have poster-size prints, it probably won't cut it for you either. But, if you're like the majority of users out there, it will do you just fine, and you can still find new G1s in the $600 range. They will also take a boatload of lenses with adaptors. And, it's two pounds lighter than a straw hat... easy to haul around all day.<br>

To go one step further... if it has to be easily pocketable, go with the GF1 and the 1.7 pancake. Also get a zoom and stick it in your fanny pack. You just don't get a much better combo than that! You will be amazed at the quality! Slide on over to the four-thirds forum and ask some questions. You'll get an earfull! I know a few professionals (actually selling prints and making money) using their G1s! Remember, that ASP-C sensor is just not that much bigger than the 4/3s. <br>

I wouldn't at all mind having a D700 for my indoor (and close outdoor) work. But on the go, it will be the Lumix every time! Good luck!</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I am in a similar situation; however can agree with you.<br>

Am still in the slide film world yet if somebody came up to me and said here's<br>

CAN$2500.00 for your F100, your remaining rolls of film, your three lenses and the<br>

D90 would I take it? More than likely, yes.<br>

Am taking fewer and fewer photographs and enjoying them less and less.<br>

My hey-day was back then, not now. And suspect as I get older and<br>

physically weaker, will need the realm of what is now, less and less.<br>

A small non-digital point and shoot would probably be nice;<br>

however is that all there is?</p>

<p>As with many others I am in a similar position and until recently my solution has been a Film camera with a single focal length lens Nikon FM2 with 24mm lens<br>

I have been playing around and keeping tabs on the Micro 4/3rds. As yet they dont have a fast wide prime in their focal length of 11 or 12, this would be a deal breaker for me.<br>

What I noticed is that the Panasonic lenses focus significantly faster than the Olympus lenses on either Olympus or Panasonic bodies. I did not particularly get along with the Olympus bodies and will definitely go down the route of the GF-1 Whilst i really like the folding Olympus zoom lens for its compactness I found it to be terribly disappointing when compared to the much larger Panasonic zoom lens.<br>

It would be easy to sink a small fortune into the 4/3rds systems particularly as they launch new lenses.<br>

I would not sell my full frame gear for this but use it extensively as a travel option where it will find a very useful niche and occupy about 60% of my photography.<br>

Cheers G</p>

<p>Look at the D90..its a nice weight and on a par with D300 image quality. The 70-300 vr nikon is a wonderful lens..add a 18-70 and you are all set.</p>

 

<p>I'm another vote for a m43. I've used a canon 5d and multiple l lenses, but they're so heavy.<br>

Now I've got a panasonic gh1 and since I've had it, the canon stuff sits in a closet.</p>

<p>I'm just finishing up a quick trip to Montreal and Quebec city. It's been rainy, so I've just used the gh1 and the 20 mm 1.7 pancake (equvalent of a 40mm on 35mm film slrs.)</p>

<p>The combination was little bigger than a gf1 with the addon viewfinder and incredibly light. Small enough to carry under the raincoat. It's a great combination. With just the prime lens, no messing with switching lenses or zooming, except zooming with my feet.</p>

<p>Sort of reminds me of my days with an AE-1 and 50mmf1.8 lens.</p>

<p>Jeff, I throw a Canon G11 into my handbag when I am not using the D300. It's very convenient for quick shots, yet it captures both RAW and JPG, and not grainy up to ISO 800.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Just saw a news item on a blog that Ricoh just came out with a telephoto for their GXR body. So I went to their website<a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.ricoh.com/r_dc/gxr/features.html" target="_blank">http://www.ricoh.com/r_dc/gxr/features.html</a> and I was impressed.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The GXR is expensive. Furthermore, I don't like the idea that you will be buying the lens and the sensor together. Thus when some day the sensor technology improves, you cannot use the lens but have to buy the lens/sensor combo again. Rumor has it that the ultimate goal of the GXR body is to separate the sensor from the lens. However this won't happen for a while.</p>

<p>I too have a m4/3 camera. I have a GH1, which also gives superb HD video. I thus no longer own a camcorder. You have to actually pick up one of these with a pancake prime lens to appreciate how small they are. With a $50 adapter, you can mount all the Nikon lenses. These m4/3 camera has a 2x crop factor. A 100-300mm zoom lens is scheduled to arrive by the end of the year. With it, you will have a 200-600mm compact lens on a very small body. </p>

<p>I had the same issue, exacerbated by being an old guy and breaking an elbow last fall - lugging a D300 was more than I could handle. I studied the issues for a while and bought a Oly E-P1 with the 14-42 collapsible. Just got back from two weeks in Turkey and the photos were great. My son was with us, and he's on a round-the-world backpacking trip. He ended up taking the E-P1 to replace his SONY DSLR gear.<br>

I drug the D300 + Tamron 10-24 around on an architectural tour today and gawd is it heavy. Want my E-P1 back and want the new 9-18 ultrawide.<br>

The D300 will go on eBay later this year.</p><div></div>

<p>I have been doing the same thing but I would not sell off my gear I would add something smaller as many have pointed out. The question is what to add. I really like the look of the Panasonic 4/3 system but It seems to make more sense to ad a more consumer body. I don't think the 4/3 is that much smaller then a consumer body, I could be wrong but from what I have seen if you ad a lens other then the pancake and a view finder its getting pretty close. I was playing around with a D40 ( I believe ) and I was amazed at how small it was compared to my 5d2. But something very cool about the 4/3 systems. it looks like a fun camera. </p>

<p>I never really looked at the Ricoh, I may have to as it seems pretty impressive. </p>

<p>I am leaning toward something like the Panasonic LX3 since I want HD video and a wide lens and this seems to be the optimal high end p/s but its been out a few years so I have been just waiting. </p>

<p>What I do for now when I want to go light is take some or just 1 small prime in a small bag like an urban disguise 20 and it ends up being more fun but I need to get something smaller as well, having a big heavy camera when your shooting just for fun takes the fun out. But I think you would regret selling it off so take your time with your decision.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>gosh I still lug a Bronica SQ with 3 lenses and a few backs , not to mention film , filters etc<br>

I even carry this at times on my pushbike .<br>

have to admit it is a bloody heavy thing but then a mate of mine does it with an 8 x10 view camera<br>

so I guess I don't really have much to wine about .</p>

<p>Hey I got good arms from this at least</p>

<p >If you choose to go with a micro four thirds, you may want to check out the Samsung NX-10. I just played with one last week at the Seoul Photo and Imaging Show 2010. I actually preferred the ergonomics and menu layout to the other micro cameras. I think it is pretty new, and they still have as yet unreleased new lenses for it. Possibly worth a look. Good luck in your hunt.</p>

<p>I have 2 Panasonic G1s, one is modified for IR, a 45-200mm, and a 7-14mm lens that will all fit into a small camera bag easily fitting under airline seats for carry on plus light weight for hiking. The telephoto is not too sharp on the long end but the kit and the wide angle are very good at their optimum f-stop. The 7-14 does not have the capability to use filters. These cameras shoot and focus a little slower so they are not very good for sports and they are noisy at higher ASAs but I use almost everything at 100.<br>

If you use ND filters for shooting waterfalls the camera is excellent. With the electronic viewfinder, it looks just like a normal exposure and you can easily compose images without having to add and remove the filters, you just leave them on.<br>

To use the camera in macro, I just screw on a Nikon macro filter. With the screw on filter, the images are very sharp with both the kit and the telephoto lens.<br>

I had shot 4x5 for years but now I would never go back. I enjoy taking pictures now just because it is so easy and fun without having to lug huge amounts of cameras and plates around. (I'm getting old obviously) <br>

I try to post a picture on most days if you would like to see examples from January 2009 onwards. www.jimcox.ca</p>

<p>If your main thing is landscapes and macros, a D300 with 12-24mm and a 105mm micro is very light and all you need. Switch to a carbon-fiber tripod if you're not already using one. I think about lightening the load quite a bit, but I'm still too into nature photography to give up the dslr.</p>

<p>I love shooting with my D300s -- the way it feels, the controls, the speed of AF and CF-card-writing -- and I shoot almost everything from a tripod. My landscapes often require lots of depth of field which necessitates a slow shutter speed. My tripod-mounted macro shots are always carefully framed, often require slow shutter speeds and remote release, and are sometimes focus-stacked. I often use a 300mm w/ 1.7X, and putting it on a tripod means I can keep the ISO down and use slower shutter speeds, frame my shots more carefully, and carry it around on my shoulder.</p>

<p>Now if I found a 4/3 forum full of the kinds of photos I take, I'd probably dump the dslr. But that day hasn't come. I did recently buy a smaller camera backpack so I can more easily go out with just part of the load. In the end it will come down to your own commitment to your art. Or at least, thinking about it that way might make you feel better about sucking it up and hauling the load.</p>