That huge size & weight problem (A true story..)

[Knut S]

These days it seems that the most important thing with camera gear is its size and weight. It should be as light and small as possible. A lot of photographers are selling their dslr(s) to enter the nirvana of mirrorless heaven. I was in that boat two years ago, and this is what happened.
     Photographing has been my main hobby for the last 12-15 years and 7 years ago I bought a house in Lofoten. (So tired of living in tent in ALL kinds of weather, summer or winter. ) And of course, spending time here you ends up walking in the mountains. A problem occurred over time; the all to heavy camera backpack. (I'm rather picky when it comes to camera gear. Guess I'm not alone?? ) So I start searching for lighter gear. Tried Nikon P7000, then Fuji X10, Canon G1x and Fuji X-e2 with 18-55mm and an adapter for all my Nikkors. All those cameras worked great while I was carrying them up and the hills, the picture quality useful, but there was a lot of compromises. Bad viewfinders, poor battery life (espessialy in the winter), way too small to operate with gloves and the shooting experience wasn't as good as it should be etc, etc.. So I wasn't satisfied with the situation. So in the end I asked myself, when is the camera most important? When I'm carrying it or WHEN I'M PHOTOGRAPHING? So the story ended as Bjørn J suggested right from the beginning. I ended up with the camera of my dreams, the magnificent D3x. So when I'm walking and want to take some shots I drag out the Domke bag from my backpack and I'm not missing anything. 16mm/3,5 28mm/2.0 50mm/1,2 105mm/2.5 makes me ready for the most.  But that is me. We live in a free world, so..
     Just wanted to share my thoughts.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Waking up from Nirvana may be more painful than entering the state of bliss, but probably more helpful in the longer run. Good luck with your Lofoten endeavours.

[Knut S]

  Hehe.. And thank you.

[elsa hoffmann]

I also used to own the D3x - and loved it.
My weight issue is linked to my tripod. I can carry my bodies - and even though they become heavier every 10 yards of carrying them - its the tripod that kills me right off. Therefor Tripod stays  - and I miss so many shots.

[Mike G]

Good luck to you Knut, as you say it's a free world!

I've gone through the agonies of ditching my Nikon stuff in favour of a Fujifilm system based on an X-T1 and various lenses!

My Nikon gear was super quality, but the weight was the killer, what is the point of having top notch lenses if you leave them at home because of the weight factor. There were also other reasons in wanting to change, and I didn't like the way that Nikon was heading, it always to me seemed larger and heavier and Nikon's support to existing models in my view is lacking for one of the premier brands! E.G. The D600 debacle, and a corporate ethos of not owning up to gear issues, ignoring or actually denying a problem doesn't make it go away! So sad.

[pluton]

. Bad viewfinders, poor battery life (espessialy in the winter), way too small to operate with gloves and the shooting experience wasn't as good as it should be etc, etc..

This pretty much sums it up for me also.

[Frank Fremerey]

I love my D3, but since I have my D600 (which undeservedly received a lot of bad press due to a communication issue at Nikons) I do not use it anymore. The rare cases in which I need speed are now covered by the D500.

The X100T is a nice camera to carry as a backup on a light weight trip. Image quality is amazing but -- sorry -- I cannot accept her as a professional tool.

Knut. You got the best of both worlds: a sturdy heavy glove compatible camera with light weight primes (16mm/3,5 28mm/2.0 50mm/1,2 105mm/2.5) ... that is my way too. I tried Zooms over and over again ... last attempt was a 200-500/5.6 ... these will never be my friends. The weight issue is solved by light (manual focus) primes. They might be all metal but they are still small and light weight because they do not zoom-af-vr ... that they are much better suited for my style of shooting.

The 300PF is a light weight prime too, esp for a 300mm high quality lens and it still features AF and VR.

[Airy]

With time, I tend to lug less and less lenses around. It used to be three, then two, now often one (out of a nice collection), and restrain myself to what I can do. Making up one's mind and choosing the lens is part of the shooting exercise (what is it that I want to achieve ?), so it is not "painful".

Df plus anything is mostly over one kilogram, but I can still survive it. I can put it into my usual bags with up to the 180/2.8 mounted (or even the 300 PF), so that's OK. This is "my way" to solve the size and weight issue.

I carry zooms only for one type of shots now: public performances where I cannot easily choose my shooting position, also because I need their brilliant AF performance. It is not primarily about "having a wide range of FLs", it is because of the use case.

When I absolutely need to be discreet (size, noise...), the OM-D does the job. OM-D plus the very good Panasonic pancake 20/1.7, and the excellent 75/1.8 for reach and the sheer pleasure is a very good combo.

[Airy]

With time, I tend to lug less and less lenses around. It used to be three, then two, now often one (out of a nice collection), and restrain myself to what I can do. Making up one's mind and choosing the lens is part of the shooting exercise (what is it that I want to achieve ?), so it is not "painful". When I cannot, any 50 will do (esp. Voigtländer 40/2 or Zeiss 50/2 MP).

Df plus anything is mostly over one kilogram, but I can still survive it. I can put it into my usual bags with up to the 180/2.8 mounted (or even the 300 PF), so that's OK. This is "my way" to solve the size and weight issue.

I carry zooms only for one type of shots now: public performances where I cannot easily choose my shooting position, also because I need their brilliant AF performance. It is not primarily about "having a wide range of FLs", it is because of the use case.

When I absolutely need to be discreet (size, noise...), the OM-D does the job. OM-D plus the very good Panasonic pancake 20/1.7, and the excellent 75/1.8 for reach and the sheer pleasure is a very good combo.

[BW]

The battle between DSLR vs mirrorless, regarding weight and portability is a matter of personal preference and what makes you bring the gear to your choice of location. I have tried different solutions, but I have a hard time making a rock solid decision about what suits my needs best. Its even harder for me to try to convince anyone else, what might suit their need best. Any photographic situation has its optimal choice of gear. What I however have learned is that Im not able to meet those requirements every time. If the situation require a picture I have to make due with whats at hand. For the time being I have only DSLRs except my AW1. Most often I find that I bring the Df with a 40 mm pancake and a couple of lenses more specific for the task at hand. However, when Im dead certain what Im about to photograph, I pick more carefully. On those occasions I carry whatever wight required. Daytime landscape photography is IMO what needs the least specific gear. The existing software can handle stitching in such a way that any modern FX, DX or M4/3 camera with a kit zoom or a slow prime can handle any photographic situation between sunrise and sunset in such a manner that you won't be able to see the difference in print or at web output. It all boils down to in what way the photographer is able to handle the gear and software. Find the gear that you are comfortable using and have fun. Knut seem to have found his holy grail, others might find it in super expensive, well corrected lenses, but what suits you is still an open question

[John Geerts]

Of course it is a personal thing, but I agree the optical quality, and therefore the results, are the only thing that matters to me. Apart from the nice handling of the Nikon DSRL instead of that upgraded smartphone's....., the lenses with the Nikon-mouth are available for every taste.

Different occasions ask for different lenses. For me the versatility is important, therefore I like the 17-35/2.8  and the Angenieux 35-70/2.5 for the wider views. They also enable  the close-ups I want.  I find weight and size not important.

[chris dees]

I go a couple of times per week to the gym to work out.
If necessary I walk all day with my D500 + Sigma 150-600 Sports and D810 + 300PF
Of course less weight is more comfortable and then the Df with a nice selection of MF-lenses is a very good alternative for me.

This one is already a few years back:
Kata backpack; D3s + 600, D700 + grip + 200-400, 16-35, 24-70, 70-200/2.8, Gitzo 55xx and Wimberley

[Frank Fremerey]

That is Chris!!!

Very good characterising shot. Lovely.

[Frank Fremerey]

If I have to get a job done I tend to take more equipment than necessary. My ThinkTank eats a lot, my car trunk eats
even more. If I need the shot and it is a one chance business like
Kofi Annan arrivin in car and entering a building or a wedding,
I will surely wear a second body available in 2 seconds.

If I go on a casual shoot I carry one lens one body.

A bottle of water and a little pic nick or an emergency
rain coat is usually more important
than more equipment.

[Jan Anne]

Congrats Knut on your new precious

Brings back some fine memories of my D3s, these are ultra dependable cameras, especially when using some hard to break manual focus lenses.