11-30-2011, 11:54 AM
(This post was last modified: 11-30-2011, 11:55 AM by Brightcolours.)
[quote name='Sammy' timestamp='1322651797' post='13383']
Total weight and total "bulk" of the equipment carried can also be highly relevant factors - pocketability is not the only thing to consider or the only sensible argument in favor of small camera bodies. I smile everytime when I pack my GF1 stuff and think of the weight/size of my previous DSLR gear.
[/quote]
Whether the camera body weighs 300 grams of 500 grams is not a big deal. The lenses are the bulk.
I use a 70-200mm f4 lens which weighs 700 grams. I use an 18-50mm f2.8 lens and a 35mm f2 lens, mainly. For your GF1 that would translate into a 35-100mm f2.8 lens, an f2 standard zoom and an f1.4/1.8 standard prime.
I am pretty sure that with such lenses your smile will mostly disappear.
If I wanted to limit my lens capabilities, and be ok with f5.6-f8 lenses, like with your GF1, yes, then the weight and bulk would be considerably less. So will be my photo creativity options.
So basically I agree with Jennben and lomskij...
Total weight and total "bulk" of the equipment carried can also be highly relevant factors - pocketability is not the only thing to consider or the only sensible argument in favor of small camera bodies. I smile everytime when I pack my GF1 stuff and think of the weight/size of my previous DSLR gear.
[/quote]
Whether the camera body weighs 300 grams of 500 grams is not a big deal. The lenses are the bulk.
I use a 70-200mm f4 lens which weighs 700 grams. I use an 18-50mm f2.8 lens and a 35mm f2 lens, mainly. For your GF1 that would translate into a 35-100mm f2.8 lens, an f2 standard zoom and an f1.4/1.8 standard prime.
I am pretty sure that with such lenses your smile will mostly disappear.
If I wanted to limit my lens capabilities, and be ok with f5.6-f8 lenses, like with your GF1, yes, then the weight and bulk would be considerably less. So will be my photo creativity options.
So basically I agree with Jennben and lomskij...