[JJ_SO]

Don't think so.

 

If I want to have a formfactor like an APS-C or smaller mirrorless, then there are plenty of options around like Fuji XF100, 70 or whatever. Why compromising IQ just for a pancake, when a fiully integrated camera is still smaller because it doesn't need the mount, the electrical contacts and whatever is possible to be placed inside the camera. It also would not need a protection glass to keep the sensor dust free.

[Njom]

Lately we have seen lots of lenses that may have pushed the optical performance yet it all came at the cost of increased size and weight - Nikkor 105mm f/1.4, Sigma 85mm f/1.4 (and all the other new ARTs), the Otuses, the late Ls, also the Sony GM lenses.

 

Is that really what you want ?

 

For my personal photography projects, I wouldn't even touch a lens beyond 1Kg.

Hi Guys,

You are right Klaus that is why the M4/3 it is a very intresting alternative.

I have both systems olympus pen f and sony A7R II, when I compare:

A7RII + FE90 vs Olympus Pen F + Olympus 60mm macro

A7RII + FE85 GM vs Olympus Pen F + Panasonic 42.5

I realize that buying the A7RII which it's a mirrorless camera was a mistake for me.

But again I am not professional.

[obican]

I don't know about you, but I cannot imagine weight in my hands before I actually hold it. Most lenses I ordered without actually have it in my hands or on a camera before. And weight is hurting my back, yes, but in my hands 1 kg can feel just right ind the right proportion or very odd. It can be in a good balance-  like the "heavier than 1 kg" 150-600 G2 is, it's really very well balanced. Or totally off balance, like the 150-600 Sports version is fully extended.

 

Heavier stuff always implies a more decent quality. Lighter lenses like the 300/4 PF E have a harder time to convince me about their quality - and if I'm honest, that lens will never reach the level of trust other lenses got right from the beginning. Stupid, I know.

 

I try to handle the lenses and cameras before buying. Luckily, it's not hard at all where I live since there are multiple stores which let you do that.

 

You are absolutely right on how the balance makes a difference and sometimes it's better in hand than on your back.

[Klaus]

Of course, there have always been big lenses. Everything from 400mm was and is big. And in this case I accepted this as a fact of life. That's a physical limitation.


The first time that I actually "realized" the increased weight in a non-long tele lens was with the 11-24mm f/4L. It's not even an overly fast lens. Carrying it around was a PAIN. And it felt the same with the Sigma 85mm Art.


Combined with the Canon EOS 5Ds R we are talking about 2kg total here. For one 85mm lens with a camera. This is when all the fun is gone and only work remains really. I was genuinely happy when the field trip was over.


I am not so sure whether this is right method to rescue the photographic industry from its demise.


But maybe I'm just getting old.

[JJ_SO]

Put some wheels under a monopod.  B)

 

The 5Ds R and all other >36MP bodies are a reason for this development, optically and mechanically. Sigma 20/1.4? This dimensions used to be MF class. We can try to simulate that IQ in FF, but it's surrogate.

 

Florent, i also do mostly photobooks, but when I spend some time with it, I want to have it bigger than A4 - so normal size is 30 × 30 cm, Sometimes even 40 × 30. 60 cm double page means - for 300 dpi - having 7000 pixels horizontally. I do see when IQ is not so perfect - and it's great to dive into the details if there are some worth a dive.

[davidmanze]

   Whilst we are talking about the ever increasing size of lenses.......

 

   Pentax "sort of announces" a new 50mm F1.4 lens, it's bigger, better and no doubt will have a bigger and better price tag!

 

  Why they started with another 50mm is a bit of a surprise as they have quite a few at around that focal length already, the 55mm F1.4 hasn't been that long for this world.  It will be no doubt very welcome to K1 shooters who are discovering the benefits of Pentax's pixel shift technology.......

 

   Keep them coming Pentax!

 

http://news.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/rim_info...14597.html

[JJ_SO]

And they also have a tiny tiny 50/1.8 "nearly pancake" (fiftyoneeight goes well with panceight  )

 

Well dave, Pentax knows how to do niftyfifties. Maybe better than anything else they know  :lol: But it's funny, I just saw the same. In pentax-land, it's a colossus. Even the dwarves go Gulliver.

[thxbb12]

Don't think so.

 

If I want to have a formfactor like an APS-C or smaller mirrorless, then there are plenty of options around like Fuji XF100, 70 or whatever. Why compromising IQ just for a pancake, when a fiully integrated camera is still smaller because it doesn't need the mount, the electrical contacts and whatever is possible to be placed inside the camera. It also would not need a protection glass to keeo the sensor dust free.

 

Yes, but having a non interchangeable camera is too restrictive. I'd like to be able to change lenses while keeping a small form factor.

Also, pancake doesn't necessarily mean compromised quality. Many of the ones I listed above are actually good optically. To name a few:

• Panasonic 20 f1.7
  
• Pentax 40 f2.8 and 70 f2.4
  
• Canon 22 f2
  
• Samsung 30 f2
  

[JJ_SO]

 

Yes, but having a non interchangeable camera is too restrictive. ...

 

 Well, that's curse and freedom at the same time. At least sometimes. I do have a set of Sigma Merills because the three together were cheaper than one (decent) body with three lenses. And I was and still am amazed of the quality of these outdated things. And if I have time and immobile subjects, want high quality on par or better than D810 and still travel light, I fill two or three of them in a bag, add half a dozen batteries and am still lighter than a D810 with 24-105.

 

For certain occasions I was using two DSLR-bodies. Wether they are interchangeable or not, I was not interchanging lenses, just taking the tele- or wideangle body, as changing lenses costs time and distracts focus (of my mind).

 

I can understand your point, I just see also the advantages of a fixed lense which keeps dust out of the body. At least in theory.

[toni-a]

Well I was very enthusiast for Tokina 16-28f2.8 it seemed just the perfect ultrawide, and after trying it was very happy with optical results. And now guess what? When was the last time I used it ? Six months ago...

When you compare size and weight of 5D plus Tokina 16-28 to 750D plus 10-18 especially with tokina's big protruding front element it's obvious which one to carry.

I own tokina 24-200 that was considered a damn heavy lens, it us lighter than many of my lenses like 24-105f4L!!! Which is not even considered heavy by today's standards