# what cameras do you have?



## inferno (Feb 1, 2020)

i have a d750 with a tamron 35/1,8, stabilized. 
i really like this combo for indoors and night shooting. since i can crank the iso up to like 3200 or 6400 and it will have very low noise, and then the f to 1,8 or 2. and then stabilization. i can basically shoot in complete darkness if i want to.
very good for night/indoor shooting. probably as good as you can get on this planet today for that.

its a big step up from my d40x with kit lens indoors. those pics were usually blurry or noisy. noise starts at 400 on that one. and 1600 is unusable more or less. 

i got a new cam yesterday. a fuji x-h1 with fuji 80mm macro. the x-h1 was on closeout so only 900€ or so. 
i noticed one thing though. even though this is supposed to be their pro body. its not even close the ergos of any nikon, nor is the build quality/feel. but i get sensor stabilization *and* lens. and they cooperate. AND they work in the 1:1 macro range as opposed to most other macro lenses that are stabilized.


----------



## chinacats (Feb 1, 2020)

D5200 w kit lens


----------



## inferno (Feb 1, 2020)

its a good body. should take just as good pics as the best apsc bodies today. but with less hardware (buttons/dials) control. (i actually prefer the menu settings as opposed to hardware buttons)

i think the development have stagnated quite a lot for the last few years. basically a d600 from 2012 have the same IQ as the newest bodies. 
i think they reached close to the theoretical maximum IQ for a given sensor size many years ago.

lenses though. have not reached maximum. not even close.


----------



## chinacats (Feb 1, 2020)

Camera is better than me but looking at similar spec'd full frame (600 or 610) before i invest in glass. I also have an older 70-210 but rarely find the need to use it.


----------



## Kristoffer (Feb 1, 2020)

Got a D7100 used a few years ago, and have a few different lenses for it. The cheap Nikkor 35/1.8 is probably the best of the bunch. 

Truth be told though, my iPhone camera sees by far the most use...


----------



## Barashka (Feb 1, 2020)

Currently, only 'real' camera is older Olympus omd m10 + 14-150mm.

I used to travel with my 5Dm3, 16-35mm and 70-200mm f2.8 .. but one day found out I'm getting old, flattened my arch on my foot from the weight and stress. Ended up selling all the equipment, quitting photography all together for a bit, but bought this Olympus for the waifu as her travel camera .. then kinda commandeered it. It's been limiting but also enough. Form factor is lifechanging.

These days though, I carry a Moment ultra-wide lens for my phone and it's been getting a lot of use, since I always have my phone on me .. and even Olympus seems big now. Shocking to think this would have happened given how much 'real' camera gear I used to have.

x-h1 is an amazingly fun camera, I hear. Enjoy!

I hope one day to pause the knife hobby for a bit and get an ff mirrorless. Sony has been utterly demolishing the other makers, though I still like Canon a bit more as a setup (glass cost and menus).


----------



## Paraffin (Feb 1, 2020)

I retired from a pro editorial and advertising photo career back in the film days, when we had Polaroid backs to preview shots, and would pay extra to the film labs to "push or pull" the E6 line to get the exposure right.

You kids these days... don't know what you're missing. 

Well, actually you're not missing anything. Not just unlimited exposures, the low-light sensitivity is something we would have _killed _for, back in the Stone Age of film chemistry. I used to have far more money tied up in lighting equipment and generators I'd haul around to advertising gigs than I did in cameras and lenses. You don't need that now, at least for "natural light" setups. You still need to know something about artificial light for the more artistic set-based stuff.

I sold off my old Nikon F2s and F3s, Hasselblads, Pentax 6x7 and Sinar view cameras years ago. I sat out the digital transition until we finally arrived at full frame digital, and finally got a FF Canon and a few lenses. For a while I had a Sigma ultrawide zoom, a Canon 24mm tilt/shift, Canon 35mm 1.4, and Canon 105 macro. Eventually sold off everything but the fast 35 and the 105, which roughly corresponded to the two money-making primes I used back in the old 35mm film days. I could make a living back then with just a fast 35mm and 85mm lens. You learn to see most everything for an ad layout in those two frames. Everything else, including the sexy toys like a 200mm f/2 for blowing out backgrounds at full aperture (and man, that is a _special_ lens if you can afford one!) was just used on occasion.

Anyway, when you do this for a living, it doesn't always stick as a hobby when you retire from the rat race. I just shoot pix on my phone now like everyone else.


----------



## inferno (Feb 1, 2020)

i spent several hours yesterday and today reading the manual for the camera. so many settings to adjust.

just tried it out on a knife blade i made. i managed to shoot at 1:1 mag, indoor, no extra light, handheld, 1/10s. and it was pretty sharp... god damn. had to crank up the iso to 3200 for that though. but it still looks good.
this combo is gonna be a lot of fun i think.


----------



## inferno (Feb 1, 2020)

a 35 and a macro you say... what a coincidence. thats exactly what i have


----------



## Marek07 (Feb 1, 2020)

Canon 450D & D750, Fuji S5200, Nikon D750***. Despite the lower quality, I like the Fuji for travelling due to its size and its digital viewfinder - great for composing in B&W. Eyeing off Fuji X100 models.

** *- plus an embarrassing number of film cameras. Like @inferno, I loved cranking up the ISO to 1600 and beyond to achieve a lot of grain. Sadly, that was in my film days. Must revisit with digital.


----------



## slickmamba (Feb 1, 2020)

I used to shoot a d800 and d650, but some of my gear got stolen and I lost the heart to keep going =/


----------



## Paraffin (Feb 2, 2020)

Marek07 said:


> ** *- plus an embarrassing number of film cameras. Like @inferno, I loved cranking up the ISO to 1600 and beyond to achieve a lot of grain. Sadly, that was in my film days. Must revisit with digital.



You may already know this, but digital "grain" at very high ISO settings doesn't look like film grain. It's electronic "noise" with a color component. It's a subtle difference, but still not quite the same. if I wanted the film grain look with a digital image, I'd just shoot digital normally at a reasonable ISO setting, and then add "film grain" in post with a Photoshop filter.


----------



## Marek07 (Feb 3, 2020)

Paraffin said:


> You may already know this, but digital "grain" at very high ISO settings doesn't look like film grain. It's electronic "noise" with a color component. It's a subtle difference, but still not quite the same. if I wanted the film grain look with a digital image, I'd just shoot digital normally at a reasonable ISO setting, and then add "film grain" in post with a Photoshop filter.


No, I didn't know this - thanks for setting me straight. Despite using digital cameras, I've mostly just been "snapping" since my film days. Don't think I'll be pushing the ISO unless I really need to do very low light photos.


----------



## Luftmensch (Feb 3, 2020)

Digital noise is uggggllleeeeeh!

On film, by changing the ISO, you are effectively making the 'pixels' bigger (more photosensitive). This is why it is grainy! It has a nice random scattering around the film. On a digital sensor, the pixel size is fixed on a grid. This is the 'rgain' and should not really be confused with noise. As you increase the digital ISO (sensor gain), you just decrease the signal to noise-ratio (and amplify the photon, dark and readout noise).... It is not pretty.

Do as @Paraffin suggests!


----------



## mille162 (Feb 11, 2020)

Canon 5d4. Go to lenses are canon 70-200/2.8L (glamour shots), Sigma Art 50, Sigma Art 35, and surprisingly, Canon 100macro 2.8L. If the 70-200 didnt do such an amazing job, I’d prob drop the 50 and just have a workhorse Sigma Art 85mm for portrait work.

95% of my work is paid glamour models, so 70-200 is used with 35 filling in for tight spaces. 

With recent advances in lighting combined with low light performance, my external lighting is pretty much speedlight bodies (Godox system) and foldable diffusers. Even my underwater stuff is super compact, portable, and cheap! When I was first getting started in Digital Photography, I had Broncolor heads that each came with a non-detachable cord that took up its own Pelican case...not to mention to giant car battery it had to be plugged into! Used to have a push cart filled to the top with cases for a job, now it all fits in a single backpack!


----------



## lotfong (May 10, 2020)

New member here.
Cool thing to have photo threads on this forum !!
I am quite emotionally attached to my gear as it's been literally a part of me for the last decade as a photographer.

I was mostly a subcontractor doing event photographic work for venues in pubs and nightclubs until 6 years ago. 
I had back then several bodies, Canon 5D3+5D2+6D with 16-35L, 24-70L and 70-200L IS II,  with a flash setup for every body + the whole paraphernalia to keep with the hectic pace of event photography. Things happened in my life that made me radically change my course and with it the job went. I got rid of most of my gear, kept just what I absolutely loved to shoot with. 
I focussed more on travel photography in the last few years ,and carrying only one or two lenses with one body was actually liberating, creatively speaking.

Nowadays I shoot with my fourth 5D classic body, a Zeiss Distagon 25mm f/2 ZE, Zeiss Distagon 35mm 1.4 ZE, Zeiss Milvus 50mm 1.4 ZE and I recently acquired a Canon EOS Elan for 10$ to shoot my lenses on film, kodak ektar 100 more precisely. I never shot color 35mm before, only black and white. 
I am still waiting for the first film to be developped. 
I am quite eager to see the results as I enjoy the rendering of each lens I own and coupled with film tonality I feel it will make for possibly stunning images. 

Even thought there are much newer and better cameras on the market, I don't expect to get rid of my 5Dinosaur soon, 
I'll shoot it to it's grave, as I did with two of the previous ones I had. 
With roughly 240k actuations it might arrive soon, but I guess I'll just acquire a fifth specimen then.
Digital fullframe for 300 bucks is hard to pass, even thought it is only 12mpx and noisy as hell past iso 400, it is still capable of stunning imagery on print below 36x24" with proper light, glass and processing. It's color science plus its very simple ergonomics with manual focus lenses makes it a really nice camera to shoot with in my opinion. 
It can be a little bit akin to shooting film in a way by its simplistuc nature, except that I get to see the results on the spot, if needed.

Anyway for those willing to have a look here's a sample of a Zeiss 50mm f/2 makro planar I used to have on the 5Dinosaur. 

To get back on the forum's topic, here's some fish processing knife skills at work. Koh Tao, Thailand, 2016
f/2.0
ISO 200
1/640sec


----------



## Dendrobatez (May 10, 2020)

I used to have DSLRs, I'd get a new one every couple years but I found myself doing more outdoor photography and started favoring my cellphone due to portability. 
I got a Sony a6000 not long after it came out and honestly haven't ever needed anything else. You lose some features over a dslr but I also use it way more because I can go to the car show and not hit everyone with the camera/lenses hanging off my shoulder, or just enjoy the bonsai garden without being distracted by my gear.


----------



## panda (May 10, 2020)

Anyone use sigma cameras? I like the look their foveon sensors create.


----------



## Luftmensch (May 10, 2020)

lotfong said:


> I am quite emotionally attached to my gear as it's been literally a part of me for the last decade as a photographer.







lotfong said:


> Even thought there are much newer and better cameras on the market, I don't expect to get rid of my 5Dinosaur soon,



Nothing wrong with a trusted technology!!





Dendrobatez said:


> I got a Sony a6000 not long after it came out and honestly haven't ever needed anything else.



I _do_ think mirrorless is the way of the future. I know this is the subject of a bit of a flame war... objectively, it seems to me that there are a lot of benefits of framing/metering your shots by what the sensor sees. If we haven't gotten there already, eventually we will reach the point where a mirror and prism offer no benefit at the cost of increased mechanical complexity. Sony has been leading the charge in this technology....

What an age to live in for photography though!? For almost all people taking photos out there, almost all modern cameras will exceed their needs!






panda said:


> Anyone use sigma cameras? I like the look their foveon sensors create.



Nope.... I do like the idea of having per-pixel colour information though. Apparently they are great at base ISO but degrade as you start to amplify the signal.... I'm keen to see how the technology progresses!


----------



## lotfong (May 10, 2020)

panda said:


> Anyone use sigma cameras? I like the look their foveon sensors create.


As @Luftmensch said at low iso they do great as they actually record three times the data of a conventional CMOS sensor. Nowadays since they allied with Leica and Panasonic they share the technology between themselves and I don't know what's in the books for the Foveon technology. Would be great to have Panasonic work with Sigma on an improved Foveon sensor that does have a good signal to noise ratio. If it would be fullframe or Medium format that would be absolutely terrific.


----------



## GoodMagic (May 10, 2020)

Sony a7 II, 24-105 lens, 90mm macro lens. 
Contax g2 35 mm rangefinder with three zeiss lenses
mostly I use my phone!


----------



## Geigs (May 10, 2020)

panda said:


> Anyone use sigma cameras? I like the look their foveon sensors create.


I remember reading up on Foveon years ago when they came out, and really wanting to try it. Such a great idea. 

I still have my old Olympus E3. I love the olympus glass and have a 12-60, 50-200 (+ the 2x and 1.5 extendors) and 50 macro, 35mm prime (sigma). Im way too lazy to shoot RAW and process, and I liked the oly JPEG colour rendition a lot. I've had this camera for 15+ years, it's up to 300K actuations. Once it dies i might find an E5. Crappy low light performance, terrible about ISO 800 but in daylight it's great.


----------



## Luftmensch (May 11, 2020)

lotfong said:


> As @Luftmensch said at low iso they do great as they actually record three times the data of a conventional CMOS sensor. Nowadays since they allied with Leica and Panasonic they share the technology between themselves and I don't know what's in the books for the Foveon technology. Would be great to have Panasonic work with Sigma on an improved Foveon sensor that does have a good signal to noise ratio. If it would be fullframe or Medium format that would be absolutely terrific.



That would be phenomenal. I bet it would be a pricey beast! Given that collaboration... I guess it would also be L-mount?

The recent incarnations of the fixed-lens foveon cameras have had quirky designs. Perhaps Sigma aught to get credit for being creative? I am not sure! I never handled one - but they sort of 'broke' camera design language.

The collaboration with Leica and Panasonic could bring those... ummm.... 'unique'... designs back to photographer oriented ergonomics


----------



## The Edge (May 11, 2020)

We have a Canon 50D and we just got a Fujifilm EX3. Saving up for the 50-140mm lense for the Fuji. I'm a novice with photography, but my wife has that skill set.


----------



## inferno (May 11, 2020)

after having used my fuji xh1 for a few months i think i like nikons much much more.

first the nikons are much higher mechanical quality.
then the ergonomics.... the body is just weirdly shaped.
the battery life is pretty much 0. yeah i give it a 0.
then we have the the whole thing with the small oled instead of optical viewfinder and pretty much this sucks too. hard.

and then the lenses. nothing regarding controls on the lens is actually mechanically coupled to the lens package. so its all "interpreted" then executed.

and like for a macro lens very often you just want to set it to max magnification and then move the focus point/the whole camera back and forth until you have focus. now this is easy with real mechanically coupled lenses. you just turn the focus ring to the soft or hard stop for closest focus/max mag. takes 0,5 seconds. but with this lens you have to like "scroll" and scroll and scroll your way to the max mag position, and to be honest you dont ever know if its actually at that position, since there are no stops or indicators.. dafuq.


----------



## WildBoar (May 11, 2020)

Luftmensch said:


> I _do_ think mirrorless is the way of the future. I know this is the subject of a bit of a flame war... objectively, it seems to me that there are a lot of benefits of framing/metering your shots by what the sensor sees. If we haven't gotten there already, eventually we will reach the point where a mirror and prism offer no benefit at the cost of increased mechanical complexity. Sony has been leading the charge in this technology....


Sony? The Betamax people? Their formats are always a sure bet.


----------



## inferno (May 11, 2020)

imo mirrorless is not on par with dslrs yet, not even close.

some of the annoying stuff i have found with the technology so far:

when just "scanning" the surface of one of my synths with the lens its like a strobe going off in the viewfinder. it changes the brightness like 5-10 times a second, because the light meter senses different light amplitudes. going from black plastic to silver anodized aluminum, there is probably a few EV difference in reflectance between these 2. but an optical finder just shows this, your eye adapts to it, but the oled on the other hand tries to compensate for this and display this at a certain brightness and gamma, and white bal, and its adjust this several times a second in the viewfinder. and this gets annoying really really fast.

then you also have gamma, white bal, brightness and colors of both the back display and the viewfinder oled (compared to reality and what you will see on your calibrated computer screen). and they are 2 different technologies and resolutions, and now you have like 6-8 things to adjust just to make stuff look natural before you even shot 1 single pic. and these adjustments are only accurate for a certain enviroment. like evening, indoors in light x. go outside and both the VF and back screen will be off by far. but the optical viewfinder is never off. because it simply shows a slightly degraded (darker) reality. but its consistent.

yeah sure you will encounter some of these problems with optical viewfinders too but in my experience they are much less severe and problematic, and much more easy to predict.

and the auto wb on the nikon is like 3000x better than the fuji. 

basically the things i have to adjust on the nikon is ev comp up or down, half an ev up or down. nothing else. then it looks exactly as i saw it with my own eyes on location (and in my viewfinder) when i look at it on my computer screen afterwards. and then for really major changes i might have to swap between spot and matrix metering. but thats it. but you see this immediately when youre shooting. because its either almost completely dark or white on the back screen.

now with the mirrorless. first you need to tune the oled to your monitor, then the back screen to the monitor, and then both of those to reality. 
and it only works so so. because sometimes you're outside in the sun and sometimes inside in the dark or whatever. basically you can never be sure you captured something like it really looked on location with the mirrorless, not even after reviewing on the back screen. and then when you get home to view the pics its a lottery if you actually captured what you wanted to. not so much with the nikon. i just do 1 at ev0 and one at -0,5 and one a +0,5. then i'm guaranteed one completely accurate shot. colors and everything. more or less. 

ymmv.


----------



## The Edge (May 11, 2020)

We got the Fuji before our trip to Ireland. It was a lighter option perfect for traveling. Balance for my wife is perfect, and you can set up the controls to what buttons and knobs you want. The picture quality is amazing. Just like knives, everyone has a different preference, and I know professionals that love this setup too. 

Find what works for you, but the reasons you may not like something may not be valid to someone else.


----------



## panda (May 11, 2020)

i'm taking a hard look at sigma dp2 merrill


----------



## Luftmensch (May 12, 2020)

WildBoar said:


> Sony? The Betamax people? Their formats are always a sure bet.



 

Dont forget mini-disc, Vaio and Bravia.

Hehe... Sony are actually phenomenal at fabricating camera sensors. A large number of the other camera manufacturers use them!




inferno said:


> imo mirrorless is not on par with dslrs yet, not even close.



It depends on what you do. For a lot of uses cases they are more than any consumer needs... More or less any camera from a trusted manufacturer is a 'ridiculous amount of camera' these days!



The Edge said:


> Find what works for you, but the reasons you may not like something may not be valid to someone else.



Pretty much this. There is far more in common between DSLRs and mirrorless than there are differences. In fact... if you want to be reductionist... they are both boxes that take photos 

I like the thud of a mirror. There is also something reassuring about the ergonomics of a bulky DSLR. On the other-hand, focusing manual lenses on a mirrorless and actually previewing the DOF and exposure is a heck of a lot of fun. You can almost have night vision. If you are travelling, M4/3 is a pretty amazing ecosystem. We're spoilt for choice!




panda said:


> i'm taking a hard look at sigma dp2 merrill



 <- one of these?

Sure why not? If you do landscape/still-life photography at base ISOs - you'll get a high-performing compact camera.


----------



## Matus (May 12, 2020)

I had ... many ... before we had kids. I think I have spend more money on cameras in my life than on knives  Let me just recall a few:


Tachichara 4x5 (Fujinon 125 CMW, Fujinon A 240/9, Grandagon 75/4.5, Osaka T 400/8)
Toyo VX125
Rolleiflext T - the camera I miss most.
Rolleiflex 2.8E
Mamiya 6
Bessa R3A (and a few lenses), Konica Auto S3
Nikon V1 (lent to a friend, the camera works but not worth selling)
Finally - still have Olympus OMD-EM5 Mark II, 12-40/2.8 and 40-80/2.8 - but have not used the camera in about a year. The camera is pretty good, the lenses are fantastic.

The only 'camera' I use is the one on my not well aging iPhone7. I basically stopped doing photography and only use phone to document things. Maybe I will turn back to analogue photography when kids will grow up.


----------



## ayumi_ishida (May 12, 2020)

lotfong said:


> New member here.
> Cool thing to have photo threads on this forum !!
> I am quite emotionally attached to my gear as it's been literally a part of me for the last decade as a photographer.
> 
> ...


Nife film processing fish skills !


----------



## panda (May 12, 2020)

Luftmensch said:


> <- one of these?
> 
> Sure why not? If you do landscape/still-life photography at base ISOs - you'll get a high-performing compact camera.


are you familiar with sigmas? i dont really have any interest in photography but the pictures foveon sensor creates just have a film-like feel to it that pulls me in.. this shows through in even B&W photos


----------



## Nagakin (May 12, 2020)

Was a huge fan of Nikon for awhile, but the form factor got annoying. Basically everyone at a cookout or something would get awkward af with a lens pointed at them. I ended up getting better photos with a compact because people were more relaxed. Went through a bunch. Panasonic, Sony, Fuji. Right now I have the Sony RX100VA because it fits literally anywhere and does everything. Fuji X series is more fun to shoot with but it's too dangerous to zoom with your feet in certain countries while traveling.


----------



## dang (May 12, 2020)

A full frame has advantages, but my experience with mirrorless has been much more favorable than some would suggest. I've been shooting with an Olympus OMD EM1 Mk II for about a year now, and I'm very happy with the tradeoffs. Some of the glass is excellent, btw.


----------



## parbaked (May 12, 2020)

dang said:


> A full frame has advantages, but my experience with mirrorless has been much more favorable than some would suggest. I've been shooting with an Olympus OMD EM1 Mk II for about a year now, and I'm very happy with the tradeoffs. Some of the glass is excellent, btw.



I've been shooting a Lumix GF1 with a 20mm pancake and 45mm Leica portrait lenses with good results.



Nagakin said:


> Fuji X series is more fun to shoot with but it's too dangerous to zoom with your feet in certain countries while traveling.



I used to take it on trips with the 20mm lens but now I just use my phone for the same reason...


----------



## Luftmensch (May 12, 2020)

panda said:


> are you familiar with sigmas? i dont really have any interest in photography but the pictures foveon sensor creates just have a film-like feel to it that pulls me in.. this shows through in even B&W photos



I was interested in the technology... so I probably did what you are doing! I looked at a lot of photos... read reviews. The images are really nice and sharp. But I haven't handled one... so I don't know what they are like to use. If I wanted a high resolution compact for street photography or landscapes, I would think seriously about it!!


----------



## Luftmensch (May 13, 2020)

Matus said:


> Let me just recall a few:
> 
> 
> Tachichara 4x5 (Fujinon 125 CMW, Fujinon A 240/9, Grandagon 75/4.5, Osaka T 400/8)
> ...



Wow! That is a serious list!! What sort of images did you shoot?


----------



## Matus (May 13, 2020)

Luftmensch said:


> Wow! That is a serious list!! What sort of images did you shoot?



Check out some of the 4x5" and 6x6 designated albums on my (since long unused) Flickr: Matus Kalisky’s albums | Flickr
There is far from everything in there, but you will see a clear examples that big cameras don't necessarily warrant great photos


----------



## lotfong (May 13, 2020)

Matus said:


> Check out some of the 4x5" and 6x6 designated albums on my (since long unused) Flickr: Matus Kalisky’s albums | Flickr
> There is far from everything in there, but you will see a clear examples that big cameras don't necessarily warrant great photos




this is stunning ! large format is really something to behold. I had a friend who did some wetplate collodion stuff for fun with his crown graphic, it is really something else. I'd love to try that !!


----------



## Matus (May 13, 2020)

It is very cool, but takes a lot of time. Based on my personal experience - it would be easier to start with large format once one has certain experience as a hobby photograph. Otherwise the result will be just snapshots that will just take much longer and cost much more - been there, done that


----------



## lotfong (May 13, 2020)

Matus said:


> It is very cool, but takes a lot of time. Based on my personal experience - it would be easier to start with large format once one has certain experience as a hobby photograph. Otherwise the result will be just snapshots that will just take much longer and cost much more - been there, done that




yeah I guess you are right, experience definitely speaks here!
I've played with medium format a bit with a bronica 6x6, it was fun. I think logistically speaking it makes more sense than large format for someone like me who didn't play that much with analog... but still, one day I'll get a crown graphic!!


----------



## Matus (May 13, 2020)

I absolutely recommend some kind if medium format to try out. There are many out there, usually quite reliable as basically all of those cameras were build for professional use. Once you get the hang of that (and developing films and such stuff), then go for the Crown


----------



## lotfong (May 13, 2020)

Matus said:


> I absolutely recommend some kind if medium format to try out. There are many out there, usually quite reliable as basically all of those cameras were build for professional use. Once you get the hang of that (and developing films and such stuff), then go for the Crown



Oh yeah !! I haven't played enough with 6x6 !! you got a rollei twin also ? would you say it is similar to a hasselblad 500 in terms of output (is the zeiss 80mm 2.8 similar in both?) I have seen very good prices for a rollei with a f/2.8, they are rare in my neck of the woods, I had seen only f/3.5 beforehand. the Hassy were still a good 1k $CAD with just a 80mm while the rollei were like 600 so maybe it would be worth it !


----------



## Corradobrit1 (May 13, 2020)

Fujifulm XT-2 with the 18-55 kit lens. I had the highly thought of 16-55 zoom but sold it as it was twice as big and twice as heavy as the body itself. Portability was not its strong suit.


----------



## inferno (May 15, 2020)

Corradobrit1 said:


> Fujifulm XT-2 with the 18-55 kit lens. I had the highly thought of 16-55 zoom but sold it as it was twice as big and twice as heavy as the body itself. Portability was not its strong suit.



i know that feeling. the whole package needs to be balanced.

on my d750 (840g) i have the tamron 35mm/1.8 (450g) and it feels really good and balanced as a package. 

i also have a d40x (420g or so) and i prefer to use it with the kit lens (like 200g), i actually got the 16-85mm for it, but thats quite a heavy and long lens (and it extends quite far) and it became super unbalanced.

the fuji body i have is no lightweight but neither is the macro lens. i think the package is slightly lighter than the d750 but the lens is longer and the heaviest elements are in the front and it makes the whole package slightly unbalanced, it feels a bit front heavy. just enough to make the package less enjoyable to use than the d750. also the weird grip dont really help either.

i think as long as the grip is truly ergonomic and well thought out, then the body can be heavy, it doesn't really matter. 
also i think one could get away with longer heavier lenses on the chonkier bodies (like the Dx ones). since they simply balance better on those.


----------

