November 28, 2014, 03:47:22 PM

Author Topic: What about those lens weights?  (Read 3029 times)

Eldar

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1712
    • View Profile
    • Flickr
Re: What about those lens weights?
« Reply #15 on: May 14, 2014, 01:23:37 PM »
When I´m off for a trip, where I may be shooting everything from birds/wildlife to social events, it gets heavy.

I fill up my Lowepro Pro Trekker 600 AW with a 600, extenders, Otus, 70-300L (or the 70-200 2.8L II), 24-70 2.8L II, 15mm 2.8 (Zeiss), 85 1.2L II and at least one TS-E (24 or 17), 5DIII, 1DX, plus flash, batteries, a tripod with ball head and Gimbal and a 15" MacBook Pro ...

I am OK with each of the lenses, but summing it up makes a very heavy pack.
5DIII, 1DX, 8-15/4L, 16-35 f4L IS, 24-70/2.8L II, 70-200/2.8L IS II, 70-300/4-5.6L IS, 200-400/4L IS 1.4x, Zeiss 15/2.8, 17/4L TS-E, Zeiss 21/2.8, 24/3.5L TS-E II, Zeiss 35/1.4, Zeiss Otus 55/1.4, Zeiss Otus 85/1.4, 100/2.8L IS Macro, Zeiss 135/2, 600/4L IS II

canon rumors FORUM

Re: What about those lens weights?
« Reply #15 on: May 14, 2014, 01:23:37 PM »

atkinsr

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Re: What about those lens weights?
« Reply #16 on: May 14, 2014, 05:18:17 PM »
To a great extent, it's more about balance than weight. I have a Sigma 24-105 F4 that weighs in at 885g. While in the camera shop the other day, I took it off to try out a Canon 70-200 f/2.8 (non-IS), it weighs 1310g. It should have felt awful, but in hand, felt more balanced and as light as the Sigma. Even hanging from my shoulder on the strap, it wasn't nearly as bad as the spec would have you believe, perhaps only feeling 10-20% heavier.

The crappy Canon 75-300 $199 lens that I "borrowed" (bought & returned) from Best Buy (I needed a lens for vacation - which I was leaving for the morning after the camera purchase) only weighed 480g, but it felt heavier than the Sigma, and was so long when extended that I felt I needed a pilot car every time I wanted to turn around.

*shrug* I'm all for lighter weights if they can be had without giving up durability or reliability, but there's more to it than weight alone.

zlatko

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 387
    • View Profile
    • http://www.zlatkobatistich.com
Re: What about those lens weights?
« Reply #17 on: May 14, 2014, 08:33:34 PM »
So what do folks think?  Is smaller and lighter better for you?  Or do you prefer higher quality and damn the pounds?  Have you swapped down to a mirrorless ILC, or would you own and use both ILCs and SLRs?

I'm generally in favor of smaller and lighter because it all adds up.  My wedding photography gear usually adds up like this:
a) gear I'm often carrying on me = 7 lbs.
b) additional gear in my shoulder bag = 17 lbs.
c) additional gear in my backup bag = 13 lbs.
Total of the above = 37 lbs.

That's after making careful choices about what to bring and after replacing a few items with lighter versions.  I've included some mirrorless and I'm considering further reductions.  It used to be more (I used to use a wheeled bag). 
« Last Edit: May 14, 2014, 10:33:18 PM by zlatko »

verysimplejason

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1367
    • View Profile
    • My Flickr Account
Re: What about those lens weights?
« Reply #18 on: May 14, 2014, 08:42:37 PM »
As I'm more of a traveller these days, the lighter, the better.  For serious work, primes would do it except for events where I favor light zooms.

WPJ

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 239
    • View Profile
Re: What about those lens weights?
« Reply #19 on: May 15, 2014, 09:23:12 AM »
Yes gear does get heavy, I have been using a think tank belt system to distribute the weight I have just recently also added a military style load bearing vest for when I am hiking and wanting to bring more gear with me, I find it better than a back pack because it again it distributes the load over more of your upper body instead of your shoulders.

 

scottburgess

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 155
  • Canonical Canon
    • View Profile
Re: What about those lens weights?
« Reply #20 on: May 15, 2014, 08:44:52 PM »
...
Total of the above = 37 lbs.

That's after making careful choices about what to bring and after replacing a few items with lighter versions.  I've included some mirrorless and I'm considering further reductions.  It used to be more (I used to use a wheeled bag).

Have you considered going entirely mirrorless, or do issues like low light or image quality make that unlikely at this time?


wickidwombat

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4542
    • View Profile
Re: What about those lens weights?
« Reply #21 on: May 16, 2014, 08:07:16 AM »
...
Total of the above = 37 lbs.

That's after making careful choices about what to bring and after replacing a few items with lighter versions.  I've included some mirrorless and I'm considering further reductions.  It used to be more (I used to use a wheeled bag).

Have you considered going entirely mirrorless, or do issues like low light or image quality make that unlikely at this time?
Thanks
I almost snorted beer out of my nose when i read that >:(
APS-H Fanboy

canon rumors FORUM

Re: What about those lens weights?
« Reply #21 on: May 16, 2014, 08:07:16 AM »