ahsanford said:
neuroanatomist said:
[quote author=choosehandsafety.com]Hand sizes for males range from 6.25" to 8.1" with an average hand size of 7.44". Female hand sizes overlap, but are generally somewhat smaller, with an average size of 6.77".
My hand size is 7.4", so pretty much spot-on male average. Sounds like you have small hands, a weak grip, or both.
I wrote about this relaxing and recalibrating my hands/habits to learn a new grip recently here:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=33528.msg688331#msg688331
If anyone finds the A7/A9 body a good fit for an f/2.8 zoom or f/1.4 prime for day long shooting, you must have small hands to tune of 2-3 sigma smaller than mean. There's just no room for your fingers and you need to make an 'iron claw' hold with your index fingers, middle finger and thumb...
just like I used to on my T1i with my 24-70 f/2.8L I. Not fun at all. Pass.
- A
[/quote]
This is something that I’ve always been surprised to hear so many people have so much trouble with.
Starting with the 1100D on a 400f5.6, holding the entire setup by the body is never an option. Even when the camera is facing straight down I
never allow the full weight of the lens to pull on the mount.
It was no different when I had a 5D2 (and the mount on the 5D2 already felt sloppy in comparison).
Regardless of whether or not your camera “looks” like the mount is going to rip off with a big lens attached, I can only imagine how much stress is going into the mount using a 70-200f2.8 and gripping just the body. I know I’ve seen people do it lots in videos, but I guarantee even a 1D will be flexing the mount, even the EF mount is just not big enough, and heaven forbid a Nikon user try anything similar.
You hold the lens, and the body just floats on the back. The 40mm Pancake and included Kit lens are my only lenses too small to be used as the primary grip.
The camera grip is mostly just a surface for more buttons and to help you aim.