Big kit Vs Small kit
Discussion
My D40 has finally given up, therefore I in the market to find a replacement and the D7000 looks appealing (have a 35mm prime and a 18-200 so staying with that system makes sense).
My question to the masses is related to lugging around DSLR kit Vs a smaller package. Now I am at this cross road I have started to consider the micro 4/3 option (Lumix GX1 / OM-D E-M5). My photography is mainly of friends, family, landscape (when out walking) etc, usual type of thing for the amateur photographer, enjoy the process of taking photographs.
When you reached this cross road what did you do? Stay with DSLR or downsize? Do you regret your decision? Positives/negatives of the decision?
I am aware I would be selling out of one system and entering another one but for the sake of this topic let us assume this presents no issue.
My question to the masses is related to lugging around DSLR kit Vs a smaller package. Now I am at this cross road I have started to consider the micro 4/3 option (Lumix GX1 / OM-D E-M5). My photography is mainly of friends, family, landscape (when out walking) etc, usual type of thing for the amateur photographer, enjoy the process of taking photographs.
When you reached this cross road what did you do? Stay with DSLR or downsize? Do you regret your decision? Positives/negatives of the decision?
I am aware I would be selling out of one system and entering another one but for the sake of this topic let us assume this presents no issue.
I carry a full size dSLR kit everywhere.
I considered the alternatives but TBH none of them would have done the job I needed, eg landscapes, on a tripod, with filters, so I took the decision to keep lugging my gear around with me. I have an every day bag with just the essentials, 5D Mk3, 17-40, CPL, Big Stopper and grads, cards and batteries and a lenscloth.
I considered the alternatives but TBH none of them would have done the job I needed, eg landscapes, on a tripod, with filters, so I took the decision to keep lugging my gear around with me. I have an every day bag with just the essentials, 5D Mk3, 17-40, CPL, Big Stopper and grads, cards and batteries and a lenscloth.
Couldn't be happier with saying goodbye to my Canon setup and starting over with micro 4/3. There is a noticeable difference (only slight mind) between the latest ones and 35mm full frame, but compared to APS-C sized cameras, there is nothing in it.
But then I enjoy travel photography so take my kit around with me a lot, if I was in a studio or did sports photography (not that that's even a problem these days with the OM-D) I'd probably stick with a dSLR.
But then I enjoy travel photography so take my kit around with me a lot, if I was in a studio or did sports photography (not that that's even a problem these days with the OM-D) I'd probably stick with a dSLR.
I had to downsize from a D2X to a D800.
Opportunity for a smaller body and full frame - got several lenses "back" - i.e. delightful to use the 17-35mm now!
Even with it's L-bracket left on, the '800 is smaller in a bag. I just carry it round with a very small lens on when I'm not carrying a lot of kit.
Then, the cameras in mobile 'phones are getting quite good for the truly mobile moment, such that my "compact" gets little use. I probably won't use that at all from next time my 'phone gets upgraded!
Opportunity for a smaller body and full frame - got several lenses "back" - i.e. delightful to use the 17-35mm now!
Even with it's L-bracket left on, the '800 is smaller in a bag. I just carry it round with a very small lens on when I'm not carrying a lot of kit.
Then, the cameras in mobile 'phones are getting quite good for the truly mobile moment, such that my "compact" gets little use. I probably won't use that at all from next time my 'phone gets upgraded!
I've also downsized from a pro body to a "normal sized" DSLR (1D to 5D) and find that much better. My view is that a smaller system camera is still going to need to go in a bag and be a downgrade in image quality and if I'm carrying a bag around I may as well take the best kit for the job.
Craikeybaby said:
I've also downsized from a pro body to a "normal sized" DSLR (1D to 5D) and find that much better. My view is that a smaller system camera is still going to need to go in a bag and be a downgrade in image quality and if I'm carrying a bag around I may as well take the best kit for the job.
As I did, 1Ds2 to 5D3, the lighter weight is much appreciated.
How long have you been waiting for a use for that?!A micro 4/3 camera or another compact system jobbie is only a little smaller than a dslr. A d40 is hardly a big brick anyway!
You won't notice any difference in the amount of kit you need to lug around. You will still need to take lenses with you and it still won't fit in your pocket anyway.
Plus, if you are anything like me, you will get fed up shooting with a screen as aposed to a proper view finder and want a dslr again anyway.
If you really do want to downsize then get a high end compact (something like a lumix lx5/7) and put up with the lower quality images. You will fit it in your pocket.
You won't notice any difference in the amount of kit you need to lug around. You will still need to take lenses with you and it still won't fit in your pocket anyway.
Plus, if you are anything like me, you will get fed up shooting with a screen as aposed to a proper view finder and want a dslr again anyway.
If you really do want to downsize then get a high end compact (something like a lumix lx5/7) and put up with the lower quality images. You will fit it in your pocket.
Edited by MysteryLemon on Monday 19th November 16:58
Simpo Two said:
Oh dear, another one with pipecleaners for arms!
The answer is of course 'both'.
I wouldn't say that. I do a lot of hiking and have pretty much stopped carrying my 7D instead taking my s95. The weight of a 7D and a few lenses when you are doing 15-20+ miles makes a difference (especially when you throw in a mountain or two!).The answer is of course 'both'.
14-7 said:
I wouldn't say that. I do a lot of hiking and have pretty much stopped carrying my 7D instead taking my s95. The weight of a 7D and a few lenses when you are doing 15-20+ miles makes a difference (especially when you throw in a mountain or two!).
I do my hiking by car 
If convenience is the priority then yes, take a compact. If however you might encounter that killer landscape shot then you'll curse for not having the proper one!
For decades I've operated with an SLR and a compact. SLR when results are more important than convenience, and compact when I only need shirtpocket snaps. Increasingly as the (D)SLR does so much work it's actually nice to leave it behind as I then feel 'off duty'!
MysteryLemon said:
A micro 4/3 camera or another compact system jobbie is only a little smaller than a dslr. A d40 is hardly a big brick anyway!
You won't notice any difference in the amount of kit you need to lug around. You will still need to take lenses with you and it still won't fit in your pocket anyway.
It's actually the lenses that make the big difference. The size and weight and miles apart and the quality isn't these days.You won't notice any difference in the amount of kit you need to lug around. You will still need to take lenses with you and it still won't fit in your pocket anyway.
See: this photo as an example of a f2.8 lens comparison.
Or here to see a Olympus PEN with the kit lens vs a Nikon d5100 with a kit lens.
Xaero said:
See: this photo as an example of a f2.8 lens comparison.
Yes but that's a pro lens for a full frame camera, so you're comparing extremes. A mid-cost lens for a crop sensor would be much smaller - though still bigger than your tiddler I agree.MysteryLemon said:
A micro 4/3 camera or another compact system jobbie is only a little smaller than a dslr. A d40 is hardly a big brick anyway!
Not really. My Micro 4/3 Olympus PEN E-PL2 is the size of a compact (without lenses attached) - and the lenses themselves are pretty small. Carries on a strap around my neck, it weighs nothing.It takes good pictures, but has notable deficiencies: no built-in viewfinder, only 3 shots per second on rapid mode, and noise at High ISOs (which is frustrating me when attempting astrophotography at the moment). And kit is expensive - no nice, cheap second-hand lenses on e-bay. You could buy some, and get adaptors, but then you need to buy Olympus' £150 electronic viewfinder in order to be able to properly manual focus them, as the AF won't work.
But given that I can carry it and three lenses (45 mm and 14mm fast primes, and a 14-42mm zoom - and the latter actually obsolete with the other two in the bag), filters and spare batteries around in a bag 15cm x 15cm x 20cm, I can live with that. I simply (as a novice amateur) would not carry a full DSLR rig to the places I take this thing. In fact, it goes everywhere with me, unless I know I'll be drinking (I don't want to leave it in a club somewhere!).
As mentioned above, the lenses make all the difference. My PEN's kit len is OK, but my two new primes make a world of difference to photo quality.
As a tool for learning, it's a fantastic thing. But I could see myself wanting an OM-D oneday, so that I can rival the big boys for photo quality. But I'm sold on the size and ease of transport of the Micro format.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff