I’m guessing it’s the Contemporary? The Sports should be 2800g 
1 Like
I don’t know, it seemed like 10kg fo me
1 Like
So small kits you all have 
What do you look for in a camera setup?
A setup which is nice to use and does not limit my hobby. Main camera must fit nicely to my hands so it can’t be too small. This will probably change when weight comes a problem some time in a distant future.
I started with Canon in 2008. Canon 50D was better fit to my hands than competing Nikon. Been shooting Canon since then. Upgraded 50D to 7Dmk2 which is still in use, borrowed it to my dad and got 5Dmk4 as a main body when it was introduced.
I started to use Canon R system with RP (changed that to R8) and got R5 right when it was available.
My current setup is pretty much complete, missing only 2-3 lenses. It goes from 5.2mm dual fisheye to 1600mm. It took me 15 years to get everything I need (or maybe want is correct word there). I’m lazy to write down all the lenses here so I will add an image here soon.
Are you happy with your current setup?
Pretty much. I have no GAS for better systems at the moment. I would get Canon R1 sized body instantly if it had 45mpix or more. Until Canon brings that kind of camera I will most probably use my current Canon R5. If R5 breaks tomorrow, only then I would get R5mk2.
I still want some wide angle tilt&shift lenses, e.g 24mm and 16mm. I will also probably upgrade old 16-35mm EF lens to RF system some time in the future.
2 Likes
Accidentally clicked the delete button , but I recommend the Irix 11mm F4 to add to your wide angle GAS…
2 Likes
So, I reviewed my image count with this Nikkor 50m f/1.8 - a total of 199 captures, with 120 in the year that I bought it. However this also prompted me to look at some of the older captures, and I thought I’d share a few out of interest - they cannot go in the “Charge your battery …” capturing thread - they are almost 5 years old. Showcase? No, I’m not sure they are ready (or ever will be) for that pedestal. Therefore:
I was on the Queensland Sunshine Coast some 10 days before summer solstice, and had the opportunity for a time-lapse of the sunrise. After getting things setup with my second camera, I captured a few frames using the 50mm, before heading to the shore with my long glass for the seabirds. I’ve never really done anything with them, but they tell a story:
I hunted up the timelapse frame that was depicted in the first image - I was taking one frame every 10 seconds, and it was shot on a D3300 with the widest lens I have - the Samyang 14mm f 2/8 - 1s exposure at f/8.
5 Likes
The difference isn’t quite as dramatic with a small full frame mirrorless body and a 24-70 mm f/4. The full frame option enables shallower DOF (compared to the f/2.8 m43 lens) and has sensor that’s ~4 times larger. Considering that I think mirrorless full frame is quite impressive.
I think all camera systems are impressive, but they excel at different things. Full frame and APS-C are a nice balance between size and image quality without being the absolute best at either. Whereas medium format and M4/3 are the best (within popular formats) at image quality and size respectively.
Depending on your needs, you could argue that the differences in size or image quality are not that significant, and so system A is better than system B; but sometimes you just want the “best” at one particular thing. For many people, that might be low-light performance or dynamic range, in which case they will look at medium format or FF. While others might be all about the smallest kit possible or the most reach, in which case APS-C and M4/3 are the preferred options.
For me these days, I’m all about portability. I just want the smallest, lightest kit possible, and DR/low-light performance is further down my list of priorities. When I look through my favourite photos, it’s rarely the lack of noise or DR that stands out. It’s the fact that I was there with a camera at the right time to take the shot. So, any camera from the last 20 years would probably suffice for that.
4 Likes
I currently use a Sony A6300 and a bunch of various cheap lenses.
I’m a spendthrift, and my first digital camera was a find on Facebook Marketplace. Before I bought that camera I had an seldom used, barely functioning Minolta 35mm. But because the lenses I had with that camera were the Minolta A mount AF lenses, I bought in to the A mount system, and I’ve stuck with it ever since.
Now I currently have Pentax and a Nikon lens adapter to go with some suitably inexpensive lenses from those brands as well.
1 Like
True that! If you want the smallest possible kit, M43 — or perhaps Pentax Q 
— is a good option.
3 Likes
I’d love it if the Pentax Q had a revival! But somehow I don’t think it will.
2 Likes
Realistically, the GR III is a few millimeters larger than the Q series cameras, and much more capable, so I think it fills that niche. (Yes, you don’t get very wide angle, but your phone does that already, and you don’t get telephoto, but I doubt many people used the Q cameras for serious telephoto).
1 Like
The telephoto work doesn’t need to be serious, just like the camera itself really isn’t (in my opinion).
This video has some good shots and shows the capabilities of small telephoto lenses pretty well.
That said, Pentax probably hasn’t revived the Q because the GRX is doing so well. With the 40mm version people also get a little more versatility and that might be enough for them