I don’t think anybody has taken the issue of weight seriously.

The 18-55mm lens is perfect for a walking around lens.

If you need more reach, the 55-200mm lens is tiny.

Get the newest versions of both lenses.


Put whichever one you are not using in a pocket or waist pack and you have a complete kit that weighs under two pounds.


Add an SB-400 for fill flash and you are still under 2.5 pounds.

The above two lenses and the flash, along with a D5600, is the lightest, most versatile kit I have ever used.

This may be one of those - you can't get there from here - but I thought I would try.

A moving company wants me to take some (stationary) drone photos of their moving trucks. But their facility is under the SeaTac (Seattle) airspace - so my drone won't fly. Mavic 2 Pro.

I do have my part 107 license. So the question is - how do real-estate drone photographers take photos of houses when they are under controlled airspace. Or do they not do it? The drone is only going 20 feet in the air - usually below the highest trees.

Thanks for any insight you can give.

Despite having previous glider, single-engined and twin-engined flying, I managed to drive a drone sideways into a tree and lost it. As alexol notes, it is not trivial, especially if the drone is out of site (and that happens at around 500 metres, depending on the background). The angle of view of the camera, Sun location and other factors are at play and it is a mono view, so depth perception is often lacking. My suggestion would be that you buy one of the Pro 4 clones (about $300 U.S on line) so that if you lose it, you don't break the bank. This drone is over 250g, so you will need to get certified. The one I lost, (Mavic Mini) cost me about $300 to replace at Black Friday prices. The new Mavic Mini 2 is under 250g, has collision avoidance, 4k camera and does not require certification. From my experience with the Mini, the platform stability and camera stabilization are excellent and the Mini 2 would probably make an excellent unit for you as well, but is more expensive than the clones. Good luck in your quest!

What I am saying is that smaller apertures would have zero effect on focus hunting. My guess is that the OP is hand holding, and focus is being acquired on different things that are visually in close proximity in two dimensions but not so close in the depth dimension. Like a bird in a tree that has some branches in front and a busy background - the camera will try and focus on the bird if the AF box is placed on the bird, but if it is a small target, it could acquire on the branches in front or the background - and focus will definitely hunt between all the elements.

Another cause is trying to focus on something that is low contrast or has no hard edges - PDAF systems don't do well in these circumstances.

A third possibility is too little light - which mimics low contrast behavior - if he just doesn't have enough light it won't focus reliably.

Don't know if we've talked about this in a dedicated topic before. I sometimes wonder why I'm attracted to a particular photo, what makes me want to linger or want to come back to it. A few reasons:

-- It realistically depicts a subject I like
-- It evokes pleasant memories (childhood/relationships/travel...)
-- It expresses beauty via form, color, shape...
-- It depicts interesting, thought-provoking forms, colors, shapes
-- It teaches me something (historical sites/events...)
-- It projects a sense of mystery I'm drawn into
-- It projects a sense of serenity and peace
-- It makes me think about the human family

Do you have any additions to the list? Any comments on what makes an "interesting" photo?