Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Too heavy.
Page <<first <prev 5 of 9 next> last>>
Apr 13, 2018 09:22:25   #
Flickwet Loc: NEOhio
 
These are also in my No more column.
Yeah I was in shape, FU









Reply
Apr 13, 2018 09:22:26   #
epstju
 
I use Nikon 750 with fx 25-300 to Israel , London, calif & soon to Italy am age 88 in excellent shape no problem find solves all my needs

Reply
Apr 13, 2018 09:24:30   #
berchman Loc: South Central PA
 
rpavich wrote:
Could it be possible that while I am ABLE to carry about 40 lbs of gear I just don't want to?


You said it. I'm 80 and my grip strength has been tested and found equal to a 30 yr old. But I don't want to be walking around a foreign city with my Nikon D800 and 24-120 f/4 or 70-200 f/2.8 lens in my hand. I have transitioned exclusively to Fuji X-T2 with the versatile 18-135 lens for travel. I keep a second Fuji with a 12mm lens in my bag.

Every now and then somebody has to brag about carrying around a heavy camera and how anyone who doesn't want to should get in shape. Believe me, I'm in shape, both cardio and strength and I could carry around a Graflex press camera with flash in my hand if I wanted to, but I don't want to.

Reply
 
 
Apr 13, 2018 09:36:51   #
leftj Loc: Texas
 
warrior wrote:
Sorry Sir: My Nikon D810got to heavy for this 87 yr old. Traded for Fujifilm XT-2.


But did you do it only for the weight? No other considerations? Because if that is the case you can get a little P&S that weighs almost nothing.

Reply
Apr 13, 2018 09:45:58   #
dragonfist Loc: Stafford, N.Y.
 
Flickwet wrote:
My Olympus OMD EM5 has saved my days, pisses me off when some a$$ holes belittle the realty of someone’s situation


Don't use the term a $$ holes disparagingly. After all an a$$hole has a purpose, you have to wonder about the ones you are making reference to.

Reply
Apr 13, 2018 09:51:31   #
Flickwet Loc: NEOhio
 
dragonfist wrote:
Don't use the term a $$ holes disparagingly. After all an a$$hole has a purpose, you have to wonder about the ones you are making reference to.


You turned my morning around! Thank you ever so much!

Reply
Apr 13, 2018 09:56:51   #
zug55 Loc: Naivasha, Kenya, and Austin, Texas
 
Somehow many here miss the real point. We are not talking about sex, after all. If you like a heavy camera, great. If you like a lightweight one, great as well.

I travel internationally a lot. I usually carry my camera bag all day long and do a lot of street and architecture photography. (I also carry a Canon G9X for moments when I do not want to show my big camera.) So weight really matters to me. I have been shooting with a Nikon D7100 for a while. I have been looking for a full frame camera to get close to professional image quality for blogging. When the new D850 came out I was ready to get it--until I held it in my hands and realized how heavy that monster is. So I decided to go with the new SONY A7 III instead--it just arrived yesterday. I got the 24-105 f/4 with it, and I am choosing some prime lenses by quality and weight.

The point is, having a lightweight and smallish camera is really important to me because of the travel photography I do. That does not mean it has to be important to everybody else. So why be judgmental about it?

Reply
 
 
Apr 13, 2018 10:01:21   #
leftj Loc: Texas
 
zug55 wrote:
Somehow many here miss the real point. We are not talking about sex, after all. If you like a heavy camera, great. If you like a lightweight one, great as well.

I travel internationally a lot. I usually carry my camera bag all day long and do a lot of street and architecture photography. (I also carry a Canon G9X for moments when I do not want to show my big camera.) So weight really matters to me. I have been shooting with a Nikon D7100 for a while. I have been looking for a full frame camera to get close to professional image quality for blogging. When the new D850 came out I was ready to get it--until I held it in my hands and realized how heavy that monster is. So I decided to go with the new SONY A7 III instead--it just arrived yesterday. I got the 24-105 f/4 with it, and I am choosing some prime lenses by quality and weight.

The point is, having a lightweight and smallish camera is really important to me because of the travel photography I do. That does not mean it has to be important to everybody else. So why be judgmental about it?
Somehow many here miss the real point. We are not ... (show quote)


Hmmm - I thought we were talking about sex but I do understand your point of view and rationale.

Reply
Apr 13, 2018 10:01:58   #
brooklyn-camera I Loc: Brooklyn, NY
 
Age 72 shoot sports with 7D MKII, grip, 70-200mm f/2.8, 100-400mm f/4. Sometimes shoot two semi-pro football games in one day from the sidelines. Tried using a mono-pod but it got in the way....shoot handheld but I also have a sling which helps to hold the gear between shoots. What gets tired are my feet from going up and down the field. Hockey is a lot easier, I shoot from the bench. The only thing is that my hands feel like ice at the end of the game. I use gloves, 3 different pairs I carry in mt backpack. The gloves really don't work that well since the frame is metal and gets and stays cold. I guess having nephropathy doesn't help either. I say just keep doing what you can do and then adjust if things change. Good luck and keep on trucking......

Reply
Apr 13, 2018 10:02:12   #
Landlord
 
Wait until your 85 then weight does count

Reply
Apr 13, 2018 10:02:47   #
GENorkus Loc: Washington Twp, Michigan
 
gvarner wrote:
What is it with weight? Unless you're physically impaired there's no reason to be always looking for lighter gear. Tired of carrying it around? Get in better shape. I'm 73 and in poor shape but have no problem carrying my D7000 and 18-200 zoom around when I go out and about. Shifting from one hand to the other isn't difficult. I like the inertia of the weight when I get it up to my eye to take a shot. Verticals are a bit problematic but I could solve that with more exercising and muscle tone. End of rant.
What is it with weight? Unless you're physically i... (show quote)


I'm only 65 now and agree too. It has something to do with the fact that I figure I'm in better shape than my doctor says I am.

Reply
 
 
Apr 13, 2018 10:10:55   #
davyboy Loc: Anoka Mn.
 
Linda From Maine wrote:
What is it with grumpy old men who spend all their time criticizing other people instead of engaging in constructive conversation about the art and science of photography? You talked about this same subject six weeks ago, gvarner:

http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-516379-1.html

Somebody please just shoot me if the only joy I can find in life is to post meaningless "rants" to online forums. End of rant
What is it with grumpy old men who spend all their... (show quote)


Love it Linda! Very well stated

Reply
Apr 13, 2018 10:22:32   #
jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ
 
gvarner wrote:
What is it with weight? Unless you're physically impaired there's no reason to be always looking for lighter gear. Tired of carrying it around? Get in better shape. I'm 73 and in poor shape but have no problem carrying my D7000 and 18-200 zoom around when I go out and about. Shifting from one hand to the other isn't difficult. I like the inertia of the weight when I get it up to my eye to take a shot. Verticals are a bit problematic but I could solve that with more exercising and muscle tone. End of rant.
What is it with weight? Unless you're physically i... (show quote)


It seems that making things smaller and lighter is the way of technology. I remember when it was the opposite and things like cars were always getting larger. Now they are getting smaller. Electronics are always getting smaller and probably always will. There is no doubt that cameras and components for cameras will continue to get smaller - maybe even to the point that they will be implanted into the human eye or other part of the body. But for artistic photos and photography cameras will probably remain fairly large to accommodate all the bells and whistles people might want.

Reply
Apr 13, 2018 10:24:17   #
Geegee Loc: Peterborough, Ont.
 
rehess wrote:
What is it with weight? Why would you want to lug it around with you? If you cannot 'balance' a long lens, do what we did thirty years ago and use your left hand to cradle the lens. If you cannot hold your system stably, get a stabilized system. I find that most people who have trouble taking verticals rotate the camera counter-clockwise instead of the easier clockwise.


Clockwise is not easier or quicker. Counter clockwise is the correct way. Always keep your right hand on the camera's grip and your right index finger on the shutter release and always keep your left hand palm up supporting the lens. (You can easily zoom with your left thumb and third finger.) You can switch from landscape to portrait in an instant just bringing your right elbow up.

If you find your rig too heavy and don't want to use an (ugh) neck strap try a Black Rapid strap. Drape it over your left shoulder with the logo facing forward and the camera hanging on your right side. Adjust the strap length so the you can comfortably hold the camera's grip with your right hand comfortably extended. All the weight is on a nice pad on your shoulder and you can bring the camera up to your eye in a fraction of a second.

If I am going out with two cameras and don't want to use a bag and also want to keep my hands free I use a two camera holster. No weight on your neck, shoulder or back and it is quite comfortable to wear. It also has the advantage of not having any camera straps to get in the way. I use this when I am going out to shoot flowers. Macro lens on one camera and my 35-200 on the other in case I see something else.

When I am going out with my heavy 600mm I use a monopod with a gimbal to take the weight off my arms when shooting and for carrying I turn the rig upside down with the foot of the monopod straight up and hold the Gimbal in one hand like carrying a briefcase.

If I am going out shooting birds all day with my long lens I use a bodypod which is great for a heavy rig and I can still carry a second camera on my hip in the holster.

I have been photographing for over sixty years and I think I now have it down pat! End of rant.

Reply
Apr 13, 2018 10:33:16   #
rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA
 
Geegee wrote:
Clockwise is not easier or quicker. Counter clockwise is the correct way. Always keep your right hand on the camera's grip and your right index finger on the shutter release and always keep your left hand palm up supporting the lens. (You can easily zoom with your left thumb and third finger.) You can switch from landscape to portrait in an instant just bringing your right elbow up.

What is "right" about having your right elbow 'up', hanging in the air?? Rotate clockwise and your elbows are tucked into your body as normal because your left hand is on the lens / left side and your right hand is on the right side as normal. And there is nothing special about keeping your hand firmly on the grip; back in the day, we did just fine with no or little grip; modern grips are part of the trend to unnecessarily large cameras

Reply
Page <<first <prev 5 of 9 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.