I have a pentax k100d. With batteries, it weighs 2lbs 1oz. Is there anything lighter out there? I am not going to go for a point and shoot (already own one), but 2lbs seems heavy. However, considering I am knew to SLRS, 2lbs could be very lightweight and I would know. Is it light? Are there any super small slrs in the 1lb range?

There are lots of smaller and lighter cameras. You might want to refine your search a bit. Convential DSLR cameras with mirrors tend to be heavy. A mirrorless one is a lot lighter, but there are performance challenges. What kind of subjects? Some small cameras aren't worth warm spit except for shooting ordinary people snapshots.

--B.G.--

I do mostly landscape shots, mid ranged shots of trees and trails. Not too much wildlife or macro. I wouldn't want a camera that sucked on performance though, but I don't need any fancy lenses, tripods, ect. I have no problem bringing my current camera along as it provides a huge source of entertainment, but if there is something lighter out there, why not jump on it?

Maybe start looking around at a Canon Powershot G12. It is kind of in the middle between the compact cameras and the big cameras. I've been a Canon shooter since 1997 (film) and digital in 2002.

--B.G.--

Not an SLR, but the Sony Nex 5 is a mirrorless camera with a large sensor and a couple of lenses. On my scale the body weighs 275 grams. The 16mm lens weighs 100 grams and the 18/55 lense weighs 213 grams, including both caps. A sample of pictures is on the Trinity Trip Report. I am no photographer, but for landscapes it seems to do well.

Thanks for the specific reqs. The nex looks very promising.

Based on your criteria, it looks like the Sony Nex series or one of the micro four thirds cameras would suit you well. Examples other than the Sony Nex would be from Panasonic or Olympus which have both just released some new updates. As an example, you could look here:

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/panasonicdmcg3/

There is also some good discussion on some of these in the photography forum. I am likely looking to make a move to micro four thirds as well.

i have the original G1. im thinking of an upgrade to the G3. the Nex has double the sensor, but too many drawbacks for a variety of conditions. maybe for open apeture landscape shots it will do great. i have seen macros on the nex 3 and they look good, but the nex with a pancake lens would be thin and light, cheers to that.

Hi Justin,

The lightest DSLR is the now-discontinued Olympus 4## series. Paired with the "pancake" 25mm/2.8 lens it comprises the lowest dslr weight that will likely ever be made.

The several mirrorless system cameras mentioned are the best option for keeping dslr image quality and interchangable lens flexibility. IIUC the new Panasonic Lumix GF3 is the smallest, lightest body yet. Paired with one of the many µ4/3 pancake primes and you've easily hit the sub 1-pound benchmark. One of the small kit zooms will be light enough to probably keep it around a pound.

The alternatives are the fixed-lens big-chip compacts like the Leica X1, Fuji X100 and Sigma DP twins. Next in line are the high-end compact Olympus X-Z1, Panasonic LX5 and Canon S95. Two are prime lenses, three are zooms, one has a built-in viewfinder and two accept electronic viewfinders.

Happy shopping.

Rick

You could go to DPReview :
http://www.dpreview.com/products/search/cameras
and dial in the features you require.
Click on the "show advance search file" to see the options.
One of them is weight.
Then start to compromise...
Franco

i've shot will all kinds of canon SLRs over the years... 1DmkII, 5D, 7D, and used many of their lenses, up to a 600mm. but generally speaking, the SLRs are just too heavy, and too much camera for the backcountry.

about 2 years ago I was an early adopter of panasonic's m4/3 cameras, picking up a GF1. i now have a gf1, and a gh2, and most of the panasonic lenses. this kit is very versatile, allows me to carry less than a pound (gf1 with 14mm pancake) if i desire, or i can carry the gh2 with 7-14, 14-45, and 45-200 and cover huge focal lengths.

so far, it's the best compromise for me. admittedly, photo quality is not as good as the canon SLRs, but i find it sufficient.

lots of trips and photos i've taken with m4/3 can be found on my blog, if you are curious. www.danransom.com/TripReports

Edited by danransom on 08/17/2011 12:22:08 MDT.