The lightest DSLR
Display Avatars Sort By:
Rog Tallbloke
(tallbloke) - F

Locale: DON'T LOOK DOWN!!
Re: Re: First pic with my bargain DSLR on 09/28/2011 17:42:48 MDT Print View

Heh, nice shot. You can see a few on the otherwise serious looking Black Prince above too.

Brian Austin
(footeab) - F

Locale: Pacific Northwest
Re: The lightest DSLR on 10/21/2011 13:52:24 MDT Print View

Q: Olympus 410/510/610 how is its hand grip?

Can you hold and manipulate it with one hand With a THIN glove on? Picture seems to show that this would be HIGHLY problematical? Yes/No?

Have access to panny GH1 and GH2 and they Certainly CANNOT be operated with a glove on single handed, at least by me. Barely without(not on auto). IE shade sun with one hand operate Aperture/Shutter with the other hand in manual mode.

My old Sony R1 is basically dead as it doesn't meter correctly anymore, but it can be wholy operated with a single hand while the other hand is gripping the ice axe stuffed into the ice.

Rick Dreher
(halfturbo) - MLife

Locale: Northernish California
Re: The lightest DSLR on 10/21/2011 14:37:47 MDT Print View

Hi Brian,

An E-510 would be no problem, it has quite a pronounced grip (and because of it has a larger battery than the 4## and 6## series cameras). I can one-hand big, heavy lenses with it. The others have not much of a grip at all, and you'd be relying more on the rubbery covering, which might not be enough. I think I'd add a wrist strap.

As to operating common controls, I prefer fingerless gloves but that might not be an option for you.

Cheers,

Rick

Dale Wambaugh
(dwambaugh) - MLife

Locale: Pacific Northwest
Re: The lightest DSLR on 10/21/2011 15:09:47 MDT Print View

Digital SLR's are so liberating after decades of film photography and having it cost real dollars when you pushed the shutter button. I still resist taking "extra" images and I've been shooting digital since the late '90's. I got a Nikon D5000 last year and it seems like a feather after lugging a Canon F1 for years, let alone a monorail 4x5 view camera and accessories.

I see a lot of cameras listed through this thread, does anyone have a good breakdown on current models, maybe showing relative size, weight, sensor stats, etc? What we need is a list like we've seen for packs or other equipment types. There's a lot of *stuff* to look at.

Rog Tallbloke
(tallbloke) - F

Locale: DON'T LOOK DOWN!!
Re: Re: The lightest DSLR on 10/21/2011 16:53:41 MDT Print View

Hi Dale,

DPreview.com is probably the best resource for side by side comparisons. Also, Rick's comments are fair, not that I would be carrying any really heavy lenses up mountains anyway. The E410 I bought is 4oz lighter than Rick's E510. In terms of the overall weight of a DSLR kit this isn't much, but when you think about it, it's the difference between a cookstove you'd consider and one you wouldn't.

I've since bought a Ricoh GX200, a quirky little beast with great low ISO performance, terrible high ISO performance, and full manual control plus nice light additional lenses. I'll decide whether I'm going to keep both cameras after a bit more testing. The olympus can produce some really nice images too. I took this one last weekend:

blencathra

Edited by tallbloke on 10/21/2011 16:56:05 MDT.

Dale Wambaugh
(dwambaugh) - MLife

Locale: Pacific Northwest
Re: Re: Re: The lightest DSLR on 10/21/2011 17:01:24 MDT Print View

I like DPreview.com a lot. There is a ton of info there. I was thinking more of a hiking-oriented list with emphasis on weight and image quality. We all fear getting an expensive turkey, like the Canon G-10 I had-- looked nice on paper :(

Rick M
(rmjapan) - F

Locale: London, UK
Small/light QUALITY cameras on 10/21/2011 17:21:06 MDT Print View

I got to shoot with the Fuji X10 again yesterday, this time with a memory card. Write performance improved considerably with card vs. the miserly 26MB internal memory. The lens is superb and I think this could be the compact to have, especially if the launch price drops 50% after a few months like most Fuji's do!

I also tried the new Nikon V1 yesterday. Nikon has some hits and misses with this design. Overall performance and IQ appears excellent. The softmenu is still pretty basic, especially compared to the Oly m4/3 cameras. That and the lack of button controls gives the distinct impression of an entry-level point-n-shoot for this Nikon D300s user. Then again, its Expeed III processor appears to do alot of heavy lifting so one can concentrate more on the "art" rather than the gear. The EVF is nothing special, especially after looking thru the new Sony EVF on the 5n...WOW! The V1 is certainly not a small camera, about the same size/heft as the Oly E-P3 and I don't care for the glossy/slippery finish of white version or any of the J1 cameras...same for the new Oly EPL-3 and mini and the Pany GF3 for that matter.

Finally, spent an inordinate amount of time with Pentax Q too. I really, really want to own this camera. It is certainly NOT a toy and is quite sophisticated in its features. But I just can't come to grips with its pricetag.

All that said, if I were buying a new small/light camera today the Sony 5n would be my choice given the SIMILAR PRICING of all the candidates. It is smaller that the m4/3 offering while still being easy to hold and with superior IQ.

Edited by rmjapan on 10/21/2011 18:15:47 MDT.

Ismail Faruqi
(ismailfaruqi) - F
Re: Small/light QUALITY cameras on 10/21/2011 18:50:59 MDT Print View

I've done hiking in Minami Alps just with E-PL1 and 20mm f1.7 lens, and eyeing Nex-5N + 30mm for added macro capability, amazing SNR at base ISO, and invaluable tilt screen.

Rick M
(rmjapan) - F

Locale: London, UK
Re: Small/light QUALITY cameras on 10/21/2011 19:44:39 MDT Print View

Yes, as long as you are using the somewhat limiting pancake lens with any of these new mirroless ICL cameras they are P&S-like small/light. But with any of kit lenses covering the more useful 28mm-150mm effective focal range they are basically still too big/heavy, the Pentax Q being the sole exception. That's why I think the new fast fixed zoom lens camera like the Fuji X10 or Oly XZ-1 are probably the best choice for hikers that put more emphasis on size/weight than absolute IQ. Just wish they were not so EXPENSIVE!

Edited by rmjapan on 10/22/2011 00:48:13 MDT.

Rog Tallbloke
(tallbloke) - F

Locale: DON'T LOOK DOWN!!
Re: Small/light QUALITY cameras on 10/22/2011 00:27:02 MDT Print View

Dale W said:
"I like DPreview.com a lot. There is a ton of info there. I was thinking more of a hiking-oriented list with emphasis on weight and image quality."

Well, DPreview is pretty exhaustive in its image testing and you can use their database to divine the weight comparison. In the end though it's all down to which compromises you are prepared to make, and that differs for all of us. I wouldn't take the Olympus to a nice brightly lit country like Italy again, because the Ricoh GX200 does so well at low ISO and also does nice long exposure dawn/dusk shots off a stable platform. It's wide and tele add on's are comparatively light too, which is a big factor in the new interchangeable lens world. I'd agree DPR doesn't cover that angle as well as it might.

Rick M said:
"I don't care for the glossy/slippery finish of white version or any of the J1 cameras...same for the new Oly EPL-3 and mini and the Pany GF3 for that matter"

They all need a rubber boot, or at least an after market rubber grip. I'm happy with the ergonomics of the Ricoh though.

Not for backpacking use but I've been toying with the idea of improving the handling and balance of something like a pen mini or E-PL3 by hiding it inside an old Russian FED 3 or Zorki I (Leica copies) rangefinder body to create a Fuji X100 like experience.

Edited by tallbloke on 10/22/2011 00:59:00 MDT.

Arapiles .
(Arapiles) - M

Locale: Melbourne
Re: Re: Re: The lightest DSLR on 10/23/2011 04:29:53 MDT Print View

Hi Rog

Where is that? Looks a bit like the Lake District.

Chris Townsend
(Christownsend) - MLife

Locale: Cairngorms National Park
The lightest DSLR on 10/23/2011 07:16:39 MDT Print View

I've been using the Sony NEX 5 for the last year and I really like it. It produces images with better resolution than my Canon 450D, especially at high ISOs, and is much more compact. I only have the 18-55 kit lens but I do find this useful for most purposes. It only weighs slightly less than the Canon kit lens but the whole package is much smaller and lighter. The lens choice is a little limited but a 55-210 lens is due soon. I will get this along with either an NEX 5N or NEX 7 body (I'd like to see high ISO images from the latter before deciding as 24mp is high for an APS-C sensor) and dispense with my Canon and lenses. I'll probably get the 16mm lens as well.

An argument against the NEX 5 (and the 3 and C3) is the lack of a viewfinder. However as the screen flips up I hold the camera against my body and look down at the screen, which is actually more stable than holding it to my eye.

Rog Tallbloke
(tallbloke) - F

Locale: DON'T LOOK DOWN!!
Re: Re: Re: Re: The lightest DSLR on 10/23/2011 09:10:45 MDT Print View

Hi D,
Spot on, it's taken from the East edge of Keswick, looking across to the north east.

Blencathra is also known as Saddleback, and has a short but exciting ridge scramble across sharp edge to the summit at Hallsfell Top.

http://lh4.ggpht.com/_57FeVYL_WoM/TEyj6Xw3yRE/AAAAAAAAsg8/JsWRuxz0qmw/20100725WALKBlencathraViaSharpEdge.jpg

Arapiles .
(Arapiles) - M

Locale: Melbourne
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The lightest DSLR on 10/27/2011 02:47:54 MDT Print View

Hi Rog

It did look a bit familiar but I was only there the once so couldn't be sure.

Windermere was flooding the town when I was there ...

Erik Danielsen
(er1kksen) - F

Locale: The Western Door
RE: 17.5-45mm on 11/24/2011 08:46:30 MST Print View

A little late here, but I figured I'd add the note that the 17.5-45 lens you mention is consistently ranked as the worst Oly lens, along with the 14-45mm (which I had on an E-330 for years). My friend who got the E-410 with the smaller 14-42mm let me borrow it, and the difference in sharpness and rendering was just night and day, at any focal length and aperture. So in comparing your E-410 with any other given camera, the 17.5-45 is probably making the 410 look worse than it is. The 14-42 just seems like a no-brainer to me, unbelievably small for a DSLR lens and often available used for well under $100.

As for me, I'm sticking with my Pentax K-x (small and light enough, I guess) until that beautiful Samsung NX200 comes down in price... tiny, with some superb pancakes available, and 20mp of APS-C goodness with the same rendering characteristics as the K20D sensor I loved but with several years of tech development in the interim... Since no one really notices Samsung's superb mirrorless offerings, after a couple months their prices come WAY down, just in time for me to hit the road for the summer.