As many among us I'm too overburdened by equipment. I have been using a LowePro Pro
trekker backpack but as the saying goes, when you fill them up they are too heavy to
lift. Since I'm using both medium format and 35mm format I have been struggling
streamlining my equipment choices for various needs while maintaining low weight. I
have even been toying with the idea of selling off my medium format equipment but a
look at the MF chromes the 645n produce has made me forget the thought.
I've more and less turned into a bird and mountain landscape (that is on top of the
mountains; not below them) photographer and for my landscape use weigth is important.
Common thinking says that MF gear is heavy but....Anyway, I've both a LowePro Orion AW
trekker which is a revelation compared to the Pro trekker. I've been using the
calculator to see what my equipment actually weight and how best take advantage of it.
1. My "complete" landscape 35mm outfit consist of the MZ-S or the LX, 18/3,5, A
24/2.8, FA 31/1.8 (not bought yet), FA 43/1.9, FA 77/1.8 and FA 200/4 Macro. This
outfit weights 2870g (with the MZ-S).
2. My "complete" MF/35mm landscape set consist of the MZ-S, 645n, FA645 75/2.8, FA645
45/2.8, FA645 120/4 Macro, 18/3.5, and A 24/2.8. + converter for using the 120/4 on
the MZ-S. This outfit weights 3620g.
3. A hypothetical "complete" 645n based system: A645 35/3,5, FA645 45/2.8, FA645
75/2.8, FA645 120/4 Macro, FA645 300/5.6. This outfit weights 3895g.
I'm a bit surprised by the results. MF gear isn't as heavy as perceived.
The weight difference between set 1. and 2. isn't really felt in the field so I could
just as well use the 645n. The weight difference between 2. and 3. is certainly not
major so a total MF set seems to be an ideal setup.
Ok so the 18mm make you go slightly wider but not enough to compensate for the vastly
better image quality of th 35mm (about 21mm in 35mm terms).
It seems to me that in order to make a 35mm based system significantly lighter than a
645n based system, you really need to use those slow plastic zoom lenses. Again this
illustrate the need for compact high quality zooms for quality work when weight is
important. These lenses are mysteriously missing from the manufacturers line ups.
However, the weight of my MF system really doesn't feel like a burden and question
arises whether I have any need for something significantly lighter.
I think om going to upgrade to that 645n II and perhaps further expand my 645 system...
P�l
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
