I’m on the edge of moving up from my D200 to a D700. Much has been made about the weight of the D700, compared to the D300 and D200 (the latter two are not very different in weight from each other). I note on this forum and others that many, if not most, posters seem to be “prosumers” or pros and predominately mount lenses like the 31 ounce 24-70 f/2.8 on their D700. I suspect that some of us enthusiastic amateurs use lenses for travel, portraiture and street photography, and, like me, use lenses like the 35mm f/2, the 50mm and 85mm f/1.4, (and, as I anticipate, may replace the DX 16-85 VR with, for example, the FX 24-85mm f/2.8-4 zoom if we use a zoom at all. All these lenses weigh in at something less (sometimes as much as 10 or 11 ounces) than the 24-70. I’m guessing that the 5 or 6 ounce difference in weight between the D200 and the D700 is not nearly as dramatic a difference as the difference between the heavy, fairly expensive “pro-zooms” and the primes I’ve mentioned. Given my choice of, say, the 35mm and 50mm primes, will the D700 really be pretty heavy for walk-around street shooting?

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

I have the three Nikkor f/2.8 zooms which I use with the D700. If I want to go "light" and don't need AF I take the Zeiss ZF lenses 35/2 or 100/2. These are much lighter and deliver better IQ than the Nikkor zooms, perhaps with the exception of the 14-24 f/2.8 which is quite excellent.

I don't think that the weight difference between the D200 and the D700 is very noticeable.

Tristan

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Jim,

I own both a D200 and a D700. The D700 is heavier than the D200, but it is a non-issue, in my opinion. I use the 24-85 f/2.8-4 zoom as my walk-around lens with the D700. This lens is noticeably heavier than the 18-70 f/3.5-4.5 zoom I use on my D200. However, the greater weight of the D700 + 24-85 compared with the D200 + 18-70 is no big deal and doesn't concern me in the least.

Bottom line: Go with the D700 and don't look back. You'll be more than pleased with the performance of the D700.

Bob

I own both the D200 and D700. Before I purchased the D700, I travelled extensively through Europe with my D200 and 18-200 zoom. Now that I have purchased the D700 and all the 2.8 zoom lenses, there is no way back to the convenience and flexibility of travelling with the D200 and 18-200. The combination of the D700 and any of the 2.8 new Nano Crystal zoom lenses is a lot heavier and the quality is amazing and way better than the D200 combo. I suppose I will have to make some difficult decisions to pick the one or two lenses to travel with. I will probably just take the 24-70 and 14-24 and reluctantly leave the 70-200 VR II at home
John.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Jim I have the D200 and D700 and I think your observation is correct. My heaviest lenses are a 70-200 VR and a 300 mm f/4 AFS. I don't own a 24-70 but use a much lighter and smaller 35-70 f/2.8. I don't find any of this objectionable to carry on the camera. Even my 17-35 f/2.8 goes nicely with the D700. All these lens are well counterbalanced by the D700 weight, which helps steady the camera when hand holding. I I want to go really light I either slap on a 16 mm fisheye, my 24 mm f/2.8 AI's lens or my 50 mm f/1.4 AI'd lens. The IQ difference between a D200 and the D700 is enough to make it all worth it. You will love a D700.

Bob Baldassano
My Nikonians Gallery

"Nikonians membership - My most important photographic investment, after the
camera"

Retirement is a gift of time - Don't waste it!

>Given my choice
>of, say, the 35mm and 50mm primes, will the D700 really be
>pretty heavy for walk-around street shooting?

Forgive me for stating this but . . . I'd recommend not soliciting opinions about what is heavy or light. Add up the weight of the gear you're proposing to carry, load that much weight into the camera bag you're going to be using and then walk around with the bag for a few days. It's a simple enough method of determining whether or not you're going to notice or mind the weight. Better still, take your D200 and mount a heavy enough lens on it (plus a heavy flash if necessary) to bring it up to the weight of a D700 + Nikkor 24-70 f/2.8. Walk around with that kit on your shoulder for a few days and see how you like it.

I'd say most people who sling a bag on one shoulder and carry the camera on the other shoulder while actively shooting, don't notice the weight. I'd say also that most people carry far too much junk in their camera bags - extra lenses they rarely (if ever) use, an extra battery even though they're only out and about for a few hours with a fully charged battery already in the camera, extra filters they never use, etc., etc.

My Nikonians Gallery

Howard Carson, Managing Editor
Kickstartnews Inc. - http://www.kickstartnews.com

Howard- good point! I am planning to take my family to Disney right after New Year and intend to bring my D700 with a 50mm f1.4D, SB600 flash, MB-D10 battery grip. I’ll carry a carbon fiber tripod, and place my extra lens (20-35mm f2.8D) in one of my jacket pockets for group photography and landscape shots. I think this is a pretty light set-up in my opinion based on what I have available in my bag. The heaviest lens in my inventory is the 20-35mm but I find it more comfortable when I replaced the stock camera strap and used a wider cushioned camera strap to make my walk around more enjoyable. I could hardly notice the weight of the lens and camera with this strap. Now I just concentrate on taking more pictures instead of worrying about neck strain.

Glenn

Regards,

Glenn

Jim, I agree with a little bit from every comment so far. However, I can't understand why the "weight" issue seems to take precedence in your question. Assuming cost is not the issue, then there is no reason to stay with the D200. Everything about the D700 will enhance your photography experience. Once you move up, you can then check out the forums here about "the best lens kit", "the best travel lens", "the best walk around lens", etc...... Needless to say, there are a lot of opinions. That's why Nikonians is so good! Buy it and love it!
Jon

Nikon made me NOCD...

Jim, I too understand what has been conveyed thus far however, I've carried my D700 with a 24-70 2.8 for the better part of the day on a walk about and I didn't feel it was a big problem. I'm just glad I had my D700 with the aforementioned lens with me. Outstanding performance, you’ll love it.
Bob

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

I am one of the lucky people, I have a ultra sharp 24-120 VR and that lens is the one I use if I can only have 1 or if weight is the the ultimate criteria.

At the end of the day, it's up to you what is heavy or not. For me, it's not an issue and any difference between my D700 and D200 are negligible. I like a little weight for my handholding technique and I have specific kit I like to hike with using either the D700 or D200.

Younger folks have grown up with plastic components and bodies. They feel like toys to me since I grew up when all metal, mechanical cameras ruled the day. So, the D700 actually seems pretty lightweight to me.

To answer your question, I don't think the difference between the two cameras is the issue. When I travel light, it's lens choice that makes the difference.

Dan L.
http://www.danlarussophotography.com/

Try a 14-day climbing trip in the backcountry.....every once matters then....you make sacrifices to save your back and legs....and your sanity...

Been there, done that. Same holds true for me regarding my kit. I always choose specific equipment I want over comfort--and grin and bear it. Maybe being a weightlifter has its benefits in this area?

Dan L.
http://www.danlarussophotography.com/

Hi,

Any chance you are over thinking this a bit? .... None of the lenses you are thinking about are all that exotic so you don't need a lot of lead time to acquire one plus you have a 35mm f/2. When you get your D700, why don't you try out the 35 for walkabout and then go from there. If this is really about whether to move from the D200 to the D700, then I'd let the FOV/sensor-performance reasons for making that move dominate your weight considerations in making that decision.

If it helps any, I'd rate myself in the upper percentile of weight sensitivity and between my D200 and D2Hs, my carry preference is the D2Hs - with lenses that range from the 35mm f/2 to the 70-200mm f/2.8 AFS VR. The reason I put up with the heavy camera is for it's better ISO and AF performance. So if there are pressing performance reasons for using a camera, I'm suggesting the weight issues will not be quite so heady. OTOH, for certain situations I use only a battery of primes, because I can pick the lens by venue and then carry only a single backup, while others remain in the kit bag. Much lighter than a heavy zoom.

Best Regards,

Roger
It is still ISO, aperture and shutter speed, right?
"Nikonians membership - My most important photographic investment."

There is a wealth of great advice and information in the above answers to your query.

That being said, all weight is NOT created equal. I have run several marathons -- 26.2 miles, and a couple of ultra-marathons -- 50 miles and 66 miles to be exact, packing a small camera. The 50 miler was through the mountains and I also carried two liters of water and a small survival pack. In a situation like this, weight distribution and comfort becomes a matter of critical importance.

Doh! It took me years before I figured out I should be paying the same attention to weight distribution when carrying my photography gear all day. In the end, the cost of a new carrying system was one of the highest values of any photo gear I've EVER purchased. Money very well spent!

For your long-term comfort and shooting pleasure I highly recommend that you should invest some time in researching your carrying system.

Dealing with the weight of a camera and lens package has been discussed in a number of other threads. Here are my two cents:

http://www.nikonians.org/forums/dcboard.php?az=set_threaded_mode&forum=226&page=2&topic_id=20177&prev_page=show_topic#20284

http://www.nikonians.org/forums/dcboard.php?az=set_threaded_mode&forum=226&page=2&topic_id=20177&prev_page=show_topic#20299

Hope this helps!

Cheers, Vince

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

I agree that a carry system can make more difference than camera + lense weight.


check out the Nikonians, Boomarange, and Black Rapid straps

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

I can vouch for the Black Rapid strap RS-7. Comfortable and easy to use.

Nikon made me NOCD...

St. Ansel said the camera and lens to use is, "the heaviest I can carry." I pump the D700 and a 28-70mm f2.8. I like my Popeye forearms. Most important - my shots are also getting stronger. I use a Think Tank D40 holster and a Think Tank sling that keeps the "shooting iron" on my chest (the lens hood mounted forward). This holster extends to pack a D700 and a Nikkor 70-200mm f2.8 (hood reversed). It's a great walk around rig.

wrdpico

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

D700 + Nikkor 80-400 or Nikkor 80-200 F2.8 AF-D or Sigma 400 f5.6 and Cotton Carrier works beautifully for me. YMMV.

tony

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Hi Tony,

Based on your comments I checked out the Cotton Carrier website and watched the product videos with interest. I don't mean to hi-jack the thread, but I was fascinated by the shot of Andy Cotton scrambling up the rocks alongside the mountain stream... I generally shy away from doing that with my camera attached to the tripod.

Very interesting! I do like the idea of greater camera control and stability while remaining completely hands-free in rough terrain. Have you ever used your Cotton Carrier in any of the conditions shown in the videos?

And the claim to be able to carry 10-50 pounds of camera gear is pretty astonishing. What's the biggest camera and lens combination you've personally tried?

This statement on the site really made me sit up and take notice -

In product testing, we gave the Cotton Carrier to numerous professional photographers, many of whom were shooting with a 5.8 lb. Canon Mark III 1Ds and 11.7 lb. Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS lens. That s a total weight of 17.5 lbs.! They responded that they barely noticed the weight of their cameras, and felt completely confident that their cameras were safely secure.

http://www.cottoncarrier.com/

http://www.cottoncarrier.com/video.html

Of course, the only downfall is the poor ***** is shooting Canon! lol

Cheers, Vince

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

The only drawback to the Cotton Carrier system is that your gear is exposed. If it rains, if you're hitting grit & muck, if it snows, etc., you better have covers or a backpack or something. If not, you're going to be doing a lot of cleaning. A chest mounted carry (and the general holster/clip design of the system) does a wonderful job of distributing weight, but don't land chest down after a fall.

Frankly, I haven't done a lot of trail riding over the years, but what little I have done seems to argue against the sort of chest carry shown in the trail biking segment of Mr. Cotton's demo video. That sort of carry is downright dangerous when you're riding. Besides that, your exposed camera and lens is subject to trail impacts, lashing from branches, stone and dirt impacts kicked up by your riding partner(s) and so on. Same goes for skiing and the demo'ed hip and chest holster carries.

The system is pitched to impress people with the its excellent weight distribution and the speed at which any moderately practiced user can draw and shoot. That's all well and good for snapshots, but it has less importance when you're walking, skiing, riding or otherwise traveling to a particular location to shoot. Give me (and most other photographers too, I think) good gear protection until I get to where I'm going.

In warm weather, the chest pad traps heat over your chest, something which can get really uncomfortable.

So what's the good news AFAIC? We found a wide range of applications for the Cotton Carrier at indoor events - shows, exhibitions, press conferences, events, arena/stadium sports and everywhere else you might need to use one or two bodies and two or three lenses in limited space, weather protected locations, for moderate durations and so on indoors.

My Nikonians Gallery

Howard Carson, Managing Editor
Kickstartnews Inc. - http://www.kickstartnews.com

Hi Vince,

I have only just gotten the CC and I have taken it out only twice on each occasion of which I was just walking about the local area. On one walk, I had my son's 80-400VR mounted on my D700, on the other, yesterday in a driving rain, my 80-200 f2.8. There is sufficient adjustability to the carrier system so that it mounted easily outside my jacket, and yet still have plenty of stability to the rig. I'm still learning to "draw" the camera, and I can see where a hand strap will be very useful for me, once I've gotten the mounting bracket secured well-enough so that it doesn't loosen up with repeated removal and replacement of the camera. CC recommends the non-permanent version, blue Loc-Tite to help with that problem.

I also mountain and road bike and because of safety concerns similar to those expressed by Howard Carson, with whom I fully agree, I would never wear my camera and rig while riding. I've been down once or twice while mountain biking, on one occsion of which I landed chest first, got up, dusted myself off and kept on trucking. I would have suffered serious ribcage injury had I been wearing the rig w/ a camera/lens attached (no never mind to what would have happened the camera/lens). Backpacking is still an open-ended question for me. Also, when yesterday I was out and about during the NE'er we were having here in Philly, I simply put the large hat I use when flying in a glider to cover the camera and lens and look for an awning under which to take cover while looking for available walkers-by to take pictures of. Worked perfectly.

I might also add that when not covered, the rig draws considerable visual curiosity from others: discreet it is not, and I thought one police officer couple days ago was entertaining the idea of asking me what I was carrying, black harness, black lens, black body; I just pointed at it and mouthed: 'camera', and he nodded and kept on walking.

What I'm really liking about it so far in my very limited experience with it is the ease with which I'm able to walk with my Golden Retriever who, while a fully trained service dog, does nonetheless with her gait at times induce an oscillation to my camera hanging from my strap about my neck. That effect is now totally gone. Moreover, I can walk in and out of doorways w/o fear of banging the lens/camera against the door frame, etc.

HTH,

tony

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Thanks Howard and Tony for your insightful comments.

I agree with both of you that I would be very hesitant to use the Cotton Carrier while on a mountain bike (but it does look good in a promotional video -- and am I the only one who finds the gum-chewing annoying?). However, I would be much more comfortable while using it on skies while going from location to location, and it looks like the bomb for trail running and hiking. Knock on wood, even while carrying some pretty serious weight, I've yet to fall on my chest while hiking or trail running (of course, now it's bound to happen, and probably while I'm wearing camera gear).

I don't mind a fanny-pack for a few power bars, water bottles and a windbreaker, but I just can't seem to get used to a waist belt for camera gear.

Definitely worth further investigation.

Back to the main thread -- we seem to get so many discussions about weight in terms of camera body and lens combinations, it might almost be worth while to create a permanent forum for camera carrying systems (actually I think it would!). In particular, there seem to have been a fair number of posts by women, some of the older Nikonians, wedding and special event photographers who might benefit from a forum that focuses specifically on camera carrying systems. I think I've talked about this in the Nikon Autofocus Lens Forum and the the D700 and D3 Forums.....

The subject seems a bit more specific than "Accessories" or "Bags, Backpacks and Cases".

Any thoughts on the matter?

Cheers, Vince

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

>Back to the main thread -- we seem to get so many discussions
>about weight in terms of camera body and lens combinations, it
>might almost be worth while to create a permanent forum for
>camera carrying systems (actually I think it would!). In
>particular, there seem to have been a fair number of posts by
>women, some of the older Nikonians, wedding and special event
>photographers who might benefit from a forum that focuses
>specifically on camera carrying systems. I think I've talked
>about this in the Nikon Autofocus Lens Forum and the the D700
>and D3 Forums.....

Great suggestion. Consider a modification though. Instead let's call it "How To Stop Carrying All Sorts of Gear You Never Use!"

I watched a guy carrying what must have been 25 lbs of photo gear at the Canadian National Exhibition (CNE) in Toronto in 2008. It was a humid, later afternoon August weekday. This guy was carrying a 1Ds MKIII with a 70-200 f/2.8, a 5D with a 24-70 f/2.8, an additional 3 lenses (a 100mm macro, a 50 f/1.4 and an 85 f/1.4 I found out later - see below), a tripod, at least one big Canon EX flash, and other junk, all in what looked like a Lowepro Computrekker Mini AW backpack and a Street & Field waist system. Add water bottles (x2) and sundry other junk, and you've got the makings of a heart attack or stroke. You should have seen this guy after a couple of hours walking the midway, dripping sweat, fighting with his gear, and looking progressively crankier. I kept watching him between shots - I actually followed him for almost 45 minutes at one point. He noticed me and walked over to ask if I was shooting Canon. I told him no, which news he received glumly because he'd forgotten to bring a wide angle prime and hoped he could borrow one from me to make a couple of busy midway shots of the crowds.

I ran into the guy at a food stand inside one of the exhibition buildings an hour after that. He had been there for the better part of the intervening hour and was completely exhausted from the heat, humidity and all the weight he was carrying, so he ended up wasting good light while sitting in a food court, rehydrating and stoking up on calories. He told me that all he ever really used was his 1Ds MKIII and the 70-200 plus a wide angle prime. I asked him what all the other gear was for and he said, "Well, you never know."

I hereby accuse 75% of all photographers (amateur and pro alike) of regularly carrying far too much gear.

My Nikonians Gallery

Howard Carson, Managing Editor
Kickstartnews Inc. - http://www.kickstartnews.com

Howard,

I burst out laughing as I read, because I resemble that remark!

I do hope that I have learned to be more disciplined over the years, but my mates regularly give me a hard time about the gear I will pack on location, take on a trip or have stowed away in the back of my truck. Right up until they need a piece.

I think I must be a disciple of John Shaw. In his great book, 'Landscape Photography' (a must own book IMHO) the last Chapter is titled, 'Deciding Where And When To Go, And What To Bring'. Shaw writes, "If I'm driving to a location, my equipment philosophy is simple - I just take everything I own." Shaw does confess that if he is flying, he edits his gear a little more judiciously, but does further confess, "I would much rather be shy on clothes than on camera equipment".

One way I've learned to simplify my life is to dedicate a shooting day to a single lens, and then slip a teleconverter, an extension tube and perhaps a diopter or two into my pockets. It's surprising how flexible a set-up like that can be. It also forces me to really think about composition, positioning and framing - never a bad thing. And of course, Nikon makes a whole array of truly astonishing zooms that make spectacular 'all you really need for a day' lenses.

Galen Rowell's, 'Vision:The Art of Adventure Photography' has some wonderful insights into the advantages of 'shooting light'. I picked up a wonderful old used Nikon 20mm f4 for that very reason -- to shoot when I'm out trail running. Practically weightless with fabulous optics.

And in the past six months, I've become a little fixated with the Lensbaby lenses because of the way they focus me on getting the shots that are available to me as opposed to the shots I 'think' that I want.

Sometimes, less is more.

Of course, I also own a 600mm f4.....

Cheers, Vince

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Howard I agree with you on people carrying too much gear. If you look in the travel forum, people are listing a camera store full of stuff they want to carry and they are not Pro's. I have narrowed my travel kit down to a 17-35 f/2.8, 35-70 f/2.8 with my D700. I also include a 1.4 TC for the 35-70 and recently added a 16 mm fisheye because it is light and small and fast. I have never found that I needed more when I travel and it all fits in a very small camera bag, the whole kit weighing about 10 lbs. I use every one of the lenses I carry.

Bob Baldassano
My Nikonians Gallery

"Nikonians membership - My most important photographic investment, after the
camera"

Retirement is a gift of time - Don't waste it!

I've been using my Black Rapid RS-5 everyday and what I especially like beside the natural placement for lightning access is that the camera has only to support itself. I normally carry my little old D90 with a 70-200VR attached as my walking around lens, or like last Friday shooting in a club and dancing for hours with the camera, 70-200VR and SB900 attached at my side, and the camera is supported by the lens that is attached at its balance point; the tripod foot. The CC system would not work on anything but a D3 or 1d probably because of the sever stress on the camera's lens flange presented by a heavy lens torquing it by its flange instead of the proper mounting at the balance point of the foot.
Watching the video makes it look good but I noticed that he really had to make sure of his grip because while mounting and dismounting there is nothing securing the camera that could be easily dislodged from his hand while attaching since he had to undue his hand from the wrist strap before attaching it to the harness.
As with what occurred Friday night, actually Saturday morning 4am, as I was raising my camera for a candid shot, a guy bounced into me by accident and knocked the camera from my hand and the camera just slid down the strap as easily as me normally releasing it after a shot. I think I would be very upset now if I was not using the RS-5. I use a wrist strap but it is naturally positioned for the camera grab to be in a secure position without thinking or aiming...one hand and no eyes needed to securely bring the camera to my eye and release it again without looking. If I am climbing something where a fall could injure me, I want my camera in my waist-belted backpack for the protection of me and the camera. I've already taken two falls this last week on the icy sidewalks here in St Petersburg. We had a hard freeze and many days of snow, out of the norm for the last 1/2 decade of very mild winters.
Stan
St Petersburg Russia

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Stan,

I have to agree with you about shooting in clubs and bars. I love the way the Black Rapid Strap keeps the camera body on my hip, and allows me to curl my fingers around the grip with a finger posed on the shutter release. It's a very unobtrusive system under a sports jacket.

With all due respect and a tip of the hat to Howard, of course this raises the age-old question; "Is there ever such a thing as too much gear?".



Cheers, Vince

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

In the interest of field studies I went to a night club last night for a private party celebrating the most important holiday here; New Years. I walked with in -15C light snow carrying my bag with flash units and lenses plus the camera. I left the bag in the office and did not change lenses all night, until I walked back home at 7:30a.m. at which time the temperature had dropped to -22. That was over 9 hours of dancing and shooting, often at the same time with the only lens being the 70-200VR. I was using the RS-5 and hardly felt it and did not tire of the non-stop activity with the extra weight. Before that strap my right thumb would be numb at the 3 hour mark. It was a great party, wonderful food, and some very attractive young women who were all very friendly and eager to "play" with me. The ratio was about 2:1. I normally don't go to this club but after last night I will have to do a lot more "research" there. I'll add a few photos to my gallery to show what hardship I had to endure for these tests:>) I made as whole lot more "friends" last night, I only hope I can remember which names went with which phone numbers and email addresses.

All the shots needed flash, and there was nothing to bounce from so I used the flash shoe mounted with a home made deffussion screen.Due to the activity and company, I only totaled 315 shots.

See what sacrifices I make for the good of Nikonians field research of carrying methods and shooting endurance with a lug of a lens/camera/grip/flash?

Happy New Years everyone!
Stan
St Petersburg Russia

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Let me know next time and I will carry your bag

Bill
North Berwick, Scotland

My Website - My Nikonians Gallery

Ahh, Stan,

Having just visited your gallery, I can see that you have tough work to accomplish, but then, somebody has to do it, right? Beautiful work, in an extraordinarily beautiful country.

tony

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Stan you certainly have wonderful models to practice on. My visit to St Petersburg last year was a wonderful feast for the eye. It is a beautiful city, and the women are stunning.

Bob Baldassano
My Nikonians Gallery

"Nikonians membership - My most important photographic investment, after the
camera"

Retirement is a gift of time - Don't waste it!

Stan,

whether or not one has to undo their hand from the wrist strap in order to secure the camera/lens depends upon the angle of insertion one chooses on the the attachment bracket. I am able FWIW to "reholster" w/o any need to reposition my hand beyond flexing/rotating my wrist to acquire the angle of insertion. YMMV.

tony

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

I must say that I disagree with most comments that weight does not matter. I travel a lot and ideally, I would like my camera to be invisible , weightless. I travel firstly to discover new places and people and the camera is only a tool that should be as easy as possible to carry around and as little intrusive as possible. I have moved from the D200 to the D700 for high ISO noise improvement and full frame in order to use my old AIS lenses. The difference in weight between the 2 cameras is not really an issue for me.
I use the 24-70 and it is huge , the sun shade is grotesque.For that reason , if I travel with a rucksack, I take the D60+18-200mm and a 35mmm for low light.
Otherwise I take the D700 with 50mm f1.8 and 28-105 when I feel I do not want to carry the bulky 24-70. I wish that Nikon, like Canon, made a constant f4 24-105 of pro quality.

Jean-luc

geneluck

Jean-luc,

It's different kits for different needs and it's hard to know all the ramifications that surround a shooting opportunity or venue. I resonate with your characterization of travel photography. When traveling for international business and where weight was very important, my kit was a F100 with 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G AFS and later a D200 with 17-55mm f/3.5-4.5 AFS DX. The kit also contained a 50/35mm for low-light. Another very usable combination was a Leica M6 with 35mm f/2 Summicron (or Contax T3) and a Canon S60 digital P&S for everything the 35mm wouldn't do. I found out you can do a lot with a 35mm .

Recently when going to see the grandkids, it was nearly everything in a camera backpack, I'm suprised they let me on the airplane.

Best Regards,

Roger
It is still ISO, aperture and shutter speed, right?
"Nikonians membership - My most important photographic investment."

Hi Jean-luc,

I don't think anybody would argue that weight doesn't matter when it comes to camera gear. Frankly, if I was a trust-fund baby, I'd never carry camera gear again. I'd have a couple of handy camera sherpas at my full-time beck and call.

Short of having a camera assistant, I think the major thrust of the discussion is how to carry the best available equipment with the least amount of concern and worry about weight considerations.

If you want high ISO and spectacularly fast glass, and lots of frames per second and God forbid, lots of reach... Well then, you're probably going to have to be prepared for some weight!

Until such time as the invisible, weightless camera is invented.... I think John Shaw said it best nearly twenty years ago in the last paragraph of Landscape Photography, "To shoot good pictures, all you need is one lens, one camera body, one tripod, and good light. ... On the other hand, I'm still waiting for that new 20-600mm f/2 close-focusing zoom lens with rotating tripod collar, no bigger than the current 28-80mm.... well, you understand".

Yes, Mr. Shaw. Yes, we do.

Cheers, Vince

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Talk about a small world!

As I mentioned earlier in the thread, I found the Cotton Carrier website based on Tony's comments and I fired off an e-mail to Andy Cotton, asking a couple of questions.

Long story short, Andy took Customer Service to the next level by calling me at home to discuss the questions I had raised. And in another strange turn of events, it just so happens that Cotton Carriers are manufactured no more than an hour away from where I live in Vancouver, in Deep Cove, BC. So this coming Thursday I am scheduled to visit the "world headquarters" of Cotton Carriers, meet Andy in person and check out the product first hand.

I will keep you all posted.

Maybe I'll even shoot a little video of my own! Say on the D3s....

Cheers, Vince

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

An invisible, weightless camera? Forget Nikon and Canon. Try the Leica M9. The M9 isn't totally invisible - but your travel budget will become weightless.

Panasonic makes a small rangefinder (Lumix GF-1) with good IQ. Not as good as a decent DSLR. Still, good enough for a small print. With the GF-1, people will not feel accosted by the "pro" look of your piece and your travel budget should flourish.

Still, for low-light street images the D700 and an 85mm f1.4 are hard to beat. One's legs become the pro quality zoom.

wrdpico

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Even on the lowly D90, my only DSLR, the 85 1.4 is pretty impressive with little light.
But for some unexplanable reason I just like what shooting with the 70-200VR does, how it presents the world through the VF and the feel in my hands. With the proper strap, weight really is not a problem. It also cuts my total weight by encouraging me to go out without my backpack full of lenses and flash units and instead take a 50mm 1.8 in my pocket and the D90/70-200/grip on the strap and spare cards, cell phone(5mpx)in pockets of the strap..
I doubt very many people have traveled to as many areas as I have, and I don't like to be loaded down with camera gear, but my travel style fits taking as much gear as a want but only going out exploring with it when I really have the urge. I usually used to travel on the spur of the moment, not even buying a ticket until at the airport and go to the country with the next plane leaving. No planning, more unexpected surprises and rewards I have found. I got tired of hotels and tourist destinations, avoided them most of my life, just went to some small village or town and rent a cabin, house or room from a widow or something and explore by digging into the culture and learning the traditions, local color, personalities etc that I would miss if I was confined to tourist regions. I don't need another snap shot of a church, i am more interested in what people think and how they relate to their community, sort of a mini cultural anthropology field study. Town plazas and taverns are key places to meet interesting people and get access to less obvious societal traits. A lot of the time that meant leaving the camera behind as to not interfere with normal social interaction. In some societies taking a photo of some is a sharing opportunity, such as here in Russia, most people love to take photos and have their photo taken. Even if not offered to them(which I normally do) they thank me for taking their photo. In other cultures it is not as accepted and in fact might be bad form for social, privacy or religious reasons.
Having a base of operations allows me to travel light on day excursions and find areas to return to that would make good photo opportunities.
But that is me, I know many people want to "sample" a country and "do" 2-3 cities or even countries in a weekend. I prefer doing two or three weeks in a single plaza or tour square. I am sort of odd that way, that is why I don't live in my native country anymore.....I like to delve deeply into what makes a culture tick. I am sure doing that here, after 100 visits and 7 years of residence.
Stan
St Petersburg Russia

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Stan,

thanks for such an informative post.

tony

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

>Having a base of operations allows me to travel light on day
>excursions and find areas to return to that would make good
>photo opportunities.
>But that is me, I know many people want to "sample"
>a country and "do" 2-3 cities or even countries in a
>weekend. I prefer doing two or three weeks in a single plaza
>or tour square. I am sort of odd that way, that is why I don't
>live in my native country anymore.....I like to delve deeply
>into what makes a culture tick. I am sure doing that here,
>after 100 visits and 7 years of residence.

It's not "odd" at all. During the past thirty years of investigative research, I've been lucky enough to also be able to take enough time in my favorite (urban) environments - often weeks - to wander, explore and meet people. But too many photographers simply don't have sufficient financial advantage to be able to develop a deep relationship with a place. Some people are driven by tour & travel marketing, their own thinking and their D700 to believe that only by taking great volumes of photos and traversing great distances can they truly feel (or say) they've traveled. Carrying a camera such as the D700, with its inherent technical quality and the idea that in the right hands it can be used to capture remarkable photos, should ideally make us slow down to examine every aspect of life as it swirls around and through us.

So rather than think your approach somewhat "odd" I think that too many others around us may have lost touch with the details of life and existence so easily captured with a good eye and a D700 if only we stop moving for a while and carefully examine the place we're in and the people who populate the place. One of the reasons I try to read and contribute regularly to Nikonians is that so many other members appreciate such detail and sense of place and time.

Truly remarkable photography, I think, often requires patience that seems increasingly to be in short supply. A heavy D700 attached to a 24-70 f/2.8 or an 85 f/1.4 can be viewed as a boat anchor for sure, but it can also be viewed and used as a remarkable platform with which to explore a place in the most intimate sort of detail.

One camera, one lens. If you need more, well, you may actually need more. But I believe that everyone should employ the one camera, one lens approach much more often, because I also believe it's the way to connect most closely with our innate creativity.

My Nikonians Gallery

Howard Carson, Managing Editor
Kickstartnews Inc. - http://www.kickstartnews.com

Stan I like your style. Last year I spent a week in St Petersburg with a tour that took me down the Volga to Moscow. It was the free time I had that was the most fun because I got to explore on foot. One of my most cherished trips was to Amsterdam 2 months after 9/11 here in the U.S. My wife and I just booked a room at the Hilton away from the center of town and spent a week exploring the city on foot; no agenda, no time tables, just what ever moved us. It was there that we discovered the Dutch Sinterklaas, stumbling by accident on the start of a parade.

Bob Baldassano
My Nikonians Gallery

"Nikonians membership - My most important photographic investment, after the
camera"

Retirement is a gift of time - Don't waste it!

I'm totally in wrdpico's camp. The D700 with 85mm f/1.4 is the ticket for me, too, as a great walk around combo. I also have the 24mm - 70mm f/2.8 and 135mm f/2 DC. I carry these three lenses and the D700 + 2 SB-900 flashes (and a bunch of other stuff) in a Domke "little bit bigger bag" when I'm shooting out of the car - or with short distances to the shooting venue. When I'm walking through the city or other places where a good deal of walking is required, I use a small Nikon bag which accommodates my 24mm-70mm and one SB-900 (not much else)and carry my D700 mounted to the 85mm f/1.4. I've tried other combinations, but I keep coming back tod this one. When I'm really feeling serendipitous, It's just the D700 and 85mm f/1.4 (with a Black Rapid strap). Lightweight, extremely mobile, and just plain fun! Incidentally, I totally sanction the idea that one camera and one lens while walking about is a great way to get in touch with your creative self - both from a technical and aesthetic point of view.
JohnA

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

This thread is relevant to some of my thinking and so I volunteer another aspect that is not mentioned so far. I don't think weight is the key issue, I believe it is volume. With each iteration of body and lens, Nikon keep making physically bigger cameras. Bigger kit means a bigger bag, and that usually means it is less well balanced on the body which makes it feel heavier. It also means that the body + lens is more 'agressive' looking which means less ability to 'blend in' during street and travel photography.

I am not actually sure why the bodies have to keep getting bigger. It is against the trend of most electronic items which shrink with development.

Bill
North Berwick, Scotland

My Website - My Nikonians Gallery

Bill, I have to say I agree with you. One of the reasons I initially went with the D700 over the D3 was that the same sensor was available in a smaller, lighter package.

I purchased the MD-10 Battery Grip, but like the option of shooting without it. I like the idea of a component system that I can strip down to its bare essentials when I want to.

Nikon seems to have a very specific philosophy in the evolutionary path of their R&D, but I would be curious to know what the opinion is within Nikon HQ and among the engineers about the Leica M9.

There are days I prefer using my D90 because of its 'hand feel'. In fact, it's the camera I mostly used with my Lensbaby and Diana lens accessories.

After using a friends D40 for the day, I am tempted to find a used one in decent condition just to have as a small camera body that will take interchangeable lenses, as I already have a drawerful of decent point and shoots.

Cheers, Vince

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

>With each iteration of body and lens, Nikon keep making physically
>bigger cameras. Bigger kit means a bigger bag, and that
>usually means it is less well balanced on the body which makes
>it feel heavier. It also means that the body + lens is more
>'aggressive' looking which means less ability to 'blend in'
>during street and travel photography.

Bill, This size/weight/cost issue is exactly why DX should continue to have a very strong future and why the m4/3 cameras are all the rage now. I certainly have found the (comparatively) monster size of FX cameras and their concomitant f2.8 pro zooms to be pretty eye-opening (thank god for the Black-Rapid and other carrying systems).

For me FX is necessitated by low-light needs, but over time I plan to add a small D40-sized (but with D300 sensor) or rumored new 2.5 crop Nikon to complement my current FX/DX kit. Am also really looking forward to a D400, but recognize that is still probably a long ways away.

Best regards, SteveK

'A camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.' -- Dorothea Lange
My Nikonians gallery
My Nikonians Blog

"I’m on the edge of moving up from my D200 to a D700. Much has been made about the weight of the D700, compared to the D300 and D200... Given my choice of, say, the 35mm and 50mm primes, will the D700 really be pretty heavy for walk-around street shooting?"

Jim,
I don't know about you, but many of the replies here (all good and interesting), just seem to be missing the point of your question--IMHO.
The consensus is that the weight differential between the two cameras is not important.
The second area of agreement is that having the right strap or carrying system makes all the difference in use and comfort. I have suggested the Black Rapid RS 7 for this as all you want to do is "walk around" and shoot (pictures!) If you have no general interest in carrying multiple lenses, then the Cotton Carrier system is overkill. While excellent...take a look at it. Do you want to be strapped in with a "flak jacket". Sure looks comfortable when you want to just walk about and sit down for an espresso. Think Tank also offers a great carrying system. But these are not for just plain walk-around one camera and one lens guys/gals.
Go for the D700 and enjoy all of the wonderful things that it offers, and then, go into the lens forum to get a zillion good suggestions for the "best walk around lens".
Happy New Year!

Nikon made me NOCD...

Thanks for writing what I was a bit hesitant to write. I understand that several of the "pro" zoom lenses are excellent, perhaps even superb, but, at a couple of pounds or more, they don't fit with my walk-around style, even if I could afford them (there seem to be many, many threads that say one of the major downsides of moving from a DX body to the D700 or another fX body is the necessity to buy a collection of costly, top notch FX zoom lenses).

Although I know I'll never be as remotely unobtrusive with any DSLR, DX or FX as I was years ago with my Leica Ms and even my Nikon Ftn, I expect to continue to practice my equipment strategy I used successfully with my D200. This summer my wife and had a nice trip to Madrid, Barcelona, Southern France and London. I used the fairly small 16-85 (which I'll sell when the D700 is in my hands, of course) and the very compact 35 f/2 for indoor backup when VR just couldn't quite cut it. The D200 with 16-85 mounted and 35 in the next compartment was quite adequately housed in a very small, Domke attaché-type case and secured near my hip (lots of camera thieves and pickpockets in Barcelona, especially), and it was a reasonable weight to carry on 8-10 hour high-temperature walking days on the street and in museums and churches.

I hope to take a few more of these trips and I plan to use either a couple of primes, or a prime and maybe the 24-85 zoom at the very most. My experience after some European touring is that if one is an urban tourist, i.e., not hanging around Alpine country, that a lomg (and heavy) lens is seldom missed. I'll leave my 180 f/2.8 at home.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

I love my Nikon zooms, IQ is superb and the flexibility is nice. But I was in the same quandry recently and decided to pick up a Nikkor 50mm 1.4 prime. The D700 is still a big package but I find it very manageable for walkaround with the 50mm prime. And the 50mm has IQ that meets tat of my 24-70. The 24-70 is a tank of a lens to carry around, the 50 is much lighter. As much as I am fond of my zooms, I'm starting to discover some of the allure of primes.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

>I love my Nikon zooms, IQ is superb and the flexibility is
>nice. But I was in the same quandry recently and decided to
>pick up a Nikkor 50mm 1.4 prime. The D700 is still a big
>package but I find it very manageable for walkaround with the
>50mm prime. And the 50mm has IQ that meets tat of my 24-70.
>The 24-70 is a tank of a lens to carry around, the 50 is much
>lighter. As much as I am fond of my zooms, I'm starting to
>discover some of the allure of primes.

The weight of the pro zooms when traveling has becomes uncomfortable in extreme weather or geography as we get older...so I have put together a lightweight combination of older AFD Nikkors that give me versatile choices in focal lenght and focus distance as follows:

Lenses all have hoods and multi-coated Hoya digital pro UV filters.
Lenses are 24mmf2.8 AFD (current Japan model) Nikkor, 50MM F1.4 AFD Nikkor (Made in China)and the very compact 3rd.generation push-pull 35-105mm f \3.5-4.5 zoom Nikkor.
1. All the same filter size.
2. All close focus with older Nikon 52mm screw in +1 and +2 supplementry close up lens.
3. 1 circular polarizer fits all.
4. A Nikon BR2a lens reverse mount ring makes the 50/1.4 a 1
;1 macro.
4. Leitz (now Leica) table tripod with large Ernst Leitz ball head.
6. The 50/1.4 with diaphragm wide open and viewed from front to rear elements makes the best loupe/mgnifier without carrying more gear.
2 spare camera batteries, lens and sensor cleaning supplies, extra CF cards, Nikon battery charger,in a black Domke F3 with room for lunch.
Weight with D700 in the bag 8.25 pounds. All also fits in my photo vest with body and 1 lens around the neck or shouldered with body/lens minimized by being under vest side panel. In certain circumstances 70-300VR can be added and/or the 24mm replaced with 20/2.8 AFD. An SB800 with batteries, charger, SC29 and diffuser plus 20mm f2.8 AFD and/or 70-300VR f4.5-5.6 (plus sadly, other sized UV & C-pola filters) are left in my PAC-SAFE 120 bag protector secured wheeled travel bag. The battery charger and SC29 can also be left in the room although the table tripod can be belt carried in of all things a belt holster designed for a Smith & Wesson Model 36 (aka just like the Chiefs Special) revolver. The Leitz table tripod with large ball head fits and is retained by the thumb snap and draws for quick use just like the revolver.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Elk in the meadows.

ISO performance in low light is by far a better reason to move up to the D700.

If only I could keep it light. But with the D700, MB-D10, 70-200 f/2.8 and the TECII 2.0 this is not a light set up or easy to carry. The solution believe it or not is a monopod.

Monopod makes a great walking stick. Has the benifit of mounting the camera to give your neck, arms, back etc a rest when you are shooting and not carrying the camera.

Seriously look at your goals in shooting. For years I shot with a FG and a 50mm prime. Let my feet do the zooming.

Michael P. Meyers

http://www.artizencreations.com

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Michael,

For years I shot with an F2A and a 28 mm. f/2.8 prime. I would give up photography if my camera equipment were so heavy that I had to routinely rely on a monopod. That's one of the reasons I don't own one of those pro f/2.8 monsters to go along with my D700.

Bob

Bob32:

GREAT POINT! My aforescribed travel kit 24/2.8 and 50/1.4 are sharper, exhibit better contrast and higher resolving power than all Nikkor zooms I own, have owned or have shot EXCEPT the 24-70/2.8 AFS NANO! The 24-70/2.8 seems to resolove finer detail than my 105/2.8 AFS NANO MICRO NIKKOR.

I only use my FAST (READ big) zooms for money, even my consumer and so called prosumer lenses make me money where constant and or fast maximum apertures are required.

The only time this was a problem was when the client, an attorney sent his nephew, the families photographer to see what he could learn about "pro photograhy". It was a small fixed subject forensic shoot for reference purposes only so...I brought a pair of D200(1 A BACK UP), 2 SB800, a 24-85AFFS and the 60/2.8AFD Micro Nikkor and the 105/2.8 AFS VR Micro. The nephew shows up with a D2x and a D2 with 3 micro Nikkors, 5 various AF Nikkors and a 4 head lighting system with high output Norman AC power pack plus stands, soft box, reflectors etc. AFTER WINNING their case, I was told that "the firm" who I had shot for since 1995, this being 2007 would no longer use my services nor refer work to me "as I showed up with inadeuate quantity an type of equipment for proffeshsional".

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.