# More gear or less: The Photographer's Paradox



## Derrel

an article from Shutterbug magazine:

*Why Using Less Photo Gear Is Often Better Than Using More*

                                         by Dan Havlik


“
Perfectionism is one of the most costly traits if it isn't strictly necessary,” DeArco says. “Often times we get caught up hyperfocusing on the wrong things – making us unproductive as photographers and creatives.”

Or, in other words, don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good, as the old expression goes. And don’t get bogged down with worrying about how much gear you think you need to use. Just keep it simple, stupid, as another famous principle of life goes.

Since the video is a little bit difficult to explain, just give it a watch and tell us what you think in the comments. We hope you find it as enlightening as we did.

You can watch more of DeArco's ideas and musings on his YouTube page.




Read more at Why Using Less Photo Gear Is Often Better Than Using More: The Photographer’s Paradox, the now online-only magazine, from 2018.


----------



## pixmedic

Fine, in theory....
But I think for the majority of photographers (myself included) acquiring gear is more about "want" and less about "need". 
For the average photographer, its probably a lot of "ooooooh, that looks cool...i want to buy that"
Or simply wanting to have a newer, more sophisticated piece of equipment. 
Lets face it, those extra 15 autofocus points COULD make or break someones career! Or someone might miss that winning shot because they didn't upgrade to a camera that could shoot ISO 128,000....
But I kinda doubt it. 

Shooting with less is fine and all, but its all the gearheads with GAS that are really driving the market and its push for improvements.


----------



## Derrel

I thought the takeaway was not so much about GEAR as it was about getting something DONE, and not obsessing over minute 'flaws' in the images...about focusing on what the "client" values, as opposed to what other photographers might say is lacking or sub-par in specific cases.


----------



## pixmedic

Derrel said:


> I thought the takeaway was not so much about GEAR as it was about getting something DONE, and not obsessing over minute 'flaws' in the images...


Could be, could be.

Sent from my LM-G710 using Tapatalk


----------



## Derrel

Agreed, however, GAS does drive the gear market, and I have had a case or two of GAS over the years. A couple years ago, I sold off a lot of excessive gear, and now am down to apprx. 30-40 lenses and one d-slr that I use for 'serious work ' (D800) plus the D610 as my "lo-rez" camera or for snaps when I am not super-serious about things. I also use the iPhone SE as my snapshot camera now, and have quit using my Canon G-series, Nikon CoolPix, and Panasonic P&S 4-12 MP models.

I liked his video.


----------



## pixmedic

Derrel said:


> Agreed, however, GAS does drive the gear market, and I have at time, had a case or two of GAS over the years.A couple years ago, I sold off a lot of excessive gear, and no am down to 40 lenses and a ON d-slr that I use for 'serious work ' (D8000 plus the D610 as my "lo-rez" camera or for snaps when I am not super-serious about things. I also use the iPhone SE as my snapshot camera now, and have quit using my Canon G-series, Nikon CoolPix, and Pansonic P&S 4-12 MP models.


I have bouts of GAS...just picked up a used fuji x-t100 on eBay, which will make 4 fujis now...havent picked up any new lenses in a while. 

I MAY consider getting rid of the x-a1 and maybe the 15-45 ois pz kit lens that is coming with the x-t100....although, i heard the kit pz lens is actually pretty decent

Sent from my LM-G710 using Tapatalk


----------



## LRLala

Thanks for attaching that video, Derrel. Thought provoking. Spend more time taking pictures than setting up lots of gear.


----------



## vintagesnaps

"People actually seemed to like it." No kidding, they seem to like anything and everything that crosses their path on social media! lol

At least he got some good advice from a more experienced photographer when she asked him 'What are you doing??' I feel like asking that a lot... But the posting & sharing etc. is nothing new to try to promote oneself, and life handing you an opportunity that develops into something is nothing new either; I've done the same thing, it's a matter of going for it when getting the opportunity. 

I don't think it's what he thinks it is; peer judgement - maybe, but for me, who cares?? I appreciate feedback from someone whose opinion I value, otherwise, who cares??! lol Perfectionism - that has nothing to do with gear to me, that's me driving myself nuts nitpicking thru my own work, and wanting my work to be good and to keep getting better. Industry standards - again to me that has nothing to do with equipment; in sports they don't care how you get the pictures or what beat up camera you're dragging around, they want what they need and in a timely manner.

I don't see a need for even a back up camera much less all that other stuff since this is every week (unless there's something specific that day) and the person with the camera equipment isn't a working pro. 

Hmm, The Photographer's Paradox _isn't_ a click-baity title?? lol does he think that's any less so than the example he gives? Maybe it's better than some but he seems to be doing the same thing he criticizes, I think videos like this are to get followers and a cut of the money from ads that accompany the videos. Then to top it off, to get on Patreon and get followers to give money there too...  I have yet to understand why people would give money when you aren't buying a product, you're not receiving a service, this isn't a charity... I can't see paying someone for their 'musings'.


----------



## Derrel

https://ignitevisibility.com/social-media-statistics/

The video guy built up from 0 followers on Instagram to 4,000 followers in a _very_ short time frame (seven weeks). If it is true that 81% of Americans have at least ONE social media account, and that 41 % of Americans have _interacted_ with a business thruough social media, we might look at social media a bit differently in the next and upcoming decades. I remember well the days before almost 93-97% of the world's population had a mobile phone, and when land lines,telephone directories, printed newspapers, and paper classified ads looked as if their place in industrial/modern life would be permanent.


IT is fashionable here on TPF to dismiss social media in much the same way as our great-grandparents dismissed *"those darn horseless carriage*s", or the way our parents/grandparents dismissed, "that awful rock n' roll music" (1950's)or that, "long-haired, hippie music"(1960s-1970s)..turns out they failed to realize they were in the midst of revolutions...

Social media is the new "television" of the 20-teens..it is also the new "newspaper." The newest media is.._*social media..*_.


----------



## Derrel

At one time, not too long ago, KODAK was one of the biggest brands in the world. They thought for 15 critical years, that people *wanted PRINTED photos.* They failed to see the changes that were hitting them in the face,and today, they are a shell of their former greatness. This video is is a lesson in re-evaluating one's strategies in business.


----------



## Overread

Honestly I think the message at the end is good, but its getting sort of lost a little because of two things
1) Who the heck wears a shirt like that whilst recording with a digital camera?! 
2) It kind of gets distracted for a bit too long into Instagram and social media. 

This latter point is a "bit" of an issue because you can become a big name on Instagram simply by putting pictures of your cat on there. It's sort of an extreme situation where your photography skills really don't matter one bit and, to me, it kind of just takes it a little to extreme and loses the overall importance of the message. It might have been better if he'd used the Instragram as just one example, but also then balanced it out showing a situation where you do need more gear. 


In the end the video is basically saying "understand your market and what it needs, then select the right gear that will produce a result to satisfy that need with the least amount of investment (in time and money)." That's a good lesson, its a sensible lesson; but I think it would have come across better if he'd given a more broad display. The video gives the subtle hint that going minimalist is best and doesn't show an example where there is gain when using more gear. That's a failing in the way the message is played across I think. 




Personally I've found that the gear I have grew in size as I tried new things, experimented and had money to invest into it. New ideas or new approaches prompted investment into better gear; specific challenges required solutions and gear was one (of several each time) solutions toward those issues that presented themselves. I think that when one focuses on a niche its very easy to get more and more gear to overcome more situations and that gear can become the crutch solution. Until such time as it can overwhelm the photographer. I know I've had times when I took all my gear with me on a shoot. Yet I found I wasn't using even half of it - sure I could see potential for it all; but the real world taught me that "no no you're not going to swap lenses endlessly all day". So I adapt and take less.
Yet sometimes the opposite happens too; you take less and find you need more to get the result you want (or if you're a pro the result you and your client wants). 

In the end its a balancing act.


----------



## Derrel

Overread said:


> SNIP>> *you can become a big name on Instagram simply by putting pictures of your cat on there*. It's sort of an extreme situation where your *photography skills really don't matter one bit* ...



I do not agree with either of the above points..Perhaps they were intended to be hyperbole?

Social media...as dumb and useless as "the internet" appeared in 1999?


----------



## Designer

Derrel said:


> by Dan Havlik
> 
> Since the video is a little bit difficult to explain, ..


It is difficult to explain because DeArco did not produce his video very well.  His basic concept is lost in the side issues.


----------



## Derrel

it was pretty easy for me to understand.


----------



## Derrel

LRlala wrote:"


LRLala said:


> Thanks for attaching that video, Derrel. Thought provoking. Spend more time taking pictures than setting up lots of gear.



Pretty much...


----------



## Designer

Derrel said:


> it was pretty easy for me to understand.


Understandable, yes, but difficult to explain.  Perhaps not very well thought out.


----------



## Derrel

Tell a story or personal anecdote


----------



## Derrel

Many things are difficult to summarize, condense, or to describe in few words. It was ONE simple story, about One attitude. Maybe if the writer had been less work-avoidant, he could have summarized the video. But that was not the goal...is it too much to ask people to draw their own conclusions from a 7:02 video? Should the video have come with a point-by-point outline at the start? 

I am frankly, surprised by the overall negative, dismissive, flippant responses here. Wow. Sooooo many people failed to get much out of this.: the negative reaction reinforces so many stereotypes about forum hive-mind characterizations.


----------



## Designer

Derrel said:


> ...is it too much to ask people to draw their own conclusions from a 7:02 video?


I did watch the video and did, indeed, draw my own conclusions.  I just think he could have accomplished the same goal with fewer side issues.


----------



## Derrel

Designer said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> 
> it was pretty easy for me to understand.
> 
> 
> 
> Understandable, yes, but difficult to explain.  Perhaps not very well thought out.
Click to expand...




Designer said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...is it too much to ask people to draw their own conclusions from a 7:02 video?
> 
> 
> 
> I did watch the video and did, indeed, draw my own conclusions.  I just think he could have accomplished the same goal with fewer side issues.
Click to expand...


I just re-watched the video, for the fourth time....I am astounded that you felt there were too many "side issues" in one, 7:02 video; what I mean is that I am astounded that you could not see the clear,simple narrative that was so blatantly obvious to me. I am really shocked that _anybody_ would have difficulty following along with this video, in any way.Was it a slick, Hollywood movie, or a Super Bowl commercial? No, neither. But it is a seven minute video...that's not that long a video to be confused by a simple anecdote about overloading on gear and effort to achieve the same level of engagement and direct, un-retouched uploading achieved with a bar minimum of equipment. It seems so,so simple to me..pay ATTENTION to your audience not to other "photographers",and pay ATTENTION to what is truly important. I loved his example of ,"_Zooming in...and retouching every zit and flyaway on a person's body"_as a good example of obsessing over detail the the viewers of photography are NOT worried about.


----------



## waday

@Derrel , thanks for posting this. I just watched it, and I did get something positive out of it. I myself have been trying to cut back and simplify my life, including my hobbies. And, I like what his friend recommended: just take the essentials and don’t edit. 

I also really liked the point he got to around the 5 minute mark (the main point of the video), which was: know your audience. The people on Instagram won’t care whether he used additional lighting or not, whether he used a reflector or not… or what lens he used. And, he noticed that in his account. It didn’t matter if there were people in the background or if the composition was off, people liked the photos because they weren't photographers.

I think that’s a lesson that every photographer, and really anyone making money in ANY business, should learn and be aware of: Know your audience.


----------



## Derrel

waday said:


> @Derrel , thanks for posting this. I just watched it, and I did get something positive out of it. I myself have been trying to cut back and simplify my life, including my hobbies. And, I like what his friend recommended: just take the essentials and don’t edit.
> 
> I also really liked the point he got to around the 5 minute mark (the main point of the video), which was: know your audience. The people on Instagram won’t care whether he used additional lighting or not, whether he used a reflector or not… or what lens he used. And, he noticed that in his account. It didn’t matter if there were people in the background or if the composition was off, people liked the photos because they weren't photographers.
> 
> I think that’s a lesson that every photographer, and really anyone making money in ANY business, should learn and be aware of: Know your audience.



Good to hear feedback that's positive, and from a person that was able to extract something from the video/blog.


----------



## cgw

Same old herd of independent minds, Derrel. The critics just don't get this video because a) they're maybe not really doing much photographically aside from spewing in forums or, b) they're too embarrassed to fess up to being suckered into amassing gear tonnage whose contribution to "quality" fell way short of expectations. Fuji mirrorless and quirky cameras like the Ricoh GR II are just plain fun. Results? No complaints. Aesthetics change and anyone who doesn't get that isn't paying--or getting--much attention.


----------



## Derrel

cgw said:


> Same old herd of independent minds, Derrel. The critics just don't get this video because a) they're maybe not really doing much photographically aside from spewing in forums or, b) they're too embarrassed to fess up to being suckered into amassing gear tonnage whose contribution to "quality" fell way short of expectations. Fuji mirrorless and quirky cameras like the Ricoh GR II are just plain fun. Results? No complaints. Aesthetics change and anyone who doesn't get that isn't paying--or getting--much attention.



A scathing indictment...

no comment , except to say that the comments about social media (and its users) in some replies above indicate an indifference/loathing/lack of respect/lack of awareness of what social media ( IG, FB, TWITTER to name the Big 3, there are others) "is" within the decade of the 20-teens...as if social media occupies the SAME stature it did it 2007 or 2008...

It is as if a lesson proved out on IG with 4,000 people has zero applicability to any aspect of business, and IG is merely a vehicle for cute cat pictures. We get it..social media fills many roles..cute cat pics? Not so much any more. Social media has become a powerful force in both culture and in business..it is a DIRECT connection, in most cases,a FREE (monetarily speaking), direct method of engagement with potential customers...

Sorry to sound so "ranty" but your reply came as I was working on my "yellow pages advertisement" for my photo business. LOL


----------



## Tim Tucker 2

I fully understand the point, and would like to offer a slightly different slant...

The trouble with gear is that it produces a *skew* in your thinking. You get to the stage that you believe that you need *this gear* to produce *that shot*. The skew is that in linking *the gear* with *the shot* you begin to concentrate on the difference the gear makes, you begin to learn to see and judge a shot by the performance of the gear. You photography begins to represent your understanding of equipment.

The point that the vid makes is that the public do not judge or categorise images in that way. They measure them purely against their experience and understanding of being human rather than the photographers understanding of the *correct* implementation of equipment.

In other words all you need to do is understand that you are human and that all you need is *your imagination* to produce *that response* in your audience. See the image from their understanding of life, rather than your's of a camera.

This is why I got so fed up with Dgearview, all they ever discuss is their understanding of gear to the point that all photographic knowledge is contained within it...

This comes with the bias of somebody who still regularly uses a 60 year old camera with a 100+ year old lens.


----------



## Derrel

Tim..I thought of YOU and the F,and the 105/24/35 lens set for 15+ years....and your mindset, as described in a post some months back...


----------



## Derrel

My experience has been that carrying excessive gear leads to less freedom, and worse photos that when carrying LESS gear. Most of the time, in most "normal" situations. The video linked to in my OP talks about end-user engagement between pictures that have had the ***+ edited out of every frame, and end-user engagement with un-edited SOOC photos.


----------



## Soocom1

When my Minolta was stolen, they took several additional lenses along with a 300 G lens, and a Heartblie 80mm Super Rotator that i used almost exclusively on architecture and building sites.  

When I got the Canon, I sought out several dedicated Canon lenses and then re-discovered the use of my Russian Kiev 88 glass.

Now I bring this up because I would regularly carry all of this gear with me everywhere I would go. On train trips, aircraft, or driving, even on the back of the Harley, its clumsy and non-sensical. 
Unless your going to go to the field, set up a base station and go hunt for photos. 

I have a general 28-135, a 70-200 USM, 19-35 wide angle and now a 35-350 that I almost use exclusively because of the glass size and superior optics. 

Too much gear and trying to switch out during something like (as of this time the burning of Notre Dame) where switching lenses becomes difficult and sloppy. 

Carrying a singular setup low in parts and accessories is best, and moreover, unless your directly trained, like a wine snob, you will not see or even care what the photographer used when shooting. They are looking at the end result.


----------



## Overread

I never said social media wasn't important nor that it doesn't have a huge effect now. I said that you can become popular on there posting photos of your cat without any specialist gear or photographic knowledge
Cats of Instagram (@cats_of_instagram) • Instagram photos and videos

10 million followers suggests that - yes you can do this (and that was just the first one google threw up). 

My point was that the video is talking about knowing your subject and using less gear, but at the same time is advertising this advise by showing a platform where gear and indeed skill are not important. Emotional subject matter, unique scenes even a sports following etc... were all far more important than anything photographic. In my view yes its an important lesson and a great one if you're aiming for that market; but at the same time I wish the video maker had taken more time to move off that one example and show others. Others where photographic skill might well be more important in the process. 

The actual message overall is, as I said earlier, generally good. It's the presentation and context of the video that I took issue with (that and the shirt!! )


----------



## cgw

Soocom1 said:


> When my Minolta was stolen, they took several additional lenses along with a 300 G lens, and a Heartblie 80mm Super Rotator that i used almost exclusively on architecture and building sites.
> 
> When I got the Canon, I sought out several dedicated Canon lenses and then re-discovered the use of my Russian Kiev 88 glass.
> 
> Now I bring this up because I would regularly carry all of this gear with me everywhere I would go. On train trips, aircraft, or driving, even on the back of the Harley, its clumsy and non-sensical.
> Unless your going to go to the field, set up a base station and go hunt for photos.
> 
> I have a general 28-135, a 70-200 USM, 19-35 wide angle and now a 35-350 that I almost use exclusively because of the glass size and superior optics.
> 
> Too much gear and trying to switch out during something like (as of this time the burning of Notre Dame) where switching lenses becomes difficult and sloppy.
> 
> Carrying a singular setup low in parts and accessories is best, and moreover, unless your directly trained, like a wine snob, you will not see or even care what the photographer used when shooting. They are looking at the end result.





Overread said:


> I never said social media wasn't important nor that it doesn't have a huge effect now. I said that you can become popular on there posting photos of your cat without any specialist gear or photographic knowledge
> Cats of Instagram (@cats_of_instagram) • Instagram photos and videos
> 
> 10 million followers suggests that - yes you can do this (and that was just the first one google threw up).
> 
> My point was that the video is talking about knowing your subject and using less gear, but at the same time is advertising this advise by showing a platform where gear and indeed skill are not important. Emotional subject matter, unique scenes even a sports following etc... were all far more important than anything photographic. In my view yes its an important lesson and a great one if you're aiming for that market; but at the same time I wish the video maker had taken more time to move off that one example and show others. Others where photographic skill might well be more important in the process.
> 
> The actual message overall is, as I said earlier, generally good. It's the presentation and context of the video that I took issue with (that and the shirt!! )



Problem I'm having with this is the loaded term "photographic skill." How it's defined(narrowly?) and by whom(you alone?) seem pretty fixed. No interest in the shirt.


----------



## Soocom1

cgw said:


> Problem I'm having with this is the loaded term "photographic skill." How it's defined(narrowly?) and by whom(you alone?) seem pretty fixed. No interest in the shirt.



Like the diff. between porn and erotic art... I know it when I see it... 




lol... 



Seriously, it does show.


----------



## Derrel

Overread said:


> I. I said that you can become popular on there posting photos of your cat without any specialist gear or photographic knowledge
> Cats of Instagram (@cats_of_instagram) • Instagram photos and videos
> 
> 10 million followers suggests that - yes you can do this (and that was just the first one google threw up).
> The actual message overall is, as I said earlier, generally good. It's the presentation and context of the video that I took issue with (that and the shirt!! )



Cats of Instagram is an aggregation site,with ONE theme, and has contributors from all over the world.The content focuses on cats (which is a video/still photo/meme topic that people like,and the site is followed by 10.2 million people world-wide. It is very popular, yes, but Ariana Grande has 151 million followers on IG.( Grande used to perform wearing cat ears--coincidence??) 

YouTube has channels with from 0 to over 80 MILLION subscribers.

Facebook stats: 250 Amazing Facebook Statistics

Social media is here to stay, it seems. Perhaps we can acknowledge that it has become part of commerce. Remember when Bill Gates talked about the internet as being of little commercial value. Remember when Sears and JC Penny were big stores? Now, Amazon has made them largely irrelevant.


----------



## DanOstergren

I agree with the author of the video. In my experience minimizing and working with less gear and older gear (because I'm always broke anyways), and focusing mainly on vision and technical skill instead has allowed me to progress a great deal more than when I was focused on having the best gear with the sharpest focus and widest f/stop, or over complicating things with too much equipment. Gear doesn't really matter in my opinion, it's more about having a great vision and an understanding of light and color. A skilled photographer will make something beautiful even with a toy camera.


----------



## Tropicalmemories

I think I'm a 'hybrid' gear fan - and I bet many are the same.

I have enough gear at home so I can take just what I need for a particular trip.

Heading out to do a pre-wedding photo session for two good friends (no fee as I'm just an amateur enthusiast) - I take all my lenses, two remote flashes plus stands, a reflector, an 'assistant' plus a light meter that I've never used 'just in case I need it'.

Going to a night market - latest body plus wide aperture 50mm equivalent lens and an f2.8 compact zoom.

Going away for a weekend and travelling light - an older body with integral flash and one 27mm prime lens.

Just because we own some gear does not mean we need to use it every time we go out - hence all the discussions about "what lens should I take for my trip to xxxxxx".


----------



## Philmar

*The Dirty Business of Buying Instagram Followers*

The Dirty Business of Buying Instagram Followers


----------



## Jeff G

I'm not a big fan of social media, but I didn't have any problems getting the point he was making in the video. The message from his marketing friend was valid, and this video probably would have had better results if it had been presented by her directly.


----------



## Grandpa Ron

More is less in many hobbies. One can end up hauling stuff they never seem to used. So you lighten the load and spend more time doing, until......you really need that one piece of gear you hardly, rarely, almost never, use. Then it is worth its weight in gold.

Murphy's law at its finest.


----------



## Derrel

Grandpa Ron said:


> More is less in many hobbies. One can end up hauling stuff they never seem to used. So you lighten the load and spend more time doing, until......you really need that one piece of gear you hardly, rarely, almost never, use. Then it is worth its weight in gold.
> 
> Murphy's law at its finest.



THAT can happen, yes.


----------



## Original katomi

Going on holiday with family  this makes me think hard on what to to take, how much can I get away with, vers what do I really need.
Norm is
mono pod, one body (canon 600d) three lenses. Close, med far. Pocket full sd cards half doz batteries and mains charger and two lens cloths


----------



## waday

Original katomi said:


> Going on holiday with family  this makes me think hard on what to to take, how much can I get away with, vers what do I really need.
> Norm is
> mono pod, one body (canon 600d) three lenses. Close, med far. Pocket full sd cards half doz batteries and mains charger and two lens cloths


Yeah, that's what I've been grappling with lately. My family vacation kit has been shrinking slowly. With a 1.5 year old, it's hard justifying all the extra gear (body, multiple lenses, tripod, etc) when we're already carrying a baby bag and stroller.

Right now, my travel kit essentially consists of body (Olympus EM1), two lenses (12-40 f/2.8 and 14-150 f/var), and if I have the space and depending on the vacation: tripod and flash. (That doesn't include the extra batteries, SD cards, and chargers.) I can fit everything comfortably into a Tenba bag insert (except tripod which goes outside).

What I'm dealing with now is a need to actually slim down even further (depending on where we go), so I've been debating a "P&S"-like camera (like the Ricoh GRiii or the Fuji X100F). The Ricoh's pocketability and streamlined use has really piqued my interest. The need to slim down more is related to me documenting the vacation rather than taking more artistic shots. I want my child to grow up seeing us enjoying vacations rather than shots that can be found on Google image search...


----------



## JonA_CT

Like Wade, kids forced me to greatly reduce what I carry.

I'm down to XT-2 and the matching 18-55mm lens nearly always. Very occasionally, I'll throw on the 35mm f1.4 that I have, but I'm honestly considering getting rid of that, too, and getting a wider angle zoom instead. I love prime lens. I don't have the luxury of time to dicker around with carrying 4 of them anymore. (You zoom with the feet crowd must live in places with more space than I  ) .


----------



## Derrel

"zoom with your feet is really a misnomer, a canard, a myth. It does not work the same as framing with focal length; "zooming with the feet" profoundly changed the perspective of the shot.


----------



## ac12

I saw two messages in the video, both of which I agree with.

#1 - Do you REALLY need all that gear?  As I have gotten older, I ran smack into a problem; I cannot physically carry the year that I could when I was younger.  So I had to rethink my kit to be smarter and lighter.   Compromise.

#2 - Know your market, and match your kit to the market requirement.
If your market is not "pixel peepers," don't worry about the 40+MP camera with the ultra expensive pro lens.  It is like a discussion we had MANY years ago,
How many MP do you NEED to make a 3-1/2 x 5 inch print?  
I think the answer was less than 3MP.  So then why do you "need" a 20MP camera?​Match the kit to the event requirement.

In a way, this is similar to the logic I apply to a travel kit.
Compromise is the name of the game.

The primary parameter is minimum bulk/size and weight.  

So I use a micro 4/3 kit rather than a DX or FX kit.  

The kit is planned to to handle 80-90% of my needs at a "good enough" level of quality.

I bring my small/light Panasonic-Lumix 12-60, and leave the larger/heavier pro Olympus 12-40 and 12-100 at home.
If I have a really long shot, I just have to crop into my shot, rather than carry the long lens, that I would use less than 1% of the time.
If I bring a flash, it is a small shoe flash.  I would leave the big flash, flash bracket and HV battery pack at home.
Now if I was shooting my nephew's wedding, the parameters change.  

Different event, importance of the event and target audience.

I may or may not bring the DX kit.  m4/3 seems to be good enough that I don't see a huge difference between m4/3 and DX.

With m4/3, I would bring the heavier pro lenses.
I would bring the bigger flash, flash bracket and HV battery pack.  

I'm a flash speed junkie.  Once you get used to FAST recycle times with a HV pack, it is really hard to go back.
I might bring a couple light stands, flashes, remotes, and umbrellas.

I would draft one of the nephews to be my assistant/sherpa, to carry the gear for me.
The kit bulk and weight would go up; at least 4x in weight and at least 6x in bulk, likely more.

In this situation, bulk and weight reduction is not a primary goal.  Image quality is.  So there is less room for compromise.


----------



## Tim Tucker 2

Derrel said:


> "zoom with your feet is really a misnomer, a canard, a myth. It does not work the same as framing with focal length; "zooming with the feet" profoundly changed the perspective of the shot.



This is so true. But it leave a dilemma...

I *choose* to carry only three primes and at the same time I also recognise that I will not be able to capture every single shot, I will miss some. At the same time it also makes me think of what I *can* do rather than try to cater for every eventuality. I have the luxury of being able to do this because I'm not working to a brief or an expectation. I find it liberating.

My photographs no longer rely on having the correct gear, I no longer think in terms of how the gear will produce the shot. I only think in terms of how I can do it. As I said it means that I will miss opportunities, but then again I do not think that the opportunities are created by the gear I carry.

It's a mindset more than anything, but a very liberating one. If I were to do this professionally I would probably use a zoom at functions, and would probably find photography a chore rather than an enjoyment as only those who can communicate a vision get to direct a client...


----------



## waday

JonA_CT said:


> Like Wade, kids forced me to greatly reduce what I carry.
> 
> I'm down to XT-2 and the matching 18-55mm lens nearly always. Very occasionally, I'll throw on the 35mm f1.4 that I have, but I'm honestly considering getting rid of that, too, and getting a wider angle zoom instead. I love prime lens. I don't have the luxury of time to dicker around with carrying 4 of them anymore. (You zoom with the feet crowd must live in places with more space than I  ) .


Yeah, the 12-40 for me usually gets stuck on my camera... I just don’t have time to change it, and sometimes that’s not a bad thing when vacationing with family. I hear you, though, I love my primes. Just wish I could use them more.


----------



## cgw

waday said:


> Original katomi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Going on holiday with family  this makes me think hard on what to to take, how much can I get away with, vers what do I really need.
> Norm is
> mono pod, one body (canon 600d) three lenses. Close, med far. Pocket full sd cards half doz batteries and mains charger and two lens cloths
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, that's what I've been grappling with lately. My family vacation kit has been shrinking slowly. With a 1.5 year old, it's hard justifying all the extra gear (body, multiple lenses, tripod, etc) when we're already carrying a baby bag and stroller.
> 
> Right now, my travel kit essentially consists of body (Olympus EM1), two lenses (12-40 f/2.8 and 14-150 f/var), and if I have the space and depending on the vacation: tripod and flash. (That doesn't include the extra batteries, SD cards, and chargers.) I can fit everything comfortably into a Tenba bag insert (except tripod which goes outside).
> 
> What I'm dealing with now is a need to actually slim down even further (depending on where we go), so I've been debating a "P&S"-like camera (like the Ricoh GRiii or the Fuji X100F). The Ricoh's pocketability and streamlined use has really piqued my interest. The need to slim down more is related to me documenting the vacation rather than taking more artistic shots. I want my child to grow up seeing us enjoying vacations rather than shots that can be found on Google image search...
Click to expand...


My street(everyday) kit is a Ricoh GR II and Fuji X100T. These premium compacts suffer in forum echo chambers at the hands of critics who've never been in the same room with either--much less shot them. Both are superb. The size and weight savings is refreshing. For candids, vacation shooting and kids, they're hard to beat. Really, who keeps a honking full-frame DSLR+2.8 zoom at the ready with small kids and all their kit in tow? The compacts you're considering a no slouches in IQ terms, either. Battery life isn't awful. They also not fragile, both you mention have full metal bodies. I have Nikon APS-C and Fuji XT series outfits with primes and grab the Ricoh/Fuji bag more often for an aimless early Sunday morning photowalk around Toronto with a couple friends. YMMV, as usual.

The Ricoh GR II is now discounted following the recent GR III release. The X100F never seems to benefit from Fuji's occasional price cuts.

Reviews worth a look on the new GR III vs GR II from Kai W and Mattias Burling.


----------



## Original katomi

It would be nice to have compact cameras like cqw suggest but funds are limited and I can’t justify the additional kit.
My one venture into compacts the canon g9 I think, did not go well.


----------



## Original katomi

Just as a side.
When I am out on a night shoot or it’s a bit wet I take extra lens cloths..  they are less expensive than a camera or lens


----------



## waday

cgw said:


> My street(everyday) kit is a Ricoh GR II and Fuji X100T. These premium compacts suffer in forum echo chambers at the hands of critics who've never been in the same room with either--much less shot them. Both are superb. The size and weight savings is refreshing. For candids, vacation shooting and kids, they're hard to beat. Really, who keeps a honking full-frame DSLR+2.8 zoom at the ready with small kids and all their kit in tow? The compacts you're considering a no slouches in IQ terms, either. Battery life isn't awful. They also not fragile, both you mention have full metal bodies. I have Nikon APS-C and Fuji XT series outfits with primes and grab the Ricoh/Fuji bag more often for an aimless early Sunday morning photowalk around Toronto with a couple friends. YMMV, as usual.
> 
> The Ricoh GR II is now discounted following the recent GR III release. The X100F never seems to benefit from Fuji's occasional price cuts.
> 
> Reviews worth a look on the new GR III vs GR II from Kai W and Mattias Burling.


Thanks! I've already watched both Kai's and Mattias' reviews, haha. I really enjoy Mattias' videos.

I've been leaning heavily towards the Ricoh GRiii. I stopped by B&H last time I had “free” time in Manhattan (late-ish 2018), and unfortunately, the Ricoh GRii had no battery life. I was able to turn it on for a few seconds, but then it would turn off. I loved the weight of it, and the fact that I could take pictures one-handed. I didn’t think the same of the Fuji, which seemed to really require two hands. I also really, really, really want something that, in a pinch, I can put into my pants pocket. Ricoh seemed to fit the bill.

Have you used the GRiii? I’m debating whether or not its worth the extra $350-400 compared to the GRii. I like the updated sensor and lens, and it would probably be my last photography purchase in a long time (so I could probably justify it to the wife).


----------



## cgw

Price/performance quotient seems to favor the GR III—but not by much with GRIIs on sale. Burling still seems very attached to the older camera but admits there’s lots to love about the GRIII. My Fuji X100T has a bigger battery appetite than the GRII. Still, the Fuji combo optical/electronic viewfinder is nice.

No I haven’t played with a GRIII—and probably won’t till the price drops or my GRII craps out! Both Ricohs need a screen protector and I wonder if it affects the new model’s touch screen action. Keep in mind that a little Pelican 1020 case is great protection for the GR(pocketability has limits). I’d also look into an extra battery and the optional charger. Sweet little cameras.


----------



## waday

cgw said:


> Both Ricohs need a screen protector and I wonder if it affects the new model’s touch screen action.


Thanks for the info! Regarding the above, I would hope it wouldn't affect the touch screen action. I have one on my Olympus EM-1, and it doesn't seem to impact it at all...


----------



## Fujidave

waday said:


> cgw said:
> 
> 
> 
> My street(everyday) kit is a Ricoh GR II and Fuji X100T. These premium compacts suffer in forum echo chambers at the hands of critics who've never been in the same room with either--much less shot them. Both are superb. The size and weight savings is refreshing. For candids, vacation shooting and kids, they're hard to beat. Really, who keeps a honking full-frame DSLR+2.8 zoom at the ready with small kids and all their kit in tow? The compacts you're considering a no slouches in IQ terms, either. Battery life isn't awful. They also not fragile, both you mention have full metal bodies. I have Nikon APS-C and Fuji XT series outfits with primes and grab the Ricoh/Fuji bag more often for an aimless early Sunday morning photowalk around Toronto with a couple friends. YMMV, as usual.
> 
> The Ricoh GR II is now discounted following the recent GR III release. The X100F never seems to benefit from Fuji's occasional price cuts.
> 
> Reviews worth a look on the new GR III vs GR II from Kai W and Mattias Burling.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks! I've already watched both Kai's and Mattias' reviews, haha. I really enjoy Mattias' videos.
> 
> I've been leaning heavily towards the Ricoh GRiii. I stopped by B&H last time I had “free” time in Manhattan (late-ish 2018), and unfortunately, the Ricoh GRii had no battery life. I was able to turn it on for a few seconds, but then it would turn off. I loved the weight of it, and the fact that I could take pictures one-handed. I didn’t think the same of the Fuji, which seemed to really require two hands. I also really, really, really want something that, in a pinch, I can put into my pants pocket. Ricoh seemed to fit the bill.
> 
> Have you used the GRiii? I’m debating whether or not its worth the extra $350-400 compared to the GRii. I like the updated sensor and lens, and it would probably be my last photography purchase in a long time (so I could probably justify it to the wife).
Click to expand...


I think on the GRIII it has IS so you can shoot at very slow shutter speeds, and it is just a bit smaller than the GRII.


----------



## waday

Fujidave said:


> waday said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cgw said:
> 
> 
> 
> My street(everyday) kit is a Ricoh GR II and Fuji X100T. These premium compacts suffer in forum echo chambers at the hands of critics who've never been in the same room with either--much less shot them. Both are superb. The size and weight savings is refreshing. For candids, vacation shooting and kids, they're hard to beat. Really, who keeps a honking full-frame DSLR+2.8 zoom at the ready with small kids and all their kit in tow? The compacts you're considering a no slouches in IQ terms, either. Battery life isn't awful. They also not fragile, both you mention have full metal bodies. I have Nikon APS-C and Fuji XT series outfits with primes and grab the Ricoh/Fuji bag more often for an aimless early Sunday morning photowalk around Toronto with a couple friends. YMMV, as usual.
> 
> The Ricoh GR II is now discounted following the recent GR III release. The X100F never seems to benefit from Fuji's occasional price cuts.
> 
> Reviews worth a look on the new GR III vs GR II from Kai W and Mattias Burling.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks! I've already watched both Kai's and Mattias' reviews, haha. I really enjoy Mattias' videos.
> 
> I've been leaning heavily towards the Ricoh GRiii. I stopped by B&H last time I had “free” time in Manhattan (late-ish 2018), and unfortunately, the Ricoh GRii had no battery life. I was able to turn it on for a few seconds, but then it would turn off. I loved the weight of it, and the fact that I could take pictures one-handed. I didn’t think the same of the Fuji, which seemed to really require two hands. I also really, really, really want something that, in a pinch, I can put into my pants pocket. Ricoh seemed to fit the bill.
> 
> Have you used the GRiii? I’m debating whether or not its worth the extra $350-400 compared to the GRii. I like the updated sensor and lens, and it would probably be my last photography purchase in a long time (so I could probably justify it to the wife).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think on the GRIII it has IS so you can shoot at very slow shutter speeds, and it is just a bit smaller than the GRII.
Click to expand...

Yes, I forgot about the IS, as well. I've gotten so used to that with my Olympus. I don't necessarily mind not having a flash, but I'll probably end up buying that LightPix flash to go along with it.


----------



## Fujidave

waday said:


> Fujidave said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> waday said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cgw said:
> 
> 
> 
> My street(everyday) kit is a Ricoh GR II and Fuji X100T. These premium compacts suffer in forum echo chambers at the hands of critics who've never been in the same room with either--much less shot them. Both are superb. The size and weight savings is refreshing. For candids, vacation shooting and kids, they're hard to beat. Really, who keeps a honking full-frame DSLR+2.8 zoom at the ready with small kids and all their kit in tow? The compacts you're considering a no slouches in IQ terms, either. Battery life isn't awful. They also not fragile, both you mention have full metal bodies. I have Nikon APS-C and Fuji XT series outfits with primes and grab the Ricoh/Fuji bag more often for an aimless early Sunday morning photowalk around Toronto with a couple friends. YMMV, as usual.
> 
> The Ricoh GR II is now discounted following the recent GR III release. The X100F never seems to benefit from Fuji's occasional price cuts.
> 
> Reviews worth a look on the new GR III vs GR II from Kai W and Mattias Burling.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks! I've already watched both Kai's and Mattias' reviews, haha. I really enjoy Mattias' videos.
> 
> I've been leaning heavily towards the Ricoh GRiii. I stopped by B&H last time I had “free” time in Manhattan (late-ish 2018), and unfortunately, the Ricoh GRii had no battery life. I was able to turn it on for a few seconds, but then it would turn off. I loved the weight of it, and the fact that I could take pictures one-handed. I didn’t think the same of the Fuji, which seemed to really require two hands. I also really, really, really want something that, in a pinch, I can put into my pants pocket. Ricoh seemed to fit the bill.
> 
> Have you used the GRiii? I’m debating whether or not its worth the extra $350-400 compared to the GRii. I like the updated sensor and lens, and it would probably be my last photography purchase in a long time (so I could probably justify it to the wife).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think on the GRIII it has IS so you can shoot at very slow shutter speeds, and it is just a bit smaller than the GRII.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, I forgot about the IS, as well. I've gotten so used to that with my Olympus. I don't necessarily mind not having a flash, but I'll probably end up buying that LightPix flash to go along with it.
Click to expand...



I traded my charity shop X-T3 in for the X-H1 just for the IS, and WOW it`s great.


----------



## waday

Fujidave said:


> waday said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fujidave said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> waday said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cgw said:
> 
> 
> 
> My street(everyday) kit is a Ricoh GR II and Fuji X100T. These premium compacts suffer in forum echo chambers at the hands of critics who've never been in the same room with either--much less shot them. Both are superb. The size and weight savings is refreshing. For candids, vacation shooting and kids, they're hard to beat. Really, who keeps a honking full-frame DSLR+2.8 zoom at the ready with small kids and all their kit in tow? The compacts you're considering a no slouches in IQ terms, either. Battery life isn't awful. They also not fragile, both you mention have full metal bodies. I have Nikon APS-C and Fuji XT series outfits with primes and grab the Ricoh/Fuji bag more often for an aimless early Sunday morning photowalk around Toronto with a couple friends. YMMV, as usual.
> 
> The Ricoh GR II is now discounted following the recent GR III release. The X100F never seems to benefit from Fuji's occasional price cuts.
> 
> Reviews worth a look on the new GR III vs GR II from Kai W and Mattias Burling.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks! I've already watched both Kai's and Mattias' reviews, haha. I really enjoy Mattias' videos.
> 
> I've been leaning heavily towards the Ricoh GRiii. I stopped by B&H last time I had “free” time in Manhattan (late-ish 2018), and unfortunately, the Ricoh GRii had no battery life. I was able to turn it on for a few seconds, but then it would turn off. I loved the weight of it, and the fact that I could take pictures one-handed. I didn’t think the same of the Fuji, which seemed to really require two hands. I also really, really, really want something that, in a pinch, I can put into my pants pocket. Ricoh seemed to fit the bill.
> 
> Have you used the GRiii? I’m debating whether or not its worth the extra $350-400 compared to the GRii. I like the updated sensor and lens, and it would probably be my last photography purchase in a long time (so I could probably justify it to the wife).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think on the GRIII it has IS so you can shoot at very slow shutter speeds, and it is just a bit smaller than the GRII.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, I forgot about the IS, as well. I've gotten so used to that with my Olympus. I don't necessarily mind not having a flash, but I'll probably end up buying that LightPix flash to go along with it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I traded my charity shop X-T3 in for the X-H1 just for the IS, and WOW it`s great.
Click to expand...

I've gotten clear shots down to 1/8 of a second with the IS... people with dual IS can get clear shots even slower. Insane.


----------



## Fujidave

waday said:


> Fujidave said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> waday said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fujidave said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> waday said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cgw said:
> 
> 
> 
> My street(everyday) kit is a Ricoh GR II and Fuji X100T. These premium compacts suffer in forum echo chambers at the hands of critics who've never been in the same room with either--much less shot them. Both are superb. The size and weight savings is refreshing. For candids, vacation shooting and kids, they're hard to beat. Really, who keeps a honking full-frame DSLR+2.8 zoom at the ready with small kids and all their kit in tow? The compacts you're considering a no slouches in IQ terms, either. Battery life isn't awful. They also not fragile, both you mention have full metal bodies. I have Nikon APS-C and Fuji XT series outfits with primes and grab the Ricoh/Fuji bag more often for an aimless early Sunday morning photowalk around Toronto with a couple friends. YMMV, as usual.
> 
> The Ricoh GR II is now discounted following the recent GR III release. The X100F never seems to benefit from Fuji's occasional price cuts.
> 
> Reviews worth a look on the new GR III vs GR II from Kai W and Mattias Burling.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks! I've already watched both Kai's and Mattias' reviews, haha. I really enjoy Mattias' videos.
> 
> I've been leaning heavily towards the Ricoh GRiii. I stopped by B&H last time I had “free” time in Manhattan (late-ish 2018), and unfortunately, the Ricoh GRii had no battery life. I was able to turn it on for a few seconds, but then it would turn off. I loved the weight of it, and the fact that I could take pictures one-handed. I didn’t think the same of the Fuji, which seemed to really require two hands. I also really, really, really want something that, in a pinch, I can put into my pants pocket. Ricoh seemed to fit the bill.
> 
> Have you used the GRiii? I’m debating whether or not its worth the extra $350-400 compared to the GRii. I like the updated sensor and lens, and it would probably be my last photography purchase in a long time (so I could probably justify it to the wife).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think on the GRIII it has IS so you can shoot at very slow shutter speeds, and it is just a bit smaller than the GRII.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, I forgot about the IS, as well. I've gotten so used to that with my Olympus. I don't necessarily mind not having a flash, but I'll probably end up buying that LightPix flash to go along with it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I traded my charity shop X-T3 in for the X-H1 just for the IS, and WOW it`s great.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I've gotten clear shots down to 1/8 of a second with the IS... people with dual IS can get clear shots even slower. Insane.
Click to expand...


My first go was 1/50 but will try again once I go to my jazz gigs in doors.


----------



## cgw

Fujidave said:


> waday said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cgw said:
> 
> 
> 
> My street(everyday) kit is a Ricoh GR II and Fuji X100T. These premium compacts suffer in forum echo chambers at the hands of critics who've never been in the same room with either--much less shot them. Both are superb. The size and weight savings is refreshing. For candids, vacation shooting and kids, they're hard to beat. Really, who keeps a honking full-frame DSLR+2.8 zoom at the ready with small kids and all their kit in tow? The compacts you're considering a no slouches in IQ terms, either. Battery life isn't awful. They also not fragile, both you mention have full metal bodies. I have Nikon APS-C and Fuji XT series outfits with primes and grab the Ricoh/Fuji bag more often for an aimless early Sunday morning photowalk around Toronto with a couple friends. YMMV, as usual.
> 
> The Ricoh GR II is now discounted following the recent GR III release. The X100F never seems to benefit from Fuji's occasional price cuts.
> 
> Reviews worth a look on the new GR III vs GR II from Kai W and Mattias Burling.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks! I've already watched both Kai's and Mattias' reviews, haha. I really enjoy Mattias' videos.
> 
> I've been leaning heavily towards the Ricoh GRiii. I stopped by B&H last time I had “free” time in Manhattan (late-ish 2018), and unfortunately, the Ricoh GRii had no battery life. I was able to turn it on for a few seconds, but then it would turn off. I loved the weight of it, and the fact that I could take pictures one-handed. I didn’t think the same of the Fuji, which seemed to really require two hands. I also really, really, really want something that, in a pinch, I can put into my pants pocket. Ricoh seemed to fit the bill.
> 
> Have you used the GRiii? I’m debating whether or not its worth the extra $350-400 compared to the GRii. I like the updated sensor and lens, and it would probably be my last photography purchase in a long time (so I could probably justify it to the wife).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think on the GRIII it has IS so you can shoot at very slow shutter speeds, and it is just a bit smaller than the GRII.
Click to expand...


Zero argument against IS. My problem with the GR III is that it's overkill in a camera so tiny and light--and potentially a rare misstep by Ricoh. Though nice to have, the feature unavoidably jacked the price along with the touch screen. The GRII is now an insane bargain. Wonder how well the pricier GRIII will sell in a market segment that's losing ground to phone cams as we speak. Can't see buying one at nearly double the GRII price--24mp+IS notwithstanding.

Suspect the Fuji X-H1's days are numbered judging from recent body+grip+batteries deals. Already shoveling loose change into a designated piggy bank to snag that IS beauty after they start collecting dust in the Fujifilm.ca warehouse.


----------



## Derrel

I personally think of stabilization as one of _the_ biggest advances in decades. It really can change the way we use a camera, in fundamental ways. Not only can stabilization allow slower hand-held shots, but it can allow sharp, clear photos under windy, gusty condition, while moving, and from vehicles/aircraft. Stabilization has, IMHO, changed panning at slow speeds quite a bit, and has made slower (smaller max aperture) and smaller lenses more practical. in another way of putting it, stabilization "enlarges or expands the shooting envelope." Many view stabilization as a long-lens-only feature, and "can't see the need for it." I hear that a lot.


----------



## Derrel

I recall testing of an early (Minolta?) d-slr at Kits Camera in 2011 or so, using a slow, 19-35 zoom, and firing off a bunch of indoor test shots at 1/6 second using IBIS. Sharp, clear, good frames all across the range, from 19mm to 35mm, using a store "Quantaray" demo lens.


----------



## waday

cgw said:


> Fujidave said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> waday said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cgw said:
> 
> 
> 
> My street(everyday) kit is a Ricoh GR II and Fuji X100T. These premium compacts suffer in forum echo chambers at the hands of critics who've never been in the same room with either--much less shot them. Both are superb. The size and weight savings is refreshing. For candids, vacation shooting and kids, they're hard to beat. Really, who keeps a honking full-frame DSLR+2.8 zoom at the ready with small kids and all their kit in tow? The compacts you're considering a no slouches in IQ terms, either. Battery life isn't awful. They also not fragile, both you mention have full metal bodies. I have Nikon APS-C and Fuji XT series outfits with primes and grab the Ricoh/Fuji bag more often for an aimless early Sunday morning photowalk around Toronto with a couple friends. YMMV, as usual.
> 
> The Ricoh GR II is now discounted following the recent GR III release. The X100F never seems to benefit from Fuji's occasional price cuts.
> 
> Reviews worth a look on the new GR III vs GR II from Kai W and Mattias Burling.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks! I've already watched both Kai's and Mattias' reviews, haha. I really enjoy Mattias' videos.
> 
> I've been leaning heavily towards the Ricoh GRiii. I stopped by B&H last time I had “free” time in Manhattan (late-ish 2018), and unfortunately, the Ricoh GRii had no battery life. I was able to turn it on for a few seconds, but then it would turn off. I loved the weight of it, and the fact that I could take pictures one-handed. I didn’t think the same of the Fuji, which seemed to really require two hands. I also really, really, really want something that, in a pinch, I can put into my pants pocket. Ricoh seemed to fit the bill.
> 
> Have you used the GRiii? I’m debating whether or not its worth the extra $350-400 compared to the GRii. I like the updated sensor and lens, and it would probably be my last photography purchase in a long time (so I could probably justify it to the wife).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think on the GRIII it has IS so you can shoot at very slow shutter speeds, and it is just a bit smaller than the GRII.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Zero argument against IS. My problem with the GR III is that it's overkill in a camera so tiny and light--and potentially a rare misstep by Ricoh. Though nice to have, the feature unavoidably jacked the price along with the touch screen. The GRII is now an insane bargain. Wonder how well the pricier GRIII will sell in a market segment that's losing ground to phone cams as we speak. Can't see buying one at nearly double the GRII price--24mp+IS notwithstanding.
Click to expand...

I understand your points. I guess if you don't need it, then it's superfluous. That's a valid argument for going to the GRii, if IS is not needed.

The only thing I'd say with respect to price, the original GRii price was around $800? The GRiii doesn't seem to be too high in comparison. I don't think the price is stopping people from purchasing, since it's currently backordered at B&H and Adorama, etc. Who knows what will happen in the future, though?



Derrel said:


> I personally think of stabilization as one of _the_ biggest advances in decades. It really can change the way we use a camera, in fundamental ways. Not only can stabilization allow slower hand-held shots, but it can allow sharp, clear photos under windy, gusty condition, while moving, and from vehicles/aircraft. Stabilization has, IMHO, changed panning at slow speeds quite a bit, and has made slower (smaller max aperture) and smaller lenses more practical. in another way of putting it, stabilization "enlarges or expands the shooting envelope." Many view stabilization as a long-lens-only feature, and "can't see the need for it." I hear that a lot.


Totally agree. Plus, I'm happy for it with people other than myself using my camera. Gasp, I know. But, I'm intending to use the Ricoh as one of my travel cameras, so if I give it to family to snap a picture with, I'm hoping the IS helps a bit.


----------



## Fujidave

Just a quick thought on the GRIII, on the Pentax forum some say the GRIII has a bit of a wobble on the D-pad I think.


----------



## Fujidave

Hope this is ok to share, it shows the wobble.

Ricoh will fix affected GR III cameras with "wobbly control dial/pad" - Pentax Rumors


----------



## Derrel

My experience: when I have LESS gear with me, I think about HOW to get the photos I want/can get/need to make. When I have a LOT of gear, my thought process is different...and I think differently, in a more-complicated way. I used to take a lot of lenses on big shoots...85/105/135/70-200..and would often NOT use the three primes at all, instead using the 70-200 as a substitute.

Adding lights, reflectors, umbrellas, softboxes, metal reflectors, grids, etc. additionally complicates things.

Camping, vacationing, it's the same: take it ALL, take a moderate quantity of stuff, or a bare-bones kit.


----------



## waday

Fujidave said:


> Hope this is ok to share, it shows the wobble.
> 
> Ricoh will fix affected GR III cameras with "wobbly control dial/pad" - Pentax Rumors


That’s wobbly!! Good to hear that Ricoh issued a response.


----------



## Solarflare

Well, the online photographer thinks that as an amateur, one should only have up to four lenses.

However there is NO WAY I would be happy with only four lenses.

Right now I use five regular lenses - 20/35/58/105/180mm and five speciality lenses - Fisheye, Wide Zoom, Long Zoom, and 2 Macro lenses.

I could see myself adding a 300mm of some description in future, but those are expensive and heavy, and more importantly do I need them ? I dont really think so.

And yes I never have all these lenses on me. Right now for example I have the 35mm and the 180mm.

I also have a lot of lenses that I no longer use at all.


----------



## Original katomi

I pack just three lanes when going on holiday... only because the other half will get a trifle upset if I fill the boot with camera kit.
Only owning 3 lenses.... got to be kidding .
Can feel the withdrawal symptoms starting just thinking about it


----------



## texxter

When I travel I take one camera, the Fuji xt100t, with a single, non-interchangeable 35mm f2 lens, and I love the experience of carrying my camera around my wrist all the time, light, unconspicuous and totally silent.  I never have to worry about changing lenses, dust on the sensor, or discomfort from carrying a heavy camera bag.  Yes, I am limited - no super-wide shots and no telephoto portraits.   But I accept the limitation of my hyper-simple setup and shoot the best I can with this single focal length.  When I went to Varanasi, India last Jan I made an exception and took another small camera with a telephoto prime.  I ended up not bothering with it much and shot most images with the Fuji x100t.   The 35mm focal length forces me to get close to people, to talk to them, and, at the same time, not to be intimidating because my camera/lens is tiny.


----------



## Derrel

In the years of 2013  and 2014 I did a lot of landscape shoots, and in 2013 I used to carry a pretty large assortment of lenses, often six or seven as well as a Nikon D3X which is a large, heavy camera.

 After returning from a coast shoot, I thought to myself,"Well I didn't use this lens,and I didn't use that lens, and I didn't use this lens, so why did I take those extra lenses? "

So...after many years of  overburdening myself, I suddenly switched to carrying a very minimalist lens kit. I had a lot of lenses back then. In 2013, owned over 100 lenses, in Nikon F mount, Leica thread mount, Bronica mount, Canon EF mount, and in M42 thread mount, and one Olympus OM lens, all amassed over 30 years..  When the Nikon D100 hit the market, there was a huge tidal wave of used Nikon  lenses that flooded the market, often at ridiculously low prices, and it was during this period that I was buying one or two lenses every month,  often for $50-$75 each.after my realization in 2014, I realized that my needs could be whittled down to a pretty small lens kit. Give me a 24 and 85 and the 70 to 200, and I am set.


----------



## dennyr

FWIW....... i am just a hack "Street Photographer"  but i carry a 28 and a 50 and an 85.
Gear is always a trade-off in one way or another, but i find it  "Liberating" to use prime lens.
I kind of laugh when i see people that lug around a 35-200 everywhere they go. Then again, they never have to change a lens.


----------



## Derrel

28/50/85... very capable trio... by most standards. A reasonable lens kit, just three lenses, each moderate in its renderings...


----------



## ac12

Original katomi said:


> It would be nice to have compact cameras like cqw suggest but funds are limited and I can’t justify the additional kit.
> My one venture into compacts the canon g9 I think, did not go well.



A compact/P&S is not a replacement for a dSLR.  It fills a gap between the phone camera and the dSLR.  It is another tool in the tool box.
_The compact/P&S has limitations, and you have to work within those limits._

To me, the most irritating limitation of a P&S is _*shutter lag*_.  The P&S did NOT work for FAST action like shooting kids at a party.  That was a frustrating experience.  By the time the camera fired, the kids moved 2 feet, turned around, or did something that ruined the shot  
And it has benefits

The ability to adjust the EC gives it a capability that a phone camera does not have, yet.
When I drain the battery, from shooting a LOT, I just swap batteries.  I don't have to leash the phone to a power pack.
I would NEVER hand my phone to a person that I did not know well, to take my pic.


----------



## Original katomi

Ac12 hi.  I just don’t use my phone that munchkin so I hardly ever use the camera on it But I know what you mean, 
I have gone down the route of DSLR as much because in the winter months and when my joints are bad I do a lot of indoor and out of the box photography. I had forgotten about shutter lag but now that you mention it my bridge camera has awful shutter lag or so it seams after using the 600d


----------



## ac12

Original katomi said:


> Ac12 hi.  I just don’t use my phone that munchkin so I hardly ever use the camera on it But I know what you mean,
> I have gone down the route of DSLR as much because in the winter months and when my joints are bad I do a lot of indoor and out of the box photography. I had forgotten about shutter lag but now that you mention it my bridge camera has awful shutter lag or so it seams after using the 600d



Hey, you should consider switching to micro 4/3.
Smaller and lighter = easier on the joints.
As senior citizen, I have pretty much switched from Nikon to Olympus m4/3, to reduce the kit weight.
The only holdout is FAST sports, where my Olympus camera is not up to the task.  There I use the D7200.  But once I get a camera that can do the job, the Nikon will be phased out to specialty work or out completely.


----------



## stevn de lozada

pixmedic said:


> Fine, in theory....
> But I think for the majority of photographers (myself included) acquiring gear is more about "want" and less about "need".
> For the average photographer, its probably a lot of "ooooooh, that looks cool...i want to buy that"
> Or simply wanting to have a newer, more sophisticated piece of equipment.
> Lets face it, those extra 15 autofocus points COULD make or break someones career! Or someone might miss that winning shot because they didn't upgrade to a camera that could shoot ISO 128,000....
> But I kinda doubt it.
> 
> Shooting with less is fine and all, but its all the gearheads with GAS that are really driving the market and its push for improvements.


----------



## ac12

texxter said:


> View attachment 173124 When I travel I take one camera, the Fuji xt100t, with a single, non-interchangeable 35mm f2 lens, and I love the experience of carrying my camera around my wrist all the time, light, unconspicuous and totally silent.  I never have to worry about changing lenses, dust on the sensor, or discomfort from carrying a heavy camera bag.  Yes, I am limited - no super-wide shots and no telephoto portraits.   But I accept the limitation of my hyper-simple setup and shoot the best I can with this single focal length.  When I went to Varanasi, India last Jan I made an exception and took another small camera with a telephoto prime.  I ended up not bothering with it much and shot most images with the Fuji x100t.   The 35mm focal length forces me to get close to people, to talk to them, and, at the same time, not to be intimidating because my camera/lens is tiny.



Hey that is just like the film days and the Nikon L35AF.
It was MUCH lighter and easier to carry than my F2 kit.


----------

