How to deal with expensive lenses you only use a handful of times throughout the year

[nerwin]

One thing to keep in mind is your expectations.

The "fast lens" ... well, okay if you want to use that term. mine is f/2 - 4

But my old pocket camera was a Nikon L20. The P7800 is heads over heels way superior to that camera.
So moving UP it's fantastic.

But, as mentioned earlier, moving DOWN it's a BIG disappointment (the smaller the sensor you go).
So as long as it meets your criteria be aware that it's not a DLSR with all the advanced and full features.

That being said, I like carrying around the P7800. I can put it anywhere.

Though this morning I saw a Boeing 747 up around 40k feet with a nice trail behind it as the sun was coming up. I know the P7800 can't do anything about that. I also knew if I bought out my DSLR that the temp change from inside to outside would just fog over the lens immediately and take 20 minutes to settle. So I still missed a shot.

I thought the P7800 is quite a chunky camera? Isn't it far larger than the Sony RX100 M3?

 

[nerwin]

Hmm.

I think a macro lens is important enough that its no shame to keep one in your backhand even if you dont use it that very often. Though I am not really fan of the current Nikon AF-S 105mm f2.8 VC micro, which IMHO is more of an overpriced underperformer ... I would much rather get a Tamron 90mm f2.8 VC macro, Tokina 100mm f2.8 macro, an old AI 105mm f2.8 micro (1:2 only), or the really mighty ones - Zeiss Makro Planar 100mm f2.0 (1:2 only), Voigtländer APO Lanthar 125mm f2.5 macro, Nikkor AF 200mm f4 micro, or Nikkor PC-E 85mm f2.8 micro (1:2 only).


Personally I currently use, with exactly this priority:
AF-S 28mm f1.8
AF-S 70-200mm f4 VR
AF-S 16-35mm f4 VR

Yes the 16-35mm stays at home quite often, because I like the two lens setup. Sometimes the 70-200mm stays at home as well, because I like the one prime lens setup, too. But the only thing I've contemplated about the 16-35mm is the question if I should replace it with a Tamron 15-30mm f2.8 VC since that appears to be an awesome lens. Even then I think I would keep it for having a more lightweight lens that also allows filter useage.


P.s.: Ooops, started ranting ... what I wanted to say: I really dont see the issue with having lenses you use less ... just as long as when you actually use them, you really need them.

You know, I am starting to wondering if I made the right choice getting the 105 instead of Tamron's 90mm. Don't get me wrong, my version of the Nikon 105 2.8G is really tack sharp and focuses super fast. But there have been times I found the 105mm just too much.

What are your opinions on having a compact camera to compliment your DSLR?

 

[astroNikon]

One thing to keep in mind is your expectations.

The "fast lens" ... well, okay if you want to use that term. mine is f/2 - 4

But my old pocket camera was a Nikon L20. The P7800 is heads over heels way superior to that camera.
So moving UP it's fantastic.

But, as mentioned earlier, moving DOWN it's a BIG disappointment (the smaller the sensor you go).
So as long as it meets your criteria be aware that it's not a DLSR with all the advanced and full features.

That being said, I like carrying around the P7800. I can put it anywhere.

Though this morning I saw a Boeing 747 up around 40k feet with a nice trail behind it as the sun was coming up. I know the P7800 can't do anything about that. I also knew if I bought out my DSLR that the temp change from inside to outside would just fog over the lens immediately and take 20 minutes to settle. So I still missed a shot.

I thought the P7800 is quite a chunky camera? Isn't it far larger than the Sony RX100 M3?

I don't know ... let's check the websites for dimensions

Nikon P7800
Approx. Dimensions (Width x Height x Depth)
4.7 in. (118.5 mm) x 3.1 in. (77.5 mm) x 2.0 in. (50.4 mm)

Approx. Weight
14.1 oz. (399 g)
==> Nikon COOLPIX P7800 | Advanced Performance Compact Digital Camera


Sony RX100 M3
DIMENSIONS (W X H X D)
4 x 2.29 x 1.61 in
WEIGHT (CIPA COMPLIANT)
10.23 oz (with battery and media), 9.28 oz (body only)
==> DSC-RX100M3 Specifications | Cameras | Sony US


So the Nikon does look like it is slightly bigger and heavier but it fits in my jacket pocket.
But smaller sensor and less money.
I also have dual dials for Aperture and Shutter, can use my Nikon Flash system, etc.
I'm sure the ISO is better on the SONY, and image quality but you also pay for that.

The Sony's EVF is popup though, the Nikon's is the fixed bulge on top making it taller (the nikon p7700 didn't have an EVF and was shorter).
though I like the Sony's Manual Focus ring, the Nikon is software driven.

Nikon does have other options. But I like the Sony's features. Just I wanted to also use my Nikon accessories and I can have multiple OCF using my existing equipment. Though, less 3rd party stuff is supported.

Truthfully, going down from a DSLR I would hate the P7800. But I thought of it moving up from the L20 which it is fantastic. It's all about perception.

 

[nerwin]

One thing to keep in mind is your expectations.

The "fast lens" ... well, okay if you want to use that term. mine is f/2 - 4

But my old pocket camera was a Nikon L20. The P7800 is heads over heels way superior to that camera.
So moving UP it's fantastic.

But, as mentioned earlier, moving DOWN it's a BIG disappointment (the smaller the sensor you go).
So as long as it meets your criteria be aware that it's not a DLSR with all the advanced and full features.

That being said, I like carrying around the P7800. I can put it anywhere.

Though this morning I saw a Boeing 747 up around 40k feet with a nice trail behind it as the sun was coming up. I know the P7800 can't do anything about that. I also knew if I bought out my DSLR that the temp change from inside to outside would just fog over the lens immediately and take 20 minutes to settle. So I still missed a shot.

I thought the P7800 is quite a chunky camera? Isn't it far larger than the Sony RX100 M3?

I don't know ... let's check the websites for dimensions

Nikon P7800
Approx. Dimensions (Width x Height x Depth)
4.7 in. (118.5 mm) x 3.1 in. (77.5 mm) x 2.0 in. (50.4 mm)

Approx. Weight
14.1 oz. (399 g)
==> Nikon COOLPIX P7800 | Advanced Performance Compact Digital Camera


Sony RX100 M3
DIMENSIONS (W X H X D)
4 x 2.29 x 1.61 in
WEIGHT (CIPA COMPLIANT)
10.23 oz (with battery and media), 9.28 oz (body only)
==> DSC-RX100M3 Specifications | Cameras | Sony US


So the Nikon does look like it is slightly bigger and heavier but it fits in my jacket pocket.
But bigger sensor and less money.
I also have dual dials for Aperture and Shutter, can use my Nikon Flash system, etc.
I'm sure the ISO is better on the SONY, and image quality but you also pay for that.

The Sony's EVF is popup though, the Nikon's is the fixed bulge on top making it taller (the nikon p7700 didn't have an EVF and was shorter).
though I like the Sony's Manual Focus ring, the Nikon is software driven.

Bigger sensor? P7800 has a 1/1.7" sensor. The RX100 uses 1" sensor. Quite a bit difference. Haha

 

[astroNikon]

One thing to keep in mind is your expectations.

The "fast lens" ... well, okay if you want to use that term. mine is f/2 - 4

But my old pocket camera was a Nikon L20. The P7800 is heads over heels way superior to that camera.
So moving UP it's fantastic.

But, as mentioned earlier, moving DOWN it's a BIG disappointment (the smaller the sensor you go).
So as long as it meets your criteria be aware that it's not a DLSR with all the advanced and full features.

That being said, I like carrying around the P7800. I can put it anywhere.

Though this morning I saw a Boeing 747 up around 40k feet with a nice trail behind it as the sun was coming up. I know the P7800 can't do anything about that. I also knew if I bought out my DSLR that the temp change from inside to outside would just fog over the lens immediately and take 20 minutes to settle. So I still missed a shot.

I thought the P7800 is quite a chunky camera? Isn't it far larger than the Sony RX100 M3?

I don't know ... let's check the websites for dimensions

Nikon P7800
Approx. Dimensions (Width x Height x Depth)
4.7 in. (118.5 mm) x 3.1 in. (77.5 mm) x 2.0 in. (50.4 mm)

Approx. Weight
14.1 oz. (399 g)
==> Nikon COOLPIX P7800 | Advanced Performance Compact Digital Camera


Sony RX100 M3
DIMENSIONS (W X H X D)
4 x 2.29 x 1.61 in
WEIGHT (CIPA COMPLIANT)
10.23 oz (with battery and media), 9.28 oz (body only)
==> DSC-RX100M3 Specifications | Cameras | Sony US


So the Nikon does look like it is slightly bigger and heavier but it fits in my jacket pocket.
But bigger sensor and less money.
I also have dual dials for Aperture and Shutter, can use my Nikon Flash system, etc.
I'm sure the ISO is better on the SONY, and image quality but you also pay for that.

The Sony's EVF is popup though, the Nikon's is the fixed bulge on top making it taller (the nikon p7700 didn't have an EVF and was shorter).
though I like the Sony's Manual Focus ring, the Nikon is software driven.

Bigger sensor? P7800 has a 1/1.7" sensor. The RX100 uses 1" sensor. Quite a bit difference. Haha

yeah, typo. I was correcting things.
but I needed a smaller sensor for more DOF. Going APS-C or even 4/3rds wasn't an option for me.
It depends what YOU need the camera for.

 

[nerwin]

One thing to keep in mind is your expectations.

The "fast lens" ... well, okay if you want to use that term. mine is f/2 - 4

But my old pocket camera was a Nikon L20. The P7800 is heads over heels way superior to that camera.
So moving UP it's fantastic.

But, as mentioned earlier, moving DOWN it's a BIG disappointment (the smaller the sensor you go).
So as long as it meets your criteria be aware that it's not a DLSR with all the advanced and full features.

That being said, I like carrying around the P7800. I can put it anywhere.

Though this morning I saw a Boeing 747 up around 40k feet with a nice trail behind it as the sun was coming up. I know the P7800 can't do anything about that. I also knew if I bought out my DSLR that the temp change from inside to outside would just fog over the lens immediately and take 20 minutes to settle. So I still missed a shot.

I thought the P7800 is quite a chunky camera? Isn't it far larger than the Sony RX100 M3?

I don't know ... let's check the websites for dimensions

Nikon P7800
Approx. Dimensions (Width x Height x Depth)
4.7 in. (118.5 mm) x 3.1 in. (77.5 mm) x 2.0 in. (50.4 mm)

Approx. Weight
14.1 oz. (399 g)
==> Nikon COOLPIX P7800 | Advanced Performance Compact Digital Camera


Sony RX100 M3
DIMENSIONS (W X H X D)
4 x 2.29 x 1.61 in
WEIGHT (CIPA COMPLIANT)
10.23 oz (with battery and media), 9.28 oz (body only)
==> DSC-RX100M3 Specifications | Cameras | Sony US


So the Nikon does look like it is slightly bigger and heavier but it fits in my jacket pocket.
But bigger sensor and less money.
I also have dual dials for Aperture and Shutter, can use my Nikon Flash system, etc.
I'm sure the ISO is better on the SONY, and image quality but you also pay for that.

The Sony's EVF is popup though, the Nikon's is the fixed bulge on top making it taller (the nikon p7700 didn't have an EVF and was shorter).
though I like the Sony's Manual Focus ring, the Nikon is software driven.

Bigger sensor? P7800 has a 1/1.7" sensor. The RX100 uses 1" sensor. Quite a bit difference. Haha

yeah, typo. I was correcting things.
but I needed a smaller sensor for more DOF. Going APS-C or even 4/3rds wasn't an option for me.
It depends what YOU need the camera for.

Hahaha. For what I like doing, I like having the option of having shallow dof.

There have been rumours of Nikon making a really awesome compact camera with 1" sensor and fast lens with a high res evf. So not sure if I want to wait. I normally don't wait on rumours. But there is a strong case.

 

[astroNikon]

Hahaha. For what I like doing, I like having the option of having shallow dof.

There have been rumours of Nikon making a really awesome compact camera with 1" sensor and fast lens with a high res evf. So not sure if I want to wait. I normally don't wait on rumours. But there is a strong case.

For my pocket camera, I need the opposite thus I needed a small sensor.
Like I said, you need a camera for YOUR requirements

For shallow DOF I have my DSLR.

 

[nerwin]

Hahaha. For what I like doing, I like having the option of having shallow dof.

There have been rumours of Nikon making a really awesome compact camera with 1" sensor and fast lens with a high res evf. So not sure if I want to wait. I normally don't wait on rumours. But there is a strong case.

For my pocket camera, I need the opposite thus I needed a small sensor.
Like I said, you need a camera for YOUR requirements

For shallow DOF I have my DSLR.

For sure..the RX100 M3 shallow dof wont come near a full frame sensor but for the size of the camera, it can get the job done when I don't have my DSLR with me. I'd much rather bring the RX100 with me into a restaurant instead of my D610 LOL.

 

[xenskhe]

Ricoh's GR Digital is worth considering. It has a snapshot mode, pre-focussed, no shutter lag.

 

[Dave442]

I just use my cell phone when I don't have my DSLR along. I like to force myself to use the different lenses by just going out with one lens for the day. Sometimes that means the macro lens. I have found that to really help me know how much I can get out of a lens.

 

[Braineack]

For sure..the RX100 M3 shallow dof wont come near a full frame sensor but for the size of the camera, it can get the job done when I don't have my DSLR with me. I'd much rather bring the RX100 with me into a restaurant instead of my D610 LOL.

yup, this is why i bought the a6000. Had the rx100 come with a crop sized sensor, I'd have gone with that. that lens it comes with looks really useful and compact.

I'm thinking of buying the NEX's kit 16mm 2.8 for ~$100 to get better low-light shots when I travel. there's no comparing the shadow recovery between it and the D610.

I'm stuck with 3.5-5.6, stinks in low light situations where I have to jack the ISO:

 

[nerwin]

For sure..the RX100 M3 shallow dof wont come near a full frame sensor but for the size of the camera, it can get the job done when I don't have my DSLR with me. I'd much rather bring the RX100 with me into a restaurant instead of my D610 LOL.

yup, this is why i bought the a6000. Had the rx100 come with a crop sized sensor, I'd have gone with that. that lens it comes with looks really useful and compact.

I'm thinking of buying the NEX's kit 16mm 2.8 for ~$100 to get better low-light shots when I travel. there's no comparing the shadow recovery between it and the D610.

I'm stuck with 3.5-5.6, stinks in low light situations where I have to jack the ISO:

What happened to the picture?

 

[nerwin]

I just use my cell phone when I don't have my DSLR along. I like to force myself to use the different lenses by just going out with one lens for the day. Sometimes that means the macro lens. I have found that to really help me know how much I can get out of a lens.

I really want that RX100 M3, but I'd hate to part with the 105 macro...its such a good lens when I need it. But quite frankly, the RX100 M3 would be more useful. I don't have a ton of income, so these kind of purchases are hard to do. I'm in no need for the RX100 at the moment...but lately I've just been losing my photography mojo. I don't know what it is..but I just feel like I'm missing something. If getting that RX100 M3 will help me get my mojo back, then its worth it. Decisions...decisions..decisions...

 

[astroNikon]

I know. I really need another tenor saxophone
as if the other 3 aren't good enough ... (and they don't sit in the closet unused, well not half the time lol )

It's all about priorities

 

[nerwin]

I don't know how much money i've spent on camera straps lately, I just keep buying them because I have yet to find one that I am comfortable with. haha. I have one arriving tomorrow that might be a winner.