A smaller camera system - your views please!

Knowing the approximate age of quite a few members I'm sure many of you will have considered this question - How long will I be happy to lug around a camera bag with a selection of lenses?

It is very rare for me to travel without a camera bag with a selection of lenses and one camera body - I carefully consider the terrain, the length of walks/treks, the type of subject matter, and of course the weight of the equipment. Having owned the K1 followed by the MkII I am a big fan of full-frame and rarely take an APS-C DSLR with me (the weight/size difference isn't that great for the benefits of FF) my preferred lenses are ideal for FF anyway. I have taken the lovely, compact and light Ricoh GR cameras - they are very capable of producing some lovely images but I don't enjoy the experience of using it that much and it's not full frame

So should I move on to a high end full frame compact digital? It seems logical but has the potential to be costly and may not be as fulfilling as I'd like!
I can't afford a Leica interchangeable lens system, I don't need high end video, but I do want high end stills capability.

So, enough waffling - the options seem to be the Panasonic S9, the Sigma FP-L or the Sony RX1R mkII - are there any others I've overlooked and should consider? I know some of you have dual systems or have migrated - what are your experiences, considerations, pitfalls, etc.

Look forward to some feedback trickling in

There are some profoundly annoying quirks with some of the smaller digital cameras. Buttons that press too easily. Dials that also press when not wanted to. Centre point focus that won't stay in the centre.

I would suggest trying the ones you shortlist out for a few days. Some manufacturers have try before you buy schemes. Some dealers might rent. If making a serious investment it would be good to avoid the pitfalls.

Personally, I would consider the S9 - panoramic aspect ratio option, usable file sizes (the Sigma is 61mp) and interchangeable lenses so the sensor can be cleaned (the Sony may suffer from dust intrusion over time).

I can't comment on any individual system because I don't have any experience of them. But... you've hinted at the real question here, that only you can answer. Which is: how much are you willing to sacrifice in terms of user experience (ergonomics, optical VF, favourite lenses etc.) and £££s for losing a pound in weight and gaining a little bit of space in your bag?

And a question for those who do have experience of these systems and may be relevant for LennyBloke: Do the FF lenses have lots of aberrations which are corrected by the computer in the camera or is it the old-style (and Pentax) approach of getting it right in the lens?

Cheeky blighter!!!

Steve

Lubbyman's response resonated with me.

First: The level of experience, expertise and knowledge of the Pentax system that has been shown in the photographs provided by Lennybloke in the past confirm how well he knows the system, as well his excellent ability to 'see'. They are seriously good images.

Second: Maybe, just maybe, one FF Pentax and just a couple of lenses(?) rather than moving to another system that will involve a learning curve as well as some cost? I've been there myself and decided to remain with Pentax. Not only because I like the system, (which I do), but also because I 'know' it.

Finally, Lubbyman's 'cheeky blighter' had me laughing out loud. Thank you for that.

How much would you gain and how much would you lose is the key question. The carriage of multiple lenses can be removed by using a zoom - The Tamron 28 - 200 (model A03) is a high performing FF example. It's so good that Pentax rebadged it to their own brand. It goes on holiday with me every year and never fails to reward. If you can put up with a crop frame then look no further than a K3 (xx) with a PLM 55-300. Superb results guaranteed. A lighter body is possible (I suppose) but then you are back in the lens lottery. My answer - leave the bag of bits at home and take a K1 and an A03 dangling across your back on a "Joby" over-the-shoulder strap. I won't see 70 again and I won't lug any extra stuff around because of it but I haven't been hampered by it either!

My camera bag is very full. It holds my K-70, with four lenses - Pentax DA 35mm, Pentax-D FA Macro 100mm, Pentax-DA 12-24mm, and Pentax DA 18-270mm. It also holds a number of filters, an external flash, spare battery and charger, a lens cleaning kit, and a number of other items. I often leave the bag in the car and carry just the body with one lens, to suit my expected needs, and maybe CP and VND filters. For example, a few years ago I took a boat trip on the St. Johns River in FL. The 18-270mm was ideal for photographing a wide variety of birds, and a number of alligators, at a variety of distances. Indoors the 12-24mm is a frequent choice, especially inside 18th and 19th century water powered mills, which can be pretty cramped. For general purposes I like the 35mm, chosen because it is a FF lens, and on the K-70 provides the same field of view that I got with a 50mm on my 35mm film bodies.

I have used Olympus system cameras in the past, EM5ii and a EM1ii and they are lovely cameras to use and some of the lenses are very compact but I found the cameras felt a little cramped and although there was a weight advantage, after going back to a DSLR (Pentax K70) I found the DSLR much more comfortable to use and Pentax make some very compact and lightweight lenses. My current lenses are 35mm f2.4, 40mm f2.8 ltd, 20-40mm ltd, 18-135mm and 55-300mm and rather than carry all that gear, I usually decide before going out what lens I am going to use for the day. Now I have the 20-40mm and 55-300mm I am thinking of selling the other lenses because they have become a bit redundant and the only lens I might want now is the 15mm ltd

I was looking at a Ricoh GR4 but reading Lenny's thread here has put me off, well a bit. Fortunately I haven't suffered too much lugging the K1 about even with a couple of lenses, but I agree with others here that is to choose carefully what lens(s) to take, unless in the car of course. But yes as the aging process catches up you have to listen to your aches and pains, so excercise and try to keep as fit as you can.
My current thoughts are to keep my 'heavy' gear and definitely not go mirrorless (and avoid sensor spots/dust).

Thank you for all your comments and suggestions, it is genuinely helpful having different opinions as often we tend to think we've covered all the options when we ask a question like this but different viewpoints make you think deeper!

@loadoftripe - Don't be put off the Ricoh by my comments, there have been times when the Pentax DSLR's were not an option to use and the Ricoh has served me admirably with results every bit as good as my APS-C DSLR's - it is the experience of using the GR I'm not that keen on, although when I've remembered to take the little optical viewfinder that experience is improved.

@johnriley - John is correct, try before you buy is a sensible option - but 2 of the 3 options I mentioned are discontinued so I would probably have to rely on buying and returning within the usual 30 period if I wasn't satisfied.

@smc - I hadn't considered the potential for dust intrusion with the Sony (but it makes sense as I did have the issue with a GRII) - the Sigma file size could be an issue too, 24 or 36mp is more manageable and holds more than enough detail.

@Lubbyman - You've addressed the real issue in you response, and deep down I think I know that no smaller system will give me the experience that I enjoy so much with the K1. I've probably already tested the water when I bought the GR, the results are so good that I even "upgraded" to the GRIII a few years ago!

Apologies for the ageism Steve, I didn't realise you were so touchy about entering your 30's

@Urbanmeister - Thank you for you kind comments Kevin, the suggestion of one FF plus a couple of lenses is the practical approach that I've been using lately. I took the K1 plus 4 lenses (21mm, 50mm, 100mm Macro and 300mm) to the Lake district and for each walk/hike I assessed which two lenses I would be most likely to use and took those with me. That worked quite well, and there were only a few times when I missed one of the left-behind lenses.

@davidwozhere - practical and sensible, and yes I've tried the APS-C with one or two lightweight zooms (KP and 16-85 + 70-210) - This may well be the option I go for at some point, but I'm still clinging to the Full-Frame preference (I love the fact that I can crop quite severely in PP and still retain a high quality image).

@DaleHCook - Your camera bag may be quite full, but all your lenses are quite sensibly lightweight options

@WiltshireBorn - I can see the appeal of dropping back to the 2 zooms you mention, lightweight and covering a good focal range. I do have the 20-40 on my KP and it really is a pleasure to use (not something I feel about most zooms).

Thinking it through I know I have a few problems...

Firstly, I'm a bit of a Prime snob - I'm fortunate enough to have several Star and Limited lenses and if I'm going to take a lens of any particular focal length out with me I feel as though I should take the very best one with me (i.e. the DFA*50/1.4 over the F50/1.4 - 910g v 230g).

Secondly, I really enjoy the optical viewfinder experience. I don't enjoy viewing the screen on the rear of any camera I've used and I've not enjoyed any EVF (yet) - I haven't experienced the latest EVF's so I could well be behind the times.

Thirdly, If were to opt for a interchangeable lens compact system such as the L-mount then there is the real risk that I would seek out fast, high quality lenses and would end up with a heavy lens system on a small and lighter compact camera, not the point of the exercise at all

Great question to start with Lenny, and some brilliant insights from other members. Being a spring chicken still (not seeing 70 until January) I still have too much gear a lot of which is heavy - this has led me to being more selective about what I take out with me but invariably the lens that I leave at home is the one that I want!
I have tried the OM system which I did find too small and fiddly, and unless you used the expensive Pro series glass I found the results disappointing. Fortunately it is a very popular system so selling my kit was quite easy!
My current Pentax alternative is the Canon RF system (2 full frame bodies the R6 Mkii and the R5) Mainly purchased for wildlife where the auto focus is blisteringly fast. Downsides, neither the camera or lenses feel as robust as my Pentax kit and the menu system is not yet intuitive for me (time and practice may resolve this). There is a weight advantage but it is not significant. Having said that I tend to use the K3iii for wildlife and not my K1, the Canon kit has more of a weight advantage over the K1. The EVFs in the Canon bodies is good, but does not equal the OVF in the Pentax
Results from the RAW files are excellent but do not seem to have the depth of the Pentax files when working on them on post - I process in LR and Topaz, use native Canon RAW and DNG files on the Pentax.
The one time I have used the Pentax and Canon together (sat comfortably in a Photo hide) both produced superb results which you would be hard pushed to separate.
If I had to sell one of the systems now I am pretty sure it would be the Canon. I just feel more comfortable with the Pentax, be that APSC ,Full Frame or my very heavy 645 kit !

Not sure my ramblings will have helped other that being one who has invested in other systems I keep coming back to the Pentax kit

As a user of an L-mount camera I have read quite a bit about the S9. The Sigmas have their fans but are known for being very quirky.

The image quality from the S9 is excellent, should be exactly the same as the S5 II, which is the same (or maybe a little worse due to the phase detect AF points) as that of my original S5. I find the S5's menus and button configuration to be very sensible and well laid-out, and the S9 will be very similar. The problems are the items that Panasonic left out in order to reduce size and cost - mechanical shutter, viewfinder, hotshoe, weather resistance and any form of grip. I regard a mechanical shutter and a viewfinder as essentials unless it's on a camera I'm going to be using very little, so I'd say it depends what you're going to use it for. A third-party add-on grip is pretty much essential.

Beyond that, if you're looking for something very compact then the problem is the lenses. There are no true pancake lenses for the L-mount unless you consider the Viltrox 28mm f/4.5 with it's fixed aperture and no manual focus ring or the Lumix 26mm f/8, again fixed aperture but also manual focus only. There's also a 7Artisans 18mm f/5.6, fixed aperture and manual focus but pretty decent. As you see, there's nothing for general use. The smallest lenses with AF and changeable apertures are the Lumix and TTArtisans 40mm f/2s. Obviously the Lumix is much more expensive, apparently optically a little better and without an aperture ring. I have the TTA and am perfectly happy with it's performance for the €179 I paid for it, and it does make for a fairly small setup (on an S9 smaller still of course).

Aside from that I have to say that all the L-mount lenses I've tried are nothing short of superb but none of them are compact. I love Sigma's I-series lenses, which are metal, solidly-built primes with aperture rings, silky-smooth manual focus and superb optics though with moderate max apertures, but then you'd be looking at something approaching a K-1 and fast prime in size and weight.

My two longest lenses don't even get into the car unless I think I may want one or both. The Mamiya/Sekor 400mm f/6.3 isn't terribly heavy, but it is fairly long. The Rokinon 650Z 650-1300mm f/8-16 is a brute. I always use a tripod for both of those - at 75 my ability to steadily support a long lens by hand is not what it was when I was young. I bought the Rokinon at my local camera shop. It was their last one, and someone who looked at it ahead of me didn't buy it because it is white, and he only buys black lenses. It cost me $270, and I have recently seen it on Amazon for $350. The Mamiya/Sekor cost me $70 at a used camera shop about 30 miles from home. I built a telephoto lens mounting bar for the Rokinon, so that the combo of body and lens balances well at any focal length. I need to take new photos. I added a second RC2 receiver to handle the Mamiya/Sekor, and a flash shoe to hold the receiver for my wireless remote trigger. I also replaced the foam of the body rest with a much better grade of foam, and of greater length, to accomodate the Mamiya/Sekor.

My realisation came when I found I was leaving the Pentax bag in the car and taking an Olympus with a couple of lenses out instead, purely because it was so much more pleasant to walk with the lighter weight gear. Like Lennybloke though I wanted to stick with FF so I listed comparative bodies and the lenses I most used to compare weight-wise with the Pentax stuff I owned. I noticed that Canon and Nikon produce some pro grade f4 versions of the f2.8 lenses which saved considerably in weight and cost. I didn't include Sony although that's an option, just from personal prejudice. For me Canon came out the winner with the lowest collective weight and the real game changer was the Canon 100-500mm pro quality lens, significantly lighter and more compact than the Pentax 150-450mm. I also liked that some mirrorless bodies use the shutter to protect the sensor and in three years or more I have never had to clean the sensor, just the occasional blow. The fact that Pentax hadn't updated the K1.II in years led the suspicion that the format has been abandoned by Ricoh and a view of the Ricoh display at the Photography Show demonstrated that the Pentax range is just a sideshow to where Ricoh are focusing their efforts, which is a great shame.

I just found my comparison list, the Pentax kit was K1, 15-30 f2.8, 24-70 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8, 150-450mm lenses. Total weight 6672g. The Nikon and Canon equivalents (using pro grade f4 lenses where available instead of f2. were 4485k and 4053k respectively. The Canon kit therefore came in at 60% of the weight of the Pentax. I appreciate that the f4 lenses are something of a compromise but the weight saving was worth it and most f2.8 lenses are not at their best wide open anyway.