Initial thought on new K3

with grip and Sigma 70-200mm f2.8

It's really, really heavy!!! It weighs in at something like 2.4 Kg or 5.25 lbs. Now I knew it was going to be heavier but I have to admit, I was surprised at just how much heavier it is than my K5 plus Sigma 70-300mm. Mind you the difference in weight from my Olympus 4Mp to the Samsung GX10 had me wondering whether I would cope.

So, have spent the last few days just pointing and shooting without any real regard to quality of the shot, just to practice holding this beast of a camera. The design of the lens is also different (with the OS switch on the side) so a lot of practice is called for. That said, some of the shots do appear to be nice and sharp, even at f2,8 (and in the centre) Once I feel comfortable with this combination, then I can start to work out how best to use it.

BTW has anyone done a comparison between using the lens OS and the body's OS? I think I prefer to use the stabilisation i the body, that way I won't have to remember to switch it on/off if I use another lens.

I think most of the weight difference there will be in the lens rather than the camera. Fast zooms are always big and always heavy, that's the price you pay for them unfortunately.

Wuss ...

And when I finish my Charles Atlas body-building course, you'll regret calling me names!!!

Funnily enough, the K3 is the same weight as the K20D, and not much heavier than the K5 models.

You weren't standing on the strap, perchance?

Lens based stabilisation is supposed to be more effective but with the Pentax system, every lens you fit is stabilised, even if it's an old manual prime. That must be a good thing.

The weight of a DSLR plus zoom lens is no joke and has to be taken into consideration if you're taking photographs all day. On a recent visit to Liverpool, I was, by the end of a long day, grateful to have a tiny CSC rather than my K5 or K10.

Weight can also equal stability, and for many situations that is a valuable plus. Why not add the battery grip? That may in fact create a better experience with the big lens due to better grip and balancing. Try to support the lens with a flattish open palm underneath near the mount and only gentle finger pressure on its sides, and move more from the waist rather than twisting and turning the hands .. Try to keep the hands and steady as possible and this reduces the strain on them.

I admire your lateral approach.

The OP complains that the camera is too heavy, so you suggest making it even heavier.

It's perhaps a good thing that you are not a captain on a Philipine ferry. "Sir, we have 400 passengers on board, and the ferry is only licensed for 180."

"Good point, No. 2. Allow another 100 aboard."

Glug, glug.

Surely the right approach is simply to hold the zoom at a point where the weight is spread equally between the two hands. Or perhaps where the left hand takes slightly more of the weight.

G

i aggre with this you have a neck strap and if you have a big lens on the balance will change as you zoom in and out so why not ad to the camera its not as if you are addin lb but only oz

Welcome back George .... it's been quiet without you

Doesn't really seem fair to say the camera itself is heavier (as per thread title) when it appears it's the honking lens attached that's making the difference?

I think the lens OS is better at the longer focal lengths, but either system is better than none
(I've seen a lot of these discussions turn quite academic and specs based, rather than doing what Pentax does best and go out and shoot some photos)

Just remember they can't both be on at the same time, as they've interact and cause instability.

The point about the grip is the extra surface area it adds for holding, plus the stability that comes from extra solidity. The left palm will support under the lens, but the extra size from the grip allows the right hand to have more effect, thereby creating the better balance ... a more even balance between the two hands.

An unbalanced or ergonomically poor setup (such as big heavy zoom on a small camera) will give the impression of extra weight. Extra weight that removes the imbalance and improves the ergonomics will not be felt as such (as in the seafaring example from George above).

I know that's your theory. And that of other grip fans.

So what do you do when you attach an even heavier lens than the Sigma (which weighs around 1,400 gms)?

The FA* 250-600 weighs over 5 kilos. If we follow your logic, we should attach 3 kilos to the bottom of the camera (if you can afford the lens, you can probably afford to use Krugerrands for this) in order to "balance it". Then there's the A* 1200 at 8 kilos. Add a few more Krugers.

Obviously this would be absurd, but it does suggest that your approach is flawed.

The problem, I think, is your concept of balance. According to you, the centre of gravity of body and lens has to be at or close to the edge of the camera. But why? Why does it matter where it is? You have two hands (I hope) and can hold the lens wherever you like.

I can understand that people with hands like bears' paws (or Antarctic explorers with heavy gloves) might prefer to use a 6x7, or a Canon, but I still don't get the point about "balance".

My heaviest lens is an ancient brass 400mm. With that on the camera, the centre of gravity is about ten inches in front of the body. But is it unbalanced? Not in my book. It's just that the balance is further away.

Your solution is especially inappropriate because the heavier the lens, the more weight you want to add to the kit, which I think makes no sense at all. What you should be doing is reducing the total weight, unless you want to end up with forearms like a gorilla. So, if you normally use a grip, I would suggest you take it OFF when using a heavy lens.

I know this is heresy in the eyes of those who have bought grips, but you must admit it's logical.

No, it's inflammatory nonsense .. Not based on what I wrote at all . The main added value in the grip comes from increased surface area, not it's extra weight, which without 6 aa batteries is easy to absorb, and actually has less relative impact the heavier the lens ... Quite the opposite of your assertion!

The extra weight from a grip will actually have more stability aiding effect the lighter the lens ... Here it's relative weight is higher in relation to the total lens/camera/grip package. The added surface area is fairly equally beneficial regardless of lens size or weight.

What benefit do you see in added surface area? It makes the camera bigger, but I like compact DSLRs such as Pentax produce. I see adding a grip as spoiling the ergonomics.