On 08/09/2011 4:15 PM, Tom C wrote:
On 08/09/2011 1:25 PM, Sam L wrote:
Yet I have never seen anything quite as retarded. It is a little
bit like mounting a race engine to a bicycle.
If you bought the Q, you wanted a small camera. If you mount anything
but a Q (or similar tiny lens),
then your camera is no longer small.
Sorry for stating the obvious!
Have you looked at a NEX with any lens mounted?
--
William Robb
I can't believe all the nay-sayers regarding a small camera with a
large lens, who haven't purchased and used such a camera. For one,
it's not much different than using an SLR with a gigantic 500mm,
600mm, 1000mm, etc., lens on it. Second, the small camera body, even
with a large lens, still reduces the total package size and weight by
a significant percentage. Third, the proof is in the results, not in
the gear.
I'm gonna play the Devil's Advocate for a moment.
You are certainly stating the obvious regarding size, but what is
perhaps getting lost is the usability of said package. I'd happily be
proven wrong, but tossing a NEX sized camera onto the back of a sizable
lens, say an 80-200/2.8, might make for a really badly balanced package
that is a PITA to use simply because the small body shape doesn't give
enough to hold onto. I read a post on PentaxForum from some guy who had
seen a bunch of people having exactly that problem at some sort of
sports event.
The weight difference between a NEX and a small SLR (I used the Pentax
Kr as a reference) is less than 12 ounces.
--
William Robb
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
