Too heavy for an all around.

For me that kind of weight really isn't too heavy. I don't mind it at all. Maybe it's because I lift weights, maybe it's because my idea of a walk-around is a few hours and not 12 hours.

I desperately want to switch to full frame Thinking I'll wait for next year's offerings given how lackluster the D610 refresh is. But you have no idea how tempted I am to just get rid of my 16-85 and D5200 right this second. The two *ONLY* reasons I still have my 16-85 is because I want a 16mm wide end, and I need a VR lens. :-/

This post was edited by Canadian_Man on Dec 8 2013 09:47pm

No need vr on a uwa. And nn vr with faster lens, and nn zooms !!!

Personal preference

VR is pretty important to me. I've got hand-held photos at 1/10 of a second at night-time at f4.5 that have turned out wonderfully, keeping the ISO down around 3200. At f2.8 with a full-frame I could manage a much faster shutter speed, maintain the same ISO, and come out with a lot less grain.

Another example where VR really comes in handy is on the go video. Hugely nice. But as far as photography goes (the main purpose), it just fits my photography style *really* nicely. As far as zooms go... again... a 24-70 f2.8 zoom fits my photography style PERFECTLY. Mind you, I'd be extremely satisfied with a 50mm f1.8 on a full-frame... that's 90% of what I'd shoot to be honest. If I had a 24-70 zoom though, I'd be 10% at 24mm, 20% at 35mm, 50% at 50mm, and 20% at ~70mm -- given the way I shoot DX right now (taking conversions into consideration). I've learned to shoot zooms like primes -- I prefer moving with my feet. The part about zooms that helps me is switching between focal lengths quickly enough, and not having to buy a fast 24mm lens. Also, some of the most amazing shots are at 24mm FF, but I seldom need that focal length & so I'll miss that shot 100% of the time without the option in front of me.

This post was edited by Canadian_Man on Dec 9 2013 05:48pm

I owned the 24-70 L it's a great lens ( I also owned the 24-70 2.8 zeiss - for alpha mount) but I always missed the creativity the a fast prime allowed me. And i shot ISO 800 or lower exclusively day or night (camera limitations mainly) and the cost of the lens meant that when I sold it I could buy a 50mm 1.4 an 85mm 1.4 sigma lens which gave me far more pleasing images for my style - however all that was on FF. Focal length variety of a zoom is not as handy as a faster prime setup in my opinion.

i think capturing the photo is more important , than worrying if you have every single peice of equipment.

I find the bulkiness of carrying extra equipment can not only actually hinder the process of you snaping that photo, but also of you finding the right place to take the photo.

I dont think there is anything wrong with slinging a camera around your neck , and then alternating a standard lense with a zoom lense

as they both require slightly differnt skills and that would allow you to practise /focus on learning with that lense.

Personally i like the fixed length lense and I like the fact that it teaches you the importance of angles and position

and that you need to move your feet , not change the lense.

This post was edited by card_sultan on Dec 14 2013 12:28pm

amen

this kid just wants to spend money for some reason,

You've got issues. Maybe jelly-itis.

i dont get jelly over a bad photographer unfortunately.

I smell jelly. Mixed with a side of social issues.