What are your priorities when building your kit?

YellowJersey · November 16, 2019

Just curious to know how other people approach building out their list of photo/video gear. There are all kinds of factors to consider, like size, weight, capabilities, ergonomics, ecosystem, price, and so on and each photographer is going to have their own priorities when balancing all of these.

I'm mostly a landscape guy who is very much into pixel peeping and most of my photos have been taken on hiking and cycling trips. So weight and size are a priority for me, but due to the pixel peeping tendencies of my brain, I also demand max(ish) image quality and, to a point, am willing to pay for it. I don't really care that much about ergonomics; that's something I'm willing to sacrifice, especially since I'm often shooting on a tripod anyway. I usually try to limit myself to a one or two lens set up for most of my shooting due to size and weight. I'm also willing to trade convenience for image quality or something else.

So my kit currently consists of

Sony A7rIII

Sony 24-105mm f/4 G

Tamron 17-28mm 2.8

Tokina 20mm f/2 (dedicated astro lens)

(not including accessories)

Rational:

I got the A7rIII shortly after it launched, giving up my Canon 5DmkIII. I was tempted by the A7rII, but it had too many deal breakers, like single card slot and small battery, all of which were fixed with the A7rIII. I like the smaller, lighter body, despite the mediocre ergonomics. The A7rIV doesn't interest me as I don't really need anything it offers over the rIII for my purposes, like the real-time tracking AF, 10-FPS, or dual USH-II card slots. I'm a landscape guy. My answer to definitely change if I were shooting sports or wildlife. The Sony and Canon trade blows in terms of convenience. I find Canon's menus and layout better, but the Sony's tilty screen and EVF make shooting easier since I'm not contorting my body to see through the viewfinder anymore and I'm not rattling off frames since the EVF allows me to see my exposure in-viewfinder, plus the extra dynamic range makes bracketing less necessary. While the colour science of Sony has a ways to go, I work extensively with my photos in post, so I'm willing to put up with that in exchange for the much better sensor compared to the Canon.

While the Sony 24-105mm f/4 isn't cheap, it's not unreasonably expensive, imo, compared to the competition or Sony's own GM lenses, and, as of writing, there still isn't a third-party alternative that doesn't require an adaptor. IQ is excellent, size and weight are acceptable, and the flexibility of the 24-105mm zoom range means I can take it as my only lens on hiking or cycling trips, where size and weight are always an issue.

I replaced my Sony 16-35mm 2.8 GM lens with the Tamron 17-28mm 2.8. I'm usually shooting at the wider end anyway, but don't lose much by giving up 1mm. The Tamron is smaller, lighter, and cheaper than the Sony while delivering comparable IQ. The lack of a dedicated AF switch on the lens is annoying, but far from a deal-breaker. Plus, I was able to sell my Sony for nearly twice the going-rate of the Tamron. While I'm willing to pay for good glass, the low cost of the Tamron was definitely a point in its favour. By comparison, now that the Tamron exists, I think the Sony is pretty over-priced.

List of priorities: on a scale of 1 (lowest) to 10 (highest)

Size - 7

Weight - 7

Image quality - 9

Video - 1

Price - 5

Weather sealing - 7

Convenience - 5

So, what are your priorities and how did they factor into putting your kit together? (There's no right answer, btw. Everyone has their own priorities, some of which cannot be easily quantified.)

19_blackie_73 · November 16, 2019

Started with a D5300 and a 18-140mm kit lens. After fiddling around with it for a good half year to a year, I planned a trip to london and was interested in night photography so I saved on a 18-35 f1.8, a freakishely sharp and still fast lens, but still used my 18-140 for the long end.

As the 18-35 has so much better IQ as the 18-140, after another year I was tired of the 18-140 and as tamron released the 70-210 f4 as a lightweight and still good option, I went for that.

Now after another year as I didn't touch the 18-140 anymore, I sold that one.

My whishlist contains the 11-16 tokina f2.8 and to fill the gap the 50mm f1.8, but they havr to wait.

IQ is on the high side on the list, weight more on the low side. What I discovered is that a good bag can compensate a lot of weight, and both lenses and the body still arent more than 2.5 kg so I guess that's still fine.

TLDR: my rig grows organically with what I need to get the job done

D13H4RD · November 17, 2019

Much like you, I'm mainly doing landscape photography with cityscapes and countryside photography making up the majority of what I shoot although I do shoot a small bit of product shots and event photography is my moneymaker.

I didn't want to fully invest into a full frame setup as of yet as I personally didn't see too much of a benefit (which might be surprising considering that both the Sony a7iii and a7Riii alongside refurbished Nikon Z6s, new D750s and a share of used EOS 5DIVs can now be had for relatively cheap prices), so I went with the best crop option available at the time, the Fujifilm X-T3.

Initially, I started with just the 18-55 kit zoom but I eventually added the 50-140 f/2.8 telephoto zoom and a vertical grip to beef up the body so it remains balanced with the larger lens.

Considering that my kit is rather large, size and weight aren't major factors. IQ however is a major factor but not to an obsessive pixel-peeping degree. 26MP is plenty for me and the lack of a low pass filter on the Fuji definitely helps. Cost is a factor as well but not by too much as the high end Fuji XF glass are creeping into 35mm FF territory. Video is not much of a factor (ironic when you consider how capable the Fuji is for that) and convenience is somewhere down the middle. Weather sealing isn't a huge deal for me but it's better to have it than to not.

I will be adding an ultrawide angle lens to my kit eventually. The XF 8-16 is great but costs too much for me to justify, so it's down to either the Laowa 9mm Zero-D or the XF 10-24. But first, I need an upgrades backpack. Looking at the Lowepro ProTactic BP350 AW II.

brandishwar · November 17, 2019

Still an amateur, but I've made several purchasing decisions based on my prior experiences, and this is what I've dialed into for now.

For the body, I use a D7200. It's 24MP, which is enough for most everyone. Yeah it doesn't have the greatest sensor and isn't the greatest camera, but I was able to find a kit that included the 18-55 VR and 70-300 non-VR lenses for around $800 brand new. I had already previously purchased the 35mm f/1.8 DX and 50mm f/1.8 Nikon primes since I had a D3200 preceding this. I upgraded to the D7200 for better low-light performance and image quality without breaking the bank. Plus it has dual card slots.

I'd always had an interest in portraiture, but through a series of photowalks I also developed a huge fascination with wildlife photography. Since I'd found myself at the long-end of the 70-300 most of the time, I found a refurbished VR 70-300 to reduce camera shake, allowing for slower shutter speeds on cloudy days. But that 300mm was still proving to be a problem, so I watched a lot of lens reviews to determine my next lens purchase. I settled on the Sigma 150-600mm "Contemporary". And I've been loving it ever since. It's lighter than the "Sport", both in weight and price, without much sacrifice in image quality.

For portraits, though, recall how I said I already had the 35mm f/1.8 DX and 50mm f/1.8 Nikon primes. I'd found myself favoring the 50mm f/1.8 over the 35mm for its tighter view angle. Meaning if I had a full frame camera, I'd be favoring an 85mm prime over the 50mm. And while I wasn't dissatisfied with the image quality I was getting with the 50mm, I wanted better. So recently, as a birthday present to myself, I bought the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 "Art" after finding a great deal on a used lens.