Everyday "carryability" -- is it about weight, size, convenience?? What matters to you?


Super Moderator Emeritus
Nov 5, 2010
Down Under
I've become a huge fan of the man-bag. In it must fit keys, wallet, phone, notebook, pen, camera/s and other miscellaneous bits and pieces (film, filters, hood, etc.). So I'm the other way around to most, I pick the bag and the camera must fit not visa versa. For instance, the Think Tank Retrospective 7 was my go-to bag when I lugged the dSLR etc. and cannot do it anymore - hence the sale of my K5 (last bit still on sale). My fave bags are either Bare Bones Bag Traveller (thanks Marlof) or Timbuk2 XS w/- Domke 3-compartment insert. Either way it's Ricoh GR and Leica IIIf. My digital and film faves.

The IIIf is about as big as I'll go. Even though it's heavy it just feels so right in-hand - weighs more than the K5 and yet on profile is so much more lithe….so weight and size become skewed here.


Top Veteran
May 17, 2013
back in Crooklyn
for me, carry-ability is preferably anything but a dslr system - whether it be a photo shoot or something more serious where i'll have a small bag of some sort for my good lenses and various other items, or just being out and about which i'll just wear my camera over my shoulder with my street lens. i may have a pouch for batteries or if when it rains. but i always carry a camera with me so i'll never miss a shot. so, a small mirrorless it must be.

mine just recently became more pocketable.

(Sent from another Galaxy via Tapatalk.)


Dec 20, 2013
Everyday, always carry? IPhone. Odds I might do more than a quick snapshot of something? RX100. Place with more interesting stuff to shoot? MFT and/or A7R system. Underwater? RX100.

I'm not particularly adept or interested in street/urban shooting, unless I'm in a new city/on vacation. Most of my photography is travel related in some way, particularly the stuff I end up printing and looking at again and again, or is of friends and family at social gatherings. For the travel, it's always a 'full' set, although the size and weight of that has shrunk considerably (about 3kg minimum, 6kg maximum including tripod, MFT, A7R and Rx100 with scuba housing, etc., which is a far cry from the Canon system I would have lugged around in the 'old days'). For outings with friends, the RX100 if there's wild dancing/socializing/partying involved (pocketable and all that) or one of the mirrorless cameras with a prime lens (maybe two), depending on my mood, if it's a little more sedate and there's somewhere safe to stash the gear.


Jan 26, 2014
Southern California
So what matters most to you for everyday carryability . . . or am I asking the wrong question?
What matters to me regarding portability is how my lower back feels.

I once carried the mighty Nikon D3 and some heavyweight lenses. Then I switched to the D700 without the grip; however, I was still carrying those dang big, heavy lenses. I then switched to the GH2 and GX1, but I found a liking for the Voigtlander 0.95 manual glass that are the heaviest prime lenses in u4/3. In my desire to shed the lbs. off my camera equipment, I have not been altogether successful.

I stopped carrying my u4/3 hardware; particularly the Voigtlanders because I refuse to stop carrying some of the other stuff that I have on my belt IF I need to do another type of shooting if the circumstance requires.

I now carry my newly-acquired Canon S120. Oh I can go on all day about the sub-par image quality, the poor battery life, etc.; but at the end of the day, I don't feel that niggling little pain as I twist a certain way because the S120 sooooo lightweight. Will I carry my studio work-only D700 again? Heck no. Not in a shoulder bag. How 'bout the u4/3s stuff? Maybe, if I return to accepting paying jobs.

I may try that goofy-looking Sigma with the electric can opener-meets-nightstand clock radio looks just for giggles and grins. In the short term, my pip-squeak Canon is getting a lot of use. I'm happy to not need to look for that bottle of NSAIDs.

Latest posts

Latest threads

Top Bottom