Originally Posted by
lhgreengrd1
Where can I get lenses that weigh 3-6 ounces for those Canon DSLRs?
Because I have 3 primes, a wide, a tele, and a fast normal lens, that TOGETHER, weigh 14 ounces. My longest lens is a 90-350mm full frame equivalent zoom, that weighs 7.5 ounces.
My travel kit is normally 1 body, and 4-5 lenses. Including my bag, filters, a couple of spare batteries, and charger, it weighs about 4 pounds, and takes up roughly 1/2 the capacity of my personal carry-on item.
Are we comparing camera systems or HO vs N gauge trains?
It's without question that bigger sensors and bigger (heavier) glass = better overall performance. But where do you draw the line? How much is good enough? How much is more than you want to carry?
I love my S120. It's an awesome point & shoot, and I really like how quickly it sets up and shuts down. Very important when pulling it out of a jersey pocket when you're riding 33 mph downhill on a bicycle (why 33? Because I have to draw the line somewhere at what a safe speed is to operate a camera while riding the bike one-handed). But it doesn't come close to what I can get from my T3i, which is just the smallest step up from entry-level. Far less noise, far less pixel-smudging.
If I could only have one camera, it would have to be the S120. I'd give up a fair amount of image quality in favor of something I could have with me, anytime, anywhere, always ready. But I'd miss the capabilities of an APS-C DSLR. Would I ever want to consider going full-frame for ultimate image quality? No. I know my limitations, and an APS-C camera has the ability to exceed them.