How important is camera balance to you?

**RICHARD L.** · 09-17-2021, 06:58 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by DonV

why is there no exif data on your photo?

EXIF's appear only the first time the picture is uploaded. 645Z + 645 FA* 300 mm f/4 ED IF, ISO 200, 1/400 sec @ f/8 handheld, lightly supported on the window frame of my Mazda.

Regards

**luftfluss** · 09-17-2021, 07:43 AM

Originally posted by DonV

Richard,
why is there no exif data on your photo?

Originally posted by RICHARD L.

EXIF's appear only the first time the picture is uploaded. 645Z + 645 FA* 300 mm f/4 ED IF, ISO 200, 1/400 sec @ f/8 handheld, lightly supported on the window frame of my Mazda.

Regards

EXIF is appearing just fine...

**RICHARD L.** · 09-17-2021, 07:48 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by luftfluss

EXIF is appearing just fine...

Thank you for letting us know. We can always learn from one another.

Regards

Lord Lucan · 09-17-2021, 08:57 AM

I don't even know what is meant by balance. The position of the centre of gravity compared with the tripod socket? Compared with where one hand-holds it? Depends on the lens, and where you hold it. I simply hand hold it wherever it is comfortable and don't give it a further thought. Is the writer one of those photogs who holds with one hand while waving the other around? That's difficult with telephotos or any massive modern lens.

Quote:

By balance, I am talking about how the chassis works together with the lens in a way that makes creating more fluid for the photographer.

That is the definition from the article, but what the heck does that mean? Someone enlighten me please.

**Pål Jensen** · 09-17-2021, 10:01 AM

I don't balance my cameras....

**DonV** · 09-17-2021, 12:31 PM

Originally posted by luftfluss

EXIF is appearing just fine...

Not on my screen, I've never seen it at the bottom like that on any post.

**luftfluss** · 09-17-2021, 12:51 PM

Originally posted by DonV

Not on my screen, I've never seen it at the bottom like that on any post.

What browser are you using? I use Firefox on a PC, and an extension called "Exify" that displays EXIF info on the photo.

I also downloaded the photo and brought it into Photoshop, and was able to read it there.

But its just occurred to me that I may be an idiot

and what you meant when you said "Richard, why is there no exif data on your photo?" is that you don't see View Picture EXIF printed directly above the photo? Neither do I.

**DonV** · 09-17-2021, 02:27 PM

Originally posted by luftfluss

What browser are you using? I use Firefox on a PC, and an extension called "Exify" that displays EXIF info on the photo.

I also downloaded the photo and brought it into Photoshop, and was able to read it there.

But its just occurred to me that I may be an idiot

and what you meant when you said "Richard, why is there no exif data on your photo?" is that you don't see View Picture EXIF printed directly above the photo? Neither do I.

I use Chrome, and yes- the question was why is it not above the picture.

**kiwi_jono** · 09-17-2021, 03:19 PM

The main thing for me is overall weight as I walk a lot with my gear. So I love having the FF K-1 but I tend use the limited lenses (and other smaller lenses) when ever I can. And so I don't think balance is really a big problem with smaller lighter lenses, as the K-1 feels all day stable to me with them (to me anyway).

**TDvN57** · 09-18-2021, 05:45 AM - **1 Like**

I became aware of camera-lens balance when I bought a slightly larger and heavier video camera and could suddenly get more stable video footage.

Even under water my small video camera became stable once it was in the housing. The housing for the larger camera is enormous and I gave up on carrying that around, although underwater it is as steady as a rock.

Having stopped all underwater videoing in abt 2013, I bought a GoPro with a deep water housing. Apart from the image quality being poor in comparison, the video stability is nonexistent.

I found the same with taking videos with a DSLR on the surface. The camera setup is usually too short and totally unbalanced, because most video is done with a short wide angle lens.

That lead me on the path of looking for ways to find a stabilized setup for still pictures.

I found APSC and FF to be mostly unstable unless you go to a 400mm lens or longer/heavier lens.

In my experience the 645z starts off with a sufficient size and mass to create a stable base. Most 645 lenses are heavier than 750g and for me it balances the setup nicely, for handheld photography. I have yet to find a mirrorless camera that has any semblance of balance.

For those interested I added a couple of pictures from an expedition I did with a couple of friends in the Philippines in 2012 to a WW2 shipwreck, The Kuda Maru.

#1- I'm doing final checks to the camera rig before descending to +/-300ft. For the descend the lights are folded away and I usually let the rig hang on a lanyard clipped to my waist. That way both my hands were free to deal with the descend task load.

Even though the video camera with housing rig weighs about 30kg, underwater it is tuned to be very slightly negative buoyant. Filming underwater was very stable and I could push it with one hand.

At this point prior to descend my dive gear is checked and prepped ready for a fast descend.

#2 - a peek into one side of the wreck through some panels that had popped open.

#3 - a view from the stern side at what is left of what was once the lower structure of the bridge.

Questions and comments welcome.

**Eric Auer** · 09-18-2021, 06:28 AM - **2 Likes**

My most stable setup is the 6456N with the 80-160mm F4.5.

News crew at dusk, Kodak Portra 800

Jonathan Mac · 09-21-2021, 11:44 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by luftfluss

What browser are you using? I use Firefox on a PC, and an extension called "Exify" that displays EXIF info on the photo.

Thanks for the tip - I see it's also available for Chrome.

---------- Post added 22-09-21 at 08:53 AM ----------

Seems like a non-issue for me, certainly not something to write an article about. It's hardly surprising that anything with the 1.5kg 28-70/2 feels front-heavy but if you can't handle the gear you use then either (A) you're holding it wrong, (B) you need to reconsider that gear or (C) you need to get yourself down to the gym and build a little muscle.

**rdenney** · 09-23-2021, 09:55 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Jonathan Mac

…or (C) you need to get yourself down to the gym and build a little muscle.

Just what I was thinking.

Rick “who recently carried a 645z in hand on a 10-mile hike” Denney

sculptor666 · 09-23-2021, 01:12 PM

it would be nice if the tripod foot of xxx lens on xxx camera was balanced so when i put the camera on a table, it's stable... otherwise, i don't understand why anyone would care about "balance"

**kaseki** · 09-24-2021, 09:31 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by sculptor666

it would be nice if the tripod foot of xxx lens on xxx camera was balanced so when i put the camera on a table, it's stable... otherwise, i don't understand why anyone would care about "balance"

Your question made me think a bit about this, and I think that a camera body/lens assembly mounted at the balance point on a tripod will be less susceptible to angular motion due to translational vibration than will an unbalanced configuration.

09-17-2021, 07:43 AM	#17
luftfluss Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,619	Originally posted by DonV Richard, why is there no exif data on your photo? Originally posted by RICHARD L. *EXIF's appear only the first time the picture is uploaded. 645Z + 645 FA 300 mm f/4 ED IF, ISO 200, 1/400 sec @ f/8 handheld, lightly supported on the window frame of my Mazda. Regards** EXIF is appearing just fine... Last edited by luftfluss; 06-16-2022 at 09:03 PM.

09-18-2021, 05:45 AM - 1 Like	#25
TDvN57 Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Berlin Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,149 Original Poster	I became aware of camera-lens balance when I bought a slightly larger and heavier video camera and could suddenly get more stable video footage. Even under water my small video camera became stable once it was in the housing. The housing for the larger camera is enormous and I gave up on carrying that around, although underwater it is as steady as a rock. Having stopped all underwater videoing in abt 2013, I bought a GoPro with a deep water housing. Apart from the image quality being poor in comparison, the video stability is nonexistent. I found the same with taking videos with a DSLR on the surface. The camera setup is usually too short and totally unbalanced, because most video is done with a short wide angle lens. That lead me on the path of looking for ways to find a stabilized setup for still pictures. I found APSC and FF to be mostly unstable unless you go to a 400mm lens or longer/heavier lens. In my experience the 645z starts off with a sufficient size and mass to create a stable base. Most 645 lenses are heavier than 750g and for me it balances the setup nicely, for handheld photography. I have yet to find a mirrorless camera that has any semblance of balance. For those interested I added a couple of pictures from an expedition I did with a couple of friends in the Philippines in 2012 to a WW2 shipwreck, The Kuda Maru. #1- I'm doing final checks to the camera rig before descending to +/-300ft. For the descend the lights are folded away and I usually let the rig hang on a lanyard clipped to my waist. That way both my hands were free to deal with the descend task load. Even though the video camera with housing rig weighs about 30kg, underwater it is tuned to be very slightly negative buoyant. Filming underwater was very stable and I could push it with one hand. At this point prior to descend my dive gear is checked and prepped ready for a fast descend. #2 - a peek into one side of the wreck through some panels that had popped open. #3 - a view from the stern side at what is left of what was once the lower structure of the bridge. Questions and comments welcome. Attached Images

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
How important are MP when you don't shoot RAW?	Rsquare	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	9	11-29-2013 02:21 PM
Is EXIF important to you?	NecroticSoldier	Pentax DSLR Discussion	8	07-23-2010 09:08 AM
Important Pornography Announcement (brought to you by the Values Voter Summit)	deadwolfbones	General Talk	32	09-25-2009 10:01 PM
How important is HD Movie recording to you?	petercrane	Pentax DSLR Discussion	12	07-18-2009 07:41 PM
Auto white balance vs. daylight balance outdoors.	fevbusch	Pentax DSLR Discussion	7	02-18-2007 03:04 PM

09-17-2021, 06:58 AM - 1 Like	#16
RICHARD L. Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2018 Location: Quebec City, Quebec Posts: 6,577	Originally posted by DonV why is there no exif data on your photo? *EXIF's appear only the first time the picture is uploaded. 645Z + 645 FA 300 mm f/4 ED IF, ISO 200, 1/400 sec @ f/8 handheld, lightly supported on the window frame of my Mazda. Regards**

09-17-2021, 07:48 AM - 1 Like	#18
RICHARD L. Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2018 Location: Quebec City, Quebec Posts: 6,577	Originally posted by luftfluss EXIF is appearing just fine... Thank you for letting us know. We can always learn from one another. Regards

09-17-2021, 08:57 AM	#19
Lord Lucan Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2017 Location: South Wales Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,961	I don't even know what is meant by balance. The position of the centre of gravity compared with the tripod socket? Compared with where one hand-holds it? Depends on the lens, and where you hold it. I simply hand hold it wherever it is comfortable and don't give it a further thought. Is the writer one of those photogs who holds with one hand while waving the other around? That's difficult with telephotos or any massive modern lens. Quote: By balance, I am talking about how the chassis works together with the lens in a way that makes creating more fluid for the photographer. That is the definition from the article, but what the heck does that mean? Someone enlighten me please.

09-17-2021, 10:01 AM	#20
Pål Jensen Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Norway Photos: Albums Posts: 4,371	I don't balance my cameras....

09-17-2021, 12:31 PM	#21
DonV Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2017 Location: Near Charlotte NC Photos: Albums Posts: 693	Originally posted by luftfluss EXIF is appearing just fine... Not on my screen, I've never seen it at the bottom like that on any post.

09-17-2021, 12:51 PM	#22
luftfluss Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,619	Originally posted by DonV Not on my screen, I've never seen it at the bottom like that on any post. What browser are you using? I use Firefox on a PC, and an extension called "Exify" that displays EXIF info on the photo. I also downloaded the photo and brought it into Photoshop, and was able to read it there. But its just occurred to me that I may be an idiot and what you meant when you said "Richard, why is there no exif data on your photo?" is that you don't see View Picture EXIF printed directly above the photo? Neither do I.

09-17-2021, 02:27 PM	#23
DonV Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2017 Location: Near Charlotte NC Photos: Albums Posts: 693	Originally posted by luftfluss What browser are you using? I use Firefox on a PC, and an extension called "Exify" that displays EXIF info on the photo. I also downloaded the photo and brought it into Photoshop, and was able to read it there. But its just occurred to me that I may be an idiot and what you meant when you said "Richard, why is there no exif data on your photo?" is that you don't see View Picture EXIF printed directly above the photo? Neither do I. I use Chrome, and yes- the question was why is it not above the picture.

09-17-2021, 03:19 PM	#24
kiwi_jono Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Christchurch, New Zealand Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,437	The main thing for me is overall weight as I walk a lot with my gear. So I love having the FF K-1 but I tend use the limited lenses (and other smaller lenses) when ever I can. And so I don't think balance is really a big problem with smaller lighter lenses, as the K-1 feels all day stable to me with them (to me anyway).

09-18-2021, 06:28 AM - 2 Likes	#26
Eric Auer Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2012 Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,211	My most stable setup is the 6456N with the 80-160mm F4.5. News crew at dusk, Kodak Portra 800

09-21-2021, 11:44 PM - 1 Like	#27
Jonathan Mac Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Madrid, Spain Posts: 10,894	Originally posted by luftfluss What browser are you using? I use Firefox on a PC, and an extension called "Exify" that displays EXIF info on the photo. Thanks for the tip - I see it's also available for Chrome. ---------- Post added 22-09-21 at 08:53 AM ---------- Seems like a non-issue for me, certainly not something to write an article about. It's hardly surprising that anything with the 1.5kg 28-70/2 feels front-heavy but if you can't handle the gear you use then either (A) you're holding it wrong, (B) you need to reconsider that gear or (C) you need to get yourself down to the gym and build a little muscle.

09-23-2021, 09:55 AM - 1 Like	#28
rdenney Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2018 Location: NoVA Posts: 635	Originally posted by Jonathan Mac …or (C) you need to get yourself down to the gym and build a little muscle. Just what I was thinking. Rick “who recently carried a 645z in hand on a 10-mile hike” Denney

09-23-2021, 01:12 PM	#29
sculptor666 Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: PA Photos: Gallery Posts: 675	it would be nice if the tripod foot of xxx lens on xxx camera was balanced so when i put the camera on a table, it's stable... otherwise, i don't understand why anyone would care about "balance"

09-24-2021, 09:31 AM - 1 Like	#30
kaseki Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2017 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,138	Originally posted by sculptor666 it would be nice if the tripod foot of xxx lens on xxx camera was balanced so when i put the camera on a table, it's stable... otherwise, i don't understand why anyone would care about "balance" Your question made me think a bit about this, and I think that a camera body/lens assembly mounted at the balance point on a tripod will be less susceptible to angular motion due to translational vibration than will an unbalanced configuration.