I kinda have grip envy (don't have one) but hard to rationalize.
My thoughts -
1) 400D crop is a great small camera. The whole point of compact size is to keep it manageable. Why on earth bolt on a ruddy great battery pack to the bottom? The grip will occupy space in the camera bag which could be allocated to other more important kit, like lenses.
2) Grip seems to be mainly a heap of heavy expensive batteries. I've never had a battery run out on me. In fact, I did 10 days in Vietnam on one charge. Extra batteries can be carried in a bag - why strap them to your body?
3) People argue a grip balances heavy lenses. I reckon on heavy lenses the balance point is in the middle of the lens somewhere; that may be the best place to hold them. What do people do with 400mm lenses? Strap lead bricks to the bottom of the grip?
4) People argue grip helps them hold the camera body better. I've never had a problem or issue. I guess my hands are average size and dexterity so no complaints.
5) People argue they can take portrait orientation photos easier with the grip controls. I've never had a problem. About half my photos are portrait.
6) Grips cost a fortune! For a plastic box with a couple wires, the price of the Canon grip is just outrageous relative to the camera+lens price (about half or more).
7) In the film days, we strapped on a device which looked identical to a grip, called an "autowinder". It allowed us to advance the film and reset the shutter automatically, rather than by hand. Autowinders were used by professionals who needed the the ability to shoot a high frame rates. Because they were used by professionals, they became cool and desirable add-ons for amateurs (like most of us!). Modern DSLRs don't need auto-winders, but the grip lives on as a bulky bolt-on to the camera base which makes it look more "professional".
So, what are your views? Are grips legitimate accessories or just vain wannabe nonsense? Anyone buy a grip then realize it was undesirable?
Thanks,
Ben




