The weight is an important feature: Cast iron has higher heat capacity and won't lose heat as fast when food is added. This is why cast-iron should be your go-to pan when searing a steak, for example.

The downside is that they take longer to heat, of course, so other pans can be more suitable for some cooking tasks.

Cast iron also has an excellent use case in which you can do any searing and such on the stove, then transfer it directly to an oven to finish. This is the secret to making S-tier steak.

Reverse sear is even better; by going oven-first you dry out the surface and get a better sear.

I look forward to trying this out!

> Cast iron also has an excellent use case in which you can do any searing and such on the stove, then transfer it directly to an oven to finish.

To be fair, lost of pans (not non-stick) can be used this way, it's not a unique feature of cast iron.

This is true, but it's also true of a lot of other non-cast iron cookware. Lots of pans are oven-proof.

It also heats very evenly, eliminating hot and cold spots.

Cast iron is not ideal for even heating, it's a myth.

http://www.cookingissues.com/2010/02/16/heavy-metal-the-scie...

Cast iron has low thermal conductivity. You can have oil smoking hot on a cast iron pan, but you can still hold the handle.

Buy old pans at yard sales if you can find them. They are much lighter and much more refined/polished compared to the new mass produced pans.

You should try a carbon steel skillet: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-suTmUX4Vbk&t=

Have you considered carbon steel skillets? They're not as worry free and have less heat retention than cast iron, but they're also much lighter and can be seasoned to a non-stick finish.

Consider it strength training. For my part I don't trust non-stick pans; the coating flakes off into your food over time and who knows what happens to it in your body.

I think I'm going to end up going stainless. Hits the sweet spot in terms of durability, safety, convenience, and weight.

Stainless 3-ply with Aluminum in the middle is perfect for even heating and indestructibility. It's not quite as non-stick as cast iron though.

Although it seems like the ideal on paper, stainless heats unevenly and sticks. IMO cast iron is ideal, albeit heavy.

Most of the stovetop cooking I do is just heating up rice or noodle dishes that I make in big batches. Those I make with big cast iron dutch ovens. The enameled ones are awesome.

For that stainless is a good choice. I usually use cast iron to fry, or toast things on the stove top, so sticking and even heat are important. Stainless is useful in a bunch of other areas though. Basically all my cookware is white stainless, or cast iron, not a fan of synthetic coatings.

Have you thought about copper?

Can be more expensive than stainless and has the same issues with acidic sauces (ie, tomato based), but it heats up really well, and you can get it pretty thick for a little more heft.

Plus, it looks nice (especially if you can find some antique French pieces).

Stainless is nice, it only loses on thermal mass and non-stickness. But if what you want is food, not perfection, it doesn't narrow your options much, and is much easier to maintain.

My skillets almost never leave the stovetop. Other than soups and sauces, everything I do on the stovetop, I do in cast iron anyway, and I use one every morning for my eggs. I try to rotate which one I fry eggs in because I find that eggs improve the condition of the pan.

Which makes it ideal for induction ranges, I will say. It's also one of the reasons it's still possible to buy a secondhand cast-iron pot or pan that's 100+ years old.

There are a number of cast iron pans out there that are lighter but you'll need to pay more for them and look for them specifically. Try searching for Field or Stargazer pans.

Also some very interesting-looking Iwachu pans from Japan[1], though I haven't tried one yet...

1: http://www.core77.com/posts/39670/Iwachu-Skillets-Effortless...

“Really heavy” is generally a positive trait in cookware.