| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/28/2011 01:12:17 AM · #1 |
I live in Colorado and I do quite a bit of backpacking, hunting, hiking and the like and my D-700 is just too big to take on some adventures. I was hoping you knowledgeable folks could give me some advice on a smaller camera.
I've been debating between a bridge long zoom type such as the Lumix DMC FZ40 and the Pen Micro 4/3 types. They each seem to have their own advantages and disadvantages and right now I'm leaning a little more toward the bridge type because of the added reach and all in one convinience. I have my D-700 for the serious stuff so I think a bridge might be the way to go. I'm not very interested in the compact type P&S.
So any advice or experience with these types of cameras would be very appreciated. Thanks |
|
|
|
07/28/2011 01:19:10 AM · #2 |
| Another option for backpaking is one of the water- and shock-proof P&Sm models (E.g. Canon D10) -- what you lose in long zoom you gain in survivability ... |
|
|
|
07/28/2011 01:28:39 AM · #3 |
when I backpack, about 20lbs goes to camera gear..
gotta pay to play
pentax does have a new 4/3 SLR mini system, but the sensor looks too small to be any good |
|
|
|
07/28/2011 01:32:21 AM · #4 |
Thanks for the advice. I'll check out the canon General.
N1, 20 lbs is just too much extra on some adventures. Remember I live in Colorado, it's steep, tall, and called the rocky mountains for good reason. |
|
|
|
07/28/2011 02:24:09 AM · #5 |
Canon S95 - no doubt, this is the ultimate* in lightweight shooting.
(*in a reasonable price range) |
|
|
|
07/28/2011 02:46:13 AM · #6 |
I take my D700 and my 16-35 with Lee gard filters in my backpack for hiking/ski touring/snowboarding ... and sometimes climbing.
It's heavy and you would prefer to take 2L of water instead of a (stupid?) camera, but it's tough and makes photos as usual... beautiful. |
|
|
|
07/28/2011 04:25:46 AM · #7 |
I, too, live in Colorado and do much the same. Cory is right about the S95, but for me, it's so small I'm not fond of it, as I was worried I would drop it. It is not very glove friendly, either. LX5 is much better in this respect, and still has great quality and is wider on the wide end by a bit (which means a lot to me for a camera I'm taking into the mountains). As for the waterproof options, there are better ones out there than the Canon offering, IMO. The TS3 is worth a look, but the Olympus ones are not. They tend to have mediocre image quality and inane controls. Fuji has the XP's, as well. The micro 4/3 of Olympus and Panasonic are worth a look and is a potentially great solution, and the Sony NEX might be too.
Myself? I take my D300 (w grip) usually, mounting the Tamron 28-75 or my 24 2.8 prime. Alternately, I'll take my 10-20 and 30 1.4 |
|
|
|
07/28/2011 06:22:55 AM · #8 |
| Nikon. Weather sealed, ruggedized chassy with rubberized coating. You could grab a used D200 body for hiking, D200 is an outstanding camera when its light outside for hiking. I bought a used D200 body from a mom and pop shop and it works great for about $450. |
|
|
|
07/28/2011 09:04:21 AM · #9 |
I have a Canon G11. The G12 is the current model. It uses the same lens and sensor as the S95 that Cory mentioned, but has more external switches, a swivel screen, and is physically larger, but still a compact that will fit nicely in the side pocket of a backback.
The sensors on these are larger than most compact cameras, though still smaller than that on a DSLR. Image quality of my G11 is excellent for a compact, though if you like to pixel-peep, you will find it is not quite up to DSLR level. And the S90/95 G11/12 can shoot RAW.
I also think the previously mentioned idea of an entry level, small body DSLR, is a good option.
Message edited by author 2011-07-28 09:57:07.
|
|
|
|
07/28/2011 09:46:46 AM · #10 |
I spend a lot of time outdoors backpacking, camping etc. I swear by my Canon D10. It's waterproof to 10m, shockproof and freezeproof. I can clip it to my backpack and just grab it to take a shot, rain, shine, sleet or snow.
This past February, I took it on a winter backpacking trip where the temps were down to -14F with no problems. I took it on my 3 day Land Navigation class. I've dropped it, dunked it, frozen it and even strapped it to a 4 wheeler in order to shoot video and had it fall off into a mudhole.
It's quite a bit bulkier than the S95, the controls aren't as flexible, but for a camera to use out in the woods, it can't be beat. |
|
|
|
07/28/2011 06:56:42 PM · #11 |
| Thanks everybody. You've given me some things to think about for sure. |
|
|
|
07/28/2011 10:30:03 PM · #12 |
| that is one of the primary reasons I recently bought an Oly Pen. but now having spent so much on it and seeing how delicate and nice it is I don't know if i dare to take it out on a hike this weekend. I'm afraid something might happen to it. may have to get a used, older one for rough terrain. |
|
|
|
07/28/2011 11:35:15 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by Yo_Spiff:
I have a Canon G11. The G12 is the current model. It uses the same lens and sensor as the S95 that Cory mentioned, but has more external switches, a swivel screen, and is physically larger, but still a compact that will fit nicely in the side pocket of a backback. .... |
Almost perfectly correct... The lens on your body is actually not quite as fast (f/2.0 vs f/2.8 - a full stop), and has a larger zoom range, ending at 135mm vs the S90's 105mm. :)
The other major thing is that the G11 does not have the front control ring that is found on the S90, S95 and G12 models. I love that front control ring, totally worth going for the S series or the G12 for that feature alone! |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/23/2024 02:25:19 PM EDT.
