Add group to favorites
Back to post list
Send new message to group Search:
Post Subject:
Which of these features would you give up in a travel camera
Which of these features would you give up in a travel camera
I am looking for an all-purpose travel camera which I can always keep
with me. I made a list of all the features I would want and DPreview
tells me it doesn't exit! Great.
So which of the following features would you give up in a travel camera
if it were your only camera:
1. Manageable size. Not necessarily light, but should fit a big pocket.
2. At least 28mm at the wide end.
3. Approx 200+ mm at the tele end. (No tripod.)
4. IS
5. Possibility of either aperture or shutter priority.
6. Optical View Finder.
OK, no such thing at present. Therefore which are one or two of the
most dispensable features in your experience and opinion?
[Just to survey the possibilities...
if I take out optical viewfinder, we have Lumix FZ18, which has not
been reviewed yet and seems too big.
Giving up the wide angle instead we have Canon G7, also large but
(barely) manageable. I do hate to give up 28mm though!
If I give up optical finder and settle for 100+ tele, then there are
good pocketable choices: Lumix Lx2, LX1; Leica D-Lux3, D-Lux2.
Giving up Aperture priority and the optical finder, I have Lumix TZ-3,
TZ-2, and a few Ricoh's]
Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
I am looking for an all-purpose travel camera which I can always keep
with me. I made a list of all the features I would want and DPreview
tells me it doesn't exit! Great.
So which of the following features would you give up in a travel camera
if it were your only camera:
1. Manageable size. Not necessarily light, but should fit a big pocket.
2. At least 28mm at the wide end.
3. Approx 200+ mm at the tele end. (No tripod.)
4. IS
5. Possibility of either aperture or shutter priority.
6. Optical View Finder.
OK, no such thing at present. Therefore which are one or two of the
most dispensable features in your experience and opinion?
[Just to survey the possibilities...
if I take out optical viewfinder, we have Lumix FZ18, which has not
been reviewed yet and seems too big.
Giving up the wide angle instead we have Canon G7, also large but
(barely) manageable. I do hate to give up 28mm though!
If I give up optical finder and settle for 100+ tele, then there are
good pocketable choices: Lumix Lx2, LX1; Leica D-Lux3, D-Lux2.
Giving up Aperture priority and the optical finder, I have Lumix TZ-3,
TZ-2, and a few Ricoh's]
Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Re: Which of these features would you give up in a travel camera
On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 06:14:17 GMT, RPS <rps@null.void> wrote:
>I am looking for an all-purpose travel camera which I can always keep
>with me. I made a list of all the features I would want and DPreview
>tells me it doesn't exit! Great.
>
>So which of the following features would you give up in a travel camera
>if it were your only camera:
>
>1. Manageable size. Not necessarily light, but should fit a big pocket.
Very important.
>2. At least 28mm at the wide end.
Somewhat important but easily created in any camera with wide-angle adapters, so
don't rule out the camera on this basis alone. A good telextender and wide-angle
adapter only take up another large pocket.
>3. Approx 200+ mm at the tele end. (No tripod.)
Very important when traveling. Even when traveling by kayak, bike, backpack or
other free-reign methods you won't be able to get close to every subject.
Besides, some subjects you shouldn't get physically close to for safety's sake.
The more zoom the better. Depending on your handheld skills and if "IS" is
involved.
>4. IS
Very important if you get a camera with a lot of zoom range on it. You won't be
setting up a tripod on every shot, even if you bring along a pocket-sized one.
IS will help you use that long-zoom range effectively while hand-holding a
camera. The counterpoint to this are some of the Fuji cameras that allow for
noise-free high-ISO imaging. Then you can just increase the ISO, allowing for
faster shutter-speeds to help compensate for those long-zoom handheld shots.
Having both, IS plus clean high-ISO, would be admirable.
>5. Possibility of either aperture or shutter priority.
Both important. You should make sure your camera has full manual modes if
possible. There are plenty of shots that no automatic setting on any camera can
capture. This is why so many are disappointed in their photography or in their
chosen camera that creates it. They expect the camera to think for them. Those
kind of people also expect that an automatic transmission on their car will turn
them into a professional race-car driver. They forget that they have to know
photography first to be able to take pictures right. Automatic modes on cameras
just provide rough approximations for the right exposures and settings, which
usually fail more often than they succeed.
>6. Optical View Finder.
This is the least important of all. A decent LCD/EVF is more than enough for
framing and watching for proper exposure. As well as being better in low-light
levels where the ambient light is amplified to help with focusing and framing.
Even better if you can swivel and tilt it so that you can take those group shots
with you in them. Or when reaching out of the window of a moving vehicle to get
the front of the vehicle in the view. Or extending your arm out over the edge of
a cliff that you dare not get any closer to. The ways that a tilting LCD can
come in handy are many. Though an electronic-viewfinder should have some way to
help you with seeing when things are in focus. They sometimes lack in that.
Hopefully the manufacturers will improve on LCD/EVF screen resolution in years
to come. But if you know your camera well enough you can easily work around that
limitation. So much will depend on your own skills rather than the hardware you
are holding 99.999% of the time. Hardware can enhance your photography skills
but never will it take the place of them.
>
>OK, no such thing at present. Therefore which are one or two of the
>most dispensable features in your experience and opinion?
>
>[Just to survey the possibilities...
>
>if I take out optical viewfinder, we have Lumix FZ18, which has not
>been reviewed yet and seems too big.
>
>Giving up the wide angle instead we have Canon G7, also large but
>(barely) manageable. I do hate to give up 28mm though!
>
>If I give up optical finder and settle for 100+ tele, then there are
>good pocketable choices: Lumix Lx2, LX1; Leica D-Lux3, D-Lux2.
>
>Giving up Aperture priority and the optical finder, I have Lumix TZ-3,
>TZ-2, and a few Ricoh's]
>
>Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 06:14:17 GMT, RPS <rps@null.void> wrote:
>I am looking for an all-purpose travel camera which I can always keep
>with me. I made a list of all the features I would want and DPreview
>tells me it doesn't exit! Great.
>
>So which of the following features would you give up in a travel camera
>if it were your only camera:
>
>1. Manageable size. Not necessarily light, but should fit a big pocket.
Very important.
>2. At least 28mm at the wide end.
Somewhat important but easily created in any camera with wide-angle adapters, so
don't rule out the camera on this basis alone. A good telextender and wide-angle
adapter only take up another large pocket.
>3. Approx 200+ mm at the tele end. (No tripod.)
Very important when traveling. Even when traveling by kayak, bike, backpack or
other free-reign methods you won't be able to get close to every subject.
Besides, some subjects you shouldn't get physically close to for safety's sake.
The more zoom the better. Depending on your handheld skills and if "IS" is
involved.
>4. IS
Very important if you get a camera with a lot of zoom range on it. You won't be
setting up a tripod on every shot, even if you bring along a pocket-sized one.
IS will help you use that long-zoom range effectively while hand-holding a
camera. The counterpoint to this are some of the Fuji cameras that allow for
noise-free high-ISO imaging. Then you can just increase the ISO, allowing for
faster shutter-speeds to help compensate for those long-zoom handheld shots.
Having both, IS plus clean high-ISO, would be admirable.
>5. Possibility of either aperture or shutter priority.
Both important. You should make sure your camera has full manual modes if
possible. There are plenty of shots that no automatic setting on any camera can
capture. This is why so many are disappointed in their photography or in their
chosen camera that creates it. They expect the camera to think for them. Those
kind of people also expect that an automatic transmission on their car will turn
them into a professional race-car driver. They forget that they have to know
photography first to be able to take pictures right. Automatic modes on cameras
just provide rough approximations for the right exposures and settings, which
usually fail more often than they succeed.
>6. Optical View Finder.
This is the least important of all. A decent LCD/EVF is more than enough for
framing and watching for proper exposure. As well as being better in low-light
levels where the ambient light is amplified to help with focusing and framing.
Even better if you can swivel and tilt it so that you can take those group shots
with you in them. Or when reaching out of the window of a moving vehicle to get
the front of the vehicle in the view. Or extending your arm out over the edge of
a cliff that you dare not get any closer to. The ways that a tilting LCD can
come in handy are many. Though an electronic-viewfinder should have some way to
help you with seeing when things are in focus. They sometimes lack in that.
Hopefully the manufacturers will improve on LCD/EVF screen resolution in years
to come. But if you know your camera well enough you can easily work around that
limitation. So much will depend on your own skills rather than the hardware you
are holding 99.999% of the time. Hardware can enhance your photography skills
but never will it take the place of them.
>
>OK, no such thing at present. Therefore which are one or two of the
>most dispensable features in your experience and opinion?
>
>[Just to survey the possibilities...
>
>if I take out optical viewfinder, we have Lumix FZ18, which has not
>been reviewed yet and seems too big.
>
>Giving up the wide angle instead we have Canon G7, also large but
>(barely) manageable. I do hate to give up 28mm though!
>
>If I give up optical finder and settle for 100+ tele, then there are
>good pocketable choices: Lumix Lx2, LX1; Leica D-Lux3, D-Lux2.
>
>Giving up Aperture priority and the optical finder, I have Lumix TZ-3,
>TZ-2, and a few Ricoh's]
>
>Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Re: Which of these features would you give up in a travel camera
DaveB <nocontact@noaddress . com > wrote:
: >1. Manageable size. Not necessarily light, but should fit a big pocket.
: Very important.
:
: >2. At least 28mm at the wide end.
: Somewhat important...
:
: >3. Approx 200+ mm at the tele end. (No tripod.)
: Very important
:
: >4. IS
: Very important
:
: >5. Possibility of either aperture or shutter priority.
: Both important.
:
: >6. Optical View Finder.
: This is the least important of all.
Keeping the tally...Giving up #s 2,6 the choices among compact cameras
would be: Panasonic FZ-7, FZ-8; Canon G7; Casio EX-V7.
DaveB <nocontact@noaddress . com > wrote:
: >1. Manageable size. Not necessarily light, but should fit a big pocket.
: Very important.
:
: >2. At least 28mm at the wide end.
: Somewhat important...
:
: >3. Approx 200+ mm at the tele end. (No tripod.)
: Very important
:
: >4. IS
: Very important
:
: >5. Possibility of either aperture or shutter priority.
: Both important.
:
: >6. Optical View Finder.
: This is the least important of all.
Keeping the tally...Giving up #s 2,6 the choices among compact cameras
would be: Panasonic FZ-7, FZ-8; Canon G7; Casio EX-V7.
Re: Which of these features would you give up in a travel camera
On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 06:14:17 +0000, RPS wrote:
> I am looking for an all-purpose travel camera which I can always keep
> with me. I made a list of all the features I would want and DPreview
> tells me it doesn't exit! Great.
>
> So which of the following features would you give up in a travel camera
> if it were your only camera:
>
> 1. Manageable size. Not necessarily light, but should fit a big pocket.
> 2. At least 28mm at the wide end.
> 3. Approx 200+ mm at the tele end. (No tripod.)
> 4. IS
> 5. Possibility of either aperture or shutter priority.
> 6. Optical View Finder.
>
> OK, no such thing at present. Therefore which are one or two of the
> most dispensable features in your experience and opinion?
>
> [Just to survey the possibilities...
>
> if I take out optical viewfinder, we have Lumix FZ18, which has not
> been reviewed yet and seems too big.
>
> Giving up the wide angle instead we have Canon G7, also large but
> (barely) manageable. I do hate to give up 28mm though!
>
> If I give up optical finder and settle for 100+ tele, then there are
> good pocketable choices: Lumix Lx2, LX1; Leica D-Lux3, D-Lux2.
>
> Giving up Aperture priority and the optical finder, I have Lumix TZ-3,
> TZ-2, and a few Ricoh's]
>
> Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
I can narrow it down even more than that for you. There is no small camera
with long zoom and optical viewfinder. Remove the viewfinder requirement
and there is still no small camera with a long zoom. BTW - why the optical
viewfinder requirement? I find that Electronic ViewFinders are fine if you
choose one with a little care. If you look through several models you'll
find that most are around 110k pixels - and to me they are very blocky - I
can't stand the thought of using one on a regular basis. Others are around
220k pixels (a la Kodak P series) and look quite nice. The advantage of
the EVF is that you'll see what you get. With an optical vf it may be
close, or not.
FWIW I started with a different set of criteria, but I wanted something
manageable for hiking/biking/showshoeing and still able to have a long
zoom for shooting wildlife. I settled on a Kodak P850 - from Kodak's
online store, refurb for $250 with printer dock. I would suggest you look
at some of the Kodak EVFs before you make a decision. If raw is at all
important, the Kodak P series does raw, tiff, jpeg and has full manual
mode - but it's larger than what you had in mind.
On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 06:14:17 +0000, RPS wrote:
> I am looking for an all-purpose travel camera which I can always keep
> with me. I made a list of all the features I would want and DPreview
> tells me it doesn't exit! Great.
>
> So which of the following features would you give up in a travel camera
> if it were your only camera:
>
> 1. Manageable size. Not necessarily light, but should fit a big pocket.
> 2. At least 28mm at the wide end.
> 3. Approx 200+ mm at the tele end. (No tripod.)
> 4. IS
> 5. Possibility of either aperture or shutter priority.
> 6. Optical View Finder.
>
> OK, no such thing at present. Therefore which are one or two of the
> most dispensable features in your experience and opinion?
>
> [Just to survey the possibilities...
>
> if I take out optical viewfinder, we have Lumix FZ18, which has not
> been reviewed yet and seems too big.
>
> Giving up the wide angle instead we have Canon G7, also large but
> (barely) manageable. I do hate to give up 28mm though!
>
> If I give up optical finder and settle for 100+ tele, then there are
> good pocketable choices: Lumix Lx2, LX1; Leica D-Lux3, D-Lux2.
>
> Giving up Aperture priority and the optical finder, I have Lumix TZ-3,
> TZ-2, and a few Ricoh's]
>
> Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
I can narrow it down even more than that for you. There is no small camera
with long zoom and optical viewfinder. Remove the viewfinder requirement
and there is still no small camera with a long zoom. BTW - why the optical
viewfinder requirement? I find that Electronic ViewFinders are fine if you
choose one with a little care. If you look through several models you'll
find that most are around 110k pixels - and to me they are very blocky - I
can't stand the thought of using one on a regular basis. Others are around
220k pixels (a la Kodak P series) and look quite nice. The advantage of
the EVF is that you'll see what you get. With an optical vf it may be
close, or not.
FWIW I started with a different set of criteria, but I wanted something
manageable for hiking/biking/showshoeing and still able to have a long
zoom for shooting wildlife. I settled on a Kodak P850 - from Kodak's
online store, refurb for $250 with printer dock. I would suggest you look
at some of the Kodak EVFs before you make a decision. If raw is at all
important, the Kodak P series does raw, tiff, jpeg and has full manual
mode - but it's larger than what you had in mind.
Re: Which of these features would you give up in a travel camera
On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 06:14:17 +0000, RPS wrote:
> I am looking for an all-purpose travel camera which I can always keep
> with me. I made a list of all the features I would want and DPreview
> tells me it doesn't exit! Great.
>
> So which of the following features would you give up in a travel camera
> if it were your only camera:
>
> 1. Manageable size. Not necessarily light, but should fit a big pocket.
> 2. At least 28mm at the wide end.
> 3. Approx 200+ mm at the tele end. (No tripod.)
> 4. IS
> 5. Possibility of either aperture or shutter priority.
> 6. Optical View Finder.
>
> OK, no such thing at present. Therefore which are one or two of the
> most dispensable features in your experience and opinion?
>
> [Just to survey the possibilities...
>
> if I take out optical viewfinder, we have Lumix FZ18, which has not
> been reviewed yet and seems too big.
>
> Giving up the wide angle instead we have Canon G7, also large but
> (barely) manageable. I do hate to give up 28mm though!
>
> If I give up optical finder and settle for 100+ tele, then there are
> good pocketable choices: Lumix Lx2, LX1; Leica D-Lux3, D-Lux2.
>
> Giving up Aperture priority and the optical finder, I have Lumix TZ-3,
> TZ-2, and a few Ricoh's]
>
> Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Canon PowerShot A710 IS
On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 06:14:17 +0000, RPS wrote:
> I am looking for an all-purpose travel camera which I can always keep
> with me. I made a list of all the features I would want and DPreview
> tells me it doesn't exit! Great.
>
> So which of the following features would you give up in a travel camera
> if it were your only camera:
>
> 1. Manageable size. Not necessarily light, but should fit a big pocket.
> 2. At least 28mm at the wide end.
> 3. Approx 200+ mm at the tele end. (No tripod.)
> 4. IS
> 5. Possibility of either aperture or shutter priority.
> 6. Optical View Finder.
>
> OK, no such thing at present. Therefore which are one or two of the
> most dispensable features in your experience and opinion?
>
> [Just to survey the possibilities...
>
> if I take out optical viewfinder, we have Lumix FZ18, which has not
> been reviewed yet and seems too big.
>
> Giving up the wide angle instead we have Canon G7, also large but
> (barely) manageable. I do hate to give up 28mm though!
>
> If I give up optical finder and settle for 100+ tele, then there are
> good pocketable choices: Lumix Lx2, LX1; Leica D-Lux3, D-Lux2.
>
> Giving up Aperture priority and the optical finder, I have Lumix TZ-3,
> TZ-2, and a few Ricoh's]
>
> Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Canon PowerShot A710 IS
