Travel Photography - Have you dumped the dSLR - and what to?

I love my dSPR (40d, several L glass/flash/etc) and the shots that come with it. But its never out. Only when we go somewhere special.

I would be interested in whether you have stopped using yours, and what did you get instead, OR do you have a carry around?

I am thinking of 2 options

1.sell it all and get a G10/pen/dlux4
2.get a PaS like the Leica CLUX3 and try and take the SLR when I can

Opinions welcome!!

I'd seriously consider option 1 if I were you.

Not a fan of having 2 cameras.

I have 2 camera's: a 50D and a P&S PowerShot S5.

The 50 is my primary camera. It's almost always out if its bag at home and is the first camera that I grab when I want to shoot something. The S5 is my backup and I keep it in a small, form fitting bag. I only use it when I have a specific need to travel light.

I need to try the camera first, this is the annoying part, I don't know anyone locally who would let me try for a holiday.

We are heading for london for a week or so, and I am going to buy the CLUX3 and take the normal camera bag.

This will be our first trip with our baby, so I am not sure how much extra hassle an SLR bag will be.

I will re-evaluate after the trip. The price I can get that camera at, I can re-sell on ebay if it doesn't work, or if I come to the realization that I dont need the SLR, but I need something better than the CLUX3.

I was hoping I could manage with a cell phone, but they are still not there for me. N86 is close, but not there.

Im sorry but its really about how serious of a photographer you are... no matter now good they get, those compact cameras are not a feasible DSLR substitute.

Under complex lighting/metering situations, if you need a wide variety of shooting options, need to follow kids quickly for sports, advanced bracketing, etc. etc.... you cannot go without a DSLR. Forget more "fun" issues like back curtain flash, advanced fireworks shooting, etc. etc.

Sorry for my bold comment... but while I suck at normal tech & IT issues, Ive been shooting photos since the early days of slide photography so I can hold my own when it comes to this subject... :D

Thanks, yeah, I have this feeling too. I guess I want something which is lighter to carry, maybe I just need a new lens :)

I have not really found a walkaround lens thats perfect, but for cities the 16-35L is pretty close.

I think I am going to try a point and shoot for the upcoming trip, take both, and have a look when I return.

I really dont think the SLR will go in the end, but I am curious to others input.

The G10 comes really close to what a dSLR will do, and you can get wide angle and tele lenses that attach quickly (easier than changing lenses on a dSLR). I know a couple pros who sometimes use their G10 on jobs.

It doesn't have the full dynamic range of a dSLR, so whites and highlights can burn out. You have to watch the histogram. You can set it to save the image simultaneously as jpg and raw, and use the raw to pull up the burnt out areas.

Ive been shooting photos since the early days of slide photography so I can hold my own when it comes to this subject... :D
Kodachrome 35mm slide film was introduced in 1936. If you've been using it since the early days, you're almost as old as Dovster, but at least you're younger than Cholula.

Ok... point taken on the start of slide photography.... I guess it was not that early... but its been a while nevertheless... 1982 to be exact... ;)

Have you looked at Micro Four-Thirds cameras such as the Panasonic GH-1? (DPreview posted a review of the GH-1 a couple of days ago. The link is still at the top of the home page.) The four-thirds sensor is smaller than a full-frame sensor but still a heck of a lot bigger than what you'll find in a P&S. The "Micro" part of MFT gets rid of the mirror, so no composing through a prism, which saves a lot more space and permits a body about half the depth of a traditional DSLR. Net effect a lot smaller and more portable, though still far from fitting into a regular pocket. One downside at this point is a relatively small range of lenses, compared to say Nikon DSLRs, but there are enough out there for most needs. Costs are comparable to entry-level DSLRs.

Just a thought, since if you're on the fence between two categories, something that sets out to be between those categories - and pretty much succeeds - could be the answer.

Ok... point taken on the start of slide photography.... I guess it was not that early... but its been a while nevertheless... 1982 to be exact... ;)

So you're not only not as old as Dovster and Cholula, you're not even as old as me. :D I started seriously shooting slide film around 1979 or 1980. My father, otoh, was using it in the late 1930's.

Last time I shot slide film was about 2 years ago, but for the most part I'm using the G9. I didn't go dSLR because of the portability issue, same reason I used to use a Rollei 35 instead of my Canons, the f1 and the fTb. The best camera in the world is useless if you don't have it with you at the moment, and the G9, like the Rollei (about the same size) is easy to carry all the time.

The eye is the most important piece of equipment, the hardware is secondary. Weegee with a Kodak Bantam would have shot rings around an amateur with a Hassleblad.

Im sorry but its really about how serious of a photographer you are... no matter now good they get, those compact cameras are not a feasible DSLR substitute.



I totally disagree. I see people with a dSLR who'd be much better off with a P&S, and I see pros with a dSLR who can do miracles with a GOOD P&S.

Some of them are mentioned here, but a nice compact Leica can become an amazing camera in the hands of a pro. Technology is at the point where many compact cameras can make better pictures than dSLR's did 4-5 years ago.

I have a moderately-priced Canon P&S to use as a carry-around when I don't want to lug the big rig. Between that, my 10-yr old's 20D/Sigma 18-250, my 5-yr old's Canon inexpensive P&S, and an old G2 laying around somewhere, we usually have something I can grab to shot with. Heck,. my Canon HD camcorder can shoot stills.

I can get decent images, in decent lighting conditions, with all but my 3.2MP camera phone.

No, I won't use them in low light, fast action, etc., etc., but they are usually adequate when I need them.

But dump the DSLR? Not a chance. It's needed for serious/dedicated work.

I totally disagree. I see people with a dSLR who'd be much better off with a P&S, and I see pros with a dSLR who can do miracles with a GOOD P&S.

Some of them are mentioned here, but a nice compact Leica can become an amazing camera in the hands of a pro. Technology is at the point where many compact cameras can make better pictures than dSLR's did 4-5 years ago.

Yes.... I agree that many DSLR users have no business with the things, but thats another discussion.

Also... I think you must compare apples to apples. If you compare a 4-5 YO DSLR vs. a current compact then I may agree, but if you compare them to one of the DSLRs with updated technology then its a different story.

IMHO, its all about the lazy factor..... DSLRs are complex and have a gazillion features, you have to read manuals and scratch below the surface... its a different ball-game.

Have you looked at Micro Four-Thirds cameras such as the Panasonic GH-1?

I'm following the micro 4/3s developments, and think they look very promising. How about the new Olympus EP-1 w/ a 17mm f2.8 pancake lens? That appears to be the closest digital equivalent to the wonderful Olympus Stylus Epic film camera. Add the expensive but tiny m4/3s 7-17mm zoom, and you have quite a setup.

I am not ready to buy into the format yet, but I am encouraged by these new cameras.

I have a Nikon D3 that I use primarily for work, and a D-Lux 4 which is my snapshot camera. For me, the holy grail of snapshot cameras will be when the sensor works as well in low light as the D3's. I've seen the new Olympus Pen but haven't had a chance to try it. If it performs as well as people say, I'll have a Leica for sale the next day.

I bought my Nikon D200 on the day it was released. 60,000 frames later it's still my camera of choice. (I have a Canon Powershot as well for those times when the D200 is impractical to sneak in to places.)

I hate using the P&S. It's a decent little camera, but I can't help but to find all of its faults whenever I take a pic.

My D200 will be with me forever. Or until I get a D700 - whichever comes first. :D

To be fair though, most of my shots on the D200 are in Program Mode which is full automatic. But I do enjoy:

1) The flexibility to do whatever I want whenever I want - Aperture mode, Shutter mode, matrix metering, spot metering ...

2) Speed. I don't often shoot at the full 5 fps, but sometimes I do. More often then not though I just enjoy the ability to go "click" whenever I want. I have yet to find a P&S that keep up with me.

3) Lens. I currently use the "everything lens" - 18mm - 200mm (27mm - 300mm in 35mm equivalent). It's a fantastic day-to-day lens but I have to admit that the 17mm - 55mm f2.8 is increasingly enticing.

In the end it all comes down to the right tool for the right job. If you find a dSLR too much, then by all means go for the P&S. It will be lightweight and most modern P&S give pretty decent quality shots.

For my tastes though, it's a dSLR and only a dSLR. Chacun son gout! :)

2) Speed. I don't often shoot at the full 5 fps, but sometimes I do. More often then not though I just enjoy the ability to go "click" whenever I want. I have yet to find a P&S that keep up with me.


+1

We still bring both. Still learning photography so sometimes, when time is of essence, we'll use the p&s to snap a photo just to make sure we get a decent shot of something. For some things, the p&s is better. For others, we need the dSLR.

Currently running a Nikon D200 and a Canon SD880

The G10 comes really close to what a dSLR will do, and you can get wide angle and tele lenses that attach quickly (easier than changing lenses on a dSLR). I know a couple pros who sometimes use their G10 on jobs.

It doesn't have the full dynamic range of a dSLR, so whites and highlights can burn out. You have to watch the histogram. You can set it to save the image simultaneously as jpg and raw, and use the raw to pull up the burnt out areas.


Kodachrome 35mm slide film was introduced in 1936. If you've been using it since the early days, you're almost as old as Dovster, but at least you're younger than Cholula.

The G10 is an incredibly capable camera, but it does not compare with a dSLR. While it is very fully featured (in fact, featurewise it surpasses many dSLRs) and you can take some very good photos with it, there are some crucial differences:

1) The sensor is considerably smaller than a DSLR
2) The viewfinder is inferior to DSLRs
3) The G10 has considerable shutter lag
4) The G10 has a continuous shooting speed of 0.7 fps vs. 4-8 fps with a modern DSLR

Especially the last three points, while not so widely discussed, are key for many photographers (including me). And the points are not about the G10 only, they hold true to most general purpose P&S cameras.

For me, the combination that I juggle with is a Nikon D300 with a ton of glass and a Canon SD870. I would not want to be without either one.

Cheers,
T.

everytime i leave the dlsr out of my luggage i regret it. it's bulky but sometimes you just see something wonderful and unexpected even as simple as a rainbow in an odd place...miss it and it's gone forever

I use the dSLR well ( I think). Certainly the shots I take are normally on Manual/Av and the portraits POP like nothing.

I love the bokeh on the portraits, and although I thought the DLUX4 would give similar effects, it seems not to.

For landscapes etc, a Point and shoot should be fine, but for people, dSLR wins every time.

After a lot of thought, I bought a better backpack which means I can take the SLR, and some lens, and I will pick up a point and shoot to try out.

everytime i leave the dlsr out of my luggage i regret it. it's bulky but sometimes you just see something wonderful and unexpected even as simple as a rainbow in an odd place...miss it and it's gone forever

Funny, I have the opposite experience. If I take my DSLR, it'll never leave my bag and I'll wonder why I carried a brick halfway around the world. ;)

I just take my DSLR around a lot; yeah, it's big and heavy, but it's a sunk cost and the quality is better than anything I've seen from a compact camera.

The only down side is that I don't have a single fast zoom - I have to choose between a fast prime (50/1.4 or 85/1.8) or slowish zoom (28-105/3.5-4). 99% of the time these days, I use the zoom, although for a while the 50mm was my walking around lens.

I've resisted getting the EF-S 17-85, but I think I probably will - not much chance of a full-frame camera in the next year or two, as much as I have been lusting after the 5D Mark II. Even if I had that and say a 24-105L, I'd probably still end up carrying the XTi since the current camera and lens would be a tolerable-to-replace loss while the 5D Mk 2 would not be.

Not dumped per se, I only take the dSLR while on vacation. For business travels, I pack a tiny Nikon Coolpix P5000. This is a very capable P&S but small enough to go in pants pocket. I do have a nice soft case that can go on a belt if need be.

Travel cameras preceding it in order were: Nikon Coolpix S7c (even smaller, 2007), Nikon Coolpix S1 (smallest, 2006), Kodak DX4530 (first 5MP, 2004-2005), Nikon Coolpix 880 (first real digital, 2001-2003), Olympus Stylus (last film P&S, most of 1990's). First digital was a Kodak DC25 and the pictures from it were useless.

I would be interested in whether you have stopped using yours, and what did you get instead, OR do you have a carry around?

Not only that I haven't dumped my dSLR, but I am trying to add EF 24/28-70L lens to the 2-3 I usually carry with me:

Canon EOS 1Dmk2N
Canon EF 17-40 f4
Canon EF 70-200 f4 IS [and I'd like to change it for f2.8 IS version]
Canon EF 50 f1.4
1-2 extra batteries and sometimes a charger.

I think I pretty much always use up my hand luggage allowance with this :D

I take both, P&S is another tool that I carry with me when DSLR just not practical (like last day run and dash shopping trip b4 heading back :D)

Normally in my bag
5D w/grip
50mm 1.4 (just drop it on the ground outside of Meiji Shrine couple days ago :() now foucs ring is jammed.
17-40 f4L
15mm fisheye
8mm fisheye for QTVR
24-105/100mm macro/135mm f2/70-200mm 2.8IS depends on where I am heading.

G9 for quick snap and video and place that needs to be absolute quiet.

NEVER!!!!!

I love DSLR (I now have a Canon EOS50D with a 10D and EOS 3 as backups Lots of L glass) I love the control and I am not bothered by the weight.

We do have a newer Canon PowerShot for when we just want a camera with us and no specific goals in mind.

I've got a Rebel XSi that I love for special events, and it takes amazing pictures, but for a short trip, or snapping a few family pictures, I carry around a Sony T77 (which for a compact P&S, takes great pictures).

I'm looking REAL hard at the new Panasonic DMC-GH1. It is one of the new hybrids that offer true HD video recording with all the controls of an SLR. It is a 4/3 camera and adapts to many legacy lenses with an adapter ring. It is a good way to utilize all the great lenses that many of us have. Some of the sample videos are amazing. A little pricey though.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicdmcgh1/

I think this is just the beginning of a new line of hybrids that will successfully having us carry just one VERY capable device.

50mm 1.4 (just drop it on the ground outside of Meiji Shrine couple days ago :() now foucs ring is jammed.

Completely, or just sticky?

My 50/1.4 was sticky for a while after a bad bonk, but smoothed out again after more use.

I'd seriously consider option 1 if I were you.

Not a fan of having 2 cameras.

I was not a fan of having 2 cameras, until I have 1 DSLR and 1 P&S. Now they go with me almost everywhere. When in tight quarters, or on plane, I pull out the P&S.

If the OP is really committed to change, why not just use your own phone?

Technology is at the point where many compact cameras can make better pictures than dSLR's did 4-5 years ago.

Completely disagree. Give me a 10D/20D or even a 5D (which was released in 2005) over a G10 any day of the week if I had to choose one.

The *only* advantage a P&S has over a dSLR is portability/size. The good ones have great picture quality (in plenty of light) but in terms of focus, shot-to-shot speed, noise, etc...they are no match for even 5 year old dSLRs especially if you have quality lenses attached.

Now with that said, having both IMO is the best of both worlds. On my recent Europe trip I had both a 20D (only brought two lenses: 24 & 50) and the G9. Took most of my snapshots during daylight hours with the G9 but once the sun started to dip low on the horizon the 20D *had* to come out. :)

About the only tangible feature I can think of that the P&S has that a dSLR doesn't is video...though if you have the new 5D mk II, Nikon D90, Nikon D5000 or Rebel TSi that isn't even true anymore....

The *only* advantage a P&S has over a dSLR is portability/size.

That's a huge advantage.

That's a huge advantage.

Only if that advantage outweighs its disadvantages with respect to what you intend to do...

I still have my Olympus OM1n with various lenses and would love to use it.............but when I lift the bag and feel the weight compared to my pocket sized digital there is only ever going to be one winner I'm afraid especially when travelling.

So as a true amateur, my biggest issue is shutter lag - and when you are a grandparent, it is especially important! Getting ready to go to Europe and usually shlep the dSLR. What P&S has the LEAST amount of shutter lag?

I've invested too much in my dSLR gear to dump them.
But, if I could, I would go for range finder cameras like Leica or Zeiss Ikon.
Not really ready for Hasselblad or other medium format camera yet.

So as a true amateur, my biggest issue is shutter lag - and when you are a grandparent, it is especially important! Getting ready to go to Europe and usually shlep the dSLR. What P&S has the LEAST amount of shutter lag?

Not sure about least, but the Canon SD990 has a optical-viewfinder-only "quick shot" mode that was much better than your average P&S when I tried it. Also, there are some rangefinder-style higher-end compact P&S that are supposed to be pretty fast - including the new Micro-4/3rds system one.

even tho my 40D+lens (28-135) is 1 whole kg over a my G7, i'd still pick it over anything else. especially sight seeing @ subrubs. (in city during the dat i can go with either)
Well, except in sushi dai (at Tsukiji mkt in tokyo), dont want to take care of the camera while enjoying. PnS will do!(or i wouldnt bring it if it was just me. my other half did)

oh well, there's always primes to cut down weight...

So as a true amateur, my biggest issue is shutter lag - and when you are a grandparent, it is especially important! Getting ready to go to Europe and usually shlep the dSLR. What P&S has the LEAST amount of shutter lag?

Isn't it funny... $5000 cameras have hardly any shutter lag. My suspicion is that at least partly, shutter lag is tied to the cost of the camera. It's not like manufacturers don't know how to eliminate lag. They choose to use it as a way to sell you on a higher model.

I have a Nikon D3 that I use primarily for work, and a D-Lux 4 which is my snapshot camera. For me, the holy grail of snapshot cameras will be when the sensor works as well in low light as the D3's. I've seen the new Olympus Pen but haven't had a chance to try it. If it performs as well as people say, I'll have a Leica for sale the next day.

I think you can sell your Leica now. The Olympus Pen sensor at 5.49MP/CM2 is right in the range of DSLRs and 1/4 the D-Lux4 pixel density. Still 4x D40, D700 pixel density but looks pretty nice by the numbers and early reviewers' comments.

Isn't it funny... $5000 cameras have hardly any shutter lag. My suspicion is that at least partly, shutter lag is tied to the cost of the camera. It's not like manufacturers don't know how to eliminate lag. They choose to use it as a way to sell you on a higher model.

They do know how to eliminate (or, to be precise, minimize) the lag, but it costs. But not 5000 bucks -- most DSLRs have practically no shutter lag no matter what the price.

Cheers,
T.

I think you can sell your Leica now. The Olympus Pen sensor at 5.49MP/CM2 is right in the range of DSLRs and 1/4 the D-Lux4 pixel density. Still 4x D40, D700 pixel density but looks pretty nice by the numbers and early reviewers' comments.

The Pen is undone by the current lens offerings and a few other features, imho. Yes you can use many other manufacturers lenses via adaptors but the 2x crop factor kills most wideangles.

But there's more cameras in the micro4/3 pipeline so things are definitely getting better ^

They do know how to eliminate (or, to be precise, minimize) the lag, but it costs. But not 5000 bucks -- most DSLRs have practically no shutter lag no matter what the price.

Cheers,
T.

Not only cost but size, the tiny batteries fitted in small camera bodies just don't have the energy to run fast processors and power large cache.

They do know how to eliminate (or, to be precise, minimize) the lag, but it costs. But not 5000 bucks -- most DSLRs have practically no shutter lag no matter what the price.

Cheers,
T.

3-5 year old DSLRs that now sell used for $250-400 don't have any noticeable shutter lag. The reason Point and Shoots do is that they don't have the larger batteries and capacitors that DSLRs do. It's not so much a matter of cost, as it's that those components have physical size and weight that precludes putting them into a camera that's less than an inch wide and weighs less than 8 ounces.

Micro 4/3 is about as small a footprint as can be made without any significant shutter lag.

It's not so much a matter of cost, as it's that those components have physical size and weight that precludes putting them into a camera that's less than an inch wide and weighs less than 8 ounces.

It's also a matter of getting the optics and sensor switched from "basically video, for viewfinder use" to "high quality still picture." With a DSLR (except in live view mode) you are typically focussing and getting the exposure set with a half-press before fully depressing the shutter button. With a P&S, in general, the user is not doing that (and some cheaper ones don't even support it) and even when it is, there is often a fine-focus and metering step that occurs after the button press.

Note that many Canon non-DSLRs use the same generation of DIGIC processor that the P&S models use, and they have somewhat-related firmware as some of the same "firmware tweak" package can be used. So it's not necessarily a matter of the CPU.

Bought Sigma's DP2 recently. its a quirky camera, low light issues abound, but the mega sensor on a P&S camera size body makes photos an absolute pleasure. Being a D70 owner when it was first introduced (until recently), i think the DP2 is an excellent compromise if you are not too worried about the zoom.

One issue i've had to deal with is the autofocus, especially in low light. it takes a couple of tries to get it right in close range.

I use my Canon 20D and a 28-300mm lens if I am going somewhere I think will be good opportunities. For example last week I drove Hwy #1 in California and a smaller camera just wouldn't get the job done.

If I am on business at a trade show or somewhere I think I won't be doing much picture wise I carry a Canon SD1100 in my computer case. It does a nice job of people and other minor stuff and it's nice to have something that small.

I can't see anyway around the two camera option for now.

picked up an olympus tough point and shoot. Figured I can use anywhere, it can be in bottom of bag, underwater etc.

will take SLR still. Recent photos reminded me just how amazing photos with the L's look :)

While I have a fuji 50fd as a P&S, My D300 is not leaving my side when I travel. I get more concerned about packing my photo stuff then my clothes.

I am going to China in October an you can bet the P&S will get little use!