Originally Posted by
BiziBB
Firstly, thank you for making this forum possible; right now I'm considering a sub-SLR camera & tripod (vs. a basic DSLR, but don't like the extra weight inconvenience w. travel).
Have been very happy with my Canon S1 IS but it was stolen recently. Canon might have a new model (S4?) coming out, but I'm unsure if it is available here in the next few weeks.
Given the smaller, lighter package of these 10+ zoom lens cameras, how much quality am I missing out on, compared to basic DSLR cameras, given I'd only use the standard lens?
Aside from the choice of camera, what else should I bring to get some great travel photos? I like the idea of the GorillaPod, but are there other, better options?
Photography will be a mix of scenic shots from hikes and rafting, scenic lookouts and wherever else I should take photos, from our accommodations and tours all around BI, Kauai and Oahu, including night shots of the volcanic activity, if these photos are any good.
Not forgetting some great HNL Do pics and a few photos for trip reports.
Is there a thread buried somewhere on making the most of camera and tripod, with smaller 'wannabe'
almost-DSLR cameras?
Finally, I have been offered a camera as a 'gift' from Dubai, if this is cost effective. Any comments?
Please move/delete/comment on this post if it does not belong here. My understanding is that this new sub-forum can encompass
'talk' about everything that goes into creating travel photography.
Thank you,
Mahalo!
One of the biggest shortcomings of the average point and shoot camera is that it can't get very wide-angle. In 35mm film terms, your average P&S doesn't get any wider than 28-35mm. The kit lenses that come with the Nikon DSLRs (and Canon, I think) are equivalent to 27mm at the wide end. However, you can get a lens which is the equivalent of 15-30mm. That's really wide. Personally, about 90% of my shooting is done from 27-75mm. My lens is the equivalent of 27-300mm.
(I keep talking about "equivalents" because most digicams have different sized sensors. So, to make fair comparisons, I'm talking about what it would look like on a 35mm film camera. For most non-pro DSLRs, you take the focal length on the lens and multiply by 1.5.)
To address your tripod thoughts, a Gorillapod is handy in certain applications. There's no substitute for a good solid real tripod though. If you don't have something around to wrap the Gorillapod on, you'll be shooting on your stomach. I have Giottos MT9160 legs ($150) and a Manfrotto 468MG ballhead ($300). You don't need to spend that much, though - look at either Benro or Giottos products - you can probably find a decent head/legs combo for under $150. Any tripod you see at BestBuy isn't worth it.
Night shots at the volcano - depends on the lava flow. I was there in Feb 2006, and the lava flow was pretty low at that point - even at night, it was so dim it took a ~5 second exposure, so it just looked like an orange blob. I did get an OK shot of the smoke plume during the day.
Originally Posted by
manneca
It really all depends on how creative you want to get. As I understand it, the sensors on the DSLRs are physically bigger, giving you more picture for the same number of pixels. (I really don't understand it, but everyone tells me bigger is really better.)
I have a canon EOS 1Ds Mark 11 (the one with the full size sensor). It is heavy and the lenses are heavy. It is a bear to drag around. I take it when I travel because I love to take good travel pictures.
Ah, a 1D shooter - hardcore.
The larger sensors basically means that you get less noise. Say you've got a 6-megapixel sensor in your little P&S. That sensor is probably 8mm in it's long dimension. My D70s's sensor is 24mm in its longest dimension. That means each pixel is 3x larger in each dimension, which means it has 9x the light gathering area of the P&S. Your 1D has about 20x the light gathering area, hence much better sensitivity when it's dark.