Travel camera advice

ChrisRoss wrote:

Kari Post wrote:Disclaimer: I haven't read all the responses, just the original post. I am also not up to date on the newest technologies, but I wanted to share my experiences with advanced small cameras.

One of the gripes I had with the smaller systems was even thought it was possible to manually control the exposure, those settings were often buried in menus and it wasn't easy to quickly select aperture and shutter speed and shoot - you always had to dive into at least one menu to adjust one parameter. Hopefully this has changed.

I think you must be using different mirrorless cameras to what I'm used to, no experience with the Sony's, but I use Olympus now for underwater work and the ease of use is great and extremely customisable.  You basically have two dials which you can assign any function to  one at the shutter finger and the other at your thumb.  You can have shutter speed and aperture on the dials and then flick a switch to get ISO on one and exp comp on the other dial.  You can also set it up so that in Av you aperture on one and exp comp on the other and Tv could shutter speed and exp comp.  Changing modes is a lockable dial.   You rarely have to dive into the menus except setup custom functions or format a card. 

Thanks for the update. I've never used Olympus and I'm certain the technology has changed quite a bit since my last foray into a micro 4/3rds system probably 6-7 years ago now. It's good to know the usability of these cameras has improved, as I would expect they would, and I'm glad someone with current experience is giving advice on here and tempering my antiquated knowledge.

I guess the main thing for me is that I find the application of a small camera system to be really limited. There are rarely/never times when I want to be serious about photography and cannot take my DSLR, and for the times I don't want to be serious, my iPhone or GoPro will do (the GoPro is one of my favorite super portable cameras due to its shock and water proofness, small form factor making it super easy to take selfies with, and the fact that it can be voice activated; its not a high resolution pro camera, but its a super fun camera). In the event that I wanted an option more portable than a DSLR and capable of better image quality than my phone, I'd probably look at an advanced point-and-shoot/all-in-one option again, preferably one with as large a sensor as I can get. I find they are more compact and therefore more portable, and not having to buy or fiddle with external lenses helps keep your investment in a different system from spiraling out of control.

For the OP, I think the main thing to think about is how much you might use your new camera/system. If there are a lot of situations in which you think a new system will fit a niche your current systems don't, then go for it. But if the application of a new camera is limited to annual vacations or a few very specific and uncommon situations, you are probably better off just using what you have or renting a camera/system, rather than investing in equipment you will rarely use and for which the technology will become outdated before you get your money's worth from it.

Kari Post wrote:[snip] I am also not up to date on the newest technologies, [snip]

I think small mirrorless camera and newer compact technology systems are tempting, but nothing beats a DSLR. [snip]

You definitely is not up to date on the newest technologies.

I agree, i think the EM-1 MkII with the 12-100/f4 is really hard to beat as a travel kit.

DChan wrote:

Kari Post wrote:[snip] I am also not up to date on the newest technologies, [snip]

I think small mirrorless camera and newer compact technology systems are tempting, but nothing beats a DSLR. [snip]

You definitely is not up to date on the newest technologies.

You're my favorite type of person and why I hate the internet. Perhaps you should stick to trolling social media networks and not a community designed to support and educate other photographers.

Kari Post wrote:

DChan wrote:

Kari Post wrote:[snip] I am also not up to date on the newest technologies, [snip]

I think small mirrorless camera and newer compact technology systems are tempting, but nothing beats a DSLR. [snip]

You definitely is not up to date on the newest technologies.

You're my favorite type of person and why I hate the internet. Perhaps you should stick to trolling social media networks and not a community designed to support and educate other photographers.

You hate people agreeing with you...on something

The original poster planned the trip for April; you responded in May

You had out-dated info on mirroless cameras, and yet you believed you could educate others on mirrorless camera vs dslr.

I'd suggest if you consider mirrorless, specifically m4/3, I'd go with the Olympus E-m1 mark 2. I've used m43 for a few years, and until the Mark 2 came along, I felt they were very niche products, not general purpose machines. With the Mark2, I think the format can play in the same league as a DSLR. No, you will not get ISO6400 results as well as bigger sensors, but up to 1600, it performs very well.
What's nice about m43 is that you can build a kit covering everything from full frame equivalents of 14mm to 840mm that will fit in a small backpack. Olympus has some top notch glass in the line up too.
As mentioned previously, the mark 2 with the 12-100(24-200 full frame equivalent) is a great combo and will cover a lot of ground. The 300f4 with or without the 1.4x makes for a great bird camera as well.
The Sony A6000 is an excellent inexpensive alternative as well. Not up to the 6300 or 6500 level of performance, but it can be purchased very inexpensively.

DChan wrote:

Kari Post wrote:

DChan wrote:

Kari Post wrote:[snip] I am also not up to date on the newest technologies, [snip]

I think small mirrorless camera and newer compact technology systems are tempting, but nothing beats a DSLR. [snip]

You definitely is not up to date on the newest technologies.

You're my favorite type of person and why I hate the internet. Perhaps you should stick to trolling social media networks and not a community designed to support and educate other photographers.

You hate people agreeing with you...on something

The original poster planned the trip for April; you responded in May

You had out-dated info on mirroless cameras, and yet you believed you could educate others on mirrorless camera vs dslr.

D Chan,... You need to calm down.  The site is about helping people and moving forward, not making snippy and cryptic comments.

More from Scott etc, less from this.  

thank you and good day. 

david fletcher wrote: D Chan,... You need to calm down.  [snip]

If there was anyone who was not calm, I can assure you that it wasn't me.  

Have a nice day !

One thing else re mirrorless I should mention. Only the latest bodies by Sony and Olympus have higher capacity batteries. The old cells only allowed for a couple of hundred photos before depletion. Even fewer shots if you are a heavy chimper or spend a lot of time with the camera on without taking images(composing, etc.). Maybe not a deal breaker, but be prepared and carry lots of extras.

david fletcher wrote:

DChan wrote:

Kari Post wrote:[snip] I am also not up to date on the newest technologies, [snip]

I think small mirrorless camera and newer compact technology systems are tempting, but nothing beats a DSLR. [snip]

You definitely is not up to date on the newest technologies.

D Chan,... You need to calm down.  The site is about helping people and moving forward, not making snippy and cryptic comments.

More from Scott etc, less from this.  

thank you and good day. 

DChan, let me help you.

"Kari it does sound like it's been a while since you've used these smaller advanced camera systems. You even said so yourself! You may want to look into them again. The technology has sure improved a lot and I would argue that they are comparable to DSLRs these days."

Or perhaps look at Chris Ross's response. He offers an opposing viewpoint in a way that helps clarify current technologies but isn't aggressive and doesn't attack me just for having a different experience than his.

Comments like the one you made aren't helpful and add nothing to the conversation. They are either intended to be hurtful, or incredibly poorly thought out. I'm not sure whether the incorrect grammar was an oversight or intentionally used to mock me, but based on your comment earlier in the thread (which uses correct subject/verb agreement throughout and actually provides helpful information related to the original topic) it seems like your entire comment towards me was mean spirited and this forum really isn't the place for that.