Trekking through Central America..dSLR vs Digicam

[ray_joyce]

I'm getting ready for a two month trip backpacking on a shoestring throughout

Central America. I'm debating between brining 350d with a 24-105mm, or picking

up a digicam and just brining that.

 

I just wanted to get any advice or suggestion from people who have done this

type of traveling with their dslr. I'm afraid I won't get nearly as many shots

with my 350d as I would with a digicam. It seems discrete and dslr don't exactly

go together...and theft is always a concern. The G7 looks interesting, but

without RAW, it's really not an option. Weight and simplicity are concerns, so

bringing both really isn't an option. I'd love to hear any strategies or advice.

Thanks

Ray

[miklosphoto]

I had the same dilemma but in the Caribbeans. My chioce was then a film SLR versus my 5D. I figured if something happens to my film camera I can take that hit. Came back with 30 rolls of film and was enjoying every moment spent photographing with my EOS 3.

So just want to suggest that film is a good option in such case. And it is way much better quality than any point-and-shoot digital.

Miklos

[w_t1]

If sticking with digital, I'd get a P&S (Canon) that takes AA batteries. "On a shoestring" means you're away from power and running water? No raw but if you know the limitations you can get decent pics. (check out user Wilson Tsoi here for a standard to shoot for) Or get a used G6 for raw, but then you are faced with re-charging batteries. Personally, if it was me, I would take a digicam, and a small film cam for black and white.

[brucecyr]

Problem with a DSLR is protection against the elements, like moisture, dust and mud. A digicam isn't necessarily more resilient, but it does represent a smaller potential loss in case of disaster :-(

 

If you knew more about the area and what you'd like to capture, that might be a factor in making a decision -- unless there's something important that requires a DSLR, then the nod goes to digicam.

[buck_rogers1]

I think you need to ask yourself what is the purpose of the trip and what will you do with the photos afterward. If you are tripping to photograph and plan on printing big and selling the prints the Rebel has it. OTOH, tripping to experience and relax and learn, take a small digicam. In reality, you're probably somewhere along a continuum between the two options.<p>When I got my first digital I traveled through Brasil for a month and couldn't bear to take the digital. I took an Elan with a bag of provia. I didn't like my slides as much when I got home because I was limited on number of exposures but when my hard drive crashed the next year, I was glad I still had the slides.<p>The Elan was $100 used and worth every penny. You've got a beautiful lens that would be a shame to leave behind. <p>FWIW, this summer I spent two months in SE Asia with my 30d, 85, 35, 17-40 and 70-200 lenses and never had a problem with any criminal or natural elements.

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

I'd chose a film camera - and would mail off the exposed film along the way. I guess you could do the same with CF cards, just in case disaster strikes and you lose your camera to theft or accident.

 

I've never liked having all of my photos in one place . . .

[barb_rowland]

I used this traveling, but had juice for the battery charger.

Panasonic Lumix, DMC-TZ3S,

NEW! Lumix? 7.2-Megapixel Digital Camera with 10x Optical Zoom, MEGA Optical Image Stabilizer & High Sensitivity Mode, Silver, around $300.

Perfect for travel with 2.5 screen, 28mm-280. Leica dc lens. Large LCD.

[jeff_schneider]

If photographing this area is important to you, take the best equipment you can carry. Life is short. Cameras can be replaced, and probably nothing bad will happen to your gear anyway.

[savas_kyprianides]

G7 exposure control allows the photographer to dispense with raw and obtain excellent in-

camera jpegs. Just don't try to create marvelous works of art with the jpeg file. But properly

exposed, which the camera makes easy, results in very nice photos that print remarkably

well.

[amol]

Perhaps you should take both. The 350D is a small light camera. I think, it would be safe to take the 350D and a P&S. The P&S will make a good back-up, just in case. And for the times you don't feel like using the DSLR, you can use the P&S. And for higher quality, important, artistic shots you can use the DSLR.

 

Amol

[damian_tinsley]

If your gear is insured, then the issue really comes down to weight and convenience, although Jeff is right in that *probably* nothing bad will happen to your kit on the trip.

 

You might remember that the 24mm end is not really wide enough for a 'one-lens-to-do-it-all' on your 350D. To that extent a digicam with a wider wide end would perhaps serve better and be smaller and lighter into the bargain, although you lose image quality. My guess though, is that if RAW is that important to you, you will be itching to find a way to tote along the 350D and good glass. For the low light the IS will be invaluable if you decide to go that way.

 

If you are going to be doing some moderately strenuous stuff then I would suggest a CCS pouch big enough for the body & lens. I have hoofed around Australia, Peru and Indonesia with a full sized SLR and a couple of lenses. None of the climbimg around or river stuff bothered me or it, although obviously complete immersion of the pouch is a baaaad idea. The CCS stuff can be belted to you, shoulder strapped etc. and doesn't get in the way too much. You could also attach it to the waist belt of a rucksack for easy access, if backpacking really does mean yomping through the jungle for days on end with all your worldly possessions on your back. Mine is now so dusty it doesn't attract attention at all.

 

That said, even I wasn't going to be getting the attached shot with a 20D and L glass attached to it - but I figured that I could take the loss of a 4MP P&S without breaking down in tears!<div></div>

[adam_buteux]

depends on whether you will be hiking or not. Weight weight and weight is the key here

[brucecyr]

Damian,

 

Photo is almost as good as the lead in! Guess you weren't doing the whole trek on foot :-)

[kin_lau]

A 350D plus a smaller lens like the Sigma 17-70 or Canon 17-85IS is quite discreet.

 

Otherwise, I would suggest the Olympus Stylus 770 SW. It's very small, waterproof to 10m, shockproof to drops of 1.5m, crushproof to 100kg. Biggest problem is no RAW.

[phil_marion]

I couldn't imagine traveling without my 30D and 3 lenses - and that included Rio de Janiero. I don't fret about losing my gear. If I was worried about that then I'd have only great shots of my backyard. I guess i'd have to be heavily in to macro- LOL.

Bring both cameras - take the lighter one when you assume the risk is too great to be with the less discrete one.

Don't be motivated by fear - you'd never leave home or even step on a plane.

[iainwilson]

Ray, if this is a once in a lifetime chance then take the DSLR. I was faced with a similar question when i went skiing. The only thing i will say is, equipment can be replaced, memories can't, don't miss the opportunity!