Best ballance between qiality, versalility and weight/size?

[everexplore]

<p>I am not new to photography that's why I realize my question will probably remain unanswered or will have too many contradicting answers but I still have to ask:<br>

What camera (and lenses) offers the best ballance between quality, versatility and weight/size when you go on long trips: multi-day traveling, mountain hiking, backbacking, etc.?<br>

So far I have been usng an ultra-zoom camera (panasonic FZ18 and others before that) because of the versatility and range I get in a relatively compact and lighweight body. I shoot mostly landscapes with some occasional portraits and wildlife.<br>

The problems I have are all related to the small size of the sensors all these cameras have:<br>

- Small dynamic range (washed out skies and dark shades with no detail)<br>

- Usable ISO up to 400<br>

- Not very shallow DOF (not good for portraits)<br>

- Terribly slow focus (not good for wildlife)<br>

For the reasons above I want to move to a camera system with bigger sensor. My problem is that by doing that I will have to sacrifice some of the advantages of the ultrazoom compacts. I will either have to put up with more weight or will have to put up with carrying more than one lens (risking to get dust and humidity in the camera while switching, wasting time, etc.) ot both.<br>

I thought that the new Micro 4/3 system (Panasonic GH1 and Olympus E-P1) will be the answer to my needs but so far it seems both have some issues I don't quite like:<br>

- GH1 is not really compact, together with the 14-140 kit lens weights about the same as Nikon D60 with 18-200 and costs SOOO much more ;-(<br>

- Olympus E-P1 looks cool and is really small but lacks an EVF which will make it hard to use in bright light. It's focus is also reportedly much slower that that of GH1. Plus there are not many micro 4/3 lenses on the market yet and putting a big lens through adaptor on the small E-P1 defeats the purpose of the "micro" concept ;-)</p>

<p>So what camera/lens combination can you recommend if your priorities were set like this:<br>

1) DSLR image quality<br>

2) Small size/weight<br>

3) Preferably one lens, two are acceptable if they are small and lightweight</p>

<p>Those of you who travel a lot (especially in the mountains): what is your favorite camera set up ?</p>

<p>Thanks!</p>

[SCL]

<p>My response, which really differs from your basic premise, is to use a Leica rangefinder and film with 2 lenses. My 2nd choice, using most of your parameters would be a high-end point & shoot rather than a DSLR. SLR/DSLR lenses by definition aren't very small and lightweight.</p>

[DickArnold]

<p>Although i have other heavier gear, I also have a Canon XTi DSLR with an 18-55 IS lens. The body has a built in flash and it weighs 2.2 lbs and the lens weighs 7 ozs. The XTi used is about 500 and I just paid 150 dollars new for the lens. The pictures are surprisingly good and the IS is very handy. Other Canon bodies in that weight range are the XSi and the newly announced Xii that also takes movies. I keep my XTi in the car and all my other stuff in the house. </p>

[peter_popp1]

<p>You might want to check out the new (soon to be available) Pentax K-7. I think it is tough to beat on the features/capability vs size curve, with an excellent lineup of lenses including some compact but pricey primes.</p>

[nicholas_fiduccia1]

<p>Have a look at the Pentax K7, especially if you like shooting with primes. Alternatively, the E620 from Olympus with some of their high quality zooms. The advantage to the Pentax system is most cameras in their lineup are weather-sealed where you will need to purchase the Olympus E3 to have the same level of weather-sealing. </p>

[Two23]

<p>I've come to think that the ultimate travel combo might be the Nikon 5000D (or D60,) Nikons 16-85mm VR and 70-300mm VR. The sensor on the cameras is the same as on the much larger D300, and ISO is usable up to 1600, maybe 3200 for some shots. The lenses are optically very good, share the same filter size (polarizer,) and the VR really works & cuts down need for tripod. It's tough to beat the versatility of quality zooms when you want compactness. I too am into wilderness & adventure travel and have just started carrying an even lighter/smaller set up. I use a Nikon D80 (because I already had it, LOL!), and Nikons 18-55mm VR & 55-200mm VR. These lenses also share same filter size (52mm), are optically pretty good, and best of all are cheap--like me! If I drop one down the side of a glacier, I'm only waving bye-bye to about $150. Throw in a compact Nikon SB-400 flash and you have it! Those two lenses on a 5000D or D60 would offer even better performance and a smaller package. I would stick with Nikon or Canon because you have MANY more options for lenses, flash, and so on.<br>

Kent in SD</p>

[stemked]

<p>I'm a Pentax person and would only add my voice to the K-7 chorus.<br>

Regarding the lens choice though. You can get a 'super zoom' (like 18-250mm; 450g) as a single lens, but these certainly are compromises, they will generally have some distortion on the wide side and not razr sharp on the long side. And they will be fairly slow. That is why serious photographers HAVE to bring multiple lenses with them. If you want landscapes then a good prime can be very light. Wildlife means many things to different people, to me it usually means at a minimum a 400mm lens. I like macro too, usually a 100mm lens.<br>

Pentax you could do something like a 21mm f3.5 (145g) + 50-200 f4.5-5.6 (235g). A decent range anyway.</p>

[craig_meddaugh]

<p>This sort of decision is about priorities. The first question is: Are you hiking for the sake of photography or simply to be outdoors? The second question (which of course depends on the first): How much are you willing to sacrifice in terms of lens speed, focal length, and image quality in order to pack light?</p>

<p>Personally, I find my trips (outdoors or not) fall into one of two categories. (1) I am focused on a photographic subject (landscape or wildlife) and want to bring the best gear that I can (often a 600mm lens) within limits. (2) I am just out and about because I enjoy the outdoors and I'll drag along a minimum of gear with less capability and quality (usually just a body and a wide-angle and maybe a light telephoto) just in case something catches my fancy. (3) I am out and about because I am trying to accomplish something else (a nice hike, fishing, some rafting, etc...) in which case I leave the camera at home because I personally don't want to be bothered. </p>

<p>By your post, I'm guessing that you fall between category 1 and 2 (maybe closer to 2) so I'd recommend you get a light body and a ~24mm f/2.8. If you want to do wildlife, add a 300mm f/4. If you fall between category 2 and 3, get a nicer p&s (the canon g series is nice) or a light body and a 18-? superzoom, preferably with some stabilization. </p>

<p> </p>

[alvinyap]

<p><strong>Those of you who travel a lot (especially in the mountains): what is your favorite camera set up ?</strong><br>

I used to hike around nature reserves, haven't done so in nearly 4 months and I doubt I will have a chance to hike much in london :(<br>

Would recommend a lightweight kit, I used to have a Nikon D40x + 18-55vr + 55-200vr, that was an awesome combo. Light, relatively small, good IQ, reasonable range, and well priced. I'm certain there is an equivalent for other brands. Last I went hiking was with a d200, 16-85, 70-300vr + flash. I assure you, I did *not* have a really good time climbing a hill about 500 meters high :) The walk between the bus stop and reserve didn't help much either :P<br>

If you want to do wildlife, consider the 70-300vr as a minimum, I've used that for a good while as my main "wildlife" lens and it does very well in good light.<br>

Alvin</p>

[everexplore]

<p>Thanks everyone for the suggestions!<br>

To summarize some of the ideas I liked and expand on what I had in mind before:<br>

I am focusing only on combinations with one or maximum two zoom lenses. I know that primes will typically give me better quality but I know myself and I know changing lenses is not for me ;-)</p>

 

<ol>

<li><strong>Panasonic GH1 with the 14-140 kit.</strong> This post here is by someone who just bought it and the comparison he makes to D90 seems very favorable to GH1: <a href="http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1033&thread=32223038">http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1033&thread=32223038</a> - this is exactly the type of photography I like. A great advantage is that the kit combination works almost like an ultrazoom model and I won't have to change lenses all the time. Downside: it looks a bit pricey but I guess I'll have to pay for the convenience.</li>

<li><strong>Nikon D5000 with 18-200VR (a cheaper alternative is D40 and 18-55VR + 55-200VR).</strong> Ken Rockwell writes good things about all these cameras and lenses and D40 + 18-55VR + 55-200VR is a really cheap combo. I am not sure if D5000 is so much better than D40 to justify the price difference. From what I read 18-200VR seems to be the ultmate all-in-one lens for tourism ;-)</li>

<li><strong>Olympus E620 or E450 with 14-42 + 40-150.</strong> I am not sure how these cameras compare to the rest of the small DSLRs in terms of quality and dynamic range but they are well priced and relatively small. Too bad that I couldn't find an all-in-one zoom lens for Oly (an equivalent to Nikon's 18-200VR). Any ideas whether such lens exists?</li>

<li><strong>Pentax K7</strong> - as some already suggested, it looks really nice, it is relatively small and weather sealed but ... it is also priced a bit higher than I like ;-( I am also not sure if there are zoom lenses available for it that cover the 28-300mm (35mm equiv) range</li>

<li><strong>Olympus E-P1</strong> - this is the one I had most of my hopes in. All reviews I have seen so far praise its image quality and compare it to that of the much bigger E-30 (they have the same sensor in fact). Its lack of EVF though makes me think it will be hard to use in bright sunlight high up in the mountains but let's hope I am wrong. Also I wish there were more micro 4/3 zoom lenses avalable for it. The currently available 14-42 seems to be fine and if they make a micro version of 40-150, that would be great. Also there is a rumour that Oly may release a newer model with an EVF by December so I guess I'll have to wait a little more before this technology matures more.</li>

</ol>

[Two23]

<p>I suggest staying with Canon or Nikon. Yes, the other brands you mentioned build nice camera bodies, but there's many fewer options available for them. You're already running into problems finding a lens for the Pentax & Olympus that is the equivalent of the Nikon 18-200mm VR. That will go for flash options and everything else as well. Everybody makes accessories for Nikon & Canon products, and you can find an ample supply of them used which saves money.<br>

Kent in SD</p>

[nick_baker]

<p>Why would you not get something like Nikon D40 with 18-200VR? If that's too big and heavy, there is probably no dSLR solution. If that's not enough IQ, you're definitely in dSLR territory. Rangefinder does not seem an option unless you give up wildlife. </p>

[alvinyap]

<p>Kiril, try the AF on the Olympus Pen before you drop your cash on it. I tried it just this weekend at a camera store, and its AF wasn't very fast - and you mentioned wildlife. It's definitely adequate for landscape shots. Perhaps that was a pre-production camera/firmware I tested. That said, the Oly E series SLRs seem to have wicked fast focusing. I really wanted something I could carry around like my QL17 days, but the AF and build just didn't work for me. Looks like its ebay and a D50 for me...<br>

Alvin</p>

[craig_gillette]

<p>Canon recently (one wonders why it took so long) released a lens competitive with the Nikon 18-200, for Canon use of course. I would look to the most recent offerings from any of the makers as opposed to say a D40. You've got a couple of years of evolution in sensor performance, etc.</p>

<p>There is a Tamron 18-250, but not having been in the market for something like that, I can't tell you what it's like. There would be reviews out there and info on cameras it's made for.</p>

<p>Be aware that many of the long zoom range lenses have rather small apertures at the long end of the zoom and that can slow them down some trying to catch active/dynamic subjects.</p>