Time for a new backpacking camera

Topics covering photography and videography of the flora, fauna and landscape of the Sierra Nevada mountains. Show off your talent. Post your photos and videos here!
User avatar
SSSdave
Topix Addict
Posts: 2693
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2005 11:18 pm
Experience: N/A
Location: Silicon Valley
Contact:

Re: Time for a new backpacking camera

Post by SSSdave » Mon Apr 15, 2019 7:27 pm

All the low light blabber targets the large numbers of users that either only hand hold while shooting, never using a tripod, or shoot in dim conditions like at night at say indoor arena sporting events or inside dim rooms. I have about two dozen batteries with my A6000 and on 9-day trips need them all. Anyone with an ILC using just auto modes and not using a tripod might as well just use a smartphone with a good camera. My new moto g6 takes excellent landscapes for 1080p web display sizes. The serious limitations with smartphone cameras are they are fixed wide angle and one will not end up images that can be printed large with fine detail. That is where the GX9 and similar models have somewhat more value.








User avatar
Wandering Daisy
Topix Docent
Posts: 4343
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 8:19 pm
Experience: N/A
Location: Fair Oaks CA (Sacramento area)
Contact:

Re: Time for a new backpacking camera

Post by Wandering Daisy » Tue Apr 16, 2019 7:03 pm

The two cameras that I ended up considering were the Canon G9x and Sony Cyber RX 100 (the first and oldest version).Either camera would be an upgrade from my old camera. Both were on display at Best Buy so I could compare both. The newer Canon version had a tilt screen, view finder and other fancy stuff, but cost $200 more. The newer Sony versions also had lots more stuff and $200+ more. I ended up getting the Canon. I ordered the silver version with the tan grips because the labels are easier to see. The one in the store was the all black version. I pick it up Friday. Thanks everyone for all the good advise.

A view finder would be nice, but I really did get used to not having one on my old camera. The tilt screen to me was just another moving part to break and I did without such before. I know this is a stupid reason to choose a camera, but it worked a lot like my older Canon so I would not have to start from scratch learning how to use it. Once I start using it I will let you all know how I like it, or not.

Frustrating, though, that the new Canon takes an entirely different battery than my old one, so my old spare battery is now useless. This time I am also going to buy (or sew) a very brightly colored case so I do not stupidly leave it on a rock!

User avatar
SSSdave
Topix Addict
Posts: 2693
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2005 11:18 pm
Experience: N/A
Location: Silicon Valley
Contact:

Re: Time for a new backpacking camera

Post by SSSdave » Wed Apr 17, 2019 10:43 am

One can charge those NB-3L batteries while inside the GX9 from a USB receptacle if it has the correct charging spec and one uses the a proper charging cable. Thus one can buy a lithium-ion power bank plus a single extra spare battery and use a power bank to charge batteries and other devices like a cellphone without needing to have a supply of several spares as I do.

User avatar
BSquared
Founding Member
Posts: 902
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 3:31 pm
Experience: Level 3 Backpacker
Location: Jericho, VT

Re: Time for a new backpacking camera

Post by BSquared » Tue Jun 04, 2019 4:58 am

How has the reputation of the Sony RX100-iii held up over time? The review that Mav cited toward the beginning of this thread made it sound like virtually the ideal backpacking camera for the enthusiastic amateur, but that review was written in 2014, a year earlier than the cut-off period fishmonger mentioned in response to WD's question about used cameras. A pretty quick skim of the Internet suggests that what has mostly happened since is the addition of bells and whistles, particularly involving movies and connectivity, with little to no improvement in image quality or zoom range, the things that matter to me. Does that match others' impressions? If it helps, what I'm after is the ability to make 8x10 to 16x20 prints with a resolution that approaches as closely as possible that of a large-negative chemical print: the print should look utterly crisp even when examined very closely. And, of course, the camera should be light and small—I ain't getting any younger, and pack weight seems to be getting more and more important ;) Maybe impossible dreams, but that's the goal...
—B²

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest