Talk to me about cameras for retirement..

[Flyfish1]

Retiring next year and we will begin to travel much more.
Our last big trip was pre-Covid to Antartica and we rented gear from borrowlenses.com. Worked out fine, but probably not logical long term to spend $2K or more for each big trip.

We have iPhones and they are impressive but they can't touch the pics we took with the high end rented gear. Don't want to break the bank here or have some giant bulky camera to lug around on our travels. Looking for advice and recommendations for a "good" camera for traveling.

Thanks

 

[OldShooter]

I have been shooting micro four thirds for a number of years. This is a somewhat smaller format than “full frame” 35mm and the benefits show up in smaller and lighter cameras and lenses. There is a huge variety of new and used bodies and lenses for the system. There are some nice wide-range zooms available, too, which IMO are the ideal travel lens.

My current kit is a pair of Panasonic GX-8s with lenses 9-18, 12-200, and 100-300. Due to the smaller format the equivalent of these lenses in 35mm terms is 2x, so my range is from 18mm to 600mm with the three. Soon I will sell the 9-18 and buy an 8-25, the latter being a better walkaround lens but with a weight and size penalty over the 9-18.

For two African photo safaris I have bought 100-400 lenses and sold them when I got home. This is cheaper than renting and may even generate a profit.

I don't think the M43 format gives up much in quality. I shot this little guy in the Masai Mara, Kenya:

 

[Souschef]

I have a Canon SX20 I bought used, and for me it is perfect for travel. It has a tremendous telephoto range for a small camera. I have attached an example. This was taken from the top of the Jungfrauhoch in the Bernese Alps. It is of a snow play area.

 

[rwdflynavy]

Mirrorless full frame is my recommendation. I'm a Nikon guy, but Canon, Sony and others are great as well. Pick and ecosystem and you should be set.

 

[braumeister]

If you just want a travel camera, look at the Sony RX100 (currently version VII).

Read the reviews and specs and I think you'll see it has incredible capability for something that easily slips into your pocket.

 

[Flyfish1]

Wow- I'm already over my head.
Micro 4/3?
Ok - thanks , time to start reading.
I'm grateful for the input!

 

[OldShooter]

Wow- I'm already over my head.
Micro 4/3?
Ok - thanks , time to start reading.
I'm grateful for the input!

I once wrote an article on cameras for a travel magazine and the thesis was that you first have to decide how big a camera you are willing to carry. Most of your subsequent decisions come from that.

Amplifying my post #2, M43 is my choice. @rwdflynavy is willing to carry heavier equipment. @braumeister's Sony is in another, smaller class. My DW will not carry a big camera; her choice for a number of years has been from the Panasonic "ZS" series, currently IIRC a ZS70. This fits in her small purse and produces excellent images. (A few years ago I was very proud of a shot taken in Ethiopia, only to discover on examination that it was hers!) The little cameras give up some capability in poor light, but generally produce great images.

Another angle: For "normal" use like prints up to 16x20" and the usual screen and web viewing you can pretty much assume that any camera you choose will be satisfactory. It is in more demanding usage where bigger is arguably better, up through the "full frame" cameras to the serious medium format cameras like the Hasselblads.

Finally, you are not getting married here. Buy and try. The first thing you buy often just teaches you what you really wanted. You may find this to be true of your camera as well.

 

[Biker_on_FIRE]

I’d recommend that you go into a camera store and see what the size difference is between the different formats. From smallest to largest, you have point and shoot, four thirds (and micro four thirds), APS, and full frame.

And some unsolicited advice- taking some photos classes will improve your photos way more than buying new camera equipment. You should be able to find some classes at your local photography store, community college, or adult school.

 

[RobbieB]

For me it's easy, pocket camera. I have a Cannon S95 (now S100). If I can't put in in my pocket I'm not going to have it.

And a camera that stays at home takes no pictures.

 

[NW-Bound]

I once wrote an article on cameras for a travel magazine and the thesis was that you first have to decide how big a camera you are willing to carry. Most of your subsequent decisions come from that.

Amplifying my post #2, M43 is my choice. @rwdflynavy is willing to carry heavier equipment. @braumeister's Sony is in another, smaller class. My DW will not carry a big camera; her choice for a number of years has been from the Panasonic "ZS" series, currently IIRC a ZS70. This fits in her small purse and produces excellent images. (A few years ago I was very proud of a shot taken in Ethiopia, only to discover on examination that it was hers!) The little cameras give up some capability in poor light, but generally produce great images.

Another angle: For "normal" use like prints up to 16x20" and the usual screen and web viewing you can pretty much assume that any camera you choose will be satisfactory. It is in more demanding usage where bigger is arguably better, up through the "full frame" cameras to the serious medium format cameras like the Hasselblads.

Finally, you are not getting married here. Buy and try. The first thing you buy often just teaches you what you really wanted. You may find this to be true of your camera as well.

I have had a ZS60 for a few years, and am OK with it. I have found that under good light and no zooming, my Samsung smartphone can take a photo that looks as good.

And I discovered that the extra wide angle lens of the smartphone let me capture big tall cathedrals, while the ZS60 could not. And in Europe, these cathedrals are often boxed in by neighboring buildings, and you cannot back out enough to get the towers in the frame.

 

[skyking1]

Thanks for all the contributions. Oldshooter, I found the GX85 micro4/3rds with a pretty decent starter set for ~$800
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1398407-REG/panasonic_dmc_gx85wk_lumix_dmc_gx85_mirrorless_micro.html
I'll dig into reviews and see how that stacks up.

 

[Sunset]

We have the Nikon coolpix A900 have had it 5 years now, maybe there is a better new model ?

What we like is:

• Pocket size, actually bought small cases to fit on waist belt.
• 35x real zoom.
• 4K movies - talk about clarity.
• The movable view screen, I thought it was a gimick at first, but it allows to position the camera so can see what it will shoot regardless of where you are, even in front of the camera.

 

[The Cosmic Avenger]

Wow- I'm already over my head.
Micro 4/3?
Ok - thanks , time to start reading.
I'm grateful for the input!

OK, so you're more my level of photography...point and shoot!


I like our Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ47K, although it's pretty old...the FZ80 seems to be a more current and available model for about $400. I rarely use anything other than auto mode, and my hobbyist MIL said she thought my pictures came out better than hers! What I really liked is the built-in lens has a very good optical zoom, so it's easier for an amateur to still frame and capture a high-res pic.


Although I do have the Canon EOS Rebel T8i on my wish list, I think that was from recommendations here and/or my serious photographer friends IRL.

 

[OldShooter]

Thanks for all the contributions. Oldshooter, I found the GX85 micro4/3rds with a pretty decent starter set for ~$800
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/prod...c_gx85wk_lumix_dmc_gx85_mirrorless_micro.html
I'll dig into reviews and see how that stacks up.

That's a fine starter kit. Image quality will be just fine although you will probably find reviewers turning up their noses at the "kit" lenses. Don't worry about it. FWIW I rarely buy new equipment. My starting point is https://www.mu-43.com/forums/member-buy-sell-trade.17/ and have never been burned. Fred Miranda (https://fredmiranda.com/forum/board/10) seems to have a good reputation, too, though I don’t recall ever buying there. https://www.keh.com/ is a used equipment dealer, so prices will be higher but most items have a 3 month warranty IIRC.

... And some unsolicited advice- taking some photos classes will improve your photos way more than buying new camera equipment. You should be able to find some classes at your local photography store, community college, or adult school.

This, too. Once you have your new camera, remember that owning a violin doesn't make you a musician. Same-o, owning a camera doesn't make you a photographer. You'll have to work at it. Work on understanding light, composition, and perspective then move on to more of the basic concepts. Just studying the adverts in a magazine will teach you a lot about light and lighting. You'll find both disasters and superb work.

Good luck!

 

[Bamaman]

OK, so you're more my level of photography...point and shoot!


I like our Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ47K, although it's pretty old...the FZ80 seems to be a more current and available model for about $400. I rarely use anything other than auto mode, and my hobbyist MIL said she thought my pictures came out better than hers! What I really liked is the built-in lens has a very good optical zoom, so it's easier for an amateur to still frame and capture a high-res pic.

I have the FZ80, and it's a great camera. But there are so many features that someone would have to go to school to learn how to work it. The owner's manual is so long that it's had to be online--and it's like reading a foreign language. (I assume it's the same with all modern cameras.)

What's so difficult these days is reading the tiny fonts on any camera and in the viewfinder. I'm not so certain I could read them back when I had the eyes of a fighter pilot.

But I'm not going to be more proficient if I don't get out and take some pictures. I walked off and forgot the camera on my last 2 trips to Europe, and needless to say Venice is a great place for photography.

 

[Ronstar]

I have a Nikon D850 and a Sony RX100 V. The Nikon is big and bulky and great for landscape and wildlife photos. But I need to stuff a backpack full of gear when I take it out.

The Sony is small (fits snugly in a pocket) and has a built in lens. I haven't checked out the new version VII, but it would be a great travel camera if it's the same or better than the version V that I have. The VII has a built in 24-200 lens where my V has a 24-70. It has almost all of the bells and whistles of a big dslr.

I would recommend a Sony RX 100 for someone who wants a good travel camera but doesn't want to carry a load.

I'm probably going to use my Sony for all travel from now on, unless I'm planning on shooting wildlife. The resolution of my Nikon is better than my Sony, but its only noticeable in bigger plots.

And the Sony is great for closeups. Eagle is a Nikon pic. Knife is a Sony pic.

 

[braumeister]

I would recommend a Sony RX 100 for someone who wants a good travel camera but doesn't want to carry a load.

I'm probably going to use my Sony for all travel from now on, unless I'm planning on shooting wildlife. The resolution of my Nikon is better than my Sony, but its only noticeable in bigger plots.

As you may have noticed, I'm also a huge fan of the RX100 (as are most camera reviewers for this category). But let me just insert a small note of caution.

I've been using my RX100 VI for the last three years very happily. The great zoom has been amazing. But on my last trip this past April it finally gave up the ghost. It was extremely windy down in the Grand Canyon and all the extremely fine sand blowing around got into the works. I wasn't able to blow it out so I had to give up on it. I've had it in plenty of rough places in the past, but this trip totally did a number on it.

Now I'm considering buying the VII to replace it. Still can't find anything remotely as capable that is still pocketable.

 

[Ronstar]

^ Yep I can see wind/ sand being a problem. And since the lens is built in - the whole camera is toast.

Another issue foe me is the with lcd screen - glare on sunny days. I think the newer RX100's have a pop up viewfinder.

 

[braumeister]

I think the newer RX100's have a pop up viewfinder.

Yes, my VI did. I used it all the time.

 

[Freedom56]

Whatever you buy, wait for the Black Friday specials.

 

[DrRoy]

I have a Nikon D850 and a Sony RX100 V. The Nikon is big and bulky and great for landscape and wildlife photos. But I need to stuff a backpack full of gear when I take it out.

I also carry the big D850 with added gear. For me, the image resolution and dynamic range are worth it.

 

[Ronstar]

^There are many places worthy of toting heavy camera gear for. And you generally find them. Your sunburst wouldn't have been nearly as impressive taken from an iPhone.

Lately I've been thinking about safety. I'll continue to lug my Nikon into desolate landscapes, but I'm not going to bring it when I'm traveling in cities.

 

[donheff]

I once wrote an article on cameras for a travel magazine and the thesis was that you first have to decide how big a camera you are willing to carry. Most of your subsequent decisions come from that.

For me it's easy, pocket camera. I have a Cannon S95 (now S100). If I can't put in in my pocket I'm not going to have it.

And a camera that stays at home takes no pictures.

I'm not a serious photographer but I like to create albums from my trips and want a camera I can hang around my neck on bike tours. I have carried a Cannon G9 (current model G16) and was happy with it. But I also do a lot of snorkeling and more recently went rafting in the Grand Canyon so I bought an Olympus Tough TG-6 which works for around my neck on the bike and raft, and, with a wrist strap, snorkeling.

I love what people do with DSLRs but I just don't want to carry them. The above point and shoots are better tools for me.

 

[braumeister]

I've been using my RX100 VI for the last three years very happily. The great zoom has been amazing. But on my last trip this past April it finally gave up the ghost. ...

Now I'm considering buying the VII to replace it. Still can't find anything remotely as capable that is still pocketable.

Update.
I went ahead and bought the RX100 VII and I'm extremely happy with it. Although the differences are small when you just read the specs, the performance is noticeably better even to my very amateur eye. Glad I got it.

https://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/side-by-side?products=sony_dscrx100m6&products=sony_dscrx100m7

https://www.trustedreviews.com/news/sony-rx100-vii-vs-rx100-vi-3924752

 

[Ronstar]

^Excellent!