Best camera for touring

[Norman H]

I long for some manufacture to produce a digital camera with the simplicity of use of the old film cameras. If someone made a digital back for my old Nikon F2 that would be perfect.

I've outfitted an old Ortlieb bar bag to take my ageing FujiS3 Pro which I often take on Day rides. The Fuji is certainly no lightweight for touring and I've just bought a second hand Nikon P7100. Its a very similar camera to the Canon G series and allows a lot of manual control. Both shutter speed and aperture can be set using dials and it will also shoot raw files. Most importantly for me, it has an optical viewfinder. If it took AA batteries I reckon it would be near perfect.

[al_yrpal]

Some Panasonic LF1 pictures

https://www.flickr.com/search/?user_id= ... view_all=1

https://www.flickr.com/groups/lf1/pool/page38

The pictures taken at gigs were taken from 20 yards back with the x7 optical zoom. Panoramas and videos are great too. With the F2.0 you can achieve good bokeh which enhances macro shots and portraits.

Tap on the pictures to get a closer look.

Al

[foxyrider]

On my desk are 5 cameras ranging from a Nikon Coolpix 330 to an Olympus OMD. The Nikon has survived two years of abuse but my Olympus 500UZ went for over five years before dying on me, the 600UZ lasted 18 months and one drop killed the Fuji S8000!

The things I look for in a touring camera are the following

Easy to source power - I prefer AA batteries, available almost anywhere
Reasonable zoom function - @ 12 is best I find
Light and easy to hold - i've sometimes had the camera in my hand for several hours
Simple menu - i'm not aiming for art pictures, just reasonable quality images - i've been known to take 10000 pics on a two week tour!
Must fit in my bar bag and jacket pockets - no good saying a haselblad is the best camera if you can't carry it!

Currently the Finepix is the camera that travels with me, it's quite tough, light, cheap and takes most stuff quite adequately. The OMD is nice but it's too complicated for quick shots and heavy too so whilst it's small it's not a tour camera.

[PH]

This thread would benefit from some pictures; if you're recommending a camera, show us what it can do...

Nice photos, but what this shows is more about the photographer than the camera. Digital in a way makes that less so, the more you take the chances of getting lucky increase, but I know a photographer who uses shots as sparingly as they would if it was the most expensive film and still gets great results. And someone else with a pro level SLR who produces mediocre snapshots.
Link to my flicker below, I've only ever had one camera at a time, it shouldn't be hard to spot where I changed from a compact to M4/3, though the Panasonic LX5 was a very good compact. I shoot in raw and play with in Lightroom, I like it when a photo captures what it felt like to be somewhere, yet despite a reasonable understanding of the technology and composition my results are unpredictable.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/phbike/

[freiston]

Almost any modern camera is capable of taking decent pictures so you really need to think about what is important to you (which it sounds like you already have: "easy to handle, light, quick to pick up and shoot with good picture quality and battery life" etc.). I get the impression that you want something small and simple (to operate) so I have ruled out micro four third format and DSLRs (but I could be wrong)

My reckoning is try to get an idea as to how automatic you want your shooting to be and how much control you want to take - will you want to override the camera's decision making and choose/experiment with your own settings or be happy with what the camera decides? If you want to choose your own settings without going through menus, there are some compact cameras with knobs and dials that make changing settings a lot easier - like the Canon G series; there are other compacts that only have automatic 'style' modes. As others have said - decide on things like viewfinder and file formats. If you want a wide range of focal lengths, a super-zoom bridge camera might be more up your street.

Once you've decided on a few key features, I would say go to a shop and try them for size - some brands/models just feel more 'right' and intuitive than others to the individual. As you have said, you want a camera that you are going to handle easily and be quick to shoot with. Cameras are like bikes - some people prefer hub gears over derailleur, some prefer straight bars over drops - both get the job done .

[Jezrant]

This thread would benefit from some pictures; if you're recommending a camera, show us what it can do...

Nice photos, but what this shows is more about the photographer than the camera. Digital in a way makes that less so, the more you take the chances of getting lucky increase, but I know a photographer who uses shots as sparingly as they would if it was the most expensive film and still gets great results. And someone else with a pro level SLR who produces mediocre snapshots.
Link to my flicker below, I've only ever had one camera at a time, it shouldn't be hard to spot where I changed from a compact to M4/3, though the Panasonic LX5 was a very good compact. I shoot in raw and play with in Lightroom, I like it when a photo captures what it felt like to be somewhere, yet despite a reasonable understanding of the technology and composition my results are unpredictable.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/phbike/

I agree with you about digital. Also what this shows is post editing. Doesn't make much sense to compare photos when one person may just be taking jpegs and maybe cropping them at most and somebody else is shooting Raw and spending hours with Lightroom afterwards. Even comparing IQ on DP Review can be tricky. Great photos, though, PH.

[Des49]

This thread would benefit from some pictures; if you're recommending a camera, show us what it can do...

Would you describe yourself as a photography enthusiast? Do you want to shoot RAW files? Do you only want a point & shoot?

The best camera for touring is influenced by these (and many more factors).

I would describe myself as an enthusiastic photographer; I'm very pleased with my Canon G15. If I lost it I would replace it with a something like an Olympus OM-D E-M10 or Fuji X-T10.

Some G15 images:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/130356579@N02/24526319799/in/datetaken-public/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/130356579@N02/16250286168/in/datetaken-public/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/130356579@N02/21844247984/in/datetaken-public/

You have some great pictures there, thanks for sharing.

But I do not think showing pictures is that useful, whereas in this digital world there are big differences in sensors it's the photographer and not the camera after all!

[bohrsatom]

I recently bought a Panasonic Lumix TZ60 from the Panasonic Outlet on eBay for about £130. It was replacing a Canon PowerShot SX260 which has served me well on travels but the lens/screen were scratched so it was time for an upgrade.

The camera you choose is a personal thing but here are my criteria

* Has a reasonable zoom (20x +) for taking 'travel' style photos
* Image quality is OK
* Small enough to fit in my bar bag
* Cheap enough that I won't be upset if its first outing results in loads of scratches
* Sweep panorama feature
* USB charging, to be compatible with a USB backup battery pack
* Ideally GPS built-in


The zoom requirement excludes my smartphone and the size/cost requirements exclude my Micro 4/3 camera, which takes amazing photos but is overkill for a bike tour IMO.

The TZ60 ticks the boxes for zoom, has sweep panorama and GPS as well as wifi controls which I'm sure I will find useful in future. And as I was able to find one at such a competitive price I couldn't resist.

PS my favourite accessory is a Joby GorillaPod with magnetic feet. Perfect for attaching to signposts to take selfies whilst riding.

[Des49]

I long for some manufacture to produce a digital camera with the simplicity of use of the old film cameras.

Exactly!

I am still after a camera that I can carry in my jacket pocket on rides that will give me the quality and ease of use I am after. Ideally an optical viewfinder, a well placed exposure compensation dial, manual and aperture priority modes will suffice, no AF either.

Have looked extensively at the Fuji range. Tempted by a Fuji X100T, but occasionally a zoom is useful. Olympus and Sony make some good models too. But none are to my liking enough. Something like a Leica M would be perfect if lighter, except no where in my budget range! Though the new Leica Q for those who have the budget and don't mind the electronic viewfinder really seems an amazing camera.

For now I don't bother taking a camera on rides unless I am specifically going out photographing when I load the bike up with a ton of gear! But if travelling the choice is either very heavy Nikon DSLRs, or if weight is an issue a really old weatherproof Pentax compact that only shoots jpegs and allows no user control and consequently I don't use it much that all.

Most modern cameras are extremely capable and once people know how to use their model properly will deliver excellent results. But I strongly recommend trying each model out and physically handling them and delving into the menus. A lot are very frustrating to use and may not be set out in an intuitive way for you personally, so try before you buy and do loads of research.

[eileithyia]

Panasonic DMC here, small enough to go in a rear pocket, so handy enough when i want to stop, point and shoot.... Leica lens so good pictures. Oh so different to the days of carrying my big slr around strapped to the back of the saddle, so had to stop, get it unstrapped and off the bike... out of case, point, focus, shoot by which time the particular lighting effect / cloud etc had changed and the scene had changed......

[phil parker]

Link to my flicker below, I've only ever had one camera at a time, it shouldn't be hard to spot where I changed from a compact to M4/3, though the Panasonic LX5 was a very good compact. I shoot in raw and play with in Lightroom, I like it when a photo captures what it felt like to be somewhere, yet despite a reasonable understanding of the technology and composition my results are unpredictable.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/phbike/

Nice to see the obligatory photo of tents and bikes outside The Crask Inn! (some others I recognize as well!)

I have drastically reduced my camera collection over the last 10 years and although I do have one no-longer-used film camera, I have just one DSLR, one CSC and I will upgrade my compact to the Panasonic DMC TZ100 when it comes out in March I was tempted by the Sony RX100 iv, but the greater zoom on the Panasonic has tilted it for me! I always take my CSC when touring, but I think I would take more photos with a good and easy to access compact camera.

[hamster]

Smartphone.

The limitation is the lens, you cannot get the sharpness and light gathering through a phone camera. Nor any controllable depth of field, focus point, etc etc etc. The image is usually heavily processed by the phone CPU to tidy it up. Phones are great for landscapes in sunlight, however in difficult lighting they really suffer. Likewise the lenses don't have the magnification or indeed wide angles. It's amazing what you get for the money, but an entire camera the size of a coat button is not going to perform as well as something purpose-built.

Most compact cameras cannot resolve much above 5-6Mp due to lens limitations, phones are worse.

[nmnm]

Smartphone.

Phones are great for landscapes in sunlight

That's my holiday covered, landscapes in sunlight!

And off-the-cuff people pics that would simply be missed with a bigger camera less near to hand.

IQ, even with my ageing iPhone5, is very much par with the "good enough" threshold of a good p&s like canon s120. Great gps too with the always-on phone, works every time, really adds to the viewing enjoyment later. And the box-with-a-button simplicity is very zen, makes the process oddly deliberate, if that makes sense.

That said, if my photos were of things nearer than 3 or 4 metres, or for the OP, if some of the trips are off the bike, I'd probably buy a sony rx100 m1 or m2, or a second hand ricoh gr2, lovely cameras.

[PH]

The limitation is the lens, you cannot get the sharpness and light gathering through a phone camera. Nor any controllable depth of field, focus point, etc etc etc.

I was once told that one of the most important aspects of photography is knowing your camera, working to it's strengths rather than fighting it's weaknesses. This was way before the time of digital, let alone phone cameras, but I think it's even more true today. In any given situation there's a choice of shots, getting the best one for whatever camera you have with you is an art. Not one I claim to have mastered, but the more I use the same camera the more selective I become over pressing the shutter.
Guardian photojournalist Dan Chung, covered the London Olympics with an iPhone and a pair of binoculars, demonstrates the point rather well. He makes no claim that it's as good as camera as a DSLR, but the shots speak for themselves.
http://www.wired.com/2012/08/covering-t ... inoculars/

[PH]

Oh so different to the days of carrying my big slr around strapped to the back of the saddle, so had to stop, get it unstrapped and off the bike... out of case, point, focus, shoot by which time the particular lighting effect / cloud etc had changed and the scene had changed......

I used to feel the same, but a bar bag changed the way I use the camera on a bike. It's in the padded bag ready to use, lens down with a UV filter, set to automatic and on standby. With the exception of those who take photos while riding, I doubt there's a quicker sequence between spotting a shot and being on the move again, while still keeping all the other options open. The only delay is when I decide I'd like to use another lens, but currently saving for a 14-140 (28 - 280 equivalent) which I'm hoping will cover all my requirements.