Do any of you carry a proper camera for backpacking trips? Is it worth it?A DSLR is out of the question due to size and weight, so I'm considering getting a smaller point-and-shoot. However, with today's smartphones, I'm not sure if the difference isn't marginal and not worth the extra weight and stress.
>>2739972Dont even bother if you arent using film. No one gives a shit about your poorly framed shitphone pics that a million other normalfag tourist scum have taken and put on reddit
>>2739976I'm mainly shooting for personal memories and I might add my favorite photos on Instagram and that's it. I just like the satisfaction of having a pretty/cool photo but I'm not going to be uploading them anywhere.
>>2739977Unironically the 20 dollar disposable kodak or fuji film cameras will aerve you far better for your purposes. Light, cheap, fits in your pocket, kino pics, makes you think before just taking some random pic you dont actually care about since you have limmited amount per roll etc
>>2739972>carry a proper camera for backpacking tripsI carry a mirrorless with two lenses>Is it worth it?depends entirely on how much you're willing to spend and how much you care about IQ>worth the extra weight and stresswhat's the concern here exactly? look into camera clips, they let you attach your camera to a backpack strap so you can walk around hands-free, with a small camera you won't even notice it's there. You can get chinesium ones for about 30 bucks
>>2739972I have the last Galaxy and too it during my last trip.While it takes great pictures, they are highly processed.The micro-4/3 i used during my other trips probably has the same mpx than my new phone camera, but the grain is definitely more accurate and less processed.On the pro-phone side, it's definitely faster and inconspiscious to use.
>>2739993>>2739992Thanks anons. What about something like the Sony Rx100? If anything, I really want something that would fit in my pocket or pouch so that I can take it everywhere.Open to other suggestions as well, I know shit about cameras (also why I'm considering staying with the smartphone).What I'm trying to also understand is how autistic I have to be about photography to appreciate the small details that it's worth having another piece of equipment with me. I know that with a big camera it'd be obvious but I'm not sure if that's still true for a microcamera. Also, I have no idea how to edit RAW files if it makes a difference. Thanks
>>2739995I own a rx100vii and a FF camera Rx100 really is tiny, it's shorter than my smart phone and the lens is quite nice in good light. If you can get an older model cheap I think it's worth it, earlier models will give you better low light and depth of field than a phone. Full price I don't think so, there are better options.The later models like my vii will give you better focal length (24mm-200mm) than even most FF zoom lenses and it still fits into your pocket. But at the cost of a slower lens and worse low light. Honestly that range is pretty insane and the reason why I still use it in tandem with my FF, anything over 70mm I just pull out the little rx100. Saying that though my FF even with a zoom is noticeably better quality low light, easier to clean and much easier to use thanks to more buttons and dials. Downsides are it's fucking big and annoying to carry around with a zoom lens. If money isn't an issue I think go for the rx100, if it is maybe consider a second hand 6xxx with a 50mm (or Fuji crop if you can get one cheap). It will still be light enough to throw into a backpack and not weigh too much, while having shit like built in flash.
>>2739972yes it's worth it
>>2739977Just get a semi modern phone 99% of the pics you want will be fine especially if they are just for memory sake.I fell for the camera meme and ended up barely using it most the time, most photos I look back on I can't tell a difference from my Poco X3 NFC or the stand alone camera I used for 99% of the shots outside some low light things which were like a handful at best. Did they look GOAT? sure, was it worth the initial cost, the hassle of making sure my shit was always charged, carrying around yet more shit, swapping quick to my camera (and did miss some shots), then spend more time to transfer/backup said things? Nah not really.A midrange 250 dollar phone+Gcam app that does it all >>>> random trip pictures.
I brought a DSLR to Europe once in all my trips. It was annoying as hell to lug it around and it singles you out immediately as a tourist. It also makes you a major target for theft.
I've been thinking about it myself. Every trip I go on the quality of my smart phone shots improve as I get more practice with things like composition and understanding natural lighting etc. I think its only justifiable if you're going to commit to photography as a general hobby and not just for travel, otherwise a smart phone camera is likely to give you similar results if you don't have the technical skillset.
>>2739972There are many, many shots I've encountered which would've been so much better with a telephoto lens.
>>2742250>better with a telephoto lensAbsolutely, but who wants to carry all that crap around? We're probably less than 2 years from the AI in your cellphone camera being able to fake a telephoto effect so perfectly that no one can tell.
>>2739972I own the Sony RX100 in the OP pic, I also own a Panasonic TZ220 (picrel). Both cameras are very compact and easy to carry, both take excellent images. The Sony has a high quality, very fast lens that can create very nice bokeh. The Panasonic has amazing telephoto capability which is useful for wildlife. Both cameras allow for manual control and have RAW output if that's important to you. But the truth is that on my last few trips I ended up using my phone a lot more than my camera, for no other reason than convenience. The main advantage of high-end point and shoot cameras over phones is they allow for more manual control, if setting your own shutter speed and aperture is important to you. But phone cameras are suitable for 90% of tourist situations. My advice is get a decent smartphone that accepts micro SD cards. For some smartphones you can get nifty third party accessories such as mini snap on wide angle or zoom lenses or even filters.
I have a Sony a7iv with a 24-70 f2.8 sigma lens. Takes incredible photos and videos. But I'm too paranoid to take it with me everywhere. My travels are usually either through sketchy countries, hiking or riding motorbikes. An expensive camera becomes a liability. Always worried it's going to get stolen, wet, or the motorbike vibrations will fuck with the sensor. I have to store it carefully and by the time I take it out and set it up the shot that I wanted to take is already gone. So a few months ago I got picrel. Tg7 OM systems. It's nowhere near as good as the Sony but it's cheap, indestructible and can output RAW which is good as I prefer to edit all my photos anyway. In the few months that I've had the tg7 I've taken more photos than I have with the Sony in 2 years. It's always in my pocket wherever I go. I never have to worry if I'm going to damage it. Surprisingly the macro features are very good. It's changed the kind of photos I'm taking. Get it in red to deter pickpockets since it looks more like a kid's toy that way.
>>2739972You have better memories if you aren't constantly taking pictures. Just use your phone and grab a few snaps. The majority of your experiences should be real.
>>2743901you'll look like a thot though..
>>2743901>The majority of your experiences should be real.How is taking a photo of something that you're standing right in front of not a real experience?
Mirrorless > Smartphone > Point & Shoot
>>2739972I have a 15- or 20-year-old point-and-shoot digital camera that sometimes takes pretty cool pictures. Picrel. However, having said that, I don't think I'd use it as my "main" camera. It's inconsistent and images easily blur. For 9 pictures out of 10, I'm better off using my iPhone.I've considered getting a simple 35mm camera, but film costs a fuckton to buy, shoot, and develop.
>>2739972I used to bring a Fuji mirrorless (18-55 kit) with me but I found that a little bulky (even tho it's small relative to some other cameras).I've switched to the Ricoh GR and it's far nicer with how small it is. The controls kind of suck though. Pic unrelated
Back in 2016, which is when I first started traveling on my own, I had two different cameras with me. One was my phone (Samsung Galaxy S6), the other was an actual camera (Sony Cyber-shot DSC-WX80). My phone took better pictures than the camera.In 2017, I got a much better camera (Sony A6000) that I still use to this day. Took me a couple of days to figure out how to use it properly, but I got there.I've also upgraded my phone, and I occasionally take pictures with it.
>>2743901This is not true in my experience. I've taken several extended trips with no photography, and while I saw many beautiful sights, they were quickly forgotten as new sights occupied my attention. For example, I can talk about the three months I spent in Colombia without a phone or camera...a night dancing salsa with some locals in Salento, the beauty of the paramo on the van ride to San Agustin, the gorgeous hookers in a Cartagena plaza, the grimy streets of Pasto...but without a single picture taken, these fleeting images in my mind don't have very much sticking power.
Bought a Lumix FZ300 for cheapish before I left on my trip and I loved using it. Was fun to whip it out to get a pic of a temple I was riding by in Taiwan while on a rental bike. Super durable too.
If people are only looking at your photos ok a smartphone they won't be able to tell the difference. That's a pretty significant strike. On the plus side you'll want a DSLR if you want to create CRISP images that you can further enhance in Photoshop. My best photo on dating apps is a shirtless photo from a teaching a girl how to shoot manual with it. It's a basic bitch d3400 even so I can't even imagine what new frames and lens could pull.
Not sure if you can achieve the majority of this dudes pics with a smartphone. Maybe with heaps of AI fuckery and photoshop, but the resolution would be as nice.>>>/p/4389411
Anyone here actually bother with drones? I've always liked the idea of aerial photography/videography, but I don't know if it's worth lugging around another piece of luggage just to do it. What's more, it would be as a hobby, not for work, so it seems even harder to justify owning such equipment.
I use to pack a sony a6100 with me on my trips and was a pain in the ass carrying it around and rarely felt the need to use it. So now I just use my smartphone.
>>2747865I have an A6000, which is a slightly shittier version of your camera. It used to be my trusty sidekick that took care of 100% of my photographic needs, but I've cut back since.For urban photography, I just use my phone. Taking pictures of random interesting shit around the city.I still use my A6000 for "more important" things. Nature, museums, conventions, major historical sites, etc.I guess you could say that my smartphone is my normie camera, and my actual camera is my nerd camera.
>buy camera to not be pleb mode with pictures>get some midrange camera recommended off /p/>take it out for some specific shots bretty gud>take camera back cuz don't want to have it damaged, lost, stolen, etc>go back out to have fun in the place I'm at>best things I want to take photos of I have to do on with my phone>all photos easier to share/auto back up>end up with my camera becoming more of a burden than a net plus>most sites/places I share my photos to compress it the hell out anyways meaning my camera is only useful for low light shots>just going to spend more to upgrade my phone for next adventuresAnyone else know this feel?
>>2747857Yes, I am currently travelling around Europe (I have a base set up) and when Im going to /out/ countries I take it.I usually travel with a carry-on though so its a pain in the ass to take (when I take my carry on I only take my camera)countries I have taken my drone to:>Iceland>Faroe Islands>Scotland>Irelandcountries I didn't take my drone to (only visited cities)>Italy>Czech Republic>Belgiumetc you get the point
>>2747961kinda. took my mirrorless to an island where the humidity was > 90% and the temp was somewhere in the spontaneous combustion realm. lightweight kit, but it got heavy due to general heat exhaustion (this is coming from someone who used to hike with 8x10s). ended up using my smartphone simply because the mirrorless kept fogging up on meIn the end it was too much hassle and just stuck with my smartphone in the daylight hours.going to another island with similar temp and humidity later in the year, so i'm slightly better prepared for it (even more silica, better bags for acclimation and a lighter lens/body combo)
>>2748045Cameras are very much weighty. I really need to Invest in a better sling because the one that comes around the neck is awful for sweat + weight bearing down on you.
>>2739972Whatever happened to camcorders?
>>2748266Digital cameras killed them and then smartphones killed them further. The low end of the market fell off entirely because those were just generic digital camera guts rearranged into a different form factor and the value just wasn't there, only the high end survived where the optics and equipment make a difference for high end productions.
>>2748262might try the sling idea as well, thanks for the tip!(had a wrist strap that is uncomfortable as hell after a short time)
>>2748296It's surprising how weighty cameras can be. One of my other frustrations is my old frame doesn't stand up well to shooting in very bright situations as I cant tell the quality of the shot on the screen and it's not easily connected with my phone. So brightness + sweat + having to lug the fucker around kills me sometimes
>>2747857yes, travel with dji mavic pro I like taking landscape pictures and video with it, especially in rugged places like >>2747977 listedit is a huge pain in the backside to deal with - I always get security inspections at airports, need certificates and registrations to fly legally, uses up huge % of carry on space, charging and backing up and processing footage takes up a lot of time, some countries are absolute dicks about where and when you can fly ... those are the downsides. the upside is you get to take drone pictures of cool places. every normie seems to livestream their vacay so I appreciate being able to take unique perspectives of stuff
>>2739972If these balkan subhuman RATS didn't block me from earning, I'd be going to the Philippines with a DSLR right now subhuman third world literal trash heap
>>2739976No one would give a shit about my photos even if they were on film.
>>2748744imagine taking photos for other people ? are you serious? you guys are sad pathethic dweebs
>>2748900>take digital photos for yourself>no one gives a shit (fair)>take analog photos because some stinky Italian on 4chan says they're better somehow>no one gives a shit (because why)Congratulations, you made zero difference in people's lives.
>>2748903I'll post my digital photos here to inspire you to shoot for the stars
