Digital Cameras

Camera, Lens, Video & Software

Moderator: HAZ - Moderators

Linked Guides none
Linked Areas none
User avatar
pixelfrog
Posts: 150
Joined: Apr 11 2002 10:00 am
City, State: Chandler, AZ
Contact:

Digital Cameras

Post by pixelfrog » Nov 26 2002 12:00 pm

Hi All,

I'm finally gonna get a digital camera, :D :D but not quite sure what kind yet. Can anyone recommend a good hiking/backpacking digital camera that can take the trail and is 3 megapixels? Also I will want to boost the memory up quite a bit.

Thanks in Advance!

Paul

User avatar
AZLumberjack
Posts: 309
Joined: Feb 17 2010 10:28 am
City, State: Apache Junction, AZ.
Contact:

Re: Digital Cameras

Post by AZLumberjack » Sep 01 2016 5:23 am

xthine wrote: I'd say it's pretty good to take out on the trails.
Sony makes some very good camera's, now ya gotta post some shots from it :)
On every trip into the Superstitions, I find another Gold Mine. Today the mine was filled with Memories. I can not wait for the next trip.

User avatar
xthine
Posts: 37
Joined: Jul 22 2016 10:20 pm
City, State: Sedona, AZ

Re: Digital Cameras

Post by xthine » Sep 14 2016 1:07 pm

@AZLumberjack

Just figured out how to post a photo..will share more :D

User avatar
AZLumberjack
Posts: 309
Joined: Feb 17 2010 10:28 am
City, State: Apache Junction, AZ.
Contact:

Re: Digital Cameras

Post by AZLumberjack » Nov 23 2016 8:53 am

I just came across something interesting to anyone who thinks their camera takes the best pictures. This video is a good down-to-earth test of some of the favorite cameras that exist on the market today, including APSC sensors, Micro Four Thirds and even the iphone. The video's a bit long but I think it has a good testing and evaluating method for comparing JPEG photos right out of the camera. Ultimately it's kinda surprising where some of the cameras placed in each of the tests.

http://www.shutterbug.com/content/which ... 2URvuuA.97
On every trip into the Superstitions, I find another Gold Mine. Today the mine was filled with Memories. I can not wait for the next trip.

User avatar
Sredfield
Posts: 1579
Joined: Sep 08 2002 1:07 pm
City, State: Ahwatukee, AZ

Re: Digital Cameras

Post by Sredfield » Nov 23 2016 1:05 pm

And when you buy that new camera, be sure to put a document in the memory stating your contact information so when someone finds it on the trail they have a way to get it back to you.
Shawn
The bear went over the mountain to see what he could see.

User avatar
outdoor_lover
Posts: 1664
Joined: Aug 19 2011 7:49 pm
City, State: Scottsdale, AZ

Re: Digital Cameras

Post by outdoor_lover » Nov 19 2017 10:21 pm

Well, after 5 years, my Camera is now mostly Retired. My Trip down to SE Arizona last Week and a Botanical Gardens Day Trip right after pretty much convinced me that it's just no longer Reliable enough. I was closing in on 60,000 Shutter Clicks with it and I don't think Nikon really built those Cameras for that kind of Use and Punishment.... :sweat: It was Crashing, Freezing Up, the AF has been starting to fail and the Colors/Exposure are starting to be "Off".... Plus I was finally starting to have problems with Dust on the Sensor.... ](*,)

So it is now my Backup if I ever need one. I managed to get the Super Zoom Bridge, that was Destined to replace it, On Sale. I decided that rather than get it Online from Nikon this Time, I'd support my Local Small Business and bought it at a Camera Store I like. It was a good Decision. They offer a 5 Year Warranty/Insurance Plan that not only covers Manufacturer's Stuff, but also Drops, Spills and even Immersion, as long as you can recover the Camera... By the Time I bought the Camera, the Insurance, a new Bag, new Spare Batteries and a new Battery Charger it got a bit spendy, but hopefully it will last 5 Years like my other one did. If it doesn't, it's covered anyway, so if something fails and they can't fix it, I get a new one... :D I've about got it set up now and will probably go out to Gilbert this next week and start breaking it in....Some new Features to get used to, but basically the Controls and Menus are Identical to what I had, so not too much of a Learning Curve... A little more Zoom though.... :y:
Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty & well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, totally worn out & proclaiming, "Wow What a Ride!"

User avatar
azbackpackr
Posts: 8122
Joined: Jan 21 2006 6:46 am
City, State: Flag-summer-Needles-winter

Re: Digital Cameras

Post by azbackpackr » Nov 20 2017 4:34 am

@outdoor_lover
Congrats on your new camera! I'm still dragging my Nikon around, similar to your old one, but still can't figure out how to stop it from having such high contrast photos. I try landscape setting, but it doesn't help much. It's always very washed-out. Anyway, I am going to look for a high quality pocket camera eventually. Those big ones simply don't fit my hiking style, especially since I am getting back into bushwhacking and scrambling. I have been bringing along my waterproof little Fujifilm (it's the third one I've owned of those) but it doesn't actually do a very good job. Need one with a better lens.
There is a point of no return unremarked at the time in most lives. Graham Greene The Comedians
A clean house is a sign of a misspent life.

User avatar
outdoor_lover
Posts: 1664
Joined: Aug 19 2011 7:49 pm
City, State: Scottsdale, AZ

Re: Digital Cameras

Post by outdoor_lover » Nov 20 2017 12:28 pm

@azbackpackr
Remind me the next time I see you and I'll look at your Camera... My New Camera is the Nikon Coolpix B700... I finally have a Camera that at least shoots RAW, lol My next Upgrade has got to be my Canyoneering Camera. The Panasonic I have is a serious POS, I hate it.... I need to Bite the Bullet pretty soon and at least get an Olympus TG....
Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty & well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, totally worn out & proclaiming, "Wow What a Ride!"

User avatar
azbackpackr
Posts: 8122
Joined: Jan 21 2006 6:46 am
City, State: Flag-summer-Needles-winter

Re: Digital Cameras

Post by azbackpackr » Nov 20 2017 4:58 pm

@outdoor_lover
Thanks!! I've been eyeing your New Year's hike, but haven't put "interested" yet. I'll have to see if I want to spend money on gas at that time. I'm working with a shoestring budget this winter due to my Oregon adventure/misadventure.
There is a point of no return unremarked at the time in most lives. Graham Greene The Comedians
A clean house is a sign of a misspent life.

User avatar
te_wa
Posts: 2478
Joined: Aug 22 2003 9:16 pm
City, State: 221b Baker St.

Re: Digital Cameras

Post by te_wa » Nov 20 2017 4:58 pm

i've been playing with my new canon for a couple weeks. it's decent. G9X mk II.
touch screen very user friendly with the smartphone crowd. its' much like my Galaxy in that regard.. but the menu is going to take some time to discover.. i'll get back to ya's later.
:D

User avatar
ssk44
Posts: 202
Joined: Mar 31 2008 8:48 pm
City, State: Gilbert, AZ

Re: Digital Cameras

Post by ssk44 » Nov 20 2017 5:27 pm

te_wa wrote:G9X mk II.
That's cool. The 1 inch sensor Canon's are good cameras. My dad has a G5X. Sensor size makes a big difference. I love that your G9X starts at 28mm on the wide end rather than 24mm. Much more natural perspective. 28mm is plenty wide for general use.
ISAIAH 6:2-3 / MATTHEW 11:28-30

User avatar
KBKB
Posts: 54
Joined: Apr 22 2012 4:52 pm
City, State: Fountain Hills, AZ

Re: Digital Cameras

Post by KBKB » Nov 21 2017 1:44 am

I've been really happy with the various Sony RX100 cameras. I'm currently using the RX100 V for most of my hikes, though I still use the III for hikes which are somewhat more adventurous - e.g. I bring the III when canyoneering.

I also own some better cameras and lenses, but generally do not like the weight and bulk when hiking.

User avatar
Hansenaz
Posts: 85
Joined: Apr 06 2005 7:22 am
City, State: Phoenix, AZ

Re: Digital Cameras

Post by Hansenaz » Nov 21 2017 10:59 am

@te_wa
I've been using a G9x for a while. I like it OK: fits in my pocket and takes decent pictures. Having said that I'm not completely satisfied: 1) I seldom get shots I think are really sharp or impressive - though I wonder if I'm comparing to results I see on HAZ which benefit from a lot of post-processing either in our out of the camera. 2) I've not really established a standard setting for my generic snapshots (tend to use P mode, vivid) 3) the small touch screen is a pain for me in bright daylight. I'm more likely to inadvertently accidentally mess up my setting than to intentionally improve it.

User avatar
ssk44
Posts: 202
Joined: Mar 31 2008 8:48 pm
City, State: Gilbert, AZ

Re: Digital Cameras

Post by ssk44 » Nov 21 2017 1:43 pm

Hansenaz wrote:I seldom get shots I think are really sharp or impressive.
Hmm.. That's interesting. That model does get some mixed reviews. Maybe they're not all the same in regards to image quality. In contrast, my dads G5X takes very impressive photos. And I'll add right out of the camera. Maybe you can try changing your setup to match my dads camera and see what happens.. Change the resolution to (S)M1. That's superfine compression and medium 12 Mega Pixel. Large resolution at 20 MP is crazy high pixel density for that sensor size. That's a different discussion all together. I would also advise not using Vivid color. I was always a fan of that setting for years until I understood more about it. It does far more than just add color. It's also max jpeg sharpening and max jpeg contrast. Switch the camera to Custom Color (C). Custom lets you manually adjust Color, Contrast, and Sharpness. You'll need to figure out how to do this from either the manual or trial and error but there's a button that will open up the (C) custom menu. Switch the color to +4.. Switch contrast to +4.. Switch sharpness to +4. For reference running everything at +3 would be Canon default. +5 is Canon max which is what selecting Vivid Color gets you. +5 contrast kills your dynamic range and +5 sharpness over sharpens. +4 contrast will keeps your brights from being too bright and your dark shadows from being too dark. You'll also see options in there for "red", "green", "blue", and "skin tone". Leave all of those at default in the middle (+3). Give this a try and see what happens. Your photos should need zero post processing assuming you've taken photos in the field correctly in regards to exposure bias and sun angle. There are always exceptions. Basically just try this setup and see what happens. Its the same sensor as my dads G5X. In theory it should be similar. Good luck!

Edit.. Also try running the exposure bias at -1/3 by default. Canons by nature regretfully commonly overexpose. Default is "0".
Last edited by ssk44 on Nov 21 2017 2:08 pm, edited 2 times in total.
ISAIAH 6:2-3 / MATTHEW 11:28-30

User avatar
ssk44
Posts: 202
Joined: Mar 31 2008 8:48 pm
City, State: Gilbert, AZ

Re: Digital Cameras

Post by ssk44 » Nov 21 2017 2:02 pm

Hansenaz wrote:Though I wonder if I'm comparing to results I see on HAZ which benefit from a lot of post-processing either in our out of the camera.
I would also add to never judge camera photo image quality from what you see posted on HAZ. Joe can likely add further to this. Web compression is rough on photos and not just this website. It's just the way it is. That is not a negative jab at Hike Arizona. Your photos will always look a little soft. Especially cameras that shoot a 3:2 aspect ratio like yours and all modern DSLR camera's. For what ever reason 4:3 aspect ratio photos look better on this website. Again, Joe would know more about that. For example look at two recent photos from Queen Valley Ruins. This is right out of the camera at medium (M) resolution 11 MP on a Canon Rebel SL2 DSLR. Look at the photo directly from this link and than view the original in the viewing options. Viewing that original will show how much cleaner the image really is. You should be able to see the differences. The rocks just look sharper. Also don't judge the image quality by the background. The background is soft from shallow depth of field based on my chosen f-stop in aperture priority. That's a separate non relevant discussion all together. Hopefully this is not getting too technical. I've been told by some (Hank Grasshopper) that I can get a bit overwhelming. Sorry, bad habit. Ha.. Hank keeps me in check.

https://hikearizona.com/photo.php?ZIP=675586
https://hikearizona.com/photo.php?ZIP=675588
ISAIAH 6:2-3 / MATTHEW 11:28-30

User avatar
Hansenaz
Posts: 85
Joined: Apr 06 2005 7:22 am
City, State: Phoenix, AZ

Re: Digital Cameras

Post by Hansenaz » Nov 21 2017 2:30 pm

@ssk44
Thanks for the suggestions. I remember using your S95 suggestions for a few productive years....I'll try some of these.

BTW my gripe about my images compared to "some" is really directed to the iPhone posters. I think those pictures are often very impressive (at least as I view them on HAZ) and I'd hope that an expensive point and shoot camera (without a phone) could do just as well. Without knowing the reason for sure I attribute it to a team of smart guys at Apple knowing how to process the images in the camera for maximum effect.

User avatar
ssk44
Posts: 202
Joined: Mar 31 2008 8:48 pm
City, State: Gilbert, AZ

Re: Digital Cameras

Post by ssk44 » Nov 21 2017 2:36 pm

Hansenaz wrote:My gripe about my images compared to "some" is really directed to the iPhone posters.
I know what you mean. Smartphones even with there small sensor size take great photos very easily. They have what I call the "magic button". Your Canon with its 1 inch sensor is capable of taking very impressive photos but it unfortunately requires more from the person holding the camera. This is why so many people have completely switched to using there phones. I don't blame them. I think most all newer smartphones take great photos. Not just the iPhone.
ISAIAH 6:2-3 / MATTHEW 11:28-30

User avatar
RedRoxx44
Posts: 805
Joined: Feb 15 2003 8:07 am
City, State: outside, anywhere

Re: Digital Cameras

Post by RedRoxx44 » Nov 21 2017 5:42 pm

For me the proof of the photo is printing out say a 13 by 19 on my old Canon 9000Pro Mark 2 printer. If it looks sharp and good even color saturation, the the camera has done the job, even with low post processing. I print out letter size photos weekly to put up at work ( if I miss a week I hear about it--). Some photos look good on the monitor and terrible printed out, esp if I do too much HDR'ring it. Go back to the original, small amount of tuning up, then print. Then the color differences between monitors. I use a free program for resizing,etc, and an old program for psuedo HDR if I can get more out of the sky. But you do have to start with something good in the photo itself, and a cheap to expensive camera can do that if you use it well, and have a good quality lens whether fixed or interchangeable. Just my non professional .02 cents worth.

User avatar
te_wa
Posts: 2478
Joined: Aug 22 2003 9:16 pm
City, State: 221b Baker St.

Re: Digital Cameras

Post by te_wa » Nov 21 2017 7:10 pm

keep in mind the gx9 and the gx9 mark 2 are a little different.
:D

User avatar
Hansenaz
Posts: 85
Joined: Apr 06 2005 7:22 am
City, State: Phoenix, AZ

Re: Digital Cameras

Post by Hansenaz » Nov 22 2017 6:20 am

@te_wa
Looking forward to seeing some nice pictures from it....

User avatar
ssk44
Posts: 202
Joined: Mar 31 2008 8:48 pm
City, State: Gilbert, AZ

Re: Digital Cameras

Post by ssk44 » Nov 22 2017 9:51 am

te_wa wrote:Keep in mind the G9X and the G9X Mark 2 are a little different.
Actually very different. I've been trying to figure out what changed on the Mark II. Now I know. Beyond Digic 7 and some other tweaks this model now utilizes "Picture Style" for its jpeg processing which is more similar to what DSLR's use. That is a very big difference. My suggestions below only apply to the original G9X...
I would also advise not using Vivid color. I was always a fan of that setting for years until I understood more about it. It does far more than just add color. It's also max jpeg sharpening and max jpeg contrast. Switch the camera to Custom Color (C). Custom lets you manually adjust Color, Contrast, and Sharpness. You'll need to figure out how to do this from either the manual or trial and error but there's a button that will open up the (C) custom menu. Switch the color to +4.. Switch contrast to +4.. Switch sharpness to +4. For reference running everything at +3 would be Canon default. +5 is Canon max which is what selecting Vivid Color gets you. +5 contrast kills your dynamic range and +5 sharpness over sharpens. +4 contrast will keeps your brights from being too bright and your dark shadows from being too dark. You'll also see options in there for "red", "green", "blue", and "skin tone". Leave all of those at default in the middle (+3). Give this a try and see what happens.
I actually plan to buy a G9X Mark II someday for my work and general use. I'm speculating at this point, but if its anything similar to DSLR Picture Style you'll likely just want to use "Standard" and possibly bump the color a bit. Contrast and sharpness will likely be fine.
ISAIAH 6:2-3 / MATTHEW 11:28-30

Post Reply

Return to “Photography”


cron