Mt. Whitney Portal Store & Hostel Forums General Mt. Whitney Portal Store Message Board I need a new camera

I had a 4-year-old Kodak digital camera, but this summer, it died. It got splashed by sea water, and after several weeks, it stopped working.

So... I am looking to replace it, and am hoping people here will share their opinions.

A thread ran last summer (Ideal camera for backpacking), but now those cameras have all been replaced by newer models. Has anyone seen any reviews lately?

I am looking for something for around $300 that is not too bulky.

Thanks for any input.

Steve,
I just happened to look at the digital camera market this past weekend after thinking about replacing my 5 year old camera. I was surprised at the number of cameras in the 7-8 Mpixel range for under $300. The Olympus Stylus 820 has a 5x optical zoom, water resistance, and a small body for around $250. The 5x optical zoom sounds appealing for outdoor use.

My old camera way dying, so after a bit of research, I bought a Canon SD1000. Great camera - very light, big LCD, optical & digital zoom, quick cycle time, etc.

Also looked at the Canon A570. Probably a better value overall, with the advantage of taking AA batteries, but it's larger size was an issue for me. Like to have a camera that rides easily on my cheststrap.

The camera was $175 on Amazon. You'll need to pick up a larger CF memory card also.

I just bought my wife her first digital camera as a birthday present. Canon A630, 4x zoom, articulating LCD. It is similar to my son's older A95, but 8mpix and 4x zoom. I like the fact that the Canon A-series still uses AA batteries, not some proprietary or, worse yet, internal non-removeable battery. They did change from compact flash to SD cards, but flash cards are inexpensive enough ($15 for 2 gig SD) that it wasn't a big issue. (Both my son's A95 and my DSLR use CF.)

Probably the most important feature of the A630 that is missing on most of the latest compact digital cameras is an optical viewfinder. For use in bright conditions like we have on sunny days in the mountains, the LCD on digital cameras is useless unless you add a hood of some sort. Having the optical viewfinder lets you use it like a regular camera, held up to your eye. Personally, I think that leads to sharper shots because you reduce the camera shake from what I see a lot of people doing holding their digital cameras at arm's length to see the LCD.

That said, I also really like the articulating LCD. Folded in facing the camera, it automatically turns off (saves batteries). You can fold it out and flip it to face the front of the camera for self portraits or flip it face-down to hold the camera over your head for over-the-crowd or high viewpoint shots. The A630 has full manual override and usable macro capabilities. Not a bad point-and-shoot digital.

I go the opposite direction for my own "lightweight backpacking camera." Nikon D200 DSLR, aux battery pack and 3 lenses (24~120, 12~24 and 10.5 fisheye for panoramas). Not anywhere near your price point, of course! But, considering I used to lug my Mamiya RB67 and 3 lenses (2-1/4x2-3/4 film waist-level SLR) backpacking, "light" is definitely a relative term. And, yes, I did get a lot of odd looks on the trail out at Philmont when people saw the D200 hanging around my neck in the middle of a 100-mile trek...

Yeah, and there was a time when I packed along a video camera on hikes.

I do like the optical viewfinder with the capability to shut off the LCD display -- saves batteries big time on a long trip. And I also like the cameras that take standard AA batteries just in case the rechargeables run out on a trip.

Thanks for the feedback. Looking forward to many more.

I like Canon for point and shoot cameras (their DSLRs are good too). If AA power is a must, look into the Canon A5xx, A6xx and A7xx series. The A5 and A7 series uses 2 AA so they're smaller than the A6 series which uses 4. But the A6 has faster flash recycle and a few extra features like a tilt-swivel screen. I use to take an A610 on my hikes and I liked it because it had a lot of photographic controls, like aperture priority and flash exposure compensation. What I didn't like about it was it was bulky, heavy and it only went as wide as 35mm. I eventually switched to a Canon SD800IS, which was smaller, lighter, and went to 28mm. I decided I would give up some controls for a smaller camera and 28mm. There is a newer version now called the SD870IS, but I don't think the small changes are worth the extra $70. You can still get the SD800IS on Amazon for $250.

If you get an AA powered camera, I recommend Sanyo Eneloops or other low self-discharge NiMH batteries.

Over the summer I bought my wife a Canon sd1000 for about $200, highly rated and takes great pictures. Not sure of it's ruggedness or ability to survive the outdoors and temperatures. But it’s perfect for her and her needs and I use it when I want something in my pocket not around my neck.

For out door use I have used the following features that I think must be specifically searched for on the current lines of consumer digitals:

I value the optical zoom capability over digital.
I value a good macro capability, to take pictures of insects or flowers.
To capture the dynamic range of light and shadow outdoors for the ‘hang on the wall pictures’ one needs a camera with a good ISO rating.
Can the camera get cold, sprinkled or snowed on. Some cameras have good seals and prevent reasonable humidity from entering the camera.
Viewfinder and high brightness LCD.

Batteries and memory card type are often secondary concerns. I’ve never gone anywhere without at least two extra cards and sets of batteries.

I take my Sony dsc717 everywhere and like Alan said, people look at me oddly on trips with this camera hanging off my neck instead of a nice sleek camera and case. I’m thinking of upgrading also and am looking for a DLSR probably a Sony Alpha. But again, one takes risks with such equipment when in the elements. It’s a balance of many things. Many of the newer cameras take great high res pictures and focus great and have some zoom features but they don’t offer other things I see valuable.

Joe

I hear there is a "build it yourself" camera located about a thousand feet under the Cables on Half Dome. Might take a bit (more) exploring to get all the parts together though..

Anyway..I've been very happy with my girlfriend's Pentax Optio W10..it is small, slim, light, takes great photographs..and best of all it is waterproof. I've taken it down to 20 or 30 feet underwater with no problems. I think they've since come out with a newer model (W20?). The only drawbacks..no viewfinder..you have to compose your photo on the LCD screen..which can suck because it uses more power that way...and in bright conditions it can be hard to read.

Good luck..

Chris

I have a Canon S80 that I really like - it's no longer made. If I replaced it right now I'd probably get a Canon PowerShot SD870 IS because I have really enjoyed the wide angle lens on the S80 and the SD870 has one too.

Has anybody seen any reviews on the new technology displays that supposedly let you set the brightness levels for outdoor use. Also, it sounds like most people do not like lithium ion rechargable cells because they need recharging. Has anybody using rechargeable batteries (including rechargable AAs) kept data on the average number of shots per charge?

No data kept, but in the Kodak, after the factory batteries became weak, I bought a pair of rechargeables from the local drug store, and they were giving me maybe a hundred shots on one charge. I think Kodak called for the NiMH type.

Based on that experience, I really like the AA battery option.

Shots per charge…
Arguably I think AA’a are relatively convenient but not necessarily the best reason to purchase a camera. My 5 year old Sony dsc717 has the NP-FM50 Li-ion battery. What I like about it is that the battery charges pretty fast and the camera displays accurately how many minutes are left on the battery. This has equated to an average of 250 pictures. I often switch between the LCD/optical viewfinder and have the Camera on a short auto off timer. The last 4 day trip I took 500+ pictures and barely got into the second of three batteries.

The GPS I have uses AA’a and lasts for two days. I find myself packing too many AA’s in reserve. The issue I’ve experienced with AA researchables is the weather. Hot and cold (freezing/snow) especially diminish their capacity. As an example, my GPS on rechargables dropped it’s usable charge significantly when I was sleeping in subfreezing temps. So the next morning the batteries in the unit needed replacement and the batteries in my pack lost some capacity as well. A hiking partner had his camera not even power up because of his batteries being too cold. It also points to the selection of batteries. I now only carry the Alkaline AA’s on my trips.

Joe

For cold weather, the Lithium primary AA batteries are pricey but effective. However, some cameras tell you NOT to use them. The Canon A630 manual says NOT to use Lithium batteries for some reason. The Li AAs will far outlast alkaline AAs in digital cameras.

My experience on long treks has been:

Nikon Coolpix 4500, proprietary Li-ion rechargeables: I needed all four Li-ion batteries to make it through a 10-day, 1000-frame trek out at Philmont in '05. I was using the LCD viewfinder with a magnifying hood and very short timeout (30 seconds) and the LCD backlight set way down low since I had the full hood and, in effect, eye-level viewfinder.

Nikon D200 DSLR, 6-AA aux battery pack, Lithium primaries: I got through 9 days of a 10-day, 1000-frame trek at Philmont this summer before having to put in the second set of Li primaries. Indeed, the first set wasn't absolutely fresh...I had taken 50-100 shots at summer camp back in June before heading to Philmont. I believe I would have gotten similar results from the proprietary Li-ion rechargeables but they are quite expensive and I had no way to recharge on the trail. Plus, they are heavier than the Li primary AAs, so carrying an extra set of AAs rather than spending $100 on a second pair of Li-ion rechargeables made sense to me. When I have regular access to AC to recharge the Li-ions, I'll use them because they're obviously cheaper in the long run. I also have NiMH AAs, but they are older ones (1500 mAH, not the newer 2600 mAH) and last me a day or so of shooting, so I tend to use them only while the Li-ions are recharging. Once they wear out, I'll buy some of the newer low-self-discharge NiMH AAs and try them out as well.

Given the choice, I'll still pick a camera that takes AA batteries simply because I then have the option of using cheap alkalines, long-lasting but expensive Li primaries or NiMH rechargeables. Above all, I'd avoid any camera with only built-in rechargeables for the obvious reason that you have no recharge capability on the trail and no option for carrying spare batteries.

I haven't bought this yet but the Kodak Z812IS looks pretty good. It's a little thicker than the flat ones out now but it has great features not the least of which is it takes HD video (720p). It has a 12x optical zoom and optical image stabilization (better than electronic). It also takes AA batteries. It also has a viewfinder so you don't have to use the LCD. It retails for about $270.
Meckers

P.S. if you get the Kodak, please post a review especially about the HD video.

"Some assembly required ..."
It may need a chip to work, too.

Steve C.

You are sure getting a lot of advice on this subject.

I bought a Sony DSC T10, which is a very light and small 7.2 mega pixel camera, about a year ago. I was backpacking out of Yosemite and my sister-in-law had a similar model that was one generation older. After I saw how easy it was for her to just pull it off her belt at a moment's notice, without hardly breaking stride, I decided this was the camera for me.

The DSC T10 has an optically stabilized Carl Zeiss lens which is excellent German type optics! This link gives the specs: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/T10/T10A.HTM

I used this camera for a week on the High Sierra Trail this last summer and took 180 pictures. The battery held the charge to the end and had a lot of time left after a week. The battery comes with a charger and is proprietary to Sony.

It takes movies, which I haven't done much of, and has a large viewing screen.

The replacement model this year for the T10 is the T20 which has bumped up the megapixels to 8.1 and costs less! Link: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/T20/T20A.HTM

Circuit City advertises it for $299 with discount for some reason or other of $50.....so $249. But of course you have to buy memory, at least 1 gig, but they're advertising 2g for $37.99.

I think a year ago I paid $50 for 1 gig!

This camera slips into a pocket and takes great pictures!

I think it's worth checking out,

NMS

Hey Steve,

If you haven't already done a side-by-side comparison using this Side-by-side Camera Comparison Tool, you owe it to yourself to spend some time comparing cameras using this valuable tool.

When I went to buy the now-demised camera that you searched for at Half Dome recently, I went into the store not really knowing exactly what kind of camera I wanted, having been kind-of overwhelmed with everything I had seen online with all the various features to choose from, etc. I had seen the above comparison tool, but still didn't really know how to evaluate the results I was seeing without further input from someone more experienced with cameras and their features than I was at the time.

So when I finally broke down and went into my local Cord Camera shop and spoke with the older experienced photographer who was in charge there, he immediately got onto their in-store computer and brought up this same comparison tool in order to show me side-by-side comparisons of every conceivable feature found on any given camera that was available on that site's list of cameras (and the list is exhaustive). That process, in concert with his expert advice, made all the difference in helping me see through the mass of choices I was facing. Give this a try with the various cameras mentioned here in this thread. I think you'll enjoy it and it will be helpful.

CaT

I use a Nikon Coolpix 4800. It is 5 mp and 8x optical zoom. Be sure to watch the optical zoom and buy the highest you can get. The digital zoom electronically zooms in. This is an edit function you can do better on the computer. The optical zoom uses the lenses to zoom and gives a clear picture. Digital zoom makes the picture look grainy and not as clear. When you edit, the picture loses more clarity because of this. Be sure to stop on the highest optical zoom before digital zoom takes over.

I also use a Nikon D50 and carry 3 of the batteries with the camera. I also carry an 80-300 zoom with it. I get fantastic shots with this set-up. I also carry 3 - 2mb cards and get 526 high-resolution shots on each card. All in all I can shoot for days on end without running out of battery and memory. However, it is heavy…

Many stores will allow returns after a trial period, just keep it new and leave the stickers on. Shoot many type of shots and edit on the computer to see how the camera works and if it is the right one for you.

CaT,
That is a great site with excellent technical reviews. I assume that you have a lot to be thankful for on Thanksgiving (and will be setting a camera resolution for the new year ).

VF,

Yes -- much to be thankful for! I took today (Friday after T-Day) off and one of the things I hope to accomplish today is getting a new replacement camera, now that the old one has officially been "not found". As requested by someone early in my "of cameras and granite" thread, I will post at the end of that thread how it goes with making a claim for a new camera based on the full replacement insurance I bought for the old one that went down Half Dome.

While digesting Thanksgiving dinner yesterday, I finally had some free time to upload the pictures on the chip that Steve found and mailed to me, and have now begun the process of moving them into my new Flickr account. I think I am going to eventually transport all my previous photos from smugmug over to Flickr. Both sites are somewhat slow uploads, but as good as smugmug is, I think Flickr's ease of use is better, once you figure it out, and I was even more impressed by what got my attention with Flickr in the first place -- ease and quickness of viewing someone's pix in a slideshow, with or without captions. I also figured if Flickr was good enough for Bob R., then I should take a look. I liked what I saw.

Glad you enjoyed the camera comparison site I referenced previously. I found it immensely useful, as I hope others here will also find. If anyone is into cameras, they may want to save the site to their Favorites.

Hope you are having a good long weekend, and also have much to be thankful for (including this MB and our family of friends here).

CaT