Cameras and Canyoneering/Peak Bagging

[blueshade]

I've been considering buying a new SLR type camera to take better pictures of all of the mountains and canyons I visit. However, I'm wondering if the extra weight and the risk of damaging pricy equipment (through physical damage, dirt, etc) is worth the better picture quality.

What are other people's experiences with this? It's one thing with an easy canyon like Buckskin but a whole other situation doing Chambers or the Black Hole.

To put it into perspective, I currently have a decent point and shoot camera (Canon SX 20) that I feel comfortable using and abusing.

[accadacca]

I am going to move this to "The Dark Room" forum. You might have better luck in there.

http://www.bogley.com/forum/forumdis...-The-Dark-Room

[jbdavies]

You could get a sealed dSLR and one lens to do the trick. For sealed Canon cameras... there are the Pro bodies (1ds MKIII, 1ds MKIV, 5D, 5D MKII)... or, the cheaper, yet still very good, semi-Pro 7D. All of those are weather sealed... so you wouldn't have to worry about the dust and the little bumps and scrapes that you're bound to get. But, to get a true seal... you need to get a 'L' lens. Which are expensive.

So, I guess it depends on how much you're willing to spend.

[Deadeye008]

These look pretty cool.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/SonyNex5Nex3/

[blueshade]

You could get a sealed dSLR and one lens to do the trick. For sealed Canon cameras... there are the Pro bodies (1ds MKIII, 1ds MKIV, 5D, 5D MKII)... or, the cheaper, yet still very good, semi-Pro 7D. All of those are weather sealed... so you wouldn't have to worry about the dust and the little bumps and scrapes that you're bound to get. But, to get a true seal... you need to get a 'L' lens. Which are expensive.

So, I guess it depends on how much you're willing to spend.

Thanks Jeremy,
A 7D or even Mark II would be great, but more than I really want to spend. Although I don't think it's really that much better than a T3i, I think I'm going to go with a 60D. Too bad it isn't weather sealed (I don't think), but it's significantly cheaper than the higher models. I'm thinking about a 18-200mm lens to start with.

Any additional thoughts would be appreciated if you have the time. Thanks!

[CarpeyBiggs]

you don't need a sealed camera. you just need to take care of it. is there a reason you prefer the 60d to the rebel t3i? for the money, i'd say the rebel is a better deal, unless you think you need the metal body, etc...

18-200 is a good starter lens. does a lot of things well, but nothing really great. covers huge focal lengths, which will be very helpful. it also helps to have a small point and shoot camera for those canyons you want to get physical in, and not ruin your expensive slr. i'd consider a panasonic TS3, which is waterproof and doesn't have a motorized lens that extends, which tends to get filled with sand and ruins the camera quickly.

if weight and price are a concern, consider looking at the new micro 4/3 offerings from panasonic, or the sony nex's. smaller, lighter, cheaper, but they are slightly less quality. although, i'm of the opinion that unless you are a decently good photographer, the image quality aspect is quite negligible nowadays. (especially if you are considering a camera like a rebel...)

[ibenick]

Thanks Jeremy,
A 7D or even Mark II would be great, but more than I really want to spend. Although I don't think it's really that much better than a T3i, I think I'm going to go with a 60D. Too bad it isn't weather sealed (I don't think), but it's significantly cheaper than the higher models. I'm thinking about a 18-200mm lens to start with.

Any additional thoughts would be appreciated if you have the time. Thanks!

I have a 60D and an 18-200. I totally dig the 60D and I was stoked about the 18-200 for a long time but lately I have major remorse about it. You can get GREAT snapshots with it but if you ever want to get really nice photo then you're screwed. Like Dan says, it does a lot of things well but nothing great. And how often do you really need 200mm? After 2 years of toting this thing around I'm seriously considering the 17-40 f/4L as a replacement for it. I think there has been maybe 3 or 4 times that I actually needed to go long and with a higher quality lens you can crop down and still have better quality than the 18-200 at its equivalent.

[gnwatts]

you don't need a sealed camera. you just need to take care of it.

You can take care of any camera and have issues with dust and water. For me, having a sealed camera is not even up for discussion, it's just what i need. You can get a 1DS MKl in great condition for under $1000, 11mp with a full frame. It is weather sealed. Combine it with a used 17-40 f4/L that Ibenick suggested and you have a fully weather sealed unit, for way under $2k. A lot of money, but prices have risen. If you need new equipment, you will spend a lot more than $2K to get a wether sealed camera.
BTW, the 17-40 on my 1ds MK ll is not as sharp as I would have liked in the corners, it does not come close to the 17mm TS-E, unfair comparison I know, but I am getting spoiled.

[CarpeyBiggs]

1ds = overkill. way too much weight, way too much money, way too old...

we are talking about a decent BEGINNER camera. weather sealed cameras are heavy and expensive, and usually only found in the pro models. if she goes to a full frame sensor, there are huge weight penalties, and they cost more... weather sealing might be worth considering for some folks, but this isn't. i've taken all kinds of cameras into plenty of slots, flowing canyons, the desert, backpacking trips, and months of international travel. weather sealing is one of the last of my concerns. only time i needed it was shooting college sports in the rain, or wildlife with long lenses in inclement weather. and even then, you can still take measures to protect them without a sealed body.

[bowjunkie]

so why not a 50d ?

[jbdavies]

so why not a 50d ?

Because the 60D is newer.

[gnwatts]

So now that we know from carpeybiggs that a 1DS is overkill, how about a micro 4/3's Panasonic? Pretty cool unit.

[blueshade]

you don't need a sealed camera. you just need to take care of it. is there a reason you prefer the 60d to the rebel t3i? for the money, i'd say the rebel is a better deal, unless you think you need the metal body, etc...

18-200 is a good starter lens. does a lot of things well, but nothing really great. covers huge focal lengths, which will be very helpful. it also helps to have a small point and shoot camera for those canyons you want to get physical in, and not ruin your expensive slr. i'd consider a panasonic TS3, which is waterproof and doesn't have a motorized lens that extends, which tends to get filled with sand and ruins the camera quickly.

if weight and price are a concern, consider looking at the new micro 4/3 offerings from panasonic, or the sony nex's. smaller, lighter, cheaper, but they are slightly less quality. although, i'm of the opinion that unless you are a decently good photographer, the image quality aspect is quite negligible nowadays. (especially if you are considering a camera like a rebel...)

I agree I don't see much of a difference between the T3i and the 60D. I was told there is a difference in picture quality- but I'm not one to know. 60Ds seem to be largely unavailable online, at least with the 18-200mm lens. So for that reason alone I may have to look into the T3i. Anyone know what the difference btwn the two really are, besides the fps and possibly getting more shots out of the 60D?

I'm used to having a long lens range with my Canon SX 20 which I use a lot for taking pics of critters and things. Was hoping for something similar in a SLR, especially so that I could avoid having to get multiple lenses.

Oh, and is a lens that starts at a narrower focus (if that's the right way to describe it) automatically better than something to tries to do it all. i.e. 70-200 or 70-300 better than 18-200

I have seen a Panasonic TS2 in action and it looks great, but doubt the pictures are ultimately any better than my SX 20.

Thanks guys!

[CarpeyBiggs]

biggest difference between the x0d series and the rebels is user interface and metal bodies. rebels only have one control wheel, and an exposure compensation button you push in combination with the wheel. x0d series have a thumb control wheel, and one on the trigger finger, so it is easier to use. also, the 60d has an articulating screen if i remember right, same with the t3i (although i can't remember on those exactly.)

typically, yes, a lens that has a huge focal range tends to be kind of weak compared to a 70-200 (canon has done a great job with those) or definitely a prime (which has the best optical quality). most 70-300's are pretty weak too, if not because of the slow aperture, but the lack of sharpness. it's all one big compromise.

i'd say the 18-200 is a good place to start, and then you can figure out what focal lengths you prefer the most. if you are always in the telephotos, you can easily sell the 18-200 and move on to another lens. same can be said for if you find yourself wanting a wider lens.

[blueshade]

biggest difference between the x0d series and the rebels is user interface and metal bodies. rebels only have one control wheel, and an exposure compensation button you push in combination with the wheel. x0d series have a thumb control wheel, and one on the trigger finger, so it is easier to use. also, the 60d has an articulating screen if i remember right, same with the t3i (although i can't remember on those exactly.)

typically, yes, a lens that has a huge focal range tends to be kind of weak compared to a 70-200 (canon has done a great job with those) or definitely a prime (which has the best optical quality). most 70-300's are pretty weak too, if not because of the slow aperture, but the lack of sharpness. it's all one big compromise.

i'd say the 18-200 is a good place to start, and then you can figure out what focal lengths you prefer the most. if you are always in the telephotos, you can easily sell the 18-200 and move on to another lens. same can be said for if you find yourself wanting a wider lens.

Both have an articulating screen. I decided to splurge again and go with the 60D, although I still have my doubts that it's really that much of a better camera. I wanted to go with the 18-200 but that package seems to be out of stock, at least on the internet. I assume as a result of the earthquake and tsunami in Japan. So had to go with the 18-135.

Wanted something nicer for my vacations this year to AZ/UT and California, as well as to try some night photography. As long as I don't drop it on a rock or in a pothole it should be all good.

Thanks for the help everybody.

[peakbaggers]

For what it's worth:
As my wife and I aged, we got tired of lugging around all the weighty camera equip - body, lenses, etc. If you're not going to make a living at your photography, we decided let's just go light with a compact digital. Started out with a Canon SD850 IS. We were very satisfied with the results in the mountains and it only weighed just over 6 oz., a lot better than 2 - 3 pounds of SLR stuff & very convenient. But it did not do well in canyons with really low light. SO went and bought a Canon G10 - 14.7 megapix. This is a semi-manual camera. Weighs right at 1 pound. Does great in canyons - especially on a tripod of some sort. It's about 3" x 4" and 1.5" thick. Color is great. Canon no longer makes the G10 but have continued the series. I think they have the G12 out now - a little more compact than ours, but same basic features. Still a fixed lense series though, so you may not be all that interested in it, but the range it does have works for us in almost every situation.