Best camera for Alaska

[lives to cruise]

Hi, I have a few point & shoot cameras and of course my smart phone but we will be cruising in Alaska next May and I want to take some spectacular pictures.

 

I have toyed with the thought of buying a DSLR but I am not that adept with taking pictures with them. I have also read about mirror-less cameras. Which are better?

 

Any an all help/advise will be appreciated.

 

TIA

[Crew News]

Hi, I have a few point & shoot cameras and of course my smart phone but we will be cruising in Alaska next May and I want to take some spectacular pictures.

 

I have toyed with the thought of buying a DSLR but I am not that adept with taking pictures with them. I have also read about mirror-less cameras. Which are better?

 

Any an all help/advise will be appreciated.

 

TIA

 

There are many good mirror-less cameras available that will give spectacular shots. Post processing also helps a lot.

 

I have been using my Olympus OMD M-1 ($699 at BHPhoto) for the past three years. It is about half the weight of a DSLR. It works great and is weather-sealed. Add a zoom lens and you will be ready for Alaska.

 

My Canon S120 P@S is always in a pocket for the "less-than-spectacular" moments (dining, ship interior, etc.)

[pierces]

Hi, I have a few point & shoot cameras and of course my smart phone but we will be cruising in Alaska next May and I want to take some spectacular pictures.

 

I have toyed with the thought of buying a DSLR but I am not that adept with taking pictures with them. I have also read about mirror-less cameras. Which are better?

 

Any an all help/advise will be appreciated.

 

TIA

 

For all intents and purposes, mirrorless and DSLR are in the same category with extensive control over the capture process and interchangeable lenses. (All have sophisticated Auto modes that allow for a smoother learning curve). Mirrorless full-frame cameras are smaller than the full-frame DSLRs and APS-C mirrorless camera are quite a bit smaller yet. (A consideration if you are concerned about weight and volume.) Ipersonally shoot with a sony A6300 and an A6000 as a backup. (both are very popular and dedicated threads have sprung up for both, discussing almost any question you may have.) A6000 link - A6300 link

 

Link to our last cruise which was shot with my Sony mirrorless cameras: http://galleries.pptphoto.com/allure2016

 

Since you are coming from a P&S, you may want to consider a "bridge" camera like the Panasonic FZ1000 or if you are fond of video as well, the expensive but superb Sony RX10 III. This type of camera has a fixed zoom lens (both excellent, with a nod going to the Sony) and a smaller sensor than the interchangeable lens cameras but they take excellent pictures and both have long zoom ranges suitable to wildlife as well as landscapes. They work in point and shoot mode well but offer a lot of control if you want/need it. The Sony is at the top of the heap in this class and is priced accordingly. As I mentioned before, if you are fond of shooting video, you can leave the camcorder at home with either and if you want broadcast quality 4K, the Sony will out-shoot just about anything short of a pro video rig.

 

Reviews.

 

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-alpha-a6000

 

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-a6300

 

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonic-lumix-dmc-fz1000

 

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-cyber-shot-dsc-rx10-iii

 

Too many choices out there. Happily, virtually none are bad.

 

Dave

Edited August 31, 2016 by pierces

[peety3]

The "better" option is whatever makes the most sense for you. I'm a dyed-in-the-wool DSLR guy, so I'm all for that option, with the caveat that in Alaska, it's entirely possible to take the widest range of lenses out there yet still not have "enough". We've gone with a range from 11mm (126-degree angle of view, for the broadest of landscapes) to 840mm (2.4-degree angle of view, for that eagle over -there-) and I still wished I had more.

[Victress2007]

As a P&S to Bridge camera to mirrorless person, I hear you! Both my trips to Alaska were with a bridge camera, and while I got some great shots I always wanted more. It's one of the reasons I finally went mirrorless this year. Next month we are going to Yellowstone and it's the first time I will use the mirrorless for some long distance wildlife.

 

I have been practicing a lot with the Sony A6000. I bought two extra lenses, a wide angle and a 18 - 240. It won't give me as much reach as my Sony HX50V or the HX200V. I plan on bringing the HX50V as a backup camera and I bought an extra plate for the tripod so I can easily change out the cameras.

 

Now, in Alaska, on a whale watch, or in a helicopter, you can't really make use of a tripod. In that case it is practice and the reach of whatever lens you have, as someone else said, you always want more! Unless you buy a DSLR with some heavy, expensive lenses it's going to be tough to get all that reach.

 

Next time we go to Alaska, (we live in the NW right now, so there probably will be a next time), I will take the mirrorless and think about renting a long lens, but I will also take along the bridge camera because it is quick and easy. I used to be tempted by the DSLRs I saw but I never wanted the weight. I love the A6000 and think it is close to the perfect camera for me.

 

Oh, and listen to Dave, he is knowledgeable and extremely helpful!

Good luck!

 

Vic

[Multi-Cruiser]

Good points Victress2007. A couple points I'll add: if you want to get shots from a moving platform like a helicopter or moving vessel you will need a fast shutter speed, 1/2000/sec or faster would be on the safe side. One thing to keep in mind is the Exposure Triangle. Increasing your shutter speed means you will have to also increase your ISO and/or open your aperture more. This will have to be done in Manual mode and will require some experimenting and practice, practice, practice. Once you see how the Exposure Triangle works it will become second nature. Have fun!

 

I agree with you on Dave! He's a great photographer and a wonderful and willing resource.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

[Mr. Click]

Yes, Dave is a great resource and a wise man. I think he knows more about photography than I do and I got paid to do for 46 years...so listen to his advice. A lot will also depend on your own budget.

[peety3]

if you want to get shots from a moving platform like a helicopter or moving vessel you will need a fast shutter speed, 1/2000/sec or faster would be on the safe side. One thing to keep in mind is the Exposure Triangle. Increasing your shutter speed means you will have to also increase your ISO and/or open your aperture more. This will have to be done in Manual mode and will require some experimenting and practice, practice, practice.

Not to be blunt, but absolutely not: "This will have to be done in Manual mode" is patently and completely false. It CAN be done in Manual mode, but it can also be done in Shutter Priority (S on some cameras, Tv on others), though I'd recommend against it until you're familiar with the exposure triangle and know how your camera warns you if the shutter speed you've requested is insufficient. It can also be done in Aperture Priority (A on many cameras), and what I normally recommend because of the more consistent look once the ISO is raised sufficiently to get to or past the target shutter speed. It can also often be done in Program mode (P on many cameras, essentially one click down from full-auto) using "program override".

 

As far as lens choice, I felt that 16-35mm and 70-200mm was actually wrong on my helicopter tour, and 16-35 plus 24-70, maybe even just 16-35 and crop as needed, would have been fine. I didn't feel an urge to shoot a lot from inside the helicopter, and it's generally too cramped on a tourist flight to wield a big 70-200 or longer lens.

 

On a moving boat, I've had absolutely no problem using a monopod on catamaran glacier tours or on whale watches. I merely kept the shutter speed perhaps a stop faster than the general rule of thumb, and have been plenty happy with my results. That's with either a 200-400/280-560 or a 600/840mm lens, and my results were far better than my first time to Alaska with a 500 and no monopod (my arm got too tired to keep the lens at the ready, and the whales were underwater before I could "draw my weapon". I'd actually characterize wind as more of a challenge than vibration from a moving boat.

 

For a sense of the range of lenses you may eventually see crazies like me shooting in Alaska, start here and scroll through to the right: You'll see a picture of the lens, followed by a shot at its widest, and a shot at its tightest (if it zooms). All of these were taken from a tripod in the same spot, with the camera aimed at the same spot.

[wmjivey]

Of course if you have any experience with a higher level camera, you can rent a really nice camera and lens for a couple hundred dollars. It is a great way to test the waters before you buy. Look at Lens Rentals and Borrow lens for their gear

 

John

[xlxo]

Hi, I have a few point & shoot cameras and of course my smart phone but we will be cruising in Alaska next May and I want to take some spectacular pictures.

 

I have toyed with the thought of buying a DSLR but I am not that adept with taking pictures with them. I have also read about mirror-less cameras. Which are better?

Thoughts....

• what excursions are you on? Whale watches demand a zoom lens to get those perfect butt shots!
  
• Are you into food porn in the dining room? You might want something with low-light if you don't plan to use the flash.
  
• Some mirrorless models use the same sensor as a DSLR. You should get similar quality.
  
• Think about a second or third battery as the mirrorless LCD screen will burn through your batteries.
  

[Multi-Cruiser]

Not to be blunt, but absolutely not: "This will have to be done in Manual mode" is patently and completely false. It CAN be done in Manual mode, but it can also be done in Shutter Priority (S on some cameras, Tv on others), though I'd recommend against it until you're familiar with the exposure triangle and know how your camera warns you if the shutter speed you've requested is insufficient. It can also be done in Aperture Priority (A on many cameras), and what I normally recommend because of the more consistent look once the ISO is raised sufficiently to get to or past the target shutter speed. It can also often be done in Program mode (P on many cameras, essentially one click down from full-auto) using "program override".

 

 

You are correct about the priority modes. I had forgotten about them since I usually shoot in manual. I'm not sure about using a monopod in a helicopter. I've never done that but I would think the monopod might pick up too much vibration if resting on the floor, but maybe not. Something else to carry around.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

[Mr. Click]

Shooting from a helicopter or an airplane you want to isolate your camera from the aircraft to reduce the vibration. I have avoided the tourist flights because you are cramped in and shooting through a window. If I can't open the window or better yet take the whole door off I am not interested. It could be fun to see these sights from the air but making quality images, not going to happen thru extra layers of glass. I have found a shutter speed of 1/500 is ok for helicopters, 1/1000 for airplanes. Just make sure to isolate from the aircraft.

[peety3]

Thoughts....

• what excursions are you on? Whale watches demand a zoom lens to get those perfect butt shots!
  
• Are you into food porn in the dining room? You might want something with low-light if you don't plan to use the flash.
  
• Some mirrorless models use the same sensor as a DSLR. You should get similar quality.
  
• Think about a second or third battery as the mirrorless LCD screen will burn through your batteries.
  

Whale watches demand a good telephoto lens. It doesn't need to zoom, but it needs a modestly high focal length.

If you're into food porn, you likely want a camera with excellent high-ISO performance (not just ability, as many brands equip their cameras with high ISO settings that are extremely noise; hence, you want a camera that performs well at high ISO). Slow shutter speed impacts the ability to hand-hold, and fast aperture impacts the depth of field in your shot. We've made the mistake of posting pictures with a macro 50mm f/2 that were shot wide-open, and had too many negative comments that we mis-focused. No, we didn't, but we did choose a poor aperture for the nature and relative size.

Same sensor in two cameras might produce similar quality images, but if one camera has a decidedly underpowered CPU, you'll find that AF and exposure is much slower, impacting how responsive the camera is.

[Victress2007]

Thoughts....

• Think about a second or third battery as the mirrorless LCD screen will burn through your batteries.
  

 

The Sony mirrorless cameras have an evf (electronic viewfinder) which is excellent. They also have great multiple shot options. That being said, there are a lot of not very expensive options for extra batteries and external chargers. It was one of my first purchases.

 

 

Taken with a HX200V bridge camera.

 

Vic

[framer]

Alaska offers some great photo ops. A good DSLR will offer faster acquisition of a shot than any other type of camera. A good 2.8 lens or better also help getting a focus lock fast.

 

If you start to see a whale breaching and want to get that perfect shot then speed matters. Catching that eagle catching that fish speed matters. For static picture any P&S or iPhone should do.

 

My two cents...

 

You can also get lucky.

 

framer

[Crew News]

You are correct about the priority modes. I had forgotten about them since I usually shoot in manual. I'm not sure about using a monopod in a helicopter. I've never done that but I would think the monopod might pick up too much vibration if resting on the floor, but maybe not. Something else to carry around.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

 

None of my helicopter flights allowed tripods, monopods, backpacks, selfie sticks, etc. A camera in your hand and an extra lens in your pocket was the limit.

[lives to cruise]

Wow, thanks so much everyone for all your input and tips. Sorry I didn't respond sooner, I live in Georgia and the storm knocked my power out for a day and then cleanup took a while.

 

I am going to reread all your posts, do some more research and them maybe rent a camera or two to see what feels better to me.

 

Again, thanks so much!

[havoc315]

Mirrorless cameras are essentially dSLRs, though it depends...

A dSLR is an interchangeable lens camera that uses a larger sensor than a P&S -- Typically it will use an "APS-C" sized sensor or a "Full frame" sensor.

A mirrorless is an interchangeable lens camera that uses a larger sensor than a P&S, though there is greater variability: Nikon 1 mirrorless utilize a "1-inch" sensor, just slightly larger than a P&S. Olympus and Panasonic use a "4/3" sensor, just slightly smaller than APS-C. Fuji, Canon and Sony use APS-C sized sensors, just like a dSLR. And Sony has models with full frame sensors, just like advanced dSLRs.

 

So the only fundamental difference between mirrorless and dSLR is a mirror that flips up and down inside the camera, allowing for a optical viewfinder that projects the image from the lens. Mirrorless, like P&S, use an electric viewfinder, and/or the LCD screen. Because they lack that flipping mirror, and because the system is sometimes designed around smaller sensors, it can lead to smaller cameras. (The Nikon 1 cameras are about the same size as P&S... The Oly/Pan cameras fall between P&S and dSLR, the Sony and Fuji APS-C cameras (with lens) can be slightly smaller than most dSLRs, the full frame mirrorless are about the same size as APS-C dSLRs.

 

So mirrorless has the potential to give you the best image quality, in a package slightly smaller than a traditional dSLR. Some people can also find mirrorless slightly simpler to use, because they feature things like face-detect over the whole frame, they let you view the shot before you take it through the viewfinder. But overall, it's about the same ease/difficulty of using a dSLR.

 

P&S, which I consider every stand-alone camera that doesn't have an interchangeable lens, is a huge term covering lots of types of cameras and hundreds of models. It's a dying breed, as phone cameras can now compete in quality with most P&S cameras, most of the time. They can't match the premium P&S cameras, like the Sony RX line, and they don't have the telephoto abilities like the Canon SX line. But for most every day pictures, they are just as capable as most P&S cameras.

 

So what's best for Alaska, really depends on the photos you want to take. Do you want to capture eagles soaring in the distance? Then you need a very responsive camera with a large telephoto lens. Do you want to take stunning vistas of the glacier landscapes? Then you want a high resolution camera with a good wide angle lens.

Do you want to take shots inside the cruise ship without resorting to a flash? Then you need a camera with a good low light sensor and lens.

[peety3]

So the only fundamental difference between mirrorless and dSLR is a mirror that flips up and down inside the camera, allowing for a optical viewfinder that projects the image from the lens. Mirrorless, like P&S, use an electric viewfinder, and/or the LCD screen. Because they lack that flipping mirror, and because the system is sometimes designed around smaller sensors, it can lead to smaller cameras. (The Nikon 1 cameras are about the same size as P&S... The Oly/Pan cameras fall between P&S and dSLR, the Sony and Fuji APS-C cameras (with lens) can be slightly smaller than most dSLRs, the full frame mirrorless are about the same size as APS-C dSLRs.

 

Yes, the fundamental difference is the lack of mirror. However, taking away that mirror and the associated mechanisms that work in tandem with it also takes away the phase-detection auto-focus that DSLR users have learned to love. Phase detection can tell not only IF the lens is focused, but if not focus, WHICH WAY and HOW MUCH it's not focused. AFAIK, that's not possible in a mirrorless camera, so those rely on contrast detection AF, which usually requires that the camera run the lens through its entire focus range to see what point had the best contrast, and return to that point. Phase-detect AF is what gives DSLRs the excellent tracking ability that's essential for sports/action/wildlife shots.

 

So what's best for Alaska, really depends on the photos you want to take. Do you want to capture eagles soaring in the distance? Then you need a very responsive camera with a large telephoto lens. Do you want to take stunning vistas of the glacier landscapes? Then you want a high resolution camera with a good wide angle lens.

Do you want to take shots inside the cruise ship without resorting to a flash? Then you need a camera with a good low light sensor and lens.

Landscape shots have no more need for high resolution than any other. Inside shots require either a good low-light sensor (high ISO performance) AND/OR a "fast" (wide aperture) lens. The high ISO performance is potentially more versatile, as it doesn't restrict your low-light shooting to thin slices of focus, but if you pair the two together you've got the ability to optimize for the scene at hand.

[pierces]

Yes, the fundamental difference is the lack of mirror. However, taking away that mirror and the associated mechanisms that work in tandem with it also takes away the phase-detection auto-focus that DSLR users have learned to love. Phase detection can tell not only IF the lens is focused, but if not focus, WHICH WAY and HOW MUCH it's not focused. AFAIK, that's not possible in a mirrorless camera, so those rely on contrast detection AF, which usually requires that the camera run the lens through its entire focus range to see what point had the best contrast, and return to that point. Phase-detect AF is what gives DSLRs the excellent tracking ability that's essential for sports/action/wildlife shots.

 

 

Almost all the latest-generation mirrorless cameras have phase-detection autofocus. This is done by embedding sensel pairs in the sensor itself. For instance, the Sony A6300 has 499 Phase-detection points covering over 90% of the image area. With the increased read speed of its new copper wire sensor design, it can actually attain focus faster than nearly all DSLRs.

 

From DPReview:

 

"Telephoto Continuous AF test

 

With the Sony FE 70-200 F4, the results were really impressive. Not only could the camera happily sustain focus on the subject traveling towards the camera, but in tracking mode with a medium-sized focus target (Lock-On: Flexible Spot M) it was able to keep track of a subject weaving around in the frame. At 8 fps.

 

This is a really impressive result: the closest we've seen to a 100% hit-rate in this test so far. The Canon 1D X II and Nikon D5 may well be able to match this performance, but there isn't a DSLR that can focus so far out towards the edge of the frame as this. What's all the more impressive is that there aren't any complex settings that need to be configured to get this result - it's essentially point and shoot."

 

A side-benefit of the on-sensor phase-detect focusing is that the focusing is done at the image plane so there is no need to micro-adjust every lens you own to correct for the slight misalignment that exists in DSLRs where the focusing is done via a reflected image.

 

Another difference in modern mirrorless is the lack of blackout between frames. The A6300 supplies a real-time video feed during shooting at up to 8 frames per second, eliminating the "slide-show" lag in earlier versions. It is still not zero-lag like a DSLR but the blackout time is shorter.

 

Mirrorless and DSLRs both have their advantages but as the format matures, mirrorless is closing the gap and even exceeding the capabilities of DSLRs in some areas. DSLRs aren't in danger of extinction anytime soon but mirrorless can no longer be dismissed as a "new toy" (especially if you shoot video too).

 

Dave

Edited September 7, 2016 by pierces

[havoc315]

Yes, the fundamental difference is the lack of mirror. However, taking away that mirror and the associated mechanisms that work in tandem with it also takes away the phase-detection auto-focus that DSLR users have learned to love. Phase detection can tell not only IF the lens is focused, but if not focus, WHICH WAY and HOW MUCH it's not focused. AFAIK, that's not possible in a mirrorless camera, so those rely on contrast detection AF, which usually requires that the camera run the lens through its entire focus range to see what point had the best contrast, and return to that point. Phase-detect AF is what gives DSLRs the excellent tracking ability that's essential for sports/action/wildlife shots.

 

 

Landscape shots have no more need for high resolution than any other. Inside shots require either a good low-light sensor (high ISO performance) AND/OR a "fast" (wide aperture) lens. The high ISO performance is potentially more versatile, as it doesn't restrict your low-light shooting to thin slices of focus, but if you pair the two together you've got the ability to optimize for the scene at hand.

 

There are now mirrorless cameras with excellent phase detect AF. Get with the times! :)

The Nikon 1 uses extremely fast phase detection. On my recent cruise, I brought my Nikon d750 and Sony a6300. The a6300 is equipped with excellent hybrid phase detect AF. In most situations, the AF is faster than my d750. (in super ridiculously extreme low light, the d750 is better)

 

While high resolution is not a necessity for landscapes, I find it presented added value in distinguishing glorious detail in such shots, including the ability to crop in post to refine the shot. And I'm much more likely to want a huge print of a landscape personally.

[peety3]

There are now mirrorless cameras with excellent phase detect AF. Get with the times! :)

I sit corrected.

 

While high resolution is not a necessity for landscapes, I find it presented added value in distinguishing glorious detail in such shots, including the ability to crop in post to refine the shot. And I'm much more likely to want a huge print of a landscape personally.

I find the same desire to preserve glorious detail in a bear's fur, an eagle's wing, barnacles on a whale's tail, etc. With the eagles in particular, I find the need to crop is almost guaranteed. ;)

[havoc315]

I sit corrected.

 

 

I find the same desire to preserve glorious detail in a bear's fur, an eagle's wing, barnacles on a whale's tail, etc. With the eagles in particular, I find the need to crop is almost guaranteed. ;)

 

Fair enough, I do tend to crop my birds heavily.

I suppose the key difference -- when shooting birds in flight, I want a fast burst rate. And high resolution cameras tend to go slower. I don't know any 30+ MP cameras that can shoot 8+ FPS.

 

On the other hand, when shooting a landscape, especially on a tripod, camera speed is mostly irrelevant so no negative to using high MP. so I correct my original statement -- not that you need high resolution for landscapes, but you're not paying a penalty for the extra benefits.

[TruckerDave]

This is turning into DPreview. (and that is NOT a good thing) :eek:

[pierces]

This is turning into DPreview. (and that is NOT a good thing) :eek:

 

I disagree...we are still missing the look-down-the-nose condescension and name-calling. There is also a pretty consistent effort to debunk "you can only do (A) if you use (B)" statements instead of piling on with blind agreement. :)

 

Dave