Size Matters - what camera for a river cruise?

[WIT]

Shopping for a camera? Here are some factors I considered in shopping for the camera I used on my Christmas Markets cruise. It was my second digital camera after using my original one on two overseas trips. (the first camera was a 4MP Canon G2) If not shopping, please skip this post.

 

Camera Size matters in a variety of ways: A compact camera will fit in your pocket and is more likely to be ready for that impromptu shot. It's also hard on your arm to hold a big camera for an entire morning tour. If you travel through Heathrow in London, security will make you fit that camera into the single bag they allow you to carry on. Size also matters oppositely in that a traveler may want a camera with a large optical zoom to get that long distance close-up. (digital zoom doesn't count - it's just cropping the photo and you can do THAT at home) Until recently, getting a large 10X 0r 12X optical zoom meant selecting a somewhat larger camera that would not fit easily in a shirt pocket, but a few small ultra-zoom cameras have come out this year. Camera charger size matters too, if you’ll be carrying it in your carry-on, so ask to see the charger before you buy - some of them are like small bricks.

 

Unfortunately, small cameras can be hard to hold, especially if your hand isn’t small. And it’s not just the drop risk to consider - you get better photos when you can comfortably hold the camera on the subject. Put any camera to this test in the store: with one hand zoom the camera to something on the farthest wall and snap a few shots while holding the camera at arm’s length. If you like any of the shots (you won’t until you are holding a camera that is right for your hand), consider buying the camera. I myself cannot snap a decent shot unless the camera has a contoured grip.

 

Features Matter 1. Zoom compounds the effect of jitters, so make sure the camera you get can stabilize the image or your zoom shots won’t be worth keeping unless you use a tripod.

 

Features Matter 2. Go for Burst Mode. Cameras with this feature will snap at least three quick shots per second, so you can pick the best shot and delete the other two. This really helps when the subject is moving - like a stork landing on a nest, or a grandchild. Some cameras will also give you three exposures or white balance variations of the same shot so you can choose the best.

 

Features Matter 3. Multi-delete gives you the option of viewing and marking many shots then deleting them all at once after you are sure. Without this feature you may not have time to delete all those extra shots you took.

 

Features Matter 4. Preset shooting modes are a big convenience if you are not a camera buff. On my recent Christmas Markets cruise almost all my outside shots were in SPORTS mode and all my inside church shots were in CANDLELIGHT mode. I hardly ever used a flash. Take a look and see what you think at

 

http://picasaweb.google.com/billwito...nubeBendVienna

 

 

Battery size matters. With all this zooming and deleting you will want an extra battery so you can make it through an entire day without running out of power. Some cameras use plain AAA or AA batteries so you will either lug along the spares or trust in purchasing them. Rechargeable batteries take many more shots, especially if the camera is made to use a camcorder battery. Li-ion batteries weight a lot less and it doesn’t hurt them to be partially recharged - an issue with NIMH batteries.

 

LCD screen size and resolution matter. A big, bright screen is easier to see - it’s great for multi-deleting and for composing photos containing two subjects. (and yes, you must stop using the view-finder or you will never learn to use the zoom feature!) Trust the LCD - it’s telling you what the photo will look like. Some newer cameras have eliminated the viewfinder entirely. But what about the problems LCDs have when bright sun is at your back and the glare on the LCD makes it unreadable? Some cameras have a moveable LCD which allows you to deflect the glare to a different angle so you can see once again. Other cameras let you greatly increase the LCD brightness despite the sun’s glare. I have found that a small piece of paper or a baseball hat can keep glare under control.

 

Photo Storage Media Size matters. Most digital cameras are shipped with no storage card or with a ridiculously small sized storage card given the size each photo will take on the card and in your computer. Some cheaper cameras have no removable storage card at all and rely on a dedicated USB cable to transfer photos to your computer. This is a slow process which is dependent on their supplied software - often of limited quality. With a card you pull the card out of the camera, pop it into a slot in the front of your computer which then treats the card like it was a CD holding photos. Picassa2, free from Google, will detect the card and copy the photos to the PC directory you choose. It also makes web photo albums easy to share with your friends. You will want the largest storage card your camera can handle so you can keep many, many photos on it. The most popular cards are SD or CompactFlash. Prices have dropped to the point where it is easier to buy a few of these tiny cards for the entire trip and just forget about needing to transfer every few days to a CD. I got a couple 2 GB SD cards at Fry’s for $30 apiece. Each holds 840 shots from my 5Megapixel 10X optical zoom Panasonic TZ-1,

 

Myth: Size ISN’T decisive when it comes to MegaPixels. A 4x6 photo print from a 4 MegaPixel camera is undistinguishable from a 4x6 print from an 8 MegaPixel camera. The machines printing your photo can’t tell the difference. Your computer screen has a resolution of about 100 dots per inch, so you cannot see a difference if one was there. Printers and computer screens operate in the 3 MP range. Picture quality changes NOT with the increase in MegaPixels, but with it’s SQUARE. To double the resolution of your 4 MP camera you need a 16 MP(big bucks), and the storage card that would have held about 800 of your photos will now hold about 50 shots.

 

Lens quality and image sharpness DO matter: Your camera’s digital sensor can only record the light the lens delivers. Manufacturers do not readily share information about lens quality except to say theirs is great. Image sharpness and depth are a function of the size of the CDD image receptor, which is why SLR cameras with a CCD the size of a 35mm film frame record sharper images than a pocket camera CCD with a sensor the side of your pinkie fingerprint. Unless you want to spend big bucks for the larger sensor, look for a camera with a better lens.

 

What did I buy? I spent $300 for a 5Megapixel 10X optical zoom Panasonic Lumix TZ-1. I liked the Leica lens, lithium battery, image stabilizer, lots of preset modes and other features. The clincher for me was the contoured grip. I miss my Canon’s stitch mode for panoramic shots, but the having a camera the size of a pack of cigarettes means making choices.

[npphotog]

Now that's what I call an excellent and very informative post. Should be great information for travelers who are looking for a camera to take with them on trips. Fine job WIT. Willard

[Buckland]

I have a Canon S3 IS and I think it's the best camera for the buck. You can find them around $450 Canadian. Mine is 6 Megapixel 12x zoom (which is amazing) and has a 2 Gig memory stick which I purchased extra. The feature I like the best about my camera is that it will shoot 16x9 format which is great to view on a wide screen TV. It has the multi shot format as well as movie mode, which I use more than I thought I would. I have big hands and this camera fits them perfectly without being too big. The batteries I use are Powerex rechargeables which have 2700 mAh (that's micro Amp hours) I have shot all day and have taken up to 500 photos without replacing the batteries. A lot of them were taken with using the flash as fill too.

 

You can get some good rechargeable batteries these days with 2500 mAh batteries. My charger is made by Maha and can condition batteries that are getting a little long in the tooth. You can Google them if you want more technical info. The above combination did me very well in the cruises that we have taken so far. They will accompany me wherever I will go in the future.

 

Thanks for the info Wit.

Even if you don't have a stitch setting you can still use the Zoombrowser software to assemble pictures. Just crop them so they line up a bit and the software will do the rest. You will probably have to practise a bit, but it does work. I tried it when we went to London last year. I was pleased with the result.

 

Buck

[WIT]

Buck - Thanks for the tip about using Zoombrowser to stitch a series of shots. I was missing that feature.

[TataTom]

Wit:

A very informative post about cameras, and you have covered almost all of the bases. One thing you didn't mention, and that almost drove me crazy with my first digital camera (a Nikon Coolpix S4) was shutter lag. We took this camera with us on a California coastal vacation, and it was extremely frustrating. We went on a whale watching cruise, and as the whale would break the surface, I would shoot. By the time the shutter went off he was back under water and I have a nice series of photos of ripples on the water surface. This camera (about $400) did not give me the option of setting the focus and exposure so it would not have to take the time to do it itself when I shot. After that experience, I knew I had to have a camera where I could control or eliminate shutter lag.

 

Another problem with this camera was viewing the potential photo. It was next to impossible to see the screen in bright daylight, and many times I was shooting by guess and by golly. (The screen looked great in the camera store, out of the sun.) So the next item on my list was a camera with optical viewfinding.

 

With those two criteria, I went to my local camera store and they recommended a Pentax Ist DL single lens reflex. It was about $500. The zoom was not as much as the Nikon, but the resolution was higher and I could optically crop (poor mans zoom) if I needed to later. Even when the camera is deciding for itself where to focus and what exposure, the shutter lag is way less than the Nikon. And if I preset the focus and exposure, shutter lag is non-existent. The ground glass viewfinder is wonderful, I always see what I am going to get and I see it clearly. This camera has many other very nice features as well.

 

I was absolutely delighted with the camera on my recent two week European river cruise. I've posted photos if you are interested, they are at:

http://travel.webshots.com/album/556525880qJuAWh

[Buckland]

I couldn't agree more with TataTom. I had a Toshiba camera (my first digital) that I got a great deal on. The camera lag was so long I often would have the camera back in my pocket by the time it would take the shot.

 

The camera I have now (Canon S3 IS) is way, way better. The lag is due mostly to the auto-focus but I can see when it is focusing. Granted there are times when it has difficulty, like when I am on maximum zoom on a moving ship, but I have been amazed at some of the results. (see statues on the river) My camera is not an SLR, but it does have a screen in the view finder which is identical to the big one on the back. (which swivels around for shooting over crowds)

 

I guess the bottom line is Pick what works for you. I used to have a film-type SLR, which was stolen from my car many years ago and never replaced. Some of the new cameras are truly amazing.

 

Buck

[steamboats]

Hi all,

 

As I do need a wide angle I opted for the Ricoh Caplio R5 which is 20mm-200mm. No shutter lag, but the flash is "underpowered" which makes it sometimes difficult to get good shots in darker rooms. But it´s a great tiny camera, pocket size.

 

DD (7 years) got a Canon Ixus which is even smaller but the optical range is not as good as the one of the Ricoh. The flash has more power on this one.

 

steamboats

[Buckland]

Hi Steamboats,

For wide shots I use the built-in "Stitch Assist" setting which allows me to stich a series of photos together to make very wide, panoramic photos. It works extremely well, especially when there is a nice vista to shoot from a bridge or high castle wall. I have a few in my Amsterdam to Budapest photos:

http://picasaweb.google.co.uk/buckcruiser/AmsterdamToBudapest2006Cruise

With a little practice I was able to get a 360 degree shot at the Vatican a couple years ago.

 

Buck

[WIT]

Steamboats - I got better results when I turned my flash OFF. What I mean is that the automatic flash setting on your camera will try to throw some light at the target even when there is no way enough light. If you turn the flash off you will get a dark picture that might be easily improved with photo software like Picassa (it's free). Every church photo in my Amadagio Christmas Markets posting was done with the flash turned off, then brightened with Picassa.

[WIT]

Buck - I remember swearing at my Minolta 440 as it struggled to find a correct focus. I noticed both you and Tatatom use the viewfinder despite having a camera with an LCD. Is your preference an old habit you choose to continue, or do you take better shots? If your LCD shows a somewhat different picture, which one is recorded. My new camera (Panasonic TZ-1) has no viewfinder at all and I think as a result I concentrate more on shot composition.

[Buckland]

That's great advice Wit - I'll give it a try - I just got Picassa and I love it. You can even straighten you photos with it!

I prefer to use the view finder rather than the LCD screen at the back of the camera. Mine screen will fold away so it looks like it doesn't have one and my nose doesn't smudge the dickens out of the screen. It displays exactly what you get too, by the way, but so does the screen in the view finder. It's not bothered by bright sunlight either so shooting in sunny conditions is a breeze. I can focus on content and not worry about if there is something I'm missing by having obliterated by sunlight.

I just got a new tripod too, which helps a great deal in keeping the camera steady in dim lit locations. It has a very wierd name, but works like a hot damn. It's called Manfrotto 785B, which you can Google to have a closer look at it.

 

Buck

[WIT]

Buck - Looks like you've found a very compact, functional tripod. I would have trouble river touring with one but I agree that some way has to be found to keep the darn camera still while shooting indoors without a flash. I took advantage of my pre-knee replacement status during our Christmas Markets cruise and purchased a Leki Trekking pole with a photo mount for its top knob. Usually I just held the camera firmly against the trekking pole instead of actually screwing it into the photo mount.

[Buckland]

Hi Wit,

 

I used several pillars in some of those dark churches to take a lot of shots. I'm sure I looked odd, but the photos turned out to be reasonable. I had thought of extending only one leg of my tribod to use as a pole for support, but have not actually tried it yet. I've been too busy clearing out our house in preparation to selling it. After the beginning of February I'll be able to devote a lot more time to playing. That is if I survive this reno!

 

Buck

[WIT]

Buck - Sounds like many of our generation have done the same things lately. We redid our place in N. Wisc, then built a townhome here in Chicago. Three words of advice: take many photos! Especially of anything that will be covered.

If this is your first downsize then another issue is the constant pile of items that become garbage each week. I recommend liberal use of 6-packs.

[Buckland]

I'm half way though my first 24!

 

There are three piles:

1 give-away and charity

 

2 Storage

 

3 Chuck

 

If I can't make up my mind, I hit with a big hammer - then it's an easy choice.

 

Buck

[TataTom]

Wit:

The answer is a combination of both. Yes, as a long time user of SLR cameras, it seems very natural to me to look through the optical viewfinder, and in an SLR you are actually looking through the lens and seeing on the groundglass exactly what will be seen by the imaging device. I think you also get better shots, because it is so much easier to hold the camera to your eye and follow the subject until the proper time to shoot. Holding the camera away from my face and peering at the digital screen seems unnatural to me. Another advantage is that you can focus while framing your photo and save time waiting for the camera to focus.

 

What you see on the LCD screen is usually a tad less than what you actually capture, the camera allows some room for "error" in framing. Most SLR ground glasses show you exactly what you will get, so you need to be a little more careful.

 

Buck - I remember swearing at my Minolta 440 as it struggled to find a correct focus. I noticed both you and Tatatom use the viewfinder despite having a camera with an LCD. Is your preference an old habit you choose to continue, or do you take better shots? If your LCD shows a somewhat different picture, which one is recorded. My new camera (Panasonic TZ-1) has no viewfinder at all and I think as a result I concentrate more on shot composition.

[WIT]

My old Minolta 440 SLR required my face to be within 1" of the viewfinder

(infrared sensor) and my hand (or some other conductor) had to complete a circuit on the hand grip otherwise it would NOT take a picture. My new Panasonic TZ-1 is the opposite: no viewfinder at all, what you see is what you get.

 

A person who has become pleased with their results using an optical viewfinder will certainly always take better pictures using that method, BUT that same person might take fundamentally better pictures using the LCD and that same person might take more interesting shots with the LCD that are inconceivable without.

 

Here are my reasons for fundamentally better.

 

1. To use the viewfinder you must press 6-8 lbs. of moist, oily, hairy exhaling body against your camera. The camera hardly ever reaches your body temperature, especially the longer you linger in that old cathedral, so if your breath has fogged your viewfinder it probably did the same to your lens. And you never can tell if your've properly cleaned the lens unless you go outside.

 

2. In order to get a long exposure you have held your camera against something in the cathedral - perhaps a cool pillar, and when you viewed the shot later it was still blurry. Here's why: If you like so many of us are blessed with corrective lenses, just look at your top lens frame against a bright light while you take 4-5 breaths - could you keep the lens completely still? Was it your pulse or your breathing that caused the movement? Either way, more body in your photography generally means more blur.

 

Here are some reasons for more interesting:

 

1. The shot over the crowd with your hands overhead, over the folks on the other side of the bus, or around the corner, or down the space between two studs (it spots the wire).

 

2. The shot or video clip where the camera hangs at your waist, apparently not on, with the LCD set at 90 degrees straight up so you can press the shutter whenever you wish without giving everyone 'the signal'.

 

3. The shot out the front window of the bus while you hold your camera at max zoom on your knee in the bus aisle. Don't try this without image stabilization, but you can get pictures only the folks in the front seat get.

 

I still love to drive stick shift and dearly miss my 5-speed Acura GSR. If it snows, I can go up to Wisconsin and get on a trail with the wind in my face, but even those darn things have CVT and you never feel them shift. At least I can shove my face up against the windshield to see what's coming. Oh, you mean you sit back and look at the whole windshield?

[TataTom]

Wit:

I agree with your logic, at least most of it.

 

Actually, I think the very best photos will be taken with a view camera using the ground glass on the rear with a dark cloth over your head, and I have done a fair amount of this, although a lot of years ago. What you can do with a view camera is amazing, almost as amazing as what you can do with Photoshop Elements. However, taking a view camera and its equipment along on a vacation trip would only appeal to Ansel Adams.

 

If my Nikon Coolpix had an LCD screen that could be seen easily in the sun, I probably wouldn't have been so anxious to have the SLR viewfinder, but I still prefer it nevertheless. I like to do the focusing and I can preview the depth of field as well.

 

Cameras are like cars...we each like something different, but we all want to get somewhere.

[Bill S]

Hi! Very interesting and informative thread you guys! To keep this on topic, we took our first river cruise last spring (Viking Tulips & Windmills) and took 2 digi's, both Nikons: Coolpix 4800 and a D50. I like them both and yes, the D50, can be a "load" compared to most other compact digis.

I have had 4 digital cameras and learned after my first one that a viewfinder is very nice to have on sunny days-the Sony Mavica had only the lcd screen. The D50 is the opposite, having only a viewfinder for framing/focusing - the lcd is merely for menus and viewing the photos. The Coolpixx 4800 has both but the viewfinder is electrically actuated - you have either the lcd screen or the viewfinder, but not both on at the same time-a bit awkward, but manageable.

The reason I took both is that I wanted the versatility and 6mp capability of the D50 along with the no-delay shutter: press the button and the shutter opens instantly; but the D50 does not like rain at all, so I wanted a foul-weather back-up, the Coolpix. The latter is easier to keep dry due to it's smaller size yet is feature-rich with a slew of image modes and a decent optical zoom. They both take great pictures, IMO.

Oh, and thanks to this thread, I started looking for a monopod and found a Manfrotto model that is just perfect---Thanks! You all have really shared a lot of good ideas and considerations. Now, if only I could take good photos!!!! :eek:

[WIT]

Cruising with a camera brings its own special challenges, not the least of which is deciding what minimal gear will do the job. I think anyone who plans to bring their photo equipment carry-on needs to consider smaller everything: laptop, camera, chargers, quad-band phone, tripod, wallet, gear bag (only ONE allowed thru Hearthrow these days).

 

I also think you arrive home with better trip photos if the camera was nearly always at your side & ready to shoot. If it is large to where you must DECIDE to have the camera ready and focused for an expected shot, then you will never attempt a whole bunch of wonderful photos because the camera and the lens are simply too big for all day long impromptu photography on a long tour. The wrist tires, you have purchases in your other hand, you do any one of the routine things of life and BAM, the perfect shot passes with your camera OFF and in the bag! Each of us has experienced the regret of not being ready for a shot. I think experienced photographers anticipate shots a lot better, but I am troubled by the blinders created by the limits of what was possible with old technology. I want to see the photos these experienced folks would produce if they discovered that a large camera is no longer vital to getting great photos.

 

 

 

Bill S. :It looks to me like the Manfrotto tripod would fit in my gear bag if I removed my umbrella. I have looked at lots of tripod options also and on my last trip carried a small (5") collapsible tripod to facilitate the delayed shutter shot and a Leki collapsible aluminum trekking pole with a removable photo mount knob. Once I recover from knee surgery I am considering using the Joby Gorillapod as it will fit in a pocket. You can check it out at

 

http://www.kk.org/cooltools/archives/cat_photography.php

 

This site also has the review which convinced me to buy my current camera, the Panasonic Lumix TZ-1. With it I don't need a large camera.