UKC

I had a nice little Sony cybershot 7.2 mp camera, unfortunately after 6 years of heavy usage and flinging it off some cliffs it has packed up.

So, what shall I get instead. The Sony cost quite a lot of money then, but I have been told you can get the same quality cheaper nowadays.
Requirements that I have: obviously should take good pictures , good optical zoom, maybe quite wide angle for panorama shots / climbing shots, sturdy, long battery life for extended trips where you can't recharge, ok in the cold.

Can anyone suggest a good one and also help me with how much money I need to spend for something fairly decent. Bare in mind that I am bit short of cash, so no really expensive suggestions please, think value for money!

Thanks for your help!

In reply to Heike:

I'd suggest investigating the Canon G series. They're quite popular on here, so a search should turn up some useful info.

In reply to Heike:

My Olympus mju is old, so you'll choose a newer mju model, but it's waterproof to 3m, shockproof to drops from 1.5m and has done me very well as a climbing camera for the last 4 years. I only broke it once, when I took it down to 7m underwater. In summer it lives on a sling over my shoulder, so is easily accessible, in winter the cold eats the (rechargeable,) battery life so it goes around my neck next to my baselayer. The battery life is fine. On long trips it's on for photos only which helps a lot (no looking at photos taken,) and I've had some photos blown up to A3 which look great on the wall. The newer models have a panoramic landscape function thingy too. I'd replace it with another shockproof waterproof camera if it broke, as they are so easy to look after and don't need to be worried about.

In reply to Heike: What about CanonS90? Fairly compact, seems rugged (had mine only a few months), good compromise between zoom and wide, manual controls or totally automatic, shoots in RAW (way better than jpeg for tweaking after you get home). It is like a slimmed down G11 sort of thing. Not too pricey, certainly considering what you get for your money.

In reply to Heike:
thanks guys, I wll check these out. There are just so many different ones....information overload...How much money do people think I need to spend?? For example I just looked at the Olympus suggestion and it ranges from 139 - 300 pounds. Also, does one really need 14 megapixels? I guess you'd need a huge memory card...

In reply to Heike:

Mine is a mju 720 which is 7 megapixels, so I wouldn't say you did. You can change the image quality though. At SHQ which is the highest setting on mine, I can get 270 photos onto a gig card.

In reply to Heike: Get a secondhand Panasonic LX2

In reply to Heike: Canon Ixus 105? Nice image quality, very quick, easy and logical to use, quite wide angle (28mm) not the best zoom in the world, but not bad once you know its restrictions. Video isn't great quality, but that doesn't bother me. Here's a link to Amazon - it's £112.00 delivered - not bad. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-IXUS-105-Digital-Camera/dp/B00375N4KS/ref=sr_...

Jamie

In reply to Heike:
Make sure you are happy with the image quality on the olympus tough models. I've a tough 6000 and I'd say that in good light and conditions it produces ok shots but they dont tend to be really sharp.

Theres a slightly out of date group test here.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/Q209waterproofgroup/

Having said that I took my canon g10 multipitch climbing over the weekend and it was fine and didnt seem to object to being knocked about.

Also have a look at what some of the top photos are done on. Wee Davie uses a canon ixus 70 and gets very nice results from it.

In reply to Heike:
There are just so many different ones....information overload...


I don't know the Sony Cybershot and you don't state whether you want a camera that you can use on manual settings, but that could be a factor to bear in mind as you think about what you want. The Canons I mentioned and the S90 (now 95) that someone else mentioned are both capable of a huge range of functions as well as shooting in RAW. You might decide that you don't need these. HTH.

In reply to Heike: Have an Olympus Mju which is great for knocking about and getting wet but hardly use it now as i always seem to be disappointed with the picture quality.

In reply to Heike:

Have a look at the Sony TX5

In reply to Heike:

Hello Heike,

Although there are at first sight bewilderingly many compact cameras to choose from, the ones which matter are in fact surprisingly few. The ones which always come up again and again on the serious photo websites are:

Canon G-series (G10 etc.)
Panasonic LX3 / LX5
Canon S90 / S95

These are according to the review sites really a lot better than the mass of indistinguishable mass-market compacts, and having compared my LX3 with pictures from quite a few friends I have to agree.

I went for the LX3 because it is quite a bit smaller and lighter than the G10 for (according to the review sites) the same picture quality. I think that Jack Geldard and Chris Craggs also use an LX3. Ian Parnell uses a G10 (or G-something).

If you can stomach reviews, the best reviews of these cameras are these:

http://www.bythom.com/compactchallenge.htm
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/lx3.shtml
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/pocket-battleships.shtml

Looking forward to some super pics of more Wilder Kaiser classics whichever one you get!

Alex

In reply to alex_th:

Hi Alex, thanks for that,loads of info! It is indeed bewildering, I'll soldier on a read some more reviews then...

(Had a quick look at the above cameras prices and I am not sure they'll fit my current budget - yikes!)

In reply to Solaris:

Cheers, some of this might be quite useful though, ...decisions. Another question, my hubbie has just thrown in that he wants a at least 8 or 10X optical zoom as he wants to sit on an opposite cliff (at Pembroke for example) and zoom in loads! Is this asking for too much of a small camera and would that blow the budget...?

Thanks Solaris and everyone else, your input is greatly appreciated as I am just a bit overwhelmed at the choice!!!!
Heike

In reply to Jamie Hageman:

thanks Jamie, looked good... I was just getting into this one til my hubbie came home and said that he wants a great zoom....So, I guess that rules that one out then?
H

In reply to Heike:

I would say that is probably asking quite a bit of any camera. If you want half-decent results you'd be wanting a tripod and a fast lens but that's all more cost. One reason some people have gone for the Pansonic LX3 is because it is faster than the G10 but (I'm guessing) I doubt there'd be much visible difference in the results between the two at, say, Huntsman's Leap.

I'm not even sure that it's possible to get 8 or 10X optical zoom on a compact...

But I am a not particularly technically-minded enthusiastic amateur and am happy to be corrected on all this by someone more knowledgeable than myself.

One other thought, there's lots of things I'd like to be able to do with my camera(s !) but I can't. There's always a trade-off between the core of what you need out a camera and those things on the periphery that you desire out of one. Maybe that one shot across the zawn is such a desire; maybe it's an essential. Having said all which, I've been surprised what a bit of digital fiddling can recover from an image.

Another thought: don't rush into buying one if you can avoid it. Look at what cameras people are using, ask them what they think of, whether you can have a fiddle (with gloves on).

Finally (sorry for the long post), I've just looked at your gallery. There's some great, well-seen images there, so if it was me, I'd be wanting to stretch the budget as far as I can to make the most of recording what I'm seeing.

In reply to Heike:

G10/G11
solid tough body, good optical viewfinder, easy access exposure compensation for snow, wide angle, very good battery life, high quality lens

In reply to Solaris:


there are various ones out there eg canon Ixus 1000 HS.

i would happily recommend the canon s90, nice small camera but it fails the zoom part.

In reply to dissonance: better to enlarge a crop than to have a stupidly long zoom on a compact

In reply to Heike:

Hello again,

I've tried this (with SLR and long zoom), for example looking over the zawn from Newton Head to Stennis Head to photograph Merchant of Stennis and Bludgeon, or photographing Riders on the Storm from the other side of that zawn, or at Mother Careys looking across to Strait Gate, and the results were universally dissappointing. I think it had to do with the perspective being so flattened that it looked as if climber and rock had been painted onto one flat page.

The zoom range of the LX3 is really small (24mm-60mm equivalent) compared to, say, the G11 (28mm-140mm eq.), let alone the so-called travel zoom cameras with their 8X-10X zooms. However, I looked at a lot of magazine and guidebook photos before making my mind up, as well as at my own, and realised that most of them are made at wide angle or normal focal lengths.

There's one class of climbing shot which probably usually gets done with a zoom (although probably just something in the 70mm-120mm eq. range, not the 8X-10X things), and that's those sport climbing shots which look into the climber's eyes if not his soul. I don't really like these, however - I prefer a photo of a route with a climber on it to a close-up of bulging muscles and grim determination.

What you definitely want to avoid in a camera for taking on routes is a zoom which starts at 35mm eq. or longer. From the belay 28mm eq. is often much better.

Alex

In reply to Heike: Another vot for the olympus mju tough. Just survived 3 weeks in kyrgyzstan including inadvetretnly being dropped and the floating off down a river!!

In reply to Heike:
Hi everyone,

thanks so much for your help. Your tips and recommendations have started me off in the rght directions as I didn't even know where to look.

Now, I have found and ordered what's hopefully going to be a good compromise - the Panasonic Lumix TZ10 which has a huge optical zoom, but also a Leica lense. It's not quite as expensive as the LX3 or Canon G-series and I found a good deal on it. I have watched and read a few reviews (my god they are a bit geeky, aren't they?) and looked at some of the pics people take with it and it looks quite good.

Needless to say, I have spent more then I wanted to....

One thing that the camera has and it seems to be the newest gimmick is GPS tracking, who needs that? Surely I know whether I am climbing on Ben Nevis or Scafell! But hey, can't wait to get it delivered now!

So, thanks again.

In reply to Heike:


I used to think the same but just as the camera records date and time of the shot (and lots of other settings that the camera used if you're into that kind of thing) then having the picture's location imprinted into the file can be very useful! The first time I was desperately trying to work out where a picture was taken then realised that it was tagged I was converted, should only get more useful as I age and the memory dims! Also, if you upload to somewhere like Flickr and geo-tag the images then it is one less step to do manually.

Nick

In reply to alex_th: Hi Alex Ive just got an LX5 to replace my G10 (scratch on the lens), I was tempted by the Canon S90 but the 24mm swung it. All of the ones you mention are of course great little cameras

In reply to Heike: Hi Heike, mine is relatively good for the money. I have had for the past three years an Fuji F480 Finepix cost £70. It is only 8.2 megapixels, but it does have a wide zoom, and also has a macro setting for close up shots.

Which I used for taking a really good close up of a common garden spider at Curbar. Unfortunately it will not upload on here. Never the less it was a good shot.

This seems like a good place to ask this. We're looking at compacts and not sure what to go for. It's primarily a point and shoot whilst climbing, hiking, travelling or whatever as I keep smashing my work Blackberry! I doubt we'd be that worried about having enthusiast type features but on the other hand I am aware enough to consider them. I want something small that will fit in my pocket whilst climbing. A wide angle lens seems a good idea as I like landscape shots and again for climbing phots.
We've been looking at the Canon S95 but maybe it's a bit expensive for what we want. Can anyone give some advice on what we'd be missing out on if we went for the cheaper models such as the Lumix TZ10 which we like the look of?

In reply to Heike: I just bought an olympus Tough 8010 which is waterproof, shockproof and cold proof. It has been fantastic for taking pictures for canyoning, mountaineering and other outdoor sports and has resisted the cold wet and banging around extremely well! In low light with fast movng images - such as in a canyon, it sometimes struggles on the automatic settings and the pictures are a bit blurred but if you take the time to work out the settings to optimise on the conditions it is fine.

In reply to kevin stephens:

I'd be EXTREMELY suprised if that was actaully true for any significant amount of magnification.

In reply to Heike:

My Sony Cybershot seem to have survived Scottish winter condition surprisingly well too and with the bonus of having a viewfinder!

But if looking for a new tough waterproof camera it might be worth looking at the Panasonic DMC-FT2
http://www.panasonic.co.uk/html/en_GB/Products/LUMIX+Digital+Cameras/Stylis...

I've got a Pentax W90 and I'm now looking at the DMC-FT2!!!

Cheers Ron

In reply to Heike:
The FT2 looks a good bit of kit. Apart from the obvious reggedness, anyone know how it compares with the s95, g10, etc?

In reply to royal:

The lens on mine isn't great at the longer lengths, but overall I really like it... Bought once I'd sold one of my SLRs as a carry around camera... and I do carry it around!

Easy to use and seems to do all I want it to... Prob 14 MP is too many and 10 would have been plenty...

On the shorter lengths, the pictures are vivid and bright with a nice feel to them...

In reply to Heike:

I like the Sony U60. Its the only camera designed to be used one handed, its rugged, has cold resistance, waterproof, light, etc...

Thanks for the replies guys

In reply to royal:

Used my new DMC FT2 / TS2 winter climbing on Monday - I shot a lot of HD video in subzero temps without making a dent in the battery power so most impressed.
The video quality and sharpness are far superior to the other tough cameras I've used too - again very impressed.
Another useful feature is that the optical zoom is increased substantially once you drop down from 14 Mega Pixels - I never use much more than 7 or 10 anyway.
On the negative side the controls are difficult to use with gloves on. The Zoom and Shutter release are very close and easy to confuse too. It's also easy to obscure the lens with your gloved finger if not careful!!!
Overall apart from the niggles with using gloves which applies to most of the small compact tough cameras I'm well impressed.
There's a good review of all the models on this link though it's geared to underwater photography rather than winter climbing!!!
Cheer Ron

In reply to royal: For the last year or so I've been using a Cannon SX200 IS year round for everything. Great image quality, good settings. Buttons are easy to use with gloves on. It has a good wide angle and zoom plus can be fully manual with settings.
It does have an annoying flash that flips up when camera is switched on but the new SX210 this can be pushed back down.
The new one also has a wider rear screen.
It os pretty tough as well, dropped numerous times and even spun off up the road at 40 mph and still works, if not a little battered and bruised.

Very close second was the TZ range as well.
Hope this helps