Is a FF camera a good travel companion?

I keep juggling the benefits of the M4/3rds system, the crop system, and the FF systems for travel photography. Cost aside for a second (although in real life, cost is very much a consideration), I wonder is a FF camera to:
1) heavy a system to travel with?
2) Valuable to travel with?

What have been your experiences? Long term travel in developing countries with FF cameras? How many lenses? Does it turn every trip into a photography trip?

Thoughts?

I think it all depends on you and how much YOU are willing to carry.

I have a 5D and an Olympus E-P1, I only got the Olympus to take it places where my DSLR is not allowed to go (concerts, etc).

My 5D and gear is never too heavy for me, even on 40-mile hikes in the backcountry, but most people would probably complain.

--
My portfolio/website: http://www.andrewholmanphoto.com/

Fair enough, I suppose I worry a good bit about if it keeps me away from my gf and too much behind the lens...

Travelinbri_74 said:

I keep juggling the benefits of the M4/3rds system, the crop system, and the FF systems for travel photography. Cost aside for a second (although in real life, cost is very much a consideration), I wonder is a FF camera to:
1) heavy a system to travel with?
2) Valuable to travel with?

What have been your experiences? Long term travel in developing countries with FF cameras? How many lenses? Does it turn every trip into a photography trip?

Thoughts?

Click to expand...

some ff cameras are bigger than others and some lenses much smaller than others. Also with the introduction of some really good compact and m43 sensor cameras they may be a better choice.

But for me I like the Leica M9 for travel. I find I have much better conversations with the M while crossing the pacific than I do with the Canon 5d becasue I don't speak Japanese as well as I speak german. Also the security people tend to think my Leicas are less subversive.
--
bosjohn aka John Shick [email protected]

In a word: no.

The professional ones are real heavy and would be great if someone else carried them. The compromise ones (Canon 5D series, Sony) are either slow, have high ISO problems, poor sealing or poor AF(points). I traveled with a Canon 1D series before (not really FF, but big, heavy, and very responsive, tough, etc.) and a Canon 5DII (belongs into studio, not on the road). I bought a K7 and good quality lenses, all of which are significantly smaller than comparable Canon FF lenses, and the system is rugged like the Pro series Canikons, portable, responsive, fast enough (though not my ideal for a sports cam), with high ISO that could be better, but then you got in-body IS.

If I had a crew, I'd pack a Canon 1D(s) series or Nikon D3(x) and tons of great and heavy lenses, and maybe a medium format body.

Would I use the Micro 4/3s? probably not - they are just too toy like: unsealed, slow to respond, few lenses, weird viewfinders etc.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/helmutsteinwender/
http://helmuts.smugmug.com
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/helmutsteinwender

Hi,

travelinbri_74 said:

Fair enough, I suppose I worry a good bit about if it keeps me away from my gf and too much behind the lens...

Click to expand...

Ah, the gf is another factor. But first things first.

I think premiumbitter is quite a hero lugging along his 5dmkii everywhere. Considering it weighs about 1kg without a lens, I would think it's heavy. A Leica M9, for me, would be the only travel FF camera in existence today.

Back to the gf topic: I find my former gf (now my wife !) complains less when I grab my LX3 for a trip than when I grab my DSLR, which is an Olympus E-420. I think she's bothered more by how I look than by the fact that I'm making photos. She's not bothered at all when I drag along an old Zorki, so an M9 could stand a chance. But I'm sure a 5d or bigger would be a no-go for travel with my wife.

It's one of the fun things of travelling together: you get to know how the other person thinks of you when you're doing certain things in certain ways. If you're unsure, just follow your gear feelings and see how she reacts. Then, learn and adjust

Peter.

--
gallery at http://picasaweb.google.com/peterleyssens

I let my girlfriend shoot stills, while I shoot video. Works well as she is happy shooting while I do video. Plus I often find myself waiting on her as she shoots

Anyway, the main thing here is to get your girlfriend engaged in the shooting process.

As for taking a FF camera, that really is up to you and what you want out of your photos. I do, but it also depends on where we are going and what we intend to do. For those times we are just taking another beach vacation, to a location we have been to before, I take my Sony R1 and panasonic LX3.

But if it's a major destination (Angkok Wat), then the FF camera and my Sony PMW-EX1 make the trip.

But it really boils down to what you and your gf can/will tolerate.

--

The greatest of mankind's criminals are those who delude themselves into thinking they have done 'the right thing.'

• Rayna Butler

Hi,

But doesn't it all depend on where you are traveling and what you intend to do when there and with the pictures later on?

A large camera will get heavier and heavier on a long trip and there's the problem of storage - usually in a hotel safe: meaning no pictures when you go out for a drink at night. (I mean, would you seriously go out for an evening's fun and games with the M9 in your pocket?)

So my choice would be something small but with a very good lens, which suggests a Leica/Panasonic or Olympus. On a long trip I'd add a duplicate for the wife as a back up.

Of course, a safari or similar, where the point of the journey is probably the pictures I'd take a dSLR just because of the ease of use with longish lenses but would continually feel I should be shooting at 80 ASA/ISO and with a tripod...

Regards, David

Where do you want to go, what is the purpose of your trips, and what do you expect to do with the images after taking them?

I think the answer to the above questions will enable much better feedbacks on the cons/pros of using a FF system for your travels.

If you dont know what you need, you probably dont need a FF camera. Grab a Pentax K-7 (or K20D) + 16-50/2.8 + 60-250/4 (or 50-135/2.8) and you have a high performing, fully stabilized and most importantly, weather sealed system that can go anywhere. Kit lens is tiny/light and weather sealed as well.

--
My Flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/36164047@N06/

Helmut_S said:

Would I use the Micro 4/3s? probably not - they are just too toy like: unsealed, slow to respond, few lenses, weird viewfinders etc.

Click to expand...

So all of that negative opinion is personal experience using/owning one. Additionally, is your dslr system fully sealed? weird VF, my 3" lcd works just fine for framing handheld and on a tripod...

I've handled dslrs that are more toylike than my Pen, is it as fast as a dslr, some, not others. Does it give away IQ to dslr's, some not others. Few lenses, that I find kind of funny as not only can I mount native m4/3rds, i can mount 4/3rds AND I can mount lenses from just about every significant 35mm lens mount produced. Extrapolating that out I'm pretty sure that means I can mount MORE lenses than potentially any other camera body produced... ever. Not 100% sure though as I'm more than prepared to be shown I'm incorrect.

The point, any of them can take great images. M4/3, asp/c, ff all have their pros/cons and you are the only one that can decide where your priorities are in it all.

While m4/3rds is still in its infancy it has more than proved able to replace a dslr to some owners, serve back up to a dslr for other owners and be a primary making an owner very content.

BTW - I use/own m4/3rds & 4/3rds...

freealfas said:

Helmut_S said:

Would I use the Micro 4/3s? probably not - they are just too toy like: unsealed, slow to respond, few lenses, weird viewfinders etc.

Click to expand...

So all of that negative opinion is personal experience using/owning one. Additionally, is your dslr system fully sealed? weird VF, my 3" lcd works just fine for framing handheld and on a tripod…

Click to expand...

yes, all mine are sealed: Pentax K7, Canon 1DIII. your VF refreshes at what rate? you hold your camera like a cheap P&S? nothing against a P$S, but it's what it is. The m4/3 wants to play at least halfway in the big league, but it's got small shoes

freealfas said:

I've handled dslrs that are more toylike than my Pen, is it as fast as a dslr, some, not others. Does it give away IQ to dslr's, some not others.

Click to expand...

It's really hard to imaging that there are DSLRs that are more toylike than the Pen. If their IQ is less, than it's because they are years old in their technology, yes, I concede that.

freealfas said:

Few lenses, that I find kind of funny as not only can I mount native m4/3rds, i can mount 4/3rds AND I can mount lenses from just about every significant 35mm lens mount produced. Extrapolating that out I'm pretty sure that means I can mount MORE lenses than potentially any other camera body produced... ever. Not 100% sure though as I'm more than prepared to be shown I'm incorrect.

Click to expand...

A long time ago, I had an old East German camera, a Pentacon something or other, with a M42 mount. This camera also was able to accept more lenses than any other brand. Great. None of the lenses it took were as good as the proprietary Leitz, Zeiss, Nikon, and beginning Canon and Pentax of the day. I don't need three hundred lenses, 295 of which are mediocre.

freealfas said:

The point, any of them can take great images. M4/3, asp/c, ff all have their pros/cons and you are the only one that can decide where your priorities are in it all.

Click to expand...

Correct. That's why I said 'I would PROBABLY NOT use the m4/3 system'. I didn't say you shouldn't. I didn't even say I never would. Things may change, the system may mature...

freealfas said:

While m4/3rds is still in its infancy it has more than proved able to replace a dslr to some owners, serve back up to a dslr for other owners and be a primary making an owner very content.

BTW - I use/own m4/3rds & 4/3rds…

Click to expand...

Now, as to the big 4/3 system, that one is completely beyond me. Why anyone would buy a camera as big as all others, with a incy-whincy sensor in it, I cannot fathom.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/helmutsteinwender/
http://helmuts.smugmug.com
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/helmutsteinwender

Helmut_S said:

freealfas said:

Helmut_S said:

Would I use the Micro 4/3s? probably not - they are just too toy like: unsealed, slow to respond, few lenses, weird viewfinders etc.

Click to expand...

So all of that negative opinion is personal experience using/owning one.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

You still didn't answer that one. that opinion sounds like many who pass judgement by reading forums and reviews.

Helmut_S said:

It's really hard to imaging that there are DSLRs that are more toylike than the Pen.

Click to expand...

go to best buy and handle a few

Helmut_S said:

A long time ago, I had an old East German camera, a Pentacon something or other, with a M42 mount. This camera also was able to accept more lenses than any other brand. Great. None of the lenses it took were as good as the proprietary Leitz, Zeiss, Nikon, and beginning Canon and Pentax of the day. I don't need three hundred lenses, 295 of which are mediocre.

Click to expand...

You really missed the point, on my pen I can mount and IS any of the lenses you decide to revere or revile. leitz, nikkor, canon, pentax, leica, zuiko... etc... that would be a strength of a system and due to it's unique format it's able to do so setting it well apart from the rest.

Helmut_S said:

Correct. That's why I said 'I would PROBABLY NOT use the m4/3 system'. I didn't say you shouldn't. I didn't even say I never would. Things may change, the system may mature...

Click to expand...

I don't need you to use it or not, but to express opinions like you did it might be good to base them in something other than what you read and surmise.

Helmut_S said:

Now, as to the big 4/3 system, that one is completely beyond me. Why anyone would buy a camera as big as all others, with a incy-whincy sensor in it, I cannot fathom.

Click to expand...

You bought a pentax didn't you it's got a tiny sensor relative to FF with its pro's cons.

Simply we all pick our battles...

My wife and I travel a lot. I'm older, so weight is getting more and more importasnt. So, for the most part, I carry one or more P&S and i'm quite happy with the images I get. Would a DSLR with a collection of expensive glass do better? Probably, but only if the trip I'm on allows me the time to set up and do my thing. If I'm on a tour with a group, time is often limited and then the DSLR becomes just another P&S - a big, heavy, P&S.

I also worry about an obviously expensive camera attracting attention from thieves. Unless you're going to carry it everywhere with you, where do you put it when having dinner, going to a show, etc.?

Another factor, is the patience level of your significant other. A friend of mine is a very serious photographer and can spend 2 hrs getting "the" shot of a flowering vine. So he spends a lot of time alone getting the shot, while his wife goes off on her own. He's lucky, my wife would not put up with that.
--
Jerry

freealfas said:

Helmut_S said:

freealfas said:

Helmut_S said:

Would I use the Micro 4/3s? probably not - they are just too toy like: unsealed, slow to respond, few lenses, weird viewfinders etc.

Click to expand...

So all of that negative opinion is personal experience using/owning one.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

You still didn't answer that one. that opinion sounds like many who pass judgement by reading forums and reviews.

Click to expand...

there's a certain limit as to how much I need/want to experience something before passing judgment. I won't buy a Kia either just to prove it's worse than a Mercedes. you go ahead, if you like, and do that...

freealfas said:

freealfas said:

It's really hard to imaging that there are DSLRs that are more toylike than the Pen.

Click to expand...

go to best buy and handle a few

freealfas said:

A long time ago, I had an old East German camera, a Pentacon something or other, with a M42 mount. This camera also was able to accept more lenses than any other brand. Great. None of the lenses it took were as good as the proprietary Leitz, Zeiss, Nikon, and beginning Canon and Pentax of the day. I don't need three hundred lenses, 295 of which are mediocre.

Click to expand...

You really missed the point, on my pen I can mount and IS any of the lenses you decide to revere or revile. leitz, nikkor, canon, pentax, leica, zuiko... etc... that would be a strength of a system and due to it's unique format it's able to do so setting it well apart from the rest.

Click to expand...

okay - that's nice.

freealfas said:

freealfas said:

Correct. That's why I said 'I would PROBABLY NOT use the m4/3 system'. I didn't say you shouldn't. I didn't even say I never would. Things may change, the system may mature...

Click to expand...

I don't need you to use it or not, but to express opinions like you did it might be good to base them in something other than what you read and surmise.

Click to expand...

My dear chap, what I read or surmise is probably a whole lot more than what you will ever know of anything, cameras being just a microscopic part of it. Do you really believe (or convince yourself) that a reviewer will arbitrarily point out something like slow response, just because he has a preconceived notion that that is what the camera ought to be deficient in? No, reviews are not perfect, but I do know how using 'liveview' handles for focusing and composition, whether it's a P&S or a DSLR, and I really don't think a m4/3 is any different. Sorry. It's not special. Just like all the other ones: LCD nice, viewfinder much nicer. There.

freealfas said:

freealfas said:

Now, as to the big 4/3 system, that one is completely beyond me. Why anyone would buy a camera as big as all others, with a incy-whincy sensor in it, I cannot fathom.

Click to expand...

You bought a pentax didn't you it's got a tiny sensor relative to FF with its pro's cons.

Click to expand...

APS-C is to 4/3 what FF is to APS-C. The Olympus models are roughly APS-C sized, yet have a much smaller sensor. Why would one buy that again? They do not have the benefit of accepting all those great lenses either, what with having mirrors, and needing a longer distance from the sensor.

freealfas said:

Simply we all pick our battles...

Click to expand...

Maybe you got some buyers remorse? I started out saying that FF is not great for travel, and I would not pick m4/3 myself. Now we have the third round of you telling me how great 4/3 is (which I do assume is your camera system). I couldn't care less what you like, but you can't be seriously claiming that 4/3 in any iteration is equivalent to even APS-C in versatility or IQ, much less to FF. Or do ya?
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/helmutsteinwender/
http://helmuts.smugmug.com
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/helmutsteinwender

PeterLeyssens said:

I find my former gf (now my wife !) complains less when I grab my LX3 for a trip than when I grab my DSLR, which is an Olympus E-420. I think she's bothered more by how I look than by the fact that I'm making photos. She's not bothered at all when I drag along an old Zorki

Click to expand...

Maybe it's the plastic and not the size that bothers her.

i was seriously thinking about a gf1, but i fiddled with a gf1 in a shop, and found it basically the size of a dslr without the handle.

a full-frame and two or three compact primes makes a portable enough travel kit. the same can't be said if you want to lug around constant-2.8 zooms.

if you're happy with aps-c, a pentax with 3 da-limiteds makes for a very light-weight kit.

I switched from a Minolta 5D with the K-M 18-200 and KM 11-18
to the Sony a900 with a Sigma 28-300 and the Sigma 15-30 for
my 3 month sojourn through Europe this past summer.

Though considerably heavier, the Sony outfit gave visibly
superior results. Had I chosen the Zeiss lenses, the package
would have been too heavy to comfortably carry around my neck for
an entire day.

After schlepping the Sony around, I vowed I'd go back to the smaller format --

until I started printing. I'd say that an APS-C camera with good quality lenses is
more than sufficient for 13x19 inch prints -- but if you want the 'headroom'

that allows a 50% crop, the FF is preferable (and a glass prism is much to be prefered).

For anyone who got used to multiple Nikon Fs or F2s or a Canon F1s (not to mention Pentax 67), the neck's already bent -- these little plastic wonders are pea-shooters hanging from a well padded neoprene stap.

And for those who turn up their noses at the Sigma lenses, having that
sort of a zoom range gets me shots that others miss while changing lenses.
F8 and be there.

Helmut_S said:

there's a certain limit as to how much I need/want to experience something before passing judgment. I won't buy a Kia either just to prove it's worse than a Mercedes. you go ahead, if you like, and do that...

Click to expand...

dr. arrogant much?

Helmut_S said:

My dear chap, what I read or surmise is probably a whole lot more than what you will ever know of anything,

Click to expand...

True to form, you know nothing of me or anything that you speak of in this thread regarding m4/3rds yet you have judgement rendered.

Helmut_S said:

Maybe you got some buyers remorse?

Click to expand...

thinking you know everything again?

Helmut_S said:

I started out saying that FF is not great for travel, and I would not pick m4/3 myself.

Click to expand...

which is fine but to pass off the comments you did on a format you know nothing of seems after our little exchange, in character and insecure(probably backed up by the fact you've never even handled one but of course you'll say you have to save face truth or not).

Helmut_S said:

Now we have the third round of you telling me how great 4/3 is (which I do assume is your camera system).

Click to expand...

I didn't do that once yet alone three times if you'd actually read the posts...

Helmut_S said:

I couldn't care less what you like,

Click to expand...

same here,

Helmut_S said:

but you can't be seriously claiming that 4/3 in any iteration is equivalent to even APS-C in versatility or IQ,

Click to expand...

Easily but that's another thread, yes how could I even think such heretical & preposterous thoughts?

Helmut_S said:

much less to FF. Or do ya?

Click to expand...

Project much? Now you are simply dreaming things up.

There are some people around here that voice strong opinions with more tact and maturity than you've displayed. To have a debate with them is respectful, you illustrate the point that arrogance is representative of a small mind.

OP,

sorry for the sidebar,

the point was/is m4/3rds is a very real option for a compact travel kit that gives little away to larger formats regardless of the opinions of people that have never handled them.

There are any number of people adopting it for it's strengths which are varied.

I didn't once say it was best, I said simply it's worth your consideration...

Travelinbri_74 said:

I keep juggling the benefits of the M4/3rds system, the crop system, and the FF > systems for travel photography.

Click to expand...

Full frame cameras were all we had "back in the day".
They worked fine then and still do today.

I never traveled (personal travel) with my "Full frame" Pentax 67 or 67ll cameras, using them for commerical sets only.