DSLR and Travel

[Pulaski]

Hey all,

I'm going to Prague and Paris this July and I've just started using a Nikon D70 about two months ago. I love the camera and I love photography, but I'm really amature.

I intend to shoot street scenes, buildings and candids. Just documentation, but I want the images to look good.

My questions: Given my inexperience, will the D70 be too much camera? I will essentially be learning the camera as I go - is this a mistake?

Thanks!

 

[Patrick T. Kelly]

Three months to learn to operate the camera is plenty. Read the manual, read it again, try the different features, and you're good to go. All of the other considerations exist independent of the camera.

 

[mdmendoz]

Learning as you go is actually the way to do it. The only caveat is if you feel you can take guaranteed decent shots with a P&S at this point and whether that insurance is enough to make you leave the DSLR aside for a moment.

I went through (am going through) a phase where in trying to take my photography to a higher level, I end up with duds of images that I know would be keepers if taken with my P&S. I guess the lesson here is if you're unsure on your DSLR on an image you can't do without, flip to P or AUTO and snap a shot with that. I guess what I'm saying is that the LCD Preview may hide some out of focus or subject motion, even if you zoom in on-screen.

Definitely read the manual -- more importantly, re-read the sections on the key advanced features (Av, Tv, Auto Focus mods, White Balance, manually turning the flash on/off, focus points, metering).

--
Mike M

 

[Leejay Wu]

I'm not entirely sure why there'd be a problem from the usability / learning POV, considering that you already have the camera and seem to like it.

One caveat is that a carrying a DSLR in a tourist destination might mark you as a likely tourist, so the usual precautions about money belts, carrying fascimiles of identification and leaving the originals in a hotel safe, keeping an eye on if you need to set it down momentarily, et al make sense. It's all a good idea even if you aren't toting a DSLR, but it may be slightly more important if you are.

The other caveat I see is that if you're traveling with any less-photography-focused people, or find other reasons for paying more attention to vacationing and less to documenting it. If you're traveling with people who are either non-photographers or are very casual about it, they might be a bit annoyed if you're frequently stopping to study a subject, walk around, check out multiple perspectives, carefully manually focus and try different DOFs, et al. And the less you're stopping to do this, the less reason there is to carry a moderately large. If this won't be a problem, good.

 

[Adam Vele]

I hope you will love Prague, it's real "jewel of Europe" and Paris is no less awesome

 

[john farrar]

That's actually a very important point. If you are travelling on your own or with other photographers, fine. But you don't want people in you group feel you are obsessed with looking at things through a viewfinder rather than enjoying the locations.

Thought about logically, unless you were going to use any of your work to illustrate books or artiicles, or maybe if you want to sell your images, then you would in all probability enjoy your trip more with a P&S.
I tried this approach once with a Canon s400 (see link below).
http://www.pbase.com/johnfr/australia__the_red_centre
Maybe I came back with better understanding and memories.

I feel that now I would want to take a P&S and also a DSLR provided that the DSLR could be kept safe when not in use.

--
John.
Please visit me at:
http://www.pbase.com/johnfr/digital_dartmoor
http://www.flickr.com/photos/18726664@N00/