Have you ditched a bulky SLR in favor of something more... lug-gable? How did you find it?
I've been shooting on Nikon DSLRs for about the last 4 years now. On my last backpacking trip I had a D40 w/lenses and more recently I Climbed Island Peak with my D7000.
Next week I'm leaving on a rather lengthy cycle journey and have almost (maybe 90%) made the decision to leave the SLR at home and take my Fuji x10 (which I bought for the trip). From what I've seen of this camera, it should do the job - other than not having a bulb mode... grrr - and I'm sure saving a lot of weight and bulk this way but... part of me doesn't want to part with the bigger sensor & bigger glass of the Nikon.
So before I leave, I'm looking for experiences of others - did you miss the SLR? In what situations? And was it worth it for the convenience?
Ben
Reply to this Welcome to Travelblog!
This is a very good question. I have a Nikon D300, but when I visited Port Moresby in Papua New Guinea for a weekend, I took my smaller point and shoot Panasonic instead. I wasn't doing a lot of sightseeing, but even that small amount of time caused me to be frustrated by not having the advanced features of my DSLR and the superior photo quality.
Is there a way to give yourself a test run of going somewhere briefly without the DSLR? For me, I was surprised how much I did miss my dearest toy, but each person is different.
[Edited: 2013 Feb 05 05:23 - The Travel Camel:11053 ]
Reply to this Hi b3nm,
Welcome to the TB community.
I can't offer any advice sorry, but am interested in the answers that others give. I bought my first DSLR a couple of months ago, and already know that I would struggle with the decision to leave either of my lenses behind....
Reply to this it really depends on what you prefer more, comfort (of bringing a smaller camera) or really good quality photos. at the end of the day you don't want to be regretting about not getting what you wanted 😉
there are some point & shoot that takes really good photos, might not be as good as DSLR's but they could be close! i always bring my canon powershot (s100) it can take raw and has manual controls, it's small and handy. i'm really not a fan of bringing huge cameras (and also most of the time i don't bother since i usually travel with friends who brings DSLRs hehe) but i'm crazy about getting quality photos. so far i'm happy with the comfort and photos my point & shoot is giving me. not missing the DSLR, though there are those (seldom) moments when i do tell myself "darn i wish i have the DSLR right now!"
Reply to this
There are some travel bloggers on this site that are masters with the point and shoot cameras. We wish we had their talent and comfort with making these smaller camera do amazing things. Dancing Dave is one of those masters.
With that said we love our Nikon D90 and travel with it every place we go. It is now like an appendage and we don't realize we have it with us some of the time.
Reply to this I'm particularly interested in any comments from DSLR users who have gone on trekking trips. While the option to leave your main backpack at the hostel back in wherever, did you lug your good (and expensive!) lenses up that high altitude mountain?
If they came along on the trip but not the tougher trek part, where and with who did you leave them?
Reply to this Thanks for the responses.
Jo, I climbed Island peak in Nepal a few months ago and took the d7000 along for the ride - purely because I wanted to get a fisheye shot from the summit :-) I think camera and lenses (16-85mm zoom, 50mm and 10.5 fisheye) weighed a bit about 2kg. Weight I could have done without to be honest!
After the fact of course, it all seems worth it as I've got some wonderful (if I say so myself) shots, including some nice clear night shots and wide-angles that I wouldn't have gotten at all with a compact.
Having said that, I do believe that it's more about the photographer than the gear, and maybe I should see it as a challenge rather than a limitation!
Ben
Reply to this In response to: Msg #166017
I currently use the Nikon 16-85 lens on my D300 - and that is the only lens in my travel kit now (unless I'm on safari, when the Tokina 80-400 comes along). It is so sharp and does almost everything I want, so it may be a compromise from carrying multiple lenses.
Reply to this It will ultimately depend on the type of compromises you are willing to make. Shoot the same scene with both cameras under different conditions (lighting and composition) and compare. Personally, I knew I wanted something light and usable on a moments notice, plus weatherproof, for my travels; so I brought a pocket camera with manual controls. I've shot some utterly terrible photos with it, but lots of good ones too.
Reply to this I take a camera I can fit into my pant pocket. I just can't be bothered hauling a big bag of expensive equipment around with me...and I get a little put off by those who do. Unfortunately with this particular strategy, I admit my mediocre photos don't capture the scenes very well. BUT I've stored them in my minds eye, and in all honesty that IS the most important place right?
Reply to this I am not a photographic fundi, so I always take my point and shoot camera with me which takes quite good photos, but nothing like the rest of you. My camera is a Panasonic Lumix 10 x optical zoom. Nice, compact and light, so fits in anywhere and if I went on a photographic course I am sure I could use it to its full potential.
So to answer your question: if you want to save on weight and space, ditch your SLR - although you are sure to miss it. But if you want to take some amazing good quality shots forfeit the convenience and lug around your SLR.
Reply to this I've never owned a SLR, but I have just bought a bridge camera for our travels. It's not as bulky, heavy or expensive as SLRs tend to be, but it certainly won't fit in my pocket. With a well padded case though, it should go safely in my day pack so won't need a separate bag just for itself. I do also have a point-and-click which I'll probably put my husband in charge of for the quick get-it-now shots.
Reply to this In response to: Msg #166059
if you want to save on weight and space, ditch your SLR - although you are sure to miss it. But if you want to take some amazing good quality shots forfeit the convenience and lug around your SLR.
This perfectly sums up the dilemma, there is no correct answer, it comes down to a personal preference. I rate my DLSR in my top three possessions when travelling behind my passport and cards to access money - so it always will come on any extended journey.
Reply to this I love Andrea's viewpoint..im the same, so I dont take stunning pics but ive got the memory there. I always thought of big bulky cameras as robber attractants...Shane wise decision not to take a big camera to Moresby.
Reply to this
In response to: Msg #165969
It is some time since I used a SLR camera - my choice has been for flexibility over the highest quality. If you photograph for National Geographic or similar publications, you have little option but use full frame DSLR cameras with a variety of lenses. A friend takes 4 cameras and a variety of lenses on his photo shoots. I have a Canon SX40,. Yes there is distortion in the images. If you are photographing for computer slide shows and home prints, these cameras are very flexible and reasonably priced. Marg is just learning to use my Canon SX10 which is very similar but with a much smaller zoom range. Both cameras produce acceptable photos. Often the lense distortion is easily edited out with Photoimpact X3.
Marg and Rob
Reply to this I’m grappling with this very dilemma at the moment...I’ve travelled with a Canon DSLR (with two lenses) for the last 7 years, but I've really started to detest the weight and size - especially on those long days.
I really envy Andrew’s compact camera that he can just about carry in his pocket and it even takes better photos than my DSLR in certain low light conditions. I also love that a small camera attracts less attention and doesn’t immediately yell ‘hey there’s a tourist over here!’.
I’ve been looking at the bridging cameras but they are still only marginally smaller/lighter than my DSLR. I think I need to do more research...but if anyone comes across a compact camera that still has manual capability and doesn’t compromise too much on quality – please let me know 😊
Reply to this
In response to: Msg #166014
Jo I've only done one long trek (three days in northern Thailand), and I took a risk and left one of my lenses locked up in my big backpack at the hotel. However by the second day I regretted taking my DSLR at all! It was too heavy to wear around my neck, and too cumbersome to keep taking out of my camera bag with sweaty hands. The few pics I did take were lovely though 😊
Reply to this I notice that Samsung have released a 20X Zoom camera that is very compact. Marg has been using my Canon but finds it too heavy and also too big for little hands. I haven't seen any reviews of the Samsung yet, but it looks to be a usful camera, not much bigger than the pocket sized cameras. I have been a fan of bridge cameras for several years loving the flexibility with less weight. As I posted before, if quality up to publishing standard is the criteria, stick to slr at this time. If happy travel snaps is the objective, check out an increasing range of very flexible small cameras from Panasonic, and maybe this Samsung 800 once we see the quality of the images in reviews.
Reply to this 
