We’re wrapping up our series on digital cameras this month. We had asked ITN subscribers to name the models that they prefer to use while traveling. We printed their recommendations in three issues, loosely categorizing the cameras into three groups by size and weight: “ultracompacts” (March ’12), “compacts” (April) and cameras that weigh more than 10 ounces and won’t fit in a pants pocket (May). The article “Camera Quest — How to Choose the Right Digital Travel Camera for You” appeared in the August issue. In this issue, we’re printing subscribers’ camera-shopping tips plus a few final camera reviews.
For each camera reviewed here, we’ve included the brand and model number. We also have indicated the year the camera was introduced, the megapixels (mp) it’s capable of producing and the degree of optical zoom/digital zoom it’s capable of (for example, “5x/4x”). In addition, we have listed each camera’s dimensions and weight, the size of its liquid crystal display (LCD) screen and the type of viewfinder it has, if any. If the subscriber mentioned the price, we’ve included it; otherwise, we’ve shown the top price at which it was listed at Amazon.com.
A good source of information on digital cameras is PC World. This monthly magazine covers cameras with reviews, comparisons and test results. In addition, subscribers can get e-mails almost every day from photography experts with advice on how best to use these fantastic little machines and optimize picture-taking results. — FRANK LAMSON-SCRIBNER, New Smyrna Beach, FL
When I travel to foreign countries, I need a converter to charge my camera batteries. To find out what type is needed in any country, check Walkabout Travel Gear’s “Worldwide Electrical Index” at www.walkabouttravelgear.com/wwelect.htm. Use the pull-down menu to select the country you’re visiting, and the site will display a converter that works at that destination.
I put the converter(s) along with spare batteries, rubber bands, string, fix-it tape and a nail clipper into a pouch that I pack in my checked bag along with a travel clock and a small flashlight — my all-purpose rescue items.
My camera(s), batteries, memory cards and cell phone with charger always go in my carry-on. — JOYCE BRUCK, Ocean Ridge, FL
Cameras with smaller-size batteries give fewer shots per charge, especially if you’re using larger file sizes. Be sure to take spare batteries and spare memory cards. — CHARLES BURKE, West Dennis, MA
When I put my Canon pocket camera in my shirt pocket, I loop the neck cord around the back of my neck and put the opposite arm through the loop, so the cord is held securely between my upper body and my shoulder. If I lean forward and it falls out, I can catch it. This has saved my camera many times.
By the way, I’m 95 and still traveling — I went to Venice in May ’12. — GEORGE MUEDEN, New York, NY
I’m not a professional photographer. I’m strictly an amateur who purchased a digital single-lens reflex (DSLR) camera in 2006, then used it for three years before deciding to actually learn how to take advantage of the technology it provided.
In the recent series of letters on digital cameras, I noticed that many readers describing their point-and-shoots (P&S) or advanced compacts (sometimes called super zooms) offered roughly the same general but subjective reviews as readers recommending cameras costing upward of three times the price. The technological differences are substantial, however.
In his Feature Article “Camera Quest” (Aug. ’12, pg. 32), George Anderson shed some light on the differences, and I have a bit more to offer.
Several of the P&S and compact cameras were described by readers as having “optical viewfinders.” Mr. Anderson uses more precise terminology when he calls these “eye-level viewfinders,” as those cameras each have an electronic viewfinder (EVF) through which you are seeing only an electronic image.
A true optical viewfinder, as is found in DSLR cameras, which each have a mirror box and pentaprism, allows the photographer to see the actual light that is being reflected off of the image being viewed. Camera purchasers should be aware that any P&S or advanced compact camera is simply too small to have a mirror box.
What’s the big deal about a mirror box? It makes the camera large and heavy, true, but it also makes the time between when the shutter is depressed and the autofocus is completed very fast, comparatively.
The technical explanation is this: the “contrast-based autofocus systems” that P&S and advanced compacts must use because of their electronic viewfinders are considerably slower than the “phase-detection autofocus system” that DSLRs use.
Add that to a usually slower buffer speed in the P&S and in many advanced compacts (a buffer temporarily holds data, so that several shots can quickly be taken in a row, before transferring the information to the storage card) and you have a camera that may not react as quickly as required for the scene, especially if the subject is moving. That slight delay may not be a big deal if you’re photographing scenery or structures, but it could cause you to lose a shot if you’re photographing wildlife.
(The one exception to this is Sony, which uses a translucent mirror that eliminates the mirror box in favor of an electronic viewfinder, but the translucent mirror permits the camera to employ a phase-detection autofocus, making it quite fast.)
Related to this is the tracking ability, the ability of the camera to continually focus on a moving object. The faster the autofocus, the faster the tracking. Some EVF camera manufacturers claim to have record-breaking tracking and autofocus, but independent research does not always bear out those claims.
In his discussion about comparing lenses, Mr. Anderson wrote, “Most manufacturers will specify a 35mm-equivalent focal length for their lenses,” from which some readers could infer that the magnifying powers of the lenses are the same. They are not. Rather than use the term “35mm equivalent,” many people now refer to the crop factor instead.
All P&S and many advanced compacts have smaller sensors and larger crop factors than their DSLR big brothers. A sensor is the area on which the incoming light shines. Each sensor has a multitude of light-gathering photosites, which generate the pixels that make up the final printed image.
The smaller the sensor, the smaller the photosites. The smaller the photosites, the less light each can absorb, which reduces image quality. The crop factor is best described as how much the field of view is cropped from what would be provided by a full-frame-sensor camera.
Most lines of DSLRs have crop factors of 1.3 to 2.0, while most P&S and many advanced compacts are 5 and over. Most manufacturers state the crop factor in terms of a lens multiplier, saying that their lens is the equivalent of a lens with a much longer focal length, but the crop factor should be thought of as a reducer of the field of view.
For example, a camera with a crop factor of 2.0 and a 100mm lens will be sold as a camera that has a lens equivalent to a 200mm lens. The unsuspecting purchaser thinks he is getting a lens that has the magnifying power of a 200mm lens, but, in fact, all that is happening is that the field of view of his 100mm lens is cropped to what the 200mm lens would have shown but without the magnifying power of the 200mm lens. Don’t be fooled.
I do not mean to dissuade people from purchasing a P&S or an advanced compact. I happen to own two P&S cameras (an Olympus Stylus 7040 and an Olympus X-560WP underwater camera) as well as an advanced compact (the Olympus SP-590). I also own two Olympus DSLR cameras (the E-500 and the E-5).
But because many people are unaware of the technological differences between camera types and also because they purchase their equipment not through camera shops but through electronics specialty stores, in many instances they wind up paying more money for less camera.
I hope that some of what I explained above will make you better able to compare what one camera is capable of as contrasted to another, keeping in mind how much each sells for.
Most important — with the camera that you do buy, learn how to use all of its features so you get the most out of it and can take the great pictures that you want to bring home from your travels. — ALAN LICHTENSTEIN, Commack, NY
Canon PowerShot SD1400 — 2010, 14 mp, 4x/4x zoom, 3.63"x2.2"x0.7" (“ultracompact”), 4.7 oz., LCD 2.7", no viewfinder, $230
My husband, Bernie, got me this little jewel for Christmas 2010. A padded Tamrac case was included with an adjustable string; I hang the camera around my neck, then let out the string so I can put the camera in an inner pocket in my jacket. Also included was a battery charger with foldable prongs — nicely compact.
This camera’s light sensitivity is amazing. It also takes video. I take this camera everywhere. It’s so light. I love it!
I used it to make reproductions of old, irreplaceable photos. I keep the images of my parents and grandparents, who loved to travel, on the memory card, so when Bernie and I take a trip, it’s like I’m sharing it with them. — MIKAYO STORCH, Santa Barbara, CA
Canon PowerShot G1X — 2012, 14.3 mp, 4x/4x zoom, 4.6"x3.17"x2.54" (“too big to pocket”), 18.8 oz., LCD 3", optical viewfinder, $800.
Panasonic Lumix DMC ZS20 — 2012, 14 mp, 20x/40x zoom, 4.1"x2.3"x1.1" (“compact”), 7.2 oz. with battery, LCD 3", no viewfinder, $240
Digital cameras can be grouped by size or by whether or not they have interchangeable lenses, but, for me, the greatest differentiating point is between those that shoot only JPG images and those that can shoot in both RAW and JPG.
A camera that shoots only in JPG uses the camera’s software to process the light data according to a preset formula. RAW images, on the other hand, represent the data as it comes straight from the camera’s sensor. This allows the photographer to easily alter this data, himself, using programs such as Photoshop. (Note: RAW files take up many, many more times the space on a memory card than do JPG files.)
If you’re shooting only “snapshots” and/or home videos and don’t plan on making enlargements, then a jpg-only camera, such as my personal favorite, the Panasonic Lumix DMC ZS20, should be just fine.
On overseas trips, my wife takes the Lumix and I take a Canon G1X, which is larger, heavier and more expensive but can shoot in RAW.
Neither of us are “pro” photographers, but we both enjoy travel photography very much. I’ve been shooting pictures for over 60 years. — STEVEN EMMET, Solana Beach, CA
Canon PowerShot S100 — 2011, 12mp, 5x/4x zoom, 3.9"x2.36"x1.1" (“compact”), 6.98 oz. (incl. battery), LCD 3.0", no viewfinder, $415
I really believe in “pocketable” cameras. I’ve carried them all over the world and even had a few shots published professionally.
I’ve always liked Canon’s rich colors, and the S100 has four great features: full manual controls, a 24mm-equivalent wide-angle lens, RAW mode, and great low-light performance. It’s frustrating taking a shot after sunset or inside a building and getting nothing but blur.
The Canon S100 (and its equally fine predecessors, the S95 and S90) gives up useless megapixels in return for better sensitivity.
Having RAW mode allows advanced photographers to “second guess” decisions made by the camera’s software. (When a digital camera takes photos in JPG mode, information is compressed and the camera’s presets choose what to leave in and what to take out. In RAW mode, all the information gathered by the camera sensor is kept.) You process the RAW image, yourself, using Canon’s software or Photoshop. Ever had a great indoor shot come out with a red or green cast? Most errors in color balance and exposure can be easily fixed in RAW images. — WALT BILOFSKY, Tiburon, CA
Panasonic DMC-Z58 — 2011, 14.1mp, 16x/4x zoom, 4.1"x2.3"x1.3" (“ultracompact”), 6.6 oz., LCD 3", no viewfinder, $360.
My favorite of the true pocket cameras, this one has a remarkable zoom range, making it the ideal all-purpose, travel-light camera. I’m not aware of any other pocket camera that goes any wider and farther.
A downside is that it doesn’t shoot in RAW mode. And, for its lack of a viewfinder, I still curse at this little jewel when I’m trying to compose a photo on the screen on a bright, sunny day! — JAMES K. DOWNS, Louisville, CO
Olympus Stylus Tough 6000 — 2009, 10 mp, 3.6x/5x zoom, 3.8"x2.5"x0.88" (“ultracompact”), 5.3 oz., LCD 2.7", no viewfinder, $160
I purchased this waterproof (shockproof, freeze-proof) camera at a Costco in Hawaii. The salesman told me that the secret to keeping it working after it has been in saltwater is to thoroughly wash it in running freshwater, then soak it for 10 minutes in freshwater. I’ve done this religiously, and so far it has worked fine.
It takes very close macro shots as well as wide-angle landscapes. I am very pleased with its functioning under water. — MARCIA BRANDES, Atlanta, GA
Olympus TG-610 — 2011, 14 mp, 5x/4x zoom, 3.9"x2.5"x1.0" (“ultracompact”), 6.7 oz. (with batteries), LCS 3", no viewfinder, $245
Pentax Optio W90 — 2010, 12.1 mp, 5x/6.25x zoom, 4.3"x2.3"x1" (“ultracompact”), 5 oz., LCD 2.7", no viewfinder, $220
• Our daughter, Ilene, earns her living as a sea kayak guide in Panama and Alaska and requires a fairly sturdy waterproof camera. Based on various reviews, we purchased her a Pentax Optio W90. She keeps the camera fastened to her life jacket with a carabiner when she’s out paddling.
The picture-quality results have been outstanding. As this camera and some other waterproof cameras lack lens covers, her only complaint has been how easy it is for the lens to fog up and even become scratched.
• When my wife and I visited Alaska and did some paddling under cold and wet conditions, I took an Olympus TG-610, which is waterproof to 16 feet, shockproof to a drop of five feet and freeze-proof to 14°F. It takes panoramic pictures as well.
While I have not fully submerged the camera in water for any length of time, I have kept it in a puddle of icy water on my lap while paddling around icebergs during a cold Alaska rain. I have also had it in my lap at an outdoor concert during a rainstorm. Results in all weather conditions have been outstanding.
The lens cover is a big plus. It closes automatically to protect the lens when the camera is turned off.
The camera is sturdy yet fits in my pocket. I travel a lot and own heavier cameras with longer telephoto lenses, but this camera takes such good pictures under so many conditions that I probably will use it exclusively unless I require a telephoto lens for certain nature photography. — MARK PRICE, Wynnewood, PA
Pentax Optio WG-1 — 2011, 14 mp, 5x/6.7x zoom, 4.5"x2.3"x1.1" (“ultracompact”), 5.3 oz., LCD 2.7", no viewfinder, $275 with kit or $225 camera only
What I like best about this camera is that it’s waterproof. It’s also dust-proof, shockproof to five feet and cold-proof to 14°F.
I like all the different scene modes it has available (video, underwater, portrait with sunset conditions, portrait with backlighting, candlelight, etc.).
I purchased the camera as a kit because of all the extras: 16-gigabyte SDHC memory card, floating wrist strap, battery charger, extra battery, carrying case and more. A good, all-around camera, it fits in a shirt pocket. — R.J. DOUGH, Las Vegas, NV