Camera Advice

[CaptainYooh]

Originally Posted by Amethyst

So I've been researching things and it seems like there are three good options:
1) Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ300
2) Nikon Coolpix P900
3) Canon Power Shot SX60HS...

A bit of a controversial advice here. I understand your urge to have a better camera for the trip, but honestly, none of the above cameras are going to give you a serious advantage over a cell-phone photography. Yes, some advantage, but nothing of real substance. No good zooming, no reach, no image stabilization, no low-light capability. You said it yourself, photography is not something you consider a hobby, so why spend any money at all on an inferior camera? I mean, serious amateur photographers (i.e. crazy and sick bunch of people) are guilty of vanity in hoarding up expensive gear and trying to take a semi-pro shot of something just to say: "Look, I took that shot myself!" But you are not going that way, I take it, so why bother? I sometimes come back from traveling and can hardly remember the views, because I only look at them from a camera viewfinder.

I suggest just enjoying the majestic scenery with your own eyes and taking a few shots with your phone to remember the special moments you want to remember.

[Kipper is King]

Originally Posted by CaptainYooh

A bit of a controversial advice here. I understand your urge to have a better camera for the trip, but honestly, none of the above cameras are going to give you a serious advantage over a cell-phone photography.

No serious advantage...except for better lenses, sensors, more memory, and the list goes on.

I can't imagine anyone in their right mind going to the Galapagos with a phone to take photos. Would it be convenient? Yes, but you'd regret it when wanting to have photos worthy of being keepsakes years later.

[CaptainYooh]

Originally Posted by Kipper is King

...you'd regret it when wanting to have photos worthy of being keepsakes years later.

There are millions of pro-quality images of the Galapagos wildlife and scenery on Internet. Personal photos worthy of keepsakes - are photos that remind someone of a moment in time he/she wanted to remember. That can be done with a cellphone. The three cameras listed as options are not capable of making good quality photographs; they are just OK; hence, the advice to save the money.

[DownhillGoat]

Originally Posted by CaptainYooh

none of the above cameras are going to give you a serious advantage over a cell-phone photography. Yes, some advantage, but nothing of real substance. No good zooming,

Umm the SX60 is a 21-1365mm lens.

[CaptainYooh]

OK, I'll re-phrase. SX60 is an entry-level camera with a fairly poor quality glass. Images made at the long range of that zoom are going to be closer than those made by a cellphone, but not much better in IQ; grainy and lacking sharpness.

I really don't want to argue this any further, as I think we are not helping the OP'er with it. I just suggested re-considering investment in an low-quality camera for a one-trip purpose.

P.S. If anything, I would consider renting a high-end mirrorless camera at Vistek instead of buying a low-end one.

[kevman]

Originally Posted by CaptainYooh

I suggest just enjoying the majestic scenery with your own eyes and taking a few shots with your phone to remember the special moments you want to remember.

I agree with you on the concept of saving nature photography for the pros and capturing memories instead.

However even a cheap travel zoom is going to have better low light sensitivity and a wider wide angle which will both help capture those indoor moments. As well any optical zoom is better than your standard 0x zoom on a camera phone. Burst rates are better for the cliche jumping photo. Video modes are better for, well, any video. etc.

Besides, if you're travelling and not using your phone anyway why not replace it with a travel zoom in your pocket?

[kevman]

Originally Posted by CaptainYooh

OK, I'll re-phrase. SX60 is an entry-level camera with a fairly poor quality glass. Images made at the long range of that zoom are going to be closer than those made by a cellphone, but not much better in IQ; grainy and lacking sharpness.

I really don't want to argue this any further, as I think we are not helping the OP'er with it. I just suggested re-considering investment in an low-quality camera for a one-trip purpose.

P.S. If anything, I would consider renting a high-end mirrorless camera at Vistek instead of buying a low-end one.

Except at the long range of that zoom you're at 10x or 20x or 30x optical. Any image with 10x optical, even with the cheapest of glass and cheapest of sensors, is going to far outperform a camera phone where you're relying on a digital (crop) zoom.

You're giving poor advice if you believe a camera phone can compare with a travel zoom. Sure they're both not comparable to a mirrorless or slr camera with good glass but there are numerous advantages to having a point and shoot over a cell phone. Even if you're only taking selfies.

[Amethyst]

Thanks to everyone for the comments and suggestions, including the "outside the box" ones. I think I've got things worked out for this one now. :-)

[DownInFlames]

Originally Posted by CaptainYooh

OK, I'll re-phrase. SX60 is an entry-level camera with a fairly poor quality glass. Images made at the long range of that zoom are going to be closer than those made by a cellphone, but not much better in IQ; grainy and lacking sharpness.

I really don't want to argue this any further, as I think we are not helping the OP'er with it. I just suggested re-considering investment in an low-quality camera for a one-trip purpose.

P.S. If anything, I would consider renting a high-end mirrorless camera at Vistek instead of buying a low-end one.

Renting a decent camera is a good idea, especially if OP won't be using it much after the trip. I wouldn't travel with a rental without some kind of insurance though.

[Buzzard]

I used to have this little point and shoot a few years back and loved it. It took great pictures until my wife introduced it to the kitchen floor. It was light and convenient for travel. Perfect for someone not to serious about photography yet wanting nice, sharp shots with a decent zoom. This particular model isn't available anymore, but whatever the equivalent is I'd take a look at. I think I paid around $300- $350 for it. Sounds like something that you might want.

Panasonic Lumix TZ5

[afc wimbledon]

I generally don't bother taking photos on holiday myself but there's no way in hell when people ask me how my trip went am I going to pull out a bunch of stock photos off the internet!

If people ask me what my girlfriend looks like I'm not pulling out a shot of Cameron Diaz and saying 'well she looks a bit like this'

[Fuzz]

I have a co-worker who does this. We sometimes do work slide shows of vacations, and she would have a few personal ones interspersed with stock internet photos. Always makes me laugh.

[greyshep]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Your Panasonic should do OK, so possibly just settings? You will want to turn your ISO way up and have a quick shutter speed, around 1/1000 if you can.

I will give that a try. The highest ISO setting available is 1600 and it looks like the highest setting for shutter speed is 1/250. Hopefully this produces an ok result.

I still kinda think I am likely gonna be better off with a DSLR if I can get my hands on one.

[Fuzz]

Ya, 1/250 is going to be to slow and 1600 iso isn't going to allow you to go fast enough. I thought I saw in a review that it went to 6400 but if 1/250 is the fastest shutter speed it won't matter.

[greyshep]

So I got the details on the DSLR I can borrow. Its pretty old actually. Its a Canon Rebel XTi eos 400D. Likely around 9 years old. Think that would still do the job?

[Fuzz]

ISO still only goes to 1600, but shutter speed won't be an issue. It depends how bright it is in there, the lens, and how much you will be zoomed in. Worth a try over yours, anyway.

[Fozzie_DeBear]

Originally Posted by greyshep

So I got the details on the DSLR I can borrow. Its pretty old actually. Its a Canon Rebel XTi eos 400D. Likely around 9 years old. Think that would still do the job?

Sure...a camera like that is a perfect way to go to try stuff out. People 9 years ago were taking great pictures with that camera...

https://www.dpreview.com/products/ca...d/user-reviews

Unless you really know what you are doing newer SLR cameras are overkill...

Unless you are totally hopeless and then the newer phone cameras are great...

What I am trying to say is that the utility gained by buying new digital cameras is low given the expense...

[Fuzz]

The biggest improvements in new DSLR's are higher ISO and faster and better autofocus. There are lots of others, but I think for amateurs those make the most difference for image quality.

[Fozzie_DeBear]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

The biggest improvements in new DSLR's are higher ISO and faster and better autofocus. There are lots of others, but I think for amateurs those make the most difference for image quality.

Sure...but autofocus was fast 5 years ago...very fast 3 years ago...very very fast last year.

I'm all for good value...just pointing out that cameras from a few years ago are cheap as borscht and can provide functionality well beyond the needs and capabilities of most users.

ISO however, is worth the $$$ if you shoot in low light or indoors.

[DoubleF]

Originally Posted by greyshep

So I got the details on the DSLR I can borrow. Its pretty old actually. Its a Canon Rebel XTi eos 400D. Likely around 9 years old. Think that would still do the job?

Cell phone cameras can't hold a light to most DSLRs made in the last decade.

I'd venture a guess that that camera is probably at least around entry level mirror less camera level quality within the the last 3-4 years, but in a much larger DSLR body. The rebel was (and still is) a quality camera.

A decade worth of improvements is a lot of change, but like cars, most people barely notice the difference. A camera is still at its base: Zoom, focus, quality of shot and form factor.

Nut shell:

Canon Rebel XTi EOS 400D (Year 2006)
10.1 MP
22.2 x 14.4mm APS-C Sensor
100 - 1600 ISO
Shutter 1/4000

Nikon J1 (Year 2011 mirrorless)
10.1 MP
13.2 x 8.8mm CMOS sensor
100-3200 ISO
Shutter 1/16000 (Because mirror less is naturally faster)

I think it's a perfectly fine camera.