Compare digital camera sensor sizes: 1″-Type, 4/3, APS-C, full frame 35mm

To optimize the portability of a serious travel camera (recommended here), get 1-inch Type sensor size or as large as APS-C sensor. Above this range, full-frame sensors overly increase camera weight for most travelers. Below “1-inch” size, sensors can suffer from poor image quality (especially in dim light) when making large prints. The archaic inch-sizing of sensors is clarified in the illustration and the table further below with relative sizes and millimeters.

For a given year of technological advance, a camera with physically bigger sensor area tends to capture better image quality by gathering more light, but at the cost of larger-diameter, bulkier lenses. Recent digital sensor advances have shrunk cameras and increased optical zoom ranges while preserving image quality. If you avoid using their poor digital zoom, even top smartphones such as Google Pixel, Samsung S6/S7 or Apple iPhone 6s can potentially make good 18-inch prints, and they excel at instantly sharing images. A powerful image can be created any decent camera in the hands of a skilled or lucky photographer. But for superior optical zoom, better performance in dim light and sharper prints, get a bigger camera.

Below, compare sensor sizes for digital cameras:

Sensor sizes for digital cameras.

In the above illustration, compare digital camera sensor sizes: full frame 35mm, APS-C, Micro Four Thirds, 1-inch, 1/1.7″ and 1/2.5” Type. For new digital cameras, a bigger sensor area captures better quality, but requires larger diameter, bulkier lenses. To optimize the size of a serious travel camera, consider 1-inch-Type sensor or up to APS-C sensor size. “Full-frame 35mm” sensor / film size (36 x 24 mm) is a standard for comparison, with a diagonal field-of-view crop factor = 1.0. In comparison, a pocket camera’s 1/2.5” Type sensor crops the light gathering by 6.0x smaller diagonally (with a surface area 35 times smaller than full frame).

Click here for my latest camera recommendations

1″-Type sensor size is now optimal for travel camera portability:

I upgrade my digital camera every 2-4 years because the latest devices keep beating older models. As of 2016, a 1″-Type sensor size is perfect for a portable, lightweight travel camera, as in the following which capture excellent dynamic range (bright to dark) with exceptionally fast autofocus:

Or the following top APS-C-sensor camera lets you interchange lenses (though I prefer the above all-in-one solutions for travel convenience):

The next step up to full-frame-sensor cameras costs extra, adds bulk, and is only needed if you regularly shoot in dim light higher than ISO 6400, or often print images larger than 2 or 3 feet in size to be viewed closer than their longest dimension by critically sharp eyes.

But huge effective billboards can be printed from compact 3-megapixel cameras (read my article)

How to compare cameras

  • My CAMERAS article updates Light Travel camera recommendations several times per year.
  • If possible, compare cameras shot side-by-side under a variety of actual field conditions (which I do just before selling a former camera to confirm the quality of the new replacement camera). I like to “pixel-peep” a side-by-side comparison of two different cameras capturing the same subject under same lighting conditions. Be sure to mentally or digitally normalize any two given shots to compare their fine detail as if printed with equal overall image size.
  • I judge image quality and resolution not by megapixel (mp) count but instead by comparing standardized studio test views at 100% pixel enlargement and checking resolvable lines per picture height (LPH), at the authoritative dpreview.com (owned by Amazon since 2007) and handy Comparometer at imaging-resource.com. Check other review sites analyzing a camera’s telephoto in addition to standard lens.

For me, yearly advances as of 2014-16 put the sweet spot for a serious travel camera between 1”-Type and APS-C size sensors. Most cheaper compact cameras have smaller but noisier sensors such as 1/2.3″ Type (6.17 x 4.56 mm) — tiny enough to miniaturize a superzoom lens (above 15x zoom range), but poor for capturing dim light or for enlarging prints much beyond 12-18 inches.

Smartphones can have even tinier sensors, such as 1/3.0″ Type (4.8 mm x 3.6 mm) in iPhone 5S. Top smartphone cameras have improved miniature sensors to the point where citizen journalists can capture newsworthy photos with image quality good enough for fast sharing and quick international publication. My Samsung Note 5 smartphone (same camera as S6/S7 with 1/2.6″ sensor) captures sunny 16mp images sufficient to make a sharp 18-inch print, virtually indistinguishable from that taken by a larger camera. Tip: avoid the digital zoom on smartphones, and instead move closer before shooting or crop at editing time, if needed to isolate subjects.

Read this pointed perspective on how far image quality has progressed from early DSLR to 2014 smartphone cameras. Historically, evocative images can clearly be captured regardless of camera size or modernity. But for a given year of technological advance, tiny-sensor cameras can have severe limitations compared to physically larger cameras in terms of print enlargement, autofocus speed, blurred performance in dim or indoor light, and so forth. The “best” travel camera is the one that you are willing to carry.

More details:

The non-standardized fractional-inch sensor sizing labels such as 1/2.5-inch Type and 1/1.7″ Type confusingly refer to antiquated 1950s-1980s vacuum tubes. When you see those archaic “inch” size labels, instead look up the actual length and width in millimeters reported in the specifications for each camera:

Table of camera sensor size, area, and diagonal crop factor relative to 35mm full-frame

Sensor Type Diagonal (mm) Width (mm) Height (mm) Sensor Area (in square millimeters) Full frame sensor area is x times bigger Diagonal crop factor* versus full frame
1/3.2″ (Apple iPhone 5 smartphone 2012) 5.68 4.54 3.42 15.50 55 7.6
1/3.0″ (Apple iPhone 5S smartphone 2013) 6.00 4.80 3.60 17.30 50 7.2
1/2.6″ Type (Samsung Galaxy S6 & Note 5 in 2015) 6.86 5.5 4.1 22.55 38 6.3
1/2.5″ Type 7.18 5.76 4.29 24.70 35 6.0
1/2.3″ Type (Canon PowerShot SX280HS, Olympus Tough TG-2) 7.66 6.17 4.56 28.07 31 5.6
1/1.7″ (Canon PowerShot S95, S100, S110, S120) 9.30 7.44 5.58 41.51 21 4.7
1/1.7″ (Pentax Q7) 9.50 7.60 5.70 43.30 20 4.6
2/3″ (Nokia Lumia 1020 smartphone with 41mp camera; Fujifilm X-S1, X20, XF1) 11.00 8.80 6.60 58.10 15 3.9
Standard 16mm Film Frame 12.7 10.26 7.49 76.85 11 3.4
1” Type (Sony RX100 & RX10, Nikon CX, Panasonic FZ1000) 15.86 13.20 8.80 116 7.4 2.7
Micro Four Thirds, 4/3 21.60 17.30 13 225 3.8 2.0
APS-C: Canon EF-S 26.70 22.20 14.80 329 2.6 1.6
APS-C: Nikon DX, Sony NEX/Alpha DT, Pentax K 28.2 – 28.4 23.6 – 23.7 15.60 368 – 370 2.3 1.52 – 1.54
35mm full-frame (Nikon FX, Sony Alpha/Alpha FE, Canon EF) 43.2 – 43.3 36 23.9 – 24.3 860 – 864 1.0 1.0
Kodak KAF 39000 CCD Medium Format 61.30 49 36.80 1803 0.48 0.71
Hasselblad H5D-60 Medium Format 67.08 53.7 40.2 2159 0.40 0.65
Phase One P 65+, IQ160, IQ180 67.40 53.90 40.40 2178 0.39 0.64
IMAX Film Frame 87.91 70.41 52.63 3706 0.23 0.49

* Crop Factor: Note that a “full frame 35mm” sensor/film size (about 36 x 24 mm) is a common standard for comparison, having a diagonal field of view crop factor of 1.0. The debatable term crop factor comes from an attempt by 35mm-film users to understand how much the angle of view of their existing full-frame lenses would narrow (increase in telephoto power) when mounted on digital SLR (DSLR) cameras which had sensor sizes (such as APS-C) which are smaller than 35mm.

With early DSLR cameras, many photographers were concerned about the loss of image quality or resolution by using a digital sensor with a light-gathering area smaller than 35mm film. However, for my publishing needs, APS-C-size sensor improvements easily surpassed my scanning of 35mm film by 2009.

An interesting number for comparing cameras is “Full frame sensor area is x times bigger” in the above table.

  • In comparison to full a frame sensor, a pocket camera’s 1/2.5-inch Type sensor crops the light gathering surface 6.0 times smaller diagonally, or 35 times smaller in area.
  • An APS-C size sensor gathers about 15 times more light (area) than a 1/2.5” Type sensor and 2.4 times less than full frame.
    • APS-C sensors in Nikon DX, Pentax, and Sony E have 1.5x diagonal field of view crop factor.
    • APS-C sensors in Canon EF-S DSLRs have 1.6x diagonal field of view crop factor.
  • 1 stop is a doubling or halving of the amount of gathered light. Doubling a sensor’s area theoretically gathers one stop more light.

Lens quality & diameter also affect image quality

For improving image quality, the quality and diameter of the lens can rival the importance of having a physically larger sensor area. Prime (non-zoom) lenses usually are sharpest for larger prints, but zoom lenses are more versatile and recommended for travelers.

Small sensor can beat larger with newer design (BSI) plus faster optics:

In my side-by-side field tests, the sharp, bright 25x zoom of Sony RX10 III resoundingly beats the resolution of 11x SEL18200 lens on flagship APS-C Sony A6300 at 90+ mm equivalent telephoto, even as high as ISO 6400. (Wider angle zoom settings show little quality difference.) Apparently RX10’s faster f/2.4-4 lens plus backside illumination (BSI) technology magically compensate for the sensor size difference, 1″-Type versus APS-C. Like most APS-C-sensor cameras in 2016, A6300 lacks BSI. Surprisingly little noise affects RX10’s image quality at high ISO 6400 in dim light. Its larger lens diameter gathering more light also helps in this comparison (72mm filter size of RX10 III versus 67mm SEL18200 on A6300).

Larger lens diameter can help dim light photography:

In my field tests, the linear sharpness of Sony’s high-quality SEL1670Z 3x zoom f/4 lens on flagship A6300 is only about 5% better than Sony RX10 III f/2.4-4 in bright light in the wider half of its 24-105mm equivalent range, but no better in dim light. I expect that RX10’s catch-up in quality under dim light is due to superior light sensitivity of BSI sensor plus larger lens diameter gathering more light, 72mm versus 55mm.

Using sweet spot of full-frame lenses on APS-C may not improve quality:

In principle, you might expect a slightly sharper image on an APS-C sensor when using the sweet spot of a lens designed for a full frame (which has a larger imaging circle), but results actually vary, especially when using older film-optimized lenses. In fact, a lens which is designed and optimized specially “for digital, for APS-C” can equal or exceed the quality of an equivalent full-frame lens on the same sensor, while also reducing bulk and weight (as in the Sony E-mount example further below).

Theoretically, new full-frame lenses “designed for digital” (using image-space telecentric design) may perform better on a digital sensor than would older lenses designed for film:

  • Unlike film, digital sensors receive light best when struck squarely rather than at a grazing angle.
  • Digital cameras perform best with lenses optimized specially “for digital”, using image-space telecentric designs, in which all the rays land squarely on the sensor (as opposed to having incoming rays emerge at the same angle as they entered, as in a pinhole camera). The light buckets (sensels) on digital sensors require light rays to be more parallel than with film (to enter at close to a 90 degree angle to the sensor).
  • Film can record light at more grazing angles than a digital sensor. Because older film-optimized lenses bend light to hit the sensor at more of a glancing angle, they reduce light-gathering efficiency and cause more vignetting around the edges (which is somewhat mitigated by the image circle being cropped by the APS-C sensor, which uses just the center part of the full-frame lens).
Side-by-side testing works better than theory to distinguish lenses:

Compare the following two Sony E-mount zoom lenses, full-frame versus APS-C:

  1. 2015 full-frame “Sony E-mount FE 24-240mm f/3.5-6.3 OSS” lens (27.5 oz, 36-360mm equivalent).
  2. 2010 APS-C “Sony E-mount 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 OSS (silver SEL-18200)” lens (18.5 oz, 27-300mm equiv).

Both lenses are optimized for digital, yet the APS-C lens is much lighter weight and performs equal to or better than the full-frame lens. Side-by-side comparisons and also DxOMark tests on a Sony A6000 camera show that while they are about equally sharp, the Sony 24-240 has more distortion, vignetting and chromatic aberration than the 18-200mm.

Raw format and advantages of large sensors over small

Cameras with larger sensors can achieve a shallower depth of focus than smaller sensors, a feature which movie makers and portrait photographers like to use for blurring the background (at brightest aperture setting, smallest F number value) to draw more attention to the focused subject. Conversely, smaller-sensor cameras like the Sony RX10 III and RX100 III tend to be much better at capturing close-focus (macro) shots with great depth of focus (especially at wide angle), at ISO up to 800. But the macro advantages of small-sensor cameras can diminish in dim light or when shooting at ISO higher than 800.

Landscape photographers often prefer to capture a deep depth of focus, which can be achieved with both small and large sensor cameras (often optimally sharp using a middle aperture F number value such as f/4 to f/5.6 on 1-inch Type sensor or f/8 on APS-C, while avoiding the diffraction of small pupil openings at high F number values such as f/22 on APS-C or full-frame).

To maximize raw dynamic range of brightness values from bright to dark, use base ISO (around ISO 100 or 200 in most digital still cameras), rather than higher ISO settings which amplify noise (blotchiness at the pixel level, most-visibly in shadows). However, using the latest full-frame sensors at high ISO values 6400+ can capture unprecedentedly low noise and open new possibilities for dim-light action photography at hand-held shutter speeds, indoors or at night.

Without the help of a flash, night and dim indoor photography is best with a full-frame sensor to gather more light with less noise. Low-noise night photography is usually best shot on a tripod at slow shutter speeds in raw format between ISO 100 and 800 (or as high as 1600-3200 on the latest large sensors).

For a given year of technological advance, cameras with larger sensors typically capture a wider dynamic range of brightness values from bright to dark per image than smaller sensors, with less noise. In 2016, Sony’s 1″-Type backside illumination (BSI) sensors capture sufficient dynamic range for my needs.

Camera raw format allows editing recovery of several stops of highlight and shadow detail which would be lost (truncated) in JPEG file format (if overexposed or underexposed). Alternatively, PC software or camera firmware using HDR (High Dynamic Range) imaging lets any size of sensor greatly increase an image’s dynamic range by combining multiple exposures. But for me, the great dynamic range of a single raw file (from 1″-Type BSI or APS-C sensor) usually makes shooting extra images for HDR unnecessary.

Despite advanced circuitry, cameras are not smart enough to know which subjects are supposed to be white, black, or midtone in brightness. By default, all cameras underexpose scenes where white tones (such as snow) predominate, and overexpose highlights in scenes where black tones predominate. IMPORTANT TIP: To correctly expose for all tones, you need to lock exposure upon an actual midtone (such as a gray card; or on a line halfway between light and shadow) in the same light as your framed subject.

For greatest editing flexibility, rather than shooting JPEG format, serious photographers should record and edit images in raw format, which is supported in advanced cameras (but often not in small-sensor devices). Editing raw format fully recovers badly-exposed images − allowing you to “point and shoot” more freely than with JPEG. Even so, I carefully shoot to expose each histogram to the far right while avoiding truncation of highlights, in order to capture the highest signal-to-noise ratio in each scene. Try to stay close to base ISO 100 or 200. I typically first shoot a test shot on automatic Aperture-preferred priority, inspect the histogram, check any blinking highlight warnings, then compensate subsequent shots using Manual Exposure (or temporary Exposure Lock grabbed from the scene). Tonal editing of JPEGs can quickly truncate color channels or accumulate round-off errors, often making the image appear pasty, pixelated, or posterized. White Balance (Color Balance) is easily adjustable after shooting raw files, but tonal editing often skews colors oddly in JPEG. 12-bit Raw format has 16 times the tonal editing headroom and color accuracy compared to JPEG (which has only 8 bits per pixel per red, green, or blue color channel). In their favor, automatic point-and-shoot JPEG camera exposure modes get smarter every year, making advanced larger cameras less necessary for many people.

Detailed full-frame comparison of low-light Sony A7S 12mp versus A7R 36mp

How can we distinguish the image quality captured by different cameras? Images are best compared at a normalized pixel level (with fine detail examined on a monitor as if printed with equal overall image size) after shooting side-by-side in the field with comparable lens and shutter speed settings. Consider two sibling full-frame-sensor cameras:

  1. Sony Alpha A7S (12 mp of large-bucket photosites optimized for high ISO, low light, and videography plus stills, new in 2015) versus
  2. Sony Alpha A7R (36 megapixels of smaller-bucket photosites optimized for high resolution, new in 2014)

Despite its tinier but denser photosite buckets (also called sensels or pixel wells for catching light photons), the 36mp Sony Alpha A7R beats the dynamic range of 12mp Sony Alpha A7S in a normalized comparison of raw files (see dpreview article). While both cameras spread their photosites across the same surface area of a full-frame sensor, the 36mp A7R trumps the 12mp A7S for exposure latitude flexibility in raw post-processing at ISO 100 through 6400. Overall image quality of the 12mp A7S doesn’t beat the A7R until ISO 12,800 and higher (but only in the shadows through midtones under low-light conditions). Sony A7S is better for low-light videographers, whereas A7R is better for low-light landscape photographers who value high resolution and dynamic range.

Support my work — buy anything after clicking any Amazon.com product link.

Sony RX100 review: best pocket camera 2012-15

The world’s best pocket-sized travel camera improved in 2015:

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 version IV (best-ever pocket camera 2015, 10.5 oz) bests earlier version III with:

  • a new Exmor RS stacked CMOS sensor, with faster operation but same image quality
  • 15 fps electronic shutter
  • viewfinder dots 2.36mp (formerly 1.44mp)
  • new 4K (UHD) video
  • improved dynamic range in video and JPEG (using S-Log2 gamma setting under Picture Profiles)
  • greatly-improved Auto ISO
  • fast eye-tracking AF
  • instant magnification of AF point in playback

The 24-70mm equivalent f/1.8-2.8 lens remains the same, but battery life has decreased to 280 shots (down from 320 shots in version III).

The earlier Sony RX100 camera version III (best-ever pocket camera 2014, 10 oz) beat previous version II with the following new features:

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 version III Digital Camera

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 version III Digital Camera

  • Widens its angle of view to 24mm (with brightest aperture f/1.8).
  • Significantly sharpens its 70mm telephoto, which is now brightened to f/2.8. (Zoom reach was shortened from 3.6x to 2.9x, but generous 20 megapixels allow much cropping for a good digital zoom.)
  • Adds a pop-up SVGA OLED electronic viewfinder with 1.44M dots!
  • Tilts its 3″ LCD further to a full 180 degrees.
  • Adds a Nuetral Density (ND) filter, great for allowing slow shutter speeds (such as to blur moving water) in bright sunlight.
  • Compared to Sony RX100 III, the rival Canon PowerShot G7X camera has no viewfinder, poor battery life, unreliable focus and poor manual focus magnification. In its favor, Canon G7X has brighter lens from 24-50mm equiv (up to 2/3 stop better), longer zoom 24-100mm equiv (versus 24-70mm), touchscreen and LCD that flips 180-degrees for selfies, in a body having the same weight, size and sensor, capturing similar image quality in studio comparisons.

Earlier versions:

Look for a great value on a used Sony RX100 version 1 (model DSCRX100/B) at Amazon (worth the price premium over a used Canon S110, both introduced in 2012).

Sony RX100 beats rival brands of pocket-sized cameras with unusually fast 0.15 sec autofocus, an unprecedented 20 mp 1″ sensor (capturing 2.6 times the light area of a Canon S110), and sharp LCD (1,228,800 dots). To better grasp its slippery body, add Sony AG-R2 attachment grip. Below, read my full review of version I:

Tom’s review of Sony RX100 version I

The world’s best pocket-sized camera of 2012, Sony RX100 camera version 1 (8.5 oz, model DSCRX100/B), packs the largest sensor (1-inch Type) ever designed into such a small body. Its high image quality and autofocus speed beat any other zoom camera under 16 ounces! Both RX100 versions I and II have 3.6x optical zoom (28–100mm equiv), with brightest aperture f/1.8 at wide angle zoom and f/4.9 at telephoto. But as expected, images will be sharpest when shot at a few stops down, around f/4 to f/5.6. A trip to Italy in summer 2013 reconfirmed my excitement about the RX100: its 20-megapixel sensor can resolve more detail than my former 12mp Nikon D5000 DSLR camera using kit lens at ISO 200 to 400. 

Compared to the competing Canon PowerShot S110 camera (7 oz, 2012) or Canon S95 (7 oz, 2010, pictured below), Sony RX100’s high-resolution 20mp sensor can actually double the area of sharp prints. Also, cropping a 20-megapixel image from its shorter telephoto easily beats the quality from an 120mm-equivalent image from the S110. The RX100’s sensor pixels dedicated to phase-detection AF impressively accelerate hybrid autofocus to as fast as 0.15 second at wide angle (0.26 sec at tele). In its favor, a Canon PowerShot S110 (2012) is 25% smaller by volume, starts its zoom wider at 24mm equivalent, adds touch screen, has friendlier menus, and costs around 40% less when new (but costs about the same when used: see Sony RX100/B version I at Amazon). Compare features in the Table at bottom. [These compact designs have a good 3-inch LCD but no viewfinder, unless you upgrade to RX100 version III, which also widens its angle of view to 24mm equivalent.]

Pocket-sized wonders: Compare camera lens and size of Sony DSC-RX100 (left) versus Canon PowerShot S95.

Pocket-sized wonders: Compare camera lens and size of Sony DSC-RX100 version I (left) versus Canon PowerShot S95.

To better grasp the slippery body of a Sony RX100 (and other compact cameras), order a Custom Grip from Richard Franiec (shown above) or Sony AG-R2 attachment grip. Protect your RX100 in a Tamrac Digital 1 Photo Bag, with room for extra Wasabi Power NPBX1 batteries.

The unusually large 1-inch Type sensor inside a Sony RX100 is 2.8 times bigger in surface area than a 1/1.7-inch Type sensor in a Canon S110, S95, or G series camera. (Compare sensor sizes in separate article.) The larger-diameter RX100 lens gathers more light onto its sensor than any other pocketable zoom camera, capturing superior quality.

To beat the image resolution recorded by an 8.5-oz Sony RX100, competitors require increasing camera weight to 16 ounces or more! For example: a 16-oz Sony Alpha NEX-6 (16mp) with 16-50mm Retractable Zoom lens beats RX100’s quality above ISO 800 (and adds a fantastic viewfinder with 2,359,296 dots). Surprisingly, studio tests show that a little 8.5-ounce Sony RX100 can beat or equal image quality from a 29-ounce Nikon D5000 DSLR with kit lens (12mp APS-C sensor, 2009) from ISO 200 up to 1600. Image quality and resolution is judged not by megapixel (mp) count but instead by comparing standardized studio test views at 100% pixel enlargement and checking resolvable lines per picture height (LPH).

1895 Heritage House (Kanab, Utah) illustrates the high resolution of a Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 compact camera (18mm, f/5.6, 1/400th sec, ISO 125) - PhotoSeek.com

100% pixel enlargements from the 1895 Heritage House (Kanab, Utah) illustrate the sharp resolution of a Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 compact camera (f/5.6, 1/400th sec, ISO 125, zoomed to 18mm, which is “48mm equivalent”).

More details:

The Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 version I digital camera has a Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T Lens with

  • 3.6x optical zoom: 10.4 – 37.1mm (28–100mm equivalent)
  • good “Optical SteadyShot” Image Stabilization
  • fast f/1.8 brightest aperture at 10.4mm wide angle
  • f/4.9 brightest aperture at 37.1mm tele
  • As expected, images will be sharpest when shot at a few stops down from brightest aperture, best around f/4 to f/5.6. Beyond that, due to physics, higher f-stops will soften images with diffraction, especially at f/11, the RX100’s smallest lens opening.
  • For telephoto subjects, an RX100’s moderate 3.6x zoom easily beats the quality of cropping images from a fixed-lens (non-zoom) camera in this size class.

The RX100 captures full HD 1080/60p video with stereo sound. Its aluminum body pops up an effective flash. Record stills using raw, JPEG, or both. Its unusually fast autofocus and 10 frames per second burst mode capture action much easier than previous pocket cameras.

My test shots on a Sony RX100 (20mp) were more than 50% sharper than a Canon S95 (10mp) throughout the zoom range, from close focus to infinity. Note that in studio comparisons, Canon S110 (12 mp) is less than 10% sharper than Canon S95. Cropping images from my RX100 beats the real resolution of a bulkier Canon PowerShot G9 from wide angle through 150mm equivalent.

Purple flower close-up, Lake Mead National Recreation Area, Nevada, USA.

The Sony RX100’s 20-megapixel sensor has plenty of room to crop from native 5472 x 3648 down to 1500 x 1000 pixels to frame the above close-focus image. Purple desert flower, Lake Mead National Recreation Area, Nevada. (Zoomed to 10.4mm widest angle, f/7.1, 1/400 second, ISO 125, manual focus)

Table: Compare Sony RX100 version I with Canon PowerShot S110 and S95

For travel portability with top image quality, a Sony RX100 version I camera clearly beats my former Canon PowerShot S95 (2010) and rivals my DSLR camera quality of  just 3 years ago. Get a great value on a used Sony RX100 version 1 (model DSCRX100/B) at Amazon (around $200 as of May 2015, same price as a used Canon S110, both introduced in 2012).

Green boxes or green text indicate features beating the other camera(s) in that row:

CAMERA FEATURES Sony RX100 camera version I Digital Camera (2012) model #DSCRX100/B

 

Canon PowerShot S110 camera (2012) Canon PowerShot S95 (2010)
Total weight with battery and memory card: 240 g (0.53 lb / 8.5 oz). Sony RX100 is only 23% heavier than Canon S110 or S95

 

198 g (0.44 lb / 7 oz). 195 g (0.43 lb / 7 oz)
Camera body size: 4.00 x 2.29 x 1.41″ / 10.16 x 5.81 x 3.59 cm (only 22% larger volume than S95)

 

3.9 x 2.32 x 1.06″ (9.9 x 5.9 x 2.7 cm) 3.94 x 2.28 x 1.18″ ( 10.0 x 5.8 x 3.0 cm)
Megapixels (mp) resolution: 20 mp, 5472 x 3648

 

12 mp, 4000 x 3000 10 mp, 3648 x 2736
Sensor type: 1-inch Exmor CMOS Low-Light Sensor (13.2 x 8.8 mm): 2.8-times-larger sensor area than Canon S110 or S95

 

1/1.7″ CMOS (7.44 x 5.58 mm) 1/1.7″ CCD (7.44 x 5.58 mm)
Lens (“equivalent” in terms of 35mm full frame): 3.6x optical zoom, 28–100mm equiv, f/1.8
– f/4.9. Cropping down from the RX100’s 20mp resolution at telephoto
easily beats image quality from the extra telephoto reach of the Canon
S110.
5x optical, 24–120mm
equiv, f/2 – f/5.9. Canon S110 has a widest angle of view of 74 degrees
horizontally (versus 66 degrees for Sony RX100 and Canon S95)
3.8x optical zoom, 28–105mm equiv, f/2.0 – f/4.9
Autofocus (AF): Hybrid autofocus as fast as 0.15 seconds at wide angle (0.26 sec at tele)

 

Contrast-detection autofocus Contrast-detection autofocus
Drive speed: frames per second (fps): 2.5 and 10 fps

 

2.1 fps 0.9 fps
Close focus distance: 5 cm (1.97″): Cropping RX100 beats the macro enlargement resolution of S110 or S95

 

3 cm 5 cm (1.97″)
Battery life (CIPA): 330 shots

 

200 shots 200 shots
LCD (no viewfinder): 3-inch Xtra Fine TFT LCD Display with WhiteMagic: 1,228,800 dots

 

3-inch LCD: 461,000 dots TFT PureColor II G Touch screen LCD 3-inch LCD: 461,000 dots
Movies/video: Records stereo sound, 1920 x 1080 (60 fps) progressive or interlaced, 1440 x 1080 (30 fps), 1280 x 720 (30 fps), 640 x 480 (30 fps)

 

Records stereo sound, 1920 x 1080 (24 fps), 1280 x 720 (30 fps), 640 x 480 (30 fps) Records stereo sound, 1280 x 720 (24 fps) 640 x 480 (30 fps), 320 x 240 (30 fps)



Support Tom’s work — buy anything after clicking any Amazon.com product links here on PhotoSeek.com.

Digital versus film for travel photography

Tom began using 35mm film (135 film cartridge) in 1978 and switched to digital cameras after 2004. This article explains why:

Digital versus Film for Travel Photography 2009” PDF document
compares and reviews digital cameras versus film through 2009.

See my latest camera model recommendations.

Read the book “Light Travel: Photography on the Go” for the story of how a photographer’s switch from film to digital cameras inspired new creativity. Get more out of your digital camera using Tom Dempsey’s helpful tips.


Support my work — buy anything after clicking this Amazon.com link.

TOM’S CAMERA GEAR HISTORY 1978-2016

PhotoSeek creator Tom Dempsey reveals his favorite photographic gear adopted from 1978-2016.

For travel and nature photography, I look for portable, high-quality cameras on a moderate budget. Since 1978 I have regularly updated my technology as follows (newest at top, oldest at bottom). See also: BEST TRAVEL CAMERAS REVIEW.  

Below, buy linked items at Amazon.com to support Tom’s work.

Current main camera: Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 III (37 oz; Tom’s usage from May 2016−present)

Sony RX10 III camera

The versatile Sony RX10 III weather-sealed camera has a superb 25x zoom 24-600mm equivalent f/2.4-4 lens.

New in May 2016, Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 III (buy at Amazon) is my ultimate travel camera, only 37 ounces (with battery & card, plus adding 5 oz for strap, lens filter, cap & hood makes 42 oz). Its weather-sealed body has a bright f/2.4-4 lens with vast 25x zoom, sharp throughout its remarkable 24-600mm equivalent range. I no longer need a pocket camera for improving close-focus shots, as RX10 already has a 1”-Type sensor — its depth of focus, deeper than APS-C sensor cameras for a given f-stop, enhances details from close flower shots to distant bird feathers all the way to 600mm equivalent telephoto. RX10 III is the world’s most versatile camera for on-the-go photographers. Read my full review of Sony RX10 III.

Indoor event photography camera (18-33 oz; Tom’s usage from April 2016−present)

Introduced in April 2016, the best value camera for capturing indoor events or action with fast autofocus is my Sony Alpha A6300 (buy at Amazon with 16-50mm lens) (2016, 14 oz body + 4 oz 24-75mm equiv zoom). Sony’s A6300 (read my review) demands the sharpest E-mount lenses to leverage its APS-C sensor, in order to rival the marvelous optics of Sony RX10 III. For indoor events using the A6300, my older Sony SEL18200 lens struggles to keep up with RX10 III outside of a 30-60mm equivalent sweet spot.

Pocketable backup camera #1: (11 oz; Tom’s usage from 2016−present)

Panasonic Lumix DSC-ZS100 (buy at Amazon) (2016, 11 oz, 25-250mm equivalent lens) has an impressive 10x zoom on a 1″ sensor body which can fit in a large shirt pocket. The Panasonic ZS100 (read my review) is more versatile than a 3x zoom Sony RX100…

Pocketable backup camera #2: Sony RX100 version III  (10 oz; Tom’s usage from 2014−present)

Sony RX100 (read my review) version III pops up an electronic viewfinder (OLED SVGA 1.44M dots), widens its lens view to 24mm equiv (brightest aperture f/1.8), zooms to a sharper and brighter 70mm f/2.8 telephoto, tilts its 3″ LCD to a full 180 degrees and adds a Nuetral Density (ND) filter, all substantial upgrades from version II. Sony RX100 (price at Amazon) has an impressive 1-inch-Type sensor (20mp), unusually fast 0.15 sec autofocus, and a sharp LCD (1,228,800 dots). To better grasp its slippery body, add a Sony AG-R2 attachment grip.

Bowling Ball Beach, Schooner Gulch State Park, south of Point Arena, Mendocino County, California, USA. Pacific Ocean waves have weathered coastal bluffs (steeply tilted beds of Miocene Galloway Formation, Cenozoic Era mudstone) to expose spherical sandstone concretions resting on bowling lanes. Concretions form because minerals of like composition tend to precipitate around a common center. The panorama was stitched from 2 overlapping photos. (© Tom Dempsey / PhotoSeek.com)

Bowling Ball Beach, Schooner Gulch State Park, south of Point Arena, Mendocino County, California, USA. Panorama was stitched from 2 overlapping photos. © 2012 Tom Dempsey / PhotoSeek.com

Tom’s latest computer and software (A, B, C, D, E)

A. Adobe Photoshop Lightroom for Windows or Macintosh (Tom’s usage from 2007−present)
  • I highly recommend Adobe Lightroom software which elegantly organizes images and speeds editing!
  • As of April 2015, Lightroom version 6 now thankfully includes good Photo Merge to Panorama and to HDR, with raw file input and high-quality output to Adobe Digital Negative DNG files.
    • An equally good option for stitching panoramas from multiple images is the FREE Image Composite Editor (ICE) released in 2015 from Microsoft Research Computational Photography Group − faster and sharper than using Adobe Photoshop CS5.
  • Save money on Adobe products using your academic/student/teacher discount, if applicable. (By the way, in 2012 Adobe competitively cut in half the retail price of Lightroom.)
  • Lightroom gets 2-3 times the organizing & editing done per week compared to Canon ZoomBrowser or Adobe Photoshop with Bridge.
  • Lightroom smartly stores its non-destructive editing commands & labels in a powerful database (and in .XMP sidecar files for raw), compatible with JPG, TIF, and most camera raw files.
    • To protect your edits and metadata changes against the rare event of a damaged Lightroom catalog, be sure to “Automatically write changes into XMP” (which unfortunately isn’t the default) set under Lightroom’s Edit menu > Catalog Settings > Metadata.
    • But backing up DNG file edits must be done manually, with the command “Update DNG Preview and Metadata” under Metadata menu. DNG is advantageously compressed 20% smaller than camera raw, but using sidecar+raw instead may be faster and more secure against file corruption. The writing time for a whole DNG file takes much longer than a quick write to a tiny sidecar XMP file. So long as you “Build Previews 1:1” at Import time as I do, Lightroom preview speeds should be similar or better using raw+sidecar compared to DNG (?). Synchronizing a folder of thousands of images should be much quicker with raw+sidecar than with DNG.
    • I don’t see an advantage to convert old or import new raw shots to DNG. As of 2015, Adobe Lightroom version 6 still handles my oldest raw files from Canon Powershot G5 camera of 2003 and Sony NEX 7 raw (2012-15).
  • Lightroom easily and automatically exports image files to attractive web pages, or to files of any size, such as for e-mail or Microsoft PowerPoint presentations (automatically converting from its internal Adobe RGB or ProPhoto RGB color space, to sRGB and so forth). Lightroom can optionally place a copyright watermark on exported images.
  • Upgrade history: A great upgrade from 1.4 to 2.0 added graduated filters, localized editing brushes, and a quicker interface to Adobe Photoshop such as for Photomerge (stitching panoramas, now included in Lightroom version 6.x). If you buy a new camera that captures raw files, check if the latest Lightroom update has added support for it. (For example, Lightroom Version 1.1 introduced RAW support for Nikon D40X camera, 1.4 added Nikon D60, 2.4 added Nikon D5000.)
  • A disadvantage of Adobe Lightroom ties you to the expense of updates required for future camera raw file compatibility. Here are some cheaper workflow software options:
    • FastStone Image Viewer 3.6 Freeware, www.faststone.org is FREE. Fast and capable, especially if you use raw files. Downloads, views, edits and exports still images, including most camera raw files. FastStone does not view or download movies or sound files.
    • Canon Zoombrowser is FREE with purchase of Canon cameras. Handily downloads, views, edits and exports Canon still images, movies and recorded sound files. (Simpler than FastStone Viewer.)
    • Apple iPhoto is not bad, but each edit creates a new file.
    • Note that Apple Aperture has features similar to Adobe Lightroom, but in 2014, Apple ceased development of its Aperture and iPhoto apps and replaced them both with the Photos for OS X app. Note that Version 3 and later of both Apple Aperture and Adobe Lightroom helpfully cataloged movie files.

      A Japanese maple turns orange in autumn. The Seattle Japanese Garden was completed in 1960 within UW's Washington Park Arboretum. Address: 1075 Lake Washington Blvd E, Seattle, Washington 98112, USA. (© Tom Dempsey / PhotoSeek.com)

      A Japanese maple turns orange in autumn. The Seattle Japanese Garden was completed in 1960 within UW’s Washington Park Arboretum, Seattle, Washington, USA. © Tom Dempsey / PhotoSeek.com

B. Adobe Photoshop
  • Adobe Photoshop: As of Spring 2013, Photoshop version CS6 and later is now rented by the month or paid yearly to run the product, which can now expire if you don’t revalidate every 6 months through Adobe Creative Cloud via internet connection. (In contrast, Adobe Lightroom is cheaper and never expires, although raw file support for new cameras requires regular upgrades.)
    • Upgrade history: Adobe upgraded to CS5.5 in 2011, to CS5 in Fall 2009, to CS4 in Fall 2008.
  • The earlier Photoshop version CS5 works fine for me.
    • Most people don’t need Photoshop, since Adobe Lightroom covers most editing needs. While Adobe Lightroom handles 95% of my editing, the remaining 5% of my very best images, printing, and book production still require Photoshop.
    • Upgrade history: CS5 through CS3 have support for 16-bit Adjustment Layers and greatly improved Photomerge, to seamlessly stitch 16-bit panoramas from multiple 16-bit images. Now Lightroom 6.x includes Photomerge.
C. Microsoft Powerpoint 2007

makes flexible photo shows combining images, music, videos, labels & charts with nice cross-fades between frames for display on a computer or digital projector. (Proshow Producer is a great alternative with flexible output formats at all resolutions.)

D. Recommended best value PC specifications for Adobe Lightroom & PhotoShop 2012-2013
  1. Use a 64-bit Windows or Apple operating system (not 32-bit).
  2. Recommended processor: quad-core 3.5 GHz Intel i7-3770K Ivy Bridge (or i5-3570K saves money)
  3. Recommended RAM: 12 to 16 gigabytes of Random Access Memory
  4. Recommended graphics: GeForce GTX570 (note that pricier Quadro 2000 isn’t necessarily better)
  5. Recommended hard drive: 2 terabytes, 7200 RPM is good enough (or 10,000 RPM if affordable)
  6. Recommended: Solid State Drive (SSD): 256 gb for PhotoShop swap files
  7. Recommended: Blu-Ray player, writer/DVD recorder (made optional due to large cheap 16gb memory cards, USB memory sticks, or cloud storage)
  8. Recommended: USB 3.0 ports
Tom’s current Personal Computer system (from December 2012−present):
  • HP Envy Phoenix H9SE-W8 Desktop PC
    with: 16 gb SDRAM DDR3 1600 MHz, Intel Core i7-3770K CPU 3.5 GHz, 3 TB SATA hard drive 7200 RPM plus ExpressCache HP 16GB Disk Cache SSD (for faster startup), 1.5 GB Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 graphics card, 600 watt power supply, and 64-bit Windows 8 operating system.
  • LCD monitor: 24 inch Dell 2407WFP-HC Ultrasharp widescreen Flat Panel, 1920 x 1200 pixels, and 1000:1 Contrast Ratio.
Computer speed tips for older systems 2007-2012
  • Install Photoshop, Lightroom program and database onto a RAM drive or SSD for faster speed of loading and running.
  • Photoshop sped up when I added a very fast internal hard drive (10,000 rpm) to host the swap file of Adobe Photoshop CS3. Adobe Lightroom versions 1.3 and 1.4 also sped up when “Lightroom Catalog.lrcat” image database was moved onto the fast drive.
    • Despite having 4 gigabytes RAM memory on your computer, Photoshop CS3 only takes advantage of one gigabyte of memory before memory starts slowly swapping to disk. Workaround: Upgrade to faster CS4, a 64 bit application.
  • My previous computer 2009-2012 was a Dell XPS 420 Workstation (2.4 GHz Quad-Core processor) with 4 gigabytes RAM memory, running Windows Vista operating system, using the 24 inch Dell 2407WFP-HC Ultrasharp widescreen Flat Panel LCD monitor, 1920 x 1200 pixels, and 1000:1 Contrast Ratio. Main image storage was on a 2 terabyte RAID 0 internal hard-drive pair backed up to 1.5 or 2 TB external USB drives. To write to CD/DVDs on my Dell Workstation and Laptop, for some reason I had to use the provided Roxio program, instead of Windows XP or Vista (which poorly handleCD/DVD disk writing).
  • For external backup or storage, get an external 1 or 2 Terabyte (TB) drive with eSATA or USB 3.0 connection. eSATA is as fast as your internal hard drive connection, much faster than Firewire or USB 2.0. New computers after 2011 may come with fast USB 3.0.
  • On your laptop, for more reliable mouse control on your touchpad, disable the annoying Tap feature, which often mistakes your mouse finger movements for a click or double click. Disable Tap in Windows XP or Vista > Control Panel > Mouse > Touchpad. Instead of the Tap feature, rely on the Left and Right buttons.
E. Tom’s presentations and shows using Microsoft PowerPoint on projector or HD TV
  • 60-inch Samsung digital HD TV monitor with LED Backlight (Tom’s usage 2012 – present)
    • As of October 2012, our living room shows are upgraded with a spectacular 60-inch Samsung digital TV with LED Backlight technology, displaying photographs with excellent tonal impact and realism. Impressive full-array backlight LED LCD television technology with local dimming has noticeably deeper blacks and greater dynamic range than edge-lit LED LCD and is worth the slightly thicker box. Mount on the wall to save floor space. LED LCD televisions use half the power of bulky old CRT (Cathode Ray Tube) models. Connect the large digital television via HDMI socket to a laptop computer.
    • Darkening the room is no longer necessary because LED televisions make presentations brighter than projectors (such as Canon Realis SX60)!
  • Our Canon Realis SX50 digital projector (Tom’s usage December 2005 – present) displays impressive multimedia presentations using Microsoft Powerpoint run on a notebook computer, dynamically brighter and better than a slide film projector. The SX50 is well optimized to show images in default sRGB mode, as captured by digital cameras. For projecting motion picture DVD’s from a Progressive Scan DVD player, the Canon SX50 creates a spectacular movie theatre experience, especially if you have a 6-speaker Surround Sound system.
    • Suggested upgrade: Canon Realis SX60 SXGA (1400 x 1050) LCD Multimedia Projector, 2500 ANSI Lumens, 10.1 lb (4.6 kg); or get the above HDTV if you don’t need portable shows.
    • Canon Realis SX50 features: SXGA+; 1400 by 1050 pixels; great 1000 to 1 contrast; 2000 actual lumens; true 720p HD broadcast for movies. $4000 in December 2005, then price dropped to $3500 in October 2006. This digital Canon SX50 projector has keystone correction, a great dynamic range (from highlights to shadows), and sharper focus than slide film projectors such as the Kodak Carousel 4600.
    • On my old Kodak Carousel 4600 film projector, the contrast ratio is smaller, requiring a darker room than the SX50; and you must wait for the curved film in each slide mount to warm up and pop into focus, which still annoyingly leaves the edges or center out of focus, even with the compensating lens and autofocus. In contrast, digital projectors focus crisply & brightly across the entire image!

Scanner: Konica Minolta DiMAGE Scan Dual IV (Tom’s usage from 2006−present)

A solo hiker walks atop the Pulpit Rock (Prekestolen) 1959 feet above a car ferry on Lysefjord, Forsand municipality, Rogaland county, Ryfylke traditional district, Norway, Europe. The nearest city is Jørpeland, in Strand municipality. Published in Wilderness Travel Catalog of Adventures 1998, 1996, 1988. Winner of "Honorable Mention, Photo Travel Division" in Photographic Society of America (PSA) Inter-Club Slide Competition May 1988. Published 2009 on a commercial web site in Amsterdam. Published in "Light Travel: Photography on the Go" book by Tom Dempsey 2009, 2010. (© Tom Dempsey / PhotoSeek.com)

I scanned this image from 35mm film that I shot in 1981 on an Olympus OM-1N camera: A solo hiker walks atop the Pulpit Rock (Prekestolen) 1959 feet above a car ferry on Lysefjord, Forsand municipality, Rogaland county, Ryfylke traditional district, Norway, Europe. Published in Wilderness Travel Catalog of Adventures 1998, 1996, 1988. Winner of “Honorable Mention, Photo Travel Division” in Photographic Society of America (PSA) Inter-Club Slide Competition May 1988. Published 2009 on a commercial web site in Amsterdam. Published in “Light Travel: Photography on the Go” book by Tom Dempsey 2009, 2010. (© Tom Dempsey / PhotoSeek.com)

  • Konica Minolta no longer sells or supports scanners or cameras, so consider another brand such as follows:
    1. Plustek OpticFilm 8200i SE film scanner (2014).
    2. Epson Perfection V700 Photo Scanner with Digital ICE™ technology for dust spot removal, scans 12 slides at once in 8×10 inch area. 6400 dpi. Optical density 4.0 Dmax. Compatible with Windows XP and various Macintosh versions.
    3. Earlier excellent scanner: Epson Perfection 4990 Photo Scanner with Digital ICE™: This flatbed scans up to 8×10 inches, many images at once automatically. 4800 x 9600 dpi resolution, 48-bit color depth, and 4.0 Dmax (dynamic range). Compatible up to Windows XP, and various Macintosh versions.
  • Konica Minolta DiMAGE Scan Dual IV (discontinued)
    • makes much better scans than my former Nikon LS-2000 (below), requiring little extra Photoshop adjustment [except for laborious manual dust removal required on 12/16-bit mode scans — where a workaround is to use Photoshop’s Filter>Dust & Scratches feature, but that often reduces image detail]. If you will be making lots of scans, get a different scanner that supports automatic dust removal using ICE or a similar infrared technology. Features: $240 in 2006; 3200dpi, or about 4284 by 2892 pixels from a scanned slide. Dynamic range higher than film, so it captures all shadow & highlight detail. This 3200 dpi resolution sufficiently captures all the clarity in 99% of my images taken on a tripod with consumer-quality SLR lenses. Photoshop can effectively enlarge using a bicubic algorithm. (I feel that 4000 dpi on a different scanner wouldn’t get any more useful information out of 99% of my film slide images). Universal USB connection. Unattended batch scan of 4 slides, each with custom settings. Requires Windows XP (which I run on a Notebook computer). Scanner doesn’t work with Windows Vista.
  • 2000 – 2005: Nikon LS-2000 Super Coolscan scanner
    • 2700 ppi, makes ~2400×3600 pixels from slides, dynamic range=3.6, $1330 plus $430 stack loader; SCSI interface; can automatically batch scan 30 slides, all at the same setting.
    • Using Nikon LS-2000 scanner, I have made prints 28×42 inches at 240dpi, which look good at a viewing distance of about 36 inches or further, scanned from Fujichrome Velvia slides (digitally enlarged from 2400×3600 pixels in two stages in Photoshop).
    • By 2003, this Nikon LS-2000 workhorse was antiquated by cheaper, better scanners, but instead of upgrading to the Nikon LS-4000, I bought new digital cameras, which offer more flexibility, higher quality, much faster work flow, and scan subjects directly. The SCSI connection on the Nikon LS-2000 was incompatible with my Dell 9300 Notebook computer. I sold the LS-2000 scanner with stack loader (for $405 on e-Bay), and purchased the above superior Minolta scanner for only $240.

Printer: Epson Stylus Photo 2200 (Tom’s usage from 2005present)

  • Makes wonderful prints (equal to or better than the typical chemical photographic process) up to 13×44 inches, rated at 80-year longevity on special Epson papers (when mounted behind glass).
  • Features: 7-color Ultrachrome inks, high quality ink jet printer. Combination of Photo Black (or Matte Black) and Light Black improves neutral and Black & White tones, and extends the dynamic range of prints. [I upgraded to the 2200 from the earlier but excellent Epson Stylus Photo 1270, for which ink costs about 25% less.]
  • Better printers of this size have since been released.
    • The 8-color Epson Stylus Photo 2400 prints on paper up to 13 x 44 inches and improves gray scale and dynamic range for blacks & shadows (essential for Black & White prints), using long lasting K3 inks, superior to the Epson 2200 or 1270/1280.
    • The 8-color Epson Stylus Photo 3800 Printer (released 2007) prints on paper 17×22 inches using long lasting K3 inks. The 3800 takes up a surprisingly small footprint on your office desktop.

Tripod: Slik “Sprint Pro II GM” with built-in quick change plate (Tom’s usage from 2005−present)

  • Slik Sprint Pro II GM Tripod with Ballhead
  • Weighs only 33 ounces (or 30 ounces without the center column) and is great for travel, superior to other travel tripods that I’ve evaluated (including Velbon MAXi343E, Manfrotto, or even Gitzo tripods costing three times more). To handle the weight of an SLR with lens weighing heavier than a pound, some photographers may prefer a more substantial change plate. Carry a penny or quarter to tightly screw lock the quick release plate securely to camera.
  • Features: The stiff magnesium alloy legs are sufficiently stable for cameras up to 3 or 4 pounds (especially if you don’t extend the bottom leg section; or if you hang on extra weight) and have very fast locking levers (of sturdy plastic). This tripod rises to eye level (64 inches), collapses to 18 inches (or 16 inches if you remove the quick-release ball head). The metal ball head swings 90 degrees each way, to two vertical positions, and turns freely around, all tightened with one effective lever. Legs can optionally splay out independently in 3 locking positions down to 6.4 inches off the ground. For macro, the center column can be reversed underneath for great shooting flexibility at ground level, and unscrews into a short section (saving 3.3 ounces). (The convertible spike leg tips which I never used are now just rubber in the Pro II, saving a little weight and collecting less soil.) The earlier model “Pro” which I used for 2005-2008 was 3 ounces heavier than the Pro II after adding the superior quick change plate: Slik “Sprint Pro GM” Tripod ($90), with Manfrotto 3299 Quick Change Plate Adapter ($35, quick release), 36 ounces total. Stiff aluminum legs. Leg tips convert from spike (outdoor) to rubber (indoor use) with a simple lockable twist.

Support Tom’s work — buy anything at Amazon.com.


The above products surpass the following older equipment which I no longer use:

Sony Alpha NEX-7 with Sony E-Mount 18-200mm lens (33 oz; Tom’s usage July 2012−April 2016)

A mounted horse wrangler leads a spare horse down the dusty Park Butte Trail, Mount Baker Wilderness, Washington.


A cowboy guides horses on dusty Park Butte Trail, Mount Baker Wilderness, Washington. Camera: Sony Alpha NEX-7 at 140mm with Sony E-Mount 18-200mm f3.5-6.3 OSS lens.

Sony DSC-RX100 version I  (8.5 oz; used by Tom in 2013-14, is now my wife’s main camera, replacing Canon G9):
Canon PowerShot G9 (13 oz) (used by Carol Dempsey July 2009−2014)
Above the Arctic Circle, ascend a slippery steep trail to Reinebringen for spectacular views of Reine village, highway E10, and sharply glaciated peaks surrounding Reinefjord, on Moskenesøya (the Moskenes Island), Lofoten archipelago, Nordland county, Norway. Panorama stitched from 3 overlapping photos. (© Carol Dempsey / PhotoSeek.com)

Stitched from 3 overlapping images shot by Carol on a Canon PowerShot G9 camera: Above the Arctic Circle, ascend a slippery steep trail to Reinebringen for spectacular views of Reine village and sharply glaciated peaks surrounding Reinefjord, on Moskenesøya (Moskenes Island), Lofoten archipelago, Nordland county, Norway. (© 2011 Carol Dempsey / PhotoSeek.com)

  • Canon PowerShot G9 was my wife’s main camera. 35-210mm equivalent lens, image stabilized.
  • Disadvantages: Grainy at ISO 400 and too noisy at ISO 800+. Workaround: A Canon PowerShot G11 gives two stops ISO improvement, flip out LCD, 28-140mm lens, and DIGIC IV.
  • The newer, smaller Sony DSC-RX100 camera effectively beats G9 real resolution from 35-150mm (by cropping RX100’s 20mp images where needed for digital telephoto) and has two stops lower noise at ISO 800+. But G9 is sharper for macro (albeit more distorted) and at telephoto 150-210mm equiv.
  • G9 is a good 13-ounce camera with quality similar to an 8-megapixel DSLR of 2009 at ISO 80.
    • Comparisons: The 28-140mm Canon PowerShot G10 has similar sharpness, making good 5×7 prints at ISO 400, with DIGIC III processor. A Canon A650 IS saves money with similar JPEG quality and adds flip-out LCD but no raw file support.
Nikon D5000 DSLR with Nikkor 18-200mm VR II Lens (45 oz) (Tom used July 2009 − June 2012)

The Nikon D5000 plus Nikon AF-S DX 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II Zoom is one of the best photo systems of 2009 for active travelers, sufficiently lightweight to carry all day in a chest bag.

  • 23 ounce body with battery & strap. Mount with 22-ounce Nikon DX 18-200mm VR II Zoom (with cap and hood) with up to 4 stops image-stabilization (up to 8 times slower hand-held shutter speed).
  • 12 megapixels 4288 by 2848 pixels, makes good prints to 23 by 30 inches or larger. Excellent quality to ISO 1600, and ISO 3200 is usable for smaller prints. Image quality similar to higher priced Nikon D300. CCD sensor size is Nikon DX format 23.6 x 15.8 mm.
  • 2.7 inch tilt and swivel LCD (new, unusual for a DSLR) with rudimentary live view which focuses very slowly, as with all DLSRs through 2010 — focusing through viewfinder is much faster. Captures movies with monophonic sound.
  • I protected the camera in a Clik Elite Large SLR Chest Pack This chest pack fits SLR camera with a lens up to 5.5 inches. Test the fit thoroughly within the store’s return period. The straps may work better for someone with larger-than-average shoulders. The upper shoulder pads are comfy, but the wide back pocket built into the back straps sorely rubbed into my left shoulder blade. I fixed by cutting away the lower back straps 2 inches below the V shape and resewing the two nicely padded upper shoulder straps to the lower part of a tested older harness.

Nikon 18-200mm AF-S ED VR II lens:

  • 20 ounces / 560 grams without cap and hood, new in 2006 (with version I of VR Vibration Reduction).
  • 18-200mm focal length 11x zoom is perfect for travel (with 27-300mm equivalent field of view in terms of 35mm film). Minimizing lens swapping saves time, reduces dust spots on sensor, and promotes creativity.
  • Hand hold shots in up to 4-stops dimmer light using Vibration Reduction (VR). Reduced tripod setup cuts shooting time in half, increasing creativity. Using the image-stabilized lens combined with good image quality on the Nikon D5000 up to ISO 1600 (even ISO 3200 is useful now) improves hand-held photography by about 1-2 stops compared to Nikon D60 (2008) and 6-8 f/stops compared to Canon Powershot Pro1 (2004) which shot noisy images above ISO 100.
  • Focuses to 18 inches (0.5 meters) throughout the zoom range. Largest magnification is at 200mm telephoto closeup: 3.5 inches wide (or an area of 93 x 62 mm).
  • Filters for Nikkor 18-200mm VR lens:
    • Hoya 72mm UV filter both sides coated, in purple box; for important lens protection. “Both sides coated” is cheaper than MultiCoated (Hoya SMC), and should be fine for 95% of your shooting. To avoid flare risk, take off filter if shooting into sun or indoors under spot lights. (My last filter saved my lens by breaking the fall of the lens, camera & tripod which tipped over onto concrete in Luray Caverns!)
    • 72mm B+W brand Circular Polarizing filter. Only polarize to remove reflections or haze. In the sky, maximum polarization is a 90 degree angle from the sun, but be careful not to
      over darken blue sky. (A cheaper polarizer may throw off your white balance.)
    • Tiffen P ND .6 Graduated Nuetral Density Filter for balancing bright sky with foreground subjects. For speed, I hold this “neutral density graduated filter” up to the lens manually without a holder.
  • How to optimize lens quality: By being so versatile, this Nikkor 18-200mm VR lens does suffer from some quality compromises, so I sharpen results from 70mm to 200mm by shooting from f/8 to f/11.
    • At 135mm, its fuzziest zoom setting, use f/11 to f/16 for sharper results.
    • When shooting flash with this 3.9″ lens, shoot above 24mm and remove the lens hood, or else a lens shadow will appear in the bottom of the image. Or mount a high flash on the hotshoe such as Nikon Speedlight SB-600 or 700.
    • With VR set ON, I can sharply hand hold shots as slow as 1/8 to 1/30th second for respectively 18mm to 200mm.
    • Caveats for the Nikkor VR 18-200mm lens: Architectural photographers (who need straight lines) won’t like the barrel distortion at 18mm wideangle (hard to correct for this lens), or the pincushion distortion between 35mm and 70mm (easily correctable using Adobe Photoshop>Filter>Distort>Lens Correction). Macro photographers should get a sharper dedicated macro lens or use a compact camera which focuses closely with great depth of field.
  • Alternative lens: Tamron Di II VC AF 18-270mm F/3.5-6.3 LD Aspherical (IF) MACRO, new in Fall 2008, zooms impressively to 15x, while stabilizing hand-held sharpness close to the image quality of 18-200mm 11x lenses from brands Nikon VR and Canon IS. Tamron 18-270mm costs less than the Nikon 18-200mm lens. But I didn’t like Tamron’s long slippery lens creep when you point the camera up or down, and focus appeared inconsistent in my tests versus the Nikon 18-200mm on a tripod in indoor light. Tamron’s 15x doesn’t help much versus Nikon’s 11x because you can slightly crop Nikon’s sharper 200mm shots and print equally large. Nikon’s focus ring has instant manual focus override, whereas you must
    inconveniently flip a switch on the Tamron.

70-300mm F4.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S VR Zoom Nikkor lens:

  • 26 ounces; 5.6″ length; 4.9 foot minimum focus; also compatible with full frame Nikon D3 DSLR.
  • For sports, wildlife and birder photographers. According to testing by www.photozone.de, the Nikon 70-300mm captures about 5 to 20% sharper resolution than the Nikon 18-200mm VR.
  • This lens proved its worth on our wildlife trip to Galapagos Islands and Ecuador in 2009.
  • Unfortunately this 70-300mm lens cannot focus closer than 4.9 feet. For travel, consider carrying the Nikkor 70-300mm VR lens together with kit lens Nikkor 18-55mm 1:3.5-5.6G DX AF-S VR (with good closest macro area 63 x 42 mm), or with the 18-200mm VR II lens (93 x 62mm closest macro area).

Accessories:

  • Hoodskins (800-818-3946): Protect your LCD from scratches by applying this clear plastic film, and preserve the resale value of your camera. Hoodskins Model HSK-4 for 3.5- to 4-inch LCD screens can be cut with scissors to fit smaller LCDs.
  • Wireless remote control transmitter for shutter release: Nikon ML-L3 ($18) is important for any tripod photography (city lights, fireworks).
Canon PowerShot S95 (8 oz) (Tom used Feb 2011 to Feb 2013)
Nikon D60 & D40X DSLR with Nikkor 18-200mm VR Lens (40 oz total) (Tom used D60 2008−09, D40X 2007−08)
Galapagos Brown Pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis, subspecies: urinator) at Suaraz Point, Española (Hood) Island, Galapagos Islands, Ecuador, South America. (© Tom Dempsey / Photoseek.com)

Photographed using a Nikon D60 DSLR using 18-200mm lens (© 2009 Tom Dempsey / Photoseek.com): A Galapagos Brown Pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis, subspecies: urinator) preens feathers at Suaraz Point, a wet landing on Española (Hood) Island, Galapagos Islands, Ecuador, South America. Published in “Light Travel: Photography on the Go” book by Tom Dempsey 2009, 2010.

  • The Nikon D60 or D40X plus all-in-one 18-200mm VR lens is a great system for active travelers, sufficiently lightweight to carry all day in my chest bag.
    • D60 or D40X camera body weighs 18 ounces (including battery & strap).
    • The Nikkor AF-S DX VR 18-200mm 3.5-5.6G IF-ED lens weighs 22 ounces with cap and hood (released in 2006, adopted by me in 2008). Its wonderful new VR (Vibration Reduction) feature stabilizes the sharpness of hand-held shots by up to 4 stops of shutter speed − remarkably unchaining travel photographers from the constraints of a tripod!
      • This D60 or D40X with 18-200mm lens system is comparable to Canon Rebel XSi with Canon 18-200mm IS.
    • The D60 thankfully introduces a good sensor dust-removal system, plus VR kit lenses. (The previous Nikon D40X model, which I used from May 2007 to August 2008, required tedious dust spot corrections, but nowhere near as bad as slide film).
      • The D60 introduces Active D-Lighting to attractively lighten shadow detail in JPEG shots, but Active D-Lighting doesn’t affect my raw shots — RAW gives superior editing leeway, so I generally avoid shooting JPEG (now that memory cards are getting cheaper than in the near past, allowing plenty of room for the larger RAW files).
    • D60/D40X sensor captures 10 megapixels = 3872 x 2592 pixels, making good prints to 23 by 30 inches or larger. Excellent quality to ISO 800, and ISO 1600 is usable for smaller prints. Same image quality as the higher priced Nikon D200. CCD sensor size is 23.6 x 15.8 mm (six times the light gathering area of the sensor in my earlier compact Canon Pro1).
    • The Nikon D60/D40X has a bright 2.5 inch LCD and shoots a generous 300 to 420 images per charge (using a Digital Concepts 1200 mAh battery, at 40 to 70 degrees F, using the LCD briefly on most shots; most shots using VR and 10% using flash). The batteries last 2.5 times longer than Canon Pro1 batteries and weigh an ounce less per battery. Long battery life is important for trekking away from electricity such as in Nepal, where six batteries lasted for two weeks shooting 2800 images without recharging on the D40X.
  • Adobe Lightroom version 1.1 introduced support for the Nikon D40X camera, and version 1.4 supported Nikon D60.
  • 2008-09: my wife uses the shirt-pocket sized Canon SD700 IS (below), which serves as my backup that adds movies & sound recording.
Canon PowerShot SD700 IS Digital ELPH, ultra-subcompact digital camera (7 oz; Tom used October 2006−2007)
  • This amazingly tiny and lightweight camera can be carried in your pocket, takes still shots with publication quality up to 12 by 16 inches, and serves as a main camera for my wife and backup camera for me.
  • Features: 6 megapixels (2816 x 2112 pixels). Image-stabilized zoom lens 5.8-23.2 mm, f/2.8-5.5 (or 35-140 mm lens in 35mm-film-camera terms); 0.79-inch macro focus. Movies can be 15, 30 or 60 frames per second, with dynamic exposure and digital zoom as you shoot, which is better than the Pro1. Great DIGIC II processor. We bought the optional housing for shooting underwater.
  • Disadvantages: No raw file mode. It has good exposure +/- compensation, but cannot set or view the F/stop aperture or shutter speed (except shutter speed thankfully displays live when the camera shake warning also displays).
  • The SD700 was succeeded by the SD850. Excellent alternatives to the SD700 IS: Sony Cyber-shot DSC-N2; or Canon SD800 IS ELPH. Slightly larger, higher quality alternatives in 2007: Canon PowerShot A710 IS, or PowerShot G7. Upgrades released in 2008: G9, G10.
Canon PowerShot Pro1 compact digital camera (25 oz; Tom used August 2004 − March 2007)
An orange and green leaf rests on polygons of orange and gray lichen in Denali State Park, Alaska, USA. Published in "Light Travel: Photography on the Go" by Tom Dempsey 2009, 2010. (© Tom Dempsey / PhotoSeek.com)

Photographed using a compact Canon PowerShot Pro1 camera (© 2006 Tom Dempsey / PhotoSeek.com): An orange and green leaf rests on polygons of orange and gray lichen in Denali State Park, Alaska, USA. Published in “Light Travel: Photography on the Go” by Tom Dempsey 2009, 2010.

  • For its time, the Canon PowerShot Pro1 was a great all-in-one camera for traveling.
  • Features: 8 megapixels = 3264 x 2448, makes good prints to 23 by 30 inches. Professional “L series” 7.2-50.8 mm zoom lens, with fast f/2.4-3.5 widest aperture, or 28-200 mm, in terms of 35mm-wide-film cameras (horizontal angle of view from 65.5 degrees wide, to 10.3 degrees at telephoto). Close macro focus to 1 inch (using 5 megapixel Super Macro, f/3.0 at 90 mm). The electronic viewfinder EVF is great when the LCD is hard to read in bright sunlight. High resolution Movies. JPEG images require little Photoshop touch up; and the raw format preserves superior image quality. Battery life is half of the earlier Canon G5, so I carry a few more batteries. CCD sensor 2/3 inch type (8.8 x 6.6 mm).
  • Using the Pro1’s wide angle lens at maximum f/8, everything is in focus from 1.4 feet to infinity when you focus at 2.7 feet (the “hyperfocal point”; all objects at distances from half of the hyperfocal distance out to infinity will be acceptably sharp). Using the Pro1’s 50.8 mm telephoto at f/8, if you focus 132 feet away, then everything is in focus from 66 feet to infinity; and focusing the same telephoto at 20 feet, you get 6 feet of total depth of field from front to back.
  • April 2005 upgrade: Canon Pro1 Firmware version 1.0.1.0 (free on Canon Support Web Site, released December 2004) doubles the shutter release speed, reducing shutter lag from about 0.6 to 0.3 seconds.
  • But in 2007, the discontinued Canon Pro1 was outclassed by the more capable Fujifilm FinePix S9100, which is the same weight but physically larger.
Canon PowerShot SD500 Digital ELPH ultra-subcompact digital camera (7 oz; Tom used May 2005 − Sept 2006)
  • This tiny and lightweight camera can be carried in a pocket, takes still shots with publication quality up to 12 by 16 inches, and served as a main camera for my wife and backup camera for me for 1.5 years.
  • Features: 7 megapixels = 3072 x 2304 pixels. Zoom lens 7.7-23.1 mm, f/2.8-7.1 Wide, f/4.9-13.0 Telephoto (or 37-111 mm lens in 35mm-film-camera terms); 2-inch macro focus. Movies can be 15, 30 or 60 frames per second, and now with dynamic exposure and digital zoom as you shoot, which is better than my Pro1. Great DIGIC II processor.
  • Drawbacks: No raw file mode. Has good exposure +/- compensation, but cannot set or view the F-stop aperture or shutter speed.
  • To maximize depth of field, set the SD500 mode dial to Manual and toggle the Infinity button (until you see the mountain symbol). Using the SD500’s 7.7 mm (37 mm equivalent) wide angle lens at maximum f/7.1, everything is in focus from 2.3 feet to infinity when you focus at 4.6 feet (the “hyperfocal point”). At the 23.1 mm (111 mm equivalent) telephoto maximum f/13, everything is in focus from 11.5 feet to infinity when you focus at 23 feet.
  • We bought the SD500 for $450 in May 2006, and sold it on e-Bay 1.5 years later. In October 2006, we upgraded to the well-reviewed Canon PowerShot SD700 IS ELPH above (which introduces excellent image stabilization in a longer zoom 35-140 mm f/2.8-5.5 lens, which helps compensate for the lower resolution of 6 megapixels; and shutter-button lag is now reduced to a very fast 0.1 to 0.3 seconds).
Film versus digital photography 2004-2009; and how to ensure digital longevity

FILM VERSUS DIGITAL (read my 2009 article).

While film can fade, high-quality digital image file formats should last perfectly into the future so long as you copy backups onto the latest storage media which are readable by up-to-date software.

To avoid unrecoverable exposure problems and posterization, always record 12-bit (or 14-bit) camera raw format files at shooting time to create digital archive files that have 16 (or 64) times the tonal editing headroom compared to JPEG (which has only 8 bits per pixel per red, green, or blue color channel).

If your editing software ever threatens to evolve beyond compatibility with older raw files (which are proprietary to each camera), first convert to a modern “universal” raw format such as Adobe Digital Negative, DNG files, to ensure future compatibility. As of 2015, Adobe Lightroom version 6 still handles my oldest raw files from Canon Powershot G5 camera of 2003, and I haven’t yet seen the need to convert old files to DNG. For secure backup of my Lightroom edits, I like “Automatically write changes into XMP” (Lightroom > Edit > Catalog Settings > Metadata), in case the Lightroom catalog ever becomes corrupted and must be restored by re-importing raw image files + sidecar XMP files.

Canon PowerShot G5 compact digital camera (19 oz) + telephoto lens (9 oz) (Tom used 2003−2004)
A Common Wombat (Vombatus ursinus) is shown at Bonorong Wildlife Park, Briggs Road, Brighton, Tasmania, Australia. Wombats are burrowing grass eaters, and can be thought of as the marsupial ecological equivalent of a bear. Wombats are found in forested, mountainous, and heathland areas of southeast Australia including Tasmania, plus an isolated group in Epping Forest National Park in central Queensland. The three living species of wombats are marsupial mammals in the Vombatidae family. They dig extensive burrow systems with rodent-like front teeth and powerful claws. Their unusual backwards-facing pouch avoids gathering dirt onto its young. Although mainly crepuscular and nocturnal, wombats also venture out to feed on cool or overcast days. Wombats are herbivores, mostly eating grasses, sedges, herbs, bark and roots. Published on Australian geocaching coin 2010, displayed in support of Wilder Foundation 2009, 2010, and exhibited at Oceanario de Lisboa, Portugal 2007. Published in "Light Travel: Photography on the Go" book by Tom Dempsey 2009, 2010. (© Tom Dempsey / PhotoSeek.com)

A flip-out-and-twist LCD allowed me to lower my Canon PowerShot G5 camera into the enclosure to frame at wombat level, with permission at Bonorong Wildlife Park, Tasmania, Australia. Published on Australian geocaching coin 2010; displayed in support of Wilder Foundation 2009, 2010; and exhibited at Oceanario de Lisboa, Portugal 2007. Published in “Light Travel: Photography on the Go” book by Tom Dempsey 2009, 2010. (© Tom Dempsey / PhotoSeek.com)

The Canon PowerShot G5 convinced me to stop shooting film! The G5 was half the size and weight of my earlier Nikon N70 SLR outfit (below), yet had a brighter lens, and rivaled the quality I got from scanning film using the Nikon LS-2000 film scanner (which was later superseded by better scanners). G5 Features: 5 megapixels = 2592 x 1944, 35-140 mm zoom (equivalent), f/2.0-3.0, + fixed 245 mm or 1.75x attachment lens. Its great flip-out-and-twist LCD became a critical feature that I never knew I needed before, for macro, wildlife, and people shots.

Fujichrome Velvia 100F 35mm color slide film (Tom used 2004)

is more realistic and not quite as vivid as Velvia 50, but has twice the speed, and could have become my new mainstay film, except for the superiority of a digital camera for my travel and nature photography.

Kodak Ektachrome 100VS 35mm color slide film (Tom used 2001−03)

I was very happy with this vivid film when I need one stop faster than Fuji Velvia. (I disliked the flat colors of Fuji Provia 100 or 100F.)

Epson Stylus Photo 1270 Printer (Tom used 2000−04)

made wonderful prints up to 12×44 inches, rated at 25-year longevity on special Epson papers (when mounted behind glass). 6-color high quality ink jet printer. My home prints on the Epson 1270 now exceeded the quality of professional chemical silver-based prints. (The 1270’s successor was the similar Model 1280; and after 2004, nicer 7-color printers became available such as the excellent Epson Stylus Photo 2200 above, and 4000.)

Fujichrome Velvia 50 ASA 35mm color slide film (Tom used 1999−2004)

This classic film became my new mainstay, until I switched to a digital camera in 2004.

Nikon N70 SLR 35mm-film camera + 2 lenses = 54 ounces (Tom used 1998−2004)Silhouettes of photographers at sunrise on Mount Nemrut, Republic of Turkey.

Doubled light gathering power and gained a nice built-in flash, at the cost of slightly more bulk and weight. Fully automatic + manual. In April 1999, I upgraded lenses to: Sigma 28-105 mm f/2.8-4 Aspherical Zoom; and Sigma 70-210 mm f/3.5-4.5 APO Telephoto Zoom Macro (2:1 magnification). Nikon N70 was released in 1996.

Gitzo “Weekend Compact Performance” tripod (Tom used 1998−2004)

2.9 pounds with lightweight ballhead, plus Kirk quick release plate. When the camera is not attached, the Kirk plate can lose its release knob unless you screw it all the way down, which partly defeats the quick release purpose. The screw-locking legs on this Gitzo model are very slow to set up and take down, and the small ball head constantly came unscrewed (a design flaw). I upgraded to a lighter, faster & cheaper yet equally sturdy tripod further above.

Fujichrome 100 Sensia I & II film (Tom used 1992−1998)

became my new mainstay: fast & sharp with adequate color.

Film experiment 1988-2000: I occasionally used Kodachrome 200 film

but I was usually unhappy with the grainy results.

Film experiment 1986-92: I occasionally used Kodachrome 64 film

which is faster than Kodachrome 25, but color is not as vivid.

Film classic 1978-92: The great Kodachrome 25 film

was my mainstay, plus I occasionally used Kodak Ektachrome 200 film with good, sharp results. Even though it is one of the longest lasting films, some of my Kodachrome 25 slide images are fading after 25 years. Ektachrome fades quicker than Kodachrome.

Classic camera: Olympus OM-1N SLR 35mm-film camera + 2 lenses = 48 ounces (Tom used 1978−97)
From Männlichen Gipfel, see Eiger, Mönch, and Jungfrau in the Berner Oberland, Switzerland, the Alps, Europe.

I photographed this popular image on a Olympus OM-1N SLR 35mm-film camera (© 1981 Tom Dempsey / PhotoSeek.com): From Männlichen Gipfel see the peaks of Eiger (Ogre 13,026 feet on left), Mönch (Monk), and Jungfrau (Virgin 13,600 feet on right) in the Berner Oberland, Switzerland, the Alps, Europe. Published multiple times and even featured in a Swiss movie by Meret Nora Burger.

Trusty and rugged. Fully manual camera. Attachable flash. I started with fixed 50 mm and 135 mm Zuiko lenses, then upgraded to a Tamron 28-70 mm f/4 zoom, and a Sigma UC II 70-210mm, f/4-5.6, 1:4.7 macro, telephoto zoom lens. From 1978 to 1997, I used lightweight SLIK 500G and other tripods for travel. The OM-1 can take 8-hour night sky star-trail photographs, which can require special battery supplements on modern battery-intensive cameras, such as the Nikon N70 film camera, and especially digital cameras.

Terminology and metric conversions

  • oz = ounces. Above camera weights in ounces (oz) include battery and memory card.
  • g = grams. Multiple ounces by 28.35 to get grams.
  • sec = second.
  • mm = millimeters. A centimeter (cm) equals 10 millimeters. Multiply centimeters (cm) by 0.3937 to get inches.
  • ILC = Interchangeable Lens Compact = “midsize mirrorless camera” term used above
  • DSLR = Digital Single Lens Reflex = a traditional camera where an optical viewfinder uses a mirror to see through the interchangeable lens.
  • EVF = Electronic Viewfinder.
  • LCD = Liquid Crystal Display.
    • OLED (Organic Light-Emitting Diode) beats an LCD in dynamic range from darkest to brightest and consumes less power.
  • LPH or LPPH = resolvable lines per picture height = the best empirical measure of real resolution of a camera’s sensor for a given lens (independent of pixel pitch or megapixel count). A camera with higher LPH can make sharper large prints. Look up cameras on dpreview.com to find absolute vertical LPH judged by photographing a PIMA/ISO 12233 camera resolution test chart under standardized lighting conditions. Note which lens, settings, and camera body was used in each test, and compare with others within the same web site.
  • equivalent lens = To compare lenses on cameras having different sensor sizes, equiv or equivalent lens refers to what would be the lens focal length (measured in mm or millimeters) that would give the same angle of view on a “full frame35mm-size sensor (or 35mm film camera, using 135 film cartridge).
    • Compared lenses are “equivalent” only in terms of angle of view. (To determine sharpness or quality, read lens reviews which analyze at 100% pixel views.)
    • Crop factor” = how many times smaller is the diagonal measurement of a small sensor than a “full frame” 35-mm size sensor. For example, the 1.5x crop factor for Nikon DX format (APS-C size sensor) makes a lens labeled 18-200mm to be equivalent in angle of view to a 27-300mm focal length lens used on a 35mm film camera. The 2x crop factor for Micro Four Thirds sensors makes a lens labeled 14-140mm to be equivalent in angle of view to a 28-280mm lens used on a 35mm film camera.
  • Superzoom lenses
    • In 2013, superzoom often refers to lenses of about 15x zoom range or larger. Steady quality improvements in the resolving power of sensors has made possible superzoom cameras in ever smaller sizes. As superzoom range increases, laws of physics require lenses to focus upon smaller sensors (light detectors) or else to increase lens size. For a given level (most recent year) of technological advancement, a camera with physically larger sensor (bigger light detecting area) should capture better quality for a given zoom lens range.
    • 10x zoom” = zoom lens telephoto divided by wide angle focal length. For example, a 14-140mm focal length zoom has a 10x zoom range (140 divided by 14). An 18-200mm zoom has an 11x zoom range (200 divided by 18).
  • equivalent” F-stop = refers to the F-stop (F-number) on a full-frame-sensor camera which has the same hole diameter as the F-stop of the camera lens being compared. The concept of “equivalent” F-stop lets you compare capabilities for creating shallow depth of focus (depth of field) on cameras with different-size sensors. Smaller-sensor cameras use shorter focal lengths for the same field of view, so at a given F-stop they have a smaller physical aperture size, meaning more depth of field (with less blur in front of and behind the focused subject). Formula: F Number (or Relative Aperture) = actual focal length of lens divided by diameter of the entrance pupil.

Support Tom’s work — buy any number of items at any Amazon.com link here on PhotoSeek.

Canon PowerShot SX10 versus G series

Canon PowerShot SX10-IS

Canon PowerShot SX10-IS

Canon PowerShot SX10 IS macro and telephoto versus G series.

Question: “My wife purchased a Canon PowerShot SX10 IS on line for me as a Christmas present. Do you have any experience or information which describes its ability in macro situations? I assume the 20x zoom is great (and look forward to using it for birds), but have they shortchanged us on the other end, or does the lens do it all? I take a lot of wildflower pictures and want to make sure that it will produce good results for the closeups I like to take. My eyes are aging, so I want to make sure the camera will auto focus when I need it to. Sorry my questions are so general…”     (from A. B. in Paradise, CA, December 2008)

 Tom responds in December 2008:

Check owner opinions for Canon SX10IS at:

www.dpreview.com/reviews/read_opinion_text.asp?prodkey=canon_sx10is&opinion=41875

Canon compact digital cameras are among the best available. The Canon Powershot SX10IS is a good choice for price value, with amazing abilities compared to earlier cameras. Canon’s official site www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&tabact=ModelTechSpecsTabAct&fcategoryid=144&modelid=17630

claims excellent macro performance, which I trust will be quite good, based upon earlier Powershot cameras:

Focusing Range Normal: 1.6 ft./50cm-infinity (W), 3.3 ft./1m-infinity (T)
Macro: 0.39 in.-1.6 ft./1-50cm (W)
Super macro: 0-3.9 in./0-10cm (W)

Super Macro mode can shoot objects that are zero distance from the lens! You cannot get any closer than that!

SX10IS  sounds like a great macro camera. (Macro close focus with superior depth of field/focus is one of the strengths of compact cameras over DSLR style cameras.)

Macro is this camera’s strength. Its weakness is most likely at the telephoto end, such as difficulty focusing on and shooting at moving birds (a problem any compact camera will have). It could still be a good compromise for shooting birds, half the size and weight and much cheaper than a DSLR style camera. A tripod would be helpful for sharper shots at telephoto. At all zoom settings, I recommend setting ISO at 400 or lower to avoid noise (blotchiness at the detail level at ISO 800 or higher), unless you need to hand hold the shot. By default the camera uses Auto ISO, which might do okay in most of your daytime outdoor shots.

The SX10IS is 1.5 pounds (large and bulky compared to the G9 or G10), surprisingly wide 20x zoom range, 28-560mm equivalent lens, probably decent quality, with good Image Stabilization (IS), a must-have in any camera.

Its sensor is unfortunately quite small, 1/2.3 ” (6.16 x 4.62 mm), which limits the size of your prints, or low light shooting abilities, compared to cameras which have larger sensors such as the Canon Powershot G9 or G10 (which cost $100 more). If your goal is mainly prints smaller than 10 inches, then the SX10IS should be fine. Larger prints with it are possible if you shoot steadily and carefully, within its limitations.

You might also look at the Fujifilm Finepix S100FS (34 ounces; 28-400mm lens), which will take higher quality images if you shoot RAW mode, but is somewhat larger and heavier than the SX10IS.

Your needs may differ from mine. Personally, I need good enough quality to sell and publish large landscape prints, and I would pick a Canon Powershot G9, G10, G10, G12, or pocket sized S95  for fun, smaller carry-everywhere size, combined with great quality images (better image quality than SX10IS) and good macro. However, the telephoto is nowhere near as long in the G series versus SX10IS, so cropping images could compensate to similar ballpark quality. A birder hobbyist shooting mostly in bright daylight or sunlight may prefer SX10IS for the long telephoto.

BEST 2017 TRAVEL CAMERAS reviewed

Top recommended travel cameras (pocket, midsize, DSLR, full frame) as of February 2017:

Research by Tom Dempsey recommends the following portable cameras and gear best for on-the-go photographers. Yearly advances now put the sweet spot for serious travel cameras in the size range from 1”-Type to APS-C sensors (read article).

Sony RX10 III camera

The world’s most versatile midsize camera: Sony RX10 III has a weather-sealed 25x zoom 24-600mm equivalent, bright f/2.4-4 lens.

As smartphones typically blur shots in dim light and zoom poorly, upgrading to (A) a pocket-size 1″-size-sensor camera (read my review) will help make bigger prints. But for publishing, I prefer (B) a midsize Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 III camera (price at Amazon) with versatile 25x zoom lens which outshines APS-C sensor systems anywhere near its weight class — read my RX10 III review.

Traditionalists wanting more lens choices and optical viewfinder may pick (C) a bulkier DSLR-style camera with APS-C sensor. Elite photographers seeking dim-light images at high ISO 6400+ may prefer a heavier (D) full-frame sensor camera

Support my work by buying products at any Amazon.com link below…

A. World’s best pocket-size camera:

Panasonic Lumix DSC-ZS100 (buy at Amazon) (2016, 11 oz, 25-250mm equivalent lens) outguns all pocketable 1″-sensor rivals with a versatile 10x zoom (read my ZS100 review).  Other options:

  1. Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 (IV, III, II, or I) (price at Amazon) only zooms to 3x but is noticeably sharper and brighter than ZS100. Add a Sony AG-R2 attachment grip. Fit into Tamrac Digital 1 Photo Bag with extra Wasabi Power NPBX1 batteries. Save money with used or earlier III, II or I versions — read Tom’s Sony RX100 review.
  2. Pocket superzoom: Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS50 (2015, 8.6 oz, 24–720mm equiv 30x zoom, EVF).
  3. Cheapest: Canon PowerShot ELPH 170 IS (2015, 5 oz, 25-300mm equiv lens, 1/2.3″ sensor).
  4. Underwater, shockproof, dust-resistant: Olympus Tough TG-4 (2015, 8.7 oz, 25-100mm equiv) compromises image quality but is good for underwater movies.

Continue reading

BEST WIDE ANGLE LENS for APS-C; or stitch panorama

On your APS-C sensor camera, would you like a view wider than the kit zoom lens, which is limited to 18mm or 16mm (27 or 24mm equivalent)? The following specialty zoom lenses shoot unusually wide angles of view, with great depth of focus (such as for tight interior spaces, architecture, real estate, slot canyons, or sweeping landscapes):

For Sony Alpha A6300A6000 and NEX mirrorless cameras (APS-C size sensor):

  • Sony 10-18mm f/4 OSS Alpha E-mount wide-angle zoom lens (8 oz, 2.75×2.5 inches, SEL1018, 2012) thankfully has OSS image stabilization for more hand-held photography free of a tripod. Its angle of view is that of a 15-27mm in terms of full-frame equivalent. SEL1018 is good for shooting architecture indoors and out, plus landscapes and slot canyons. (It is significantly sharper than Sony’s 18-200mm, SEL18200 lens.) SEL1018 is sharpest at f/5.6 to f/8 as you zoom, with least distortion from 14-18mm.
  • Although SEL1018 wasn’t designed for the full-frame Sony Alpha A7 Mirrorless Digital Camera (2013, 17 oz body) or Sony Alpha A7 II camera, you can easily crop away the corner vignetting for surprisingly satisfying results.

For Nikon DX and Canon EF-S DSLR cameras with APS-C sensor, the wide-angle choices unfortunately lack image stabilization:

  • Tokina 12-28mm f/4.0 AT-X Pro DX lens (19 oz, 2013) is sharper than the following older lenses:
    • Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC HSM
    • Tamron 10-24mm F3.5-4.5 Di-II
    • Tokina 12-24mm f/4.0
  • Tokina AT-X Pro 11-16mm f/2.8 DX II wide angle lens (19 oz, 2012) has sharper, faster, professional-level, pricier optics, best leveraged on a 24 megapixel camera such as Nikon D3300 (2014, 16 oz body).
  • Caveats: The above wide-angle Tokina lenses are not image-stabilized, and thereby increase tripod use; instead, consider the stabilized Sony 10-18mm OSS lens. Image stabilization (such as Nikon Vibration Reduction/VR or Canon IS or Sony OSS or Tamron VC) is most important for telephoto lenses to counteract hand held shake at slow shutter speeds. When built into some wide angle lenses, this feature helps you shoot more sharply at slower shutter speeds (such as in dimmer light), helping to blur flowing water or moving subjects while keeping non-moving subjects sharp in the same image.

Note: These wide angle lenses don’t work well for close-focus (macro) photography − instead use specialty macro lens. 

Support my work — buy anything from any Amazon.com product link on this page.

Stitch panoramas instead of buying a specialty wide-angle lens

Instead of buying a specialty wide-angle lens above, it’s cheaper to stitch a panorama from multiple shots:

  • To easily capture landscape images wider than your 18mm kit lens, simply stitch a panorama from a series of adjacent images shot with your existing lens.
  • Stitching multiplies megapixel count to compensate for compromised sharpness of megazoom and kit lenses. But if you want to enlarge prints bigger than 2 or 3 feet without the need for stitching, shoot with sharper lenses such as the above Tokinas on a tripod.

Prayer flags express compassion at this monument to fallen climbers, at Annapurna South Base Camp (ABC) in the Annapurna Range of Nepal.

The above panorama was stitched from three overlapping images. Prayer flags express compassion at this monument to fallen climbers, at Annapurna South Base Camp (ABC) in the Annapurna Range of Nepal. Published in “Light Travel: Photography on the Go” book by Tom Dempsey 2009, 2010. Published in Wilderness Travel 2010 Catalog of Adventures.

How to build a panorama:

If you don’t have Adobe Lightroom 6 or CC, or PhotoShop, to manually build your panoramas, try one of these:

  • Image Composite Editor (ICE) for Windows only, FREE from Microsoft Research Computational Photography Group. (I found that ICE was faster and sharper than using the old Photoshop version CS5.)
  • Hugin: FREE for Mac & Windows. Hugin is harder to learn & use than Microsoft’s ICE.

Nowadays for most people, a smartphone camera is the easiest way to make sweeping panoramas with decent quality. Just select the Panorama option, hold the phone vertically, press (or speak the command for) the shutter release, and sweep steadily left to right, followed by a second press of shutter release to finish recording. Fairly quickly, you’ll see the resulting panorama. Pinch zoom to check sharp details in the recorded image. Smartphones made after 2015 can capture good shadow detail in fairly sharp panoramas by default (using AUTO HDR).

Most digital cameras have an automatic Panorama mode on their mode dial, but I find that automatic panorama modes often blur detail as you sweep the camera, or they can fail with an error message unless you carefully practice the steady sweeping motion. Your results may vary. (Some compact cameras don’t allow holding vertically during the sweep, so just horizontal shots are stitched, thereby making a less-useful proportion: an overly squat and wide image.)

For the best quality, I prefer to shoot a panorama manually on a good camera (with large sensor) as a series of steady shots as follows:

  1. Hold the camera very still for each shot, swiveling as if the center of the lens were mounted on a fixed post. Shoot quickly (but steadily) if subjects are moving.
  2. Overlap each image by a third, one after another in a row, column, or array.
  3. The distance at which important subjects are focused can optionally vary shot to shot, near or far.
  4. If brightness varies drastically across the intended panorama, try to expose for a true midtone within each separate frame, but ensuring that exposure transitions aren’t extreme, shot to shot. If panorama has a consistent brightness, try shooting with a fixed Manual exposure. Shooting raw instead of JPEG gives you more leeway to simply use autoexposure.

A tripod is not needed if light is sufficiently bright for sharp hand-held photography. Look for a camera with a built-in level indicator such as in Panasonic ZS100 or Sony RX10 III or Sony Alpha A6300.

Adobe Lightroom notes:

Adobe Lightroom Version 6 (released April 2015) and later includes Photo Merge to Panorama (and to HDR): Photo > Photo Merge > Panorama

But as of 2017, the quickest and best Photo Merge is in Lightroom CC (Creative Cloud version), which adds the wonderful Boundary Warp with Auto Crop, which retains about 20% more image around the edges (without needing frequent time-consuming touch ups around the edges in Photoshop). Lightroom CC stitches raw files into a top quality Digital Negative panorama .DNG file which can be edited with large tonal leeway AFTER stitching, just like raw. This is a big time-saver compared to earlier versions of Lightroom or other programs, where you had to edit each image first, THEN stitch. Always edit from the original raw file format (or from the largest, highest quality JPEG directly from the camera; because each time you re-save a JPEG, it loses quality).

For travel, zoom flexibility beats interchanging specialty lenses

For travel portability and convenience, I prefer an all-in-one camera such as Sony RX 10 III (read my review) which sharply captures 24-600mm equivalent, with up to 4.5 stops of stabilization benefit (slower shutter speed handheld). RX10 III is sharper across the frame at more zoom settings than the following 11x to 19x travel zooms shot on 24mp APS-C:

  • Nikon VR, Canon IS, or Sony OSS 18-200mm 11x zoom travel lenses (at Amazon).
  • 19x zoom Tamron 16-300mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC PZD MACRO lens (Amazon).
  • These lenses equal the kit lens sharpness, without the need for constant swapping of two or more lenses in the field. Their image stabilization feature (VR, IS, OSS, or VC) supports 2 to 4 stops slower hand held shutter speed, which is critical for on-the-go photographers who want to minimize tripod usage.
  • When compared to faster Pro lenses, the handy Nikon VR or Canon IS 18-200mm travel lenses gain in image stabilization and compositional zoom versatility what they lose in absolute optical sharpness. Stitch sets of 18mm images into wide or tall panoramas. Better yet, zoom to 22mm and set aperture to f/8 to optimize sharpness on the Nikon 18-200mm VR lens. Check lens reviews or test it yourself to find the sharpest zoom and aperture settings for your specific lens. If in doubt, remember f/8 is great! (typically when using a camera with an APS-C or 35mm size sensor)

Support my work — buy anything from Amazon.com links on this page.

Compare Pentax K20D, Nikon D90, D60

Pentax K20D is good for Nepal trekking, but Nikon D90 mounts 18-200 VR lens and D60 is lighter. Lens angle of view factor.

Question from Brian to tom @ photoseek.com, September 2008

…I will be going on a trek to the Everest region in spring of 2009.  I am really excited about the trip.  I have been thinking about adding on the Gokyo Lakes trek also.  This is how I happened across your web site.  Your images are truly incredible.  BY FAR the best I have seen.  So, thanks for your site!  Your images have convinced me to add on the Gokyo Lakes trek to the Everest Base Camp trek.  After all, when will be the next time I will have this opportunity?  The web is a pretty amazing creation isn’t it?  I am looking forward to the trip.  I will have to buy a new camera for it.  I have been using an old Pentax PZ-1p for a long time.  I am looking at the Pentax D20 which operates on double A batteries as opposed to Lithium cells.  Do you have an opinion on that?  I guess I think it would be easier to carry around a lot of double A instead of trying to charge or replace the Li cells.  I have about 4 lens but for ease I am thinking of 28-90mm and 100-300mm.  These lenses are not that fast so maybe the 50 mm 1.4 lens.  Thanks again for your art, it is breathtaking and inspirational (heck, it has convinced me to do an add on trek!)  Have a great weekend, Brian — Friday Sept 26, 2008

Tom Dempsey answers

Hi Brian: the view from the peak of Gokyo Ri in Nepal is very spectacular and worth the effort!  Annapurna Sanctuary was also spectacular and actually more enjoyable due to lower altitude (only 14,000 ft) and fewer days on the trail.

Nepal Trekking Tip: I recommend wearing a scarf over your mouth to keep out dust and better hydrate each breath in the high altitude air, to reduce the “Khumbu cough” that nearly everyone experiences above 10,000 feet elevation..

Here is a full review of the Pentax K20D, where dpreview.com gives their highest rating “Highly Recommended”:

  • Read the detailed review of Pentax K20D: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxk20d/
  • “Robust body with dust and weather seals, high build quality.”
  • Dust reduction by anti-static coating and optional sensor ‘shake’. Dust alert makes sensor cleaning simpler.
  • Not so good: “The live view mode is neither as seamless as Sony’s implementation nor as useful for tripod-based work as Olympus’s and consequently feels like a feature that has been added purely to make the camera more marketable.” (Live view is a feature new to DSLR cameras, a bonus, previously found in most compact digital cameras.)
  • The extra megapixels in the K20D (14.6 mp) don’t gain any enlargement quality advantage over the competing Canon Rebel Xsi/450D, or Nikon D90 (12 mp each).
  • For me, the biggest problem of the Pentax K20D (and Nikon D90) is the weight: body with battery: 800 grams (1.7 pounds).

If you are going to get a camera that heavy, 1.7 pounds, I recommend considering the Nikon D90 (specifications on dpreview.com) which weighs the same, has similar price, has useful live view, shoots HD movies (which the Pentax doesn’t do). For travel, consider mounting the Nikon D90 with the all-in-one wonder lens, like I use on every trip: Nikkor AF-S DX VR 18-200mm 3.5-5.6G IF-ED lens (20 ounces / 560 grams; new in 2006; about $800) which lets you hand hold images in up to 4-stops dimmer light, using Vibration Reduction (VR). No lens changing required!  I hardly ever use a tripod now, which is a big change for me from earlier cameras. Pentax doesn’t offer an equivalent high quality, image stabilized lens, so far as I have heard.

To save 8 ounces of weight, you might consider the Nikon D60 (17 ounce camera, with battery), which I currently use exclusively along with the Nikkor 18-200mm VR travel lens. I may later add a longer telephoto for better animal photography. The D60 plus 18-200mm VR lens is only 38 ounces.

For batteries, I buy enough rechargeable batteries to last the time I am away from power, like two weeks for Nepal. (11 batteries was more than enough — I only used about 6 batteries before recharging). I get about 400 shots per charge on the Nikon D60 and D40X. (Keep a spare warming in your pocket for temperatures below 45 F., and change it every ten minutes if temperatures are near freezing.)

Have a great trip!  — Tom Dempsey, photographer, Seattle, Washington

Brian’s Question: I have a 28-90 (42-135 digital equivalent) that I use most of the time.  On a trip like this, do you think additional zoom capability is necessary? or is 135mm enough?  Could always swap out with a 100-300mm, but like yourself I am a minimalist and on the trip I would rather not worry too much about camera equipment and having to deal with filters (UV and polarizer only)…

Tom Answers: I would definitely bring more zoom power on this trip of a lifetime to Nepal. (I rarely used polarizer in Nepal, because at high altitude the polarized sky turns too black, and it flattens the image appearance too much.)

Brian’s Question: Regarding an 18-55mm lens sold with a camera kit, is that a real 18-55 or is it a 27-83mm based on the conversion? Also, are the available lenses designed to focus light on the digital light sensor for digital SLR, and not film emulsion?  Are our older lens that we used for film less “effective” when mounted on a DSLR because they have not been designed for a sensor rather film?

Tom Answers: Many photographers like using the heavier conventional lenses on their APS-C cameras, because they save money, and they only use the sweet spot in the center of the lens, for sharp, undistorted images. The newer lenses “designed for digital” “or designed for APS-C” usually capture equal quality images, with less weight and bulk. In my opinion, using either the old or new lenses, the latest APS-C DSLR cameras capture much better quality than scanning 35mm film. Please confirm quality differences with specific lens reviews:

The sensor size determines the angle of view conversion factor (to give you the equivalent angle of view of a film camera lens shooting 35mm size film). APS-C size cameras have a sensor about 24×16 mm, such as the Pentax K200 or K100 (or Nikon D60 or Canon digital Rebel). Divide 35mm by 24mm and you get about a 1.5x angle of view conversion (or some call it focal Length Multiplier; or others call it a field of view crop factor), when using 35mm film camera (“full frame”) lenses on an APS-C sensor camera. Good explanation:

http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glossary/Optical/Focal_Length_Multiplier_01.htm

If you are accustomed to 35mm film terminology, when you buy a digital APS-C camera coming with a lens labeled as a 18-55mm real focal length, then you can know that it captures an angle of view equivalent to a 27-83mm lens on a “conventional” film camera (multiply by 1.5x). Most digital SLRs can use conventional 35mm lenses. But such lenses are designed to create an image circle that covers a 35mm film frame and are therefore larger and heavier than necessary for sensors which are smaller than a 35mm film frame. ‘Digital’ lenses (such as Canon EF-S lenses, Nikon DX Lenses, Olympus 4/3″ System) are lighter because their image circles only cover the sensor area.”

Pentax K20d first impressions

Brian’s followup January 13, 2009 to Tom Dempsey:

Well, I received the Pentax k20d from B and H last week.  I spent about three days with the manual and playing with the menus, custom functions and in general screwing around with the camera to get familiar with it.  It is quite similar to the Pentax PZ-1p that I have used for years.  This camera is well built, solid feel in my hands.  Has plenty of features that I will make use of while not bogged down with complicated functions of a pro camera.  The camera functions well mechanically and the image stabilization works well.  All in all, a great camera at a fantastic price.  If I used Canon or Nikon prior to this I would stay with those brands but as a Pentax user, the K20d delivers the goods to the market it was designed for.

Nikon D60 upgrades D40X

In August 2008, I upgraded to the Nikon D60 from Nikon D40X digital SLR camera (DSLR). The D60 thankfully introduces a good sensor dust-removal system, plus Vibration Reduction (VR) kit lenses (good for resale). The previous model Nikon D40X (used since May 2007) required tediously correction of dust spots in a photo editor. To be fair in retrospect, correcting dust and scratches was much worse with scanned slide film!

By the way, the Nikon D90 (new in October 2008) offers superior resolution with 12 megapixel sensor, a 920,000-pixel 3-inch LCD with live view, and 1280 x 720 (720p) movie support 24fps with mono sound, but its 26 ounce body is heavier than the 18 ounce D60 or D40X. One appreciates lighter weight cameras when trekking all day with a camera bag. When combined with the all-in-one Nikkor 18-200mm VR lens (20 ounces), the Nikon D60 (or D40X) offers the best 2008 quality for the weight for active travelers — camera and lens together weigh only 38 ounces.

[ I have upgraded cameras since this article was posted. Click here for Tom’s latest camera recommendations. Click here for my personal photo gear history. ]

Dynamic range

Nikon’s new Active D-Lighting feature in the Nikon D60 (and D300) only improves dynamic range of JPEG shots, and has no effect on raw files. Better dynamic range captures more detail simultaneously in both bright and dark parts of images. If you shoot any JPEG files, be sure to use Active D-Lighting (although it delays preview of your latest shot by 2 seconds; and delays the next shot after a quick burst of four).

However, if you only shoot raw files like I do, Nikon’s Active D-Lighting is useless and slows performance, so leave it disabled.

Canon offers a superior dynamic range feature helping both raw and JPEG, called “Highlight Tone Priority” mode, new in the Canon EOS 40D and Rebel XSi. The Canon Rebel XSi is one of the best lightweight cameras for travel, similar to the Nikon D60 or D40X.

Raw is better than JPEG

Raw gives you several extra stops of dynamic range versus normal JPEG files on the latest DSLR cameras. Raw also extends the dynamic range of advanced non-SLR compact cameras such as the Canon G9, though by half as much versus a DSLR, due to a smaller sensor. If you need to edit shots after shooting as I do, shooting raw gives much better quality than JPEG, especially to preserve details in bright highlights, and to change white balance. To get the most out of every image, I recommend using a good raw editor such as “Adobe Photoshop Lightroom version 2.0”:

Adobe Lightroom expedites photographic work flow

I love Adobe Lightroom (currently selling for $299, or $99 upgrade; or save about 50% with academic discount), which elegantly organizes images, and drastically reduces my time spent in Adobe Photoshop. My photo editing is now quicker than ever from download to edit to output. The excellent upgrade from Lightroom version 1.4 to 2.0 thankfully adds graduated filters, localized editing brushes, and a quicker interface to Photoshop such as for Photomerge, stitching panoramas. It easily and automatically exports image files to handsome web pages, or to files of any size, such as for e-mail or for Microsoft Powerpoint presentations.

More details: Adobe Lightroom automatically outputs to standard sRGB color space (or Adobe RGB if desired), while working internally with the broader color space of Adobe RGB or ProPhoto RGB. Adobe Lightroom smartly stores its non-destructive editing commands and labels in a powerful database (and in .XMP sidecar files for raw), and is compatible with JPG, TIF, most raw and .XMP files. If you buy a new camera with raw, check if the latest Lightroom update has added support for its raw files — for example, Adobe Lightroom version 1.4 added support for the Nikon D60 camera, and version 1.1 added Nikon D40X.

BEST TELEPHOTO ZOOM LENS 300mm+ for wildlife: Sony RX10 III vs APS-C, 4/3 cameras

How well can travel cameras magnify distant birds for a given weight and price? For serious wildlife photography on a budget, nothing beats Sony RX10 III:

Sony RX10 III camera

The versatile Sony RX10 III weather-sealed camera has a breathtaking 25x zoom 24-600mm equivalent f/2.4-4 lens.

  • $1600: 37 oz for 24-600mm equivalent f/2.4-4 zoom lens on 1″-Type sensor: Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 III (buy at Amazon) is now my ultimate travel camera (weighing just 37 ounces including battery & card; plus adding 5 oz for strap, lens filter, cap & hood makes 42 oz). This compact camera includes a weather-sealed, bright f/2.4-4 lens with incredible 25x zoom, sharp across the frame, from wide angle to wildlife telephoto. Its stacked Exmor RS CMOS backside illumination BSI 1-inch-size sensor technology plus a big 72mm-diameter lens help it rival a flagship APS-C system, even in dim light: read my RX10 III review. [Capturing great depth of focus, the lens has a “full-frame-equivalent” brightest aperture of f/6.5 at wide angle to f/10.8 starting at 100mm equiv.]

The following rival systems can potentially capture higher quality using a larger sensor and larger-diameter glass to collect more light, but are much heavier, pricier and require swapping out the bulkier telephoto to reach normal angles of view with yet another lens:

  1. $2900: 52 oz for 200-800mm equivalent zoom lens mounted on Micro Four Thirds sensor:
    Panasonic Leica DG Vario-Elmar 100-400mm F4-6.3 Power OIS lens (2016, 35 oz, 72mm filter size, 3.3 x 6.8″) mounted on Panasonic DMC-GX8 camera (2015, 17.1 oz body, 20mp), both weather-sealed. This Micro 4/3 sensor has twice the light-gathering area compared to 1-inch type (but RX10 III somewhat compensates with 1″ sensor with a superior stacked Exmor RS CMOS backside illumination BSI technology, not found in Panasonic GX8’s 4/3-Type sensor; and their lenses have equal 72mm diameter). This “slower” Panasonic lens opens as bright as f/4 down to about f/5.6 within the overlapping range 200-600mm equivalent of Sony RX10 III, which has a faster f/4 constant real aperture, up to a full stop brighter at 600mm, possibly equalizing image quality. [This Panasonic lens has a “full-frame-equivalent” brightest aperture of f/8 at 200mm equivalent and f/12.6 at 800mm, meaning that the first half of its zoom can achieve shallower depth of focus than RX10 III.]
  2. $1750: 83 oz for 225-900mm equivalent lens on mirrorless camera with APS-C sensor:
    Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary lens for Canon EF (2015, 68 ounces, 4.1 x 10.2″, 95mm filter size), mounted on Sigma Mount Converter MC-11 for Canon SGV lenses for Sony E (2016, ~3 oz, $250, for full stabilization and autofocus of Sigma’s Canon-mount lenses onto Sony E-Mount bodies) on Sony A6000 camera (2014, 12 oz body) or A6300. This lens may be the best telephoto quality & reach for the money, if you don’t mind bulky lens-swapping. Or on Nikon:

  3. $8300-8900: 153 oz for professional 750mm equivalent lens on APS-C sensor:
    Nikon 500mm f/4G ED AF-S Vibration Reduction (VR II) Nikkor Lens (137 oz, 5.5 x 15.4″) mounted on Nikon D3300 (2014, 16 oz). Upgrading to Nikon D5500 (2015, 15 oz) adds $100. A new lens upgrade costs $2000 more: Nikon 500mm AF-S NIKKOR f/4E FL ED VR Lens (2015, 109 oz, 5.51 x 15.24″). [This lens has a “full-frame-equivalent” brightest aperture of f/6 at 750mm equivalent, which gives it the shallowest depth of focus on this list; but it ties with the “actual” f/4 relative aperture brightness of RX10 III.]

    • Professional lenses like this are a heavy, bulky, and costly commitment for travelers. Further below, read more about wildlife telephoto lenses for DSLR cameras, including acronyms explained (for image stabilization, ultrasonic focusing motors, and APS-C-only optimization) from major brands (Nikon, Canon, Sigma, Tamron, Sony).
Chilean Flamingo, Woodland Park Zoo, Seattle

Sony RX10 III is sharp across the frame throughout its breathtaking 25x zoom, including at maximum telephoto 220mm (600mm equivalent) shown above. Sections of the Chilean Flamingo are shown at 100% pixel view. Woodland Park Zoo, Seattle, WA.

The following good value compact wildlife cameras are cheaper than Sony RX10 III and likewise don’t interchange lenses:

  1. $1200: 33 oz for 24-480mm equivalent 20x zoom on 1″-Type sensor: Panasonic FZ2500 (2016, 20mp) with f/2.8–4.5 lens, fully articulated LCD with touchscreen, great viewfinder magnification, best video specs (ND filter, Cine/UHD 4K). But FZ2500’s lens collects a half stop less light, slightly lowering image quality; its telephoto doesn’t reach long enough for birders; and its CIPA battery life of 350 shots is shorter than RX10III’s 420 shots. (FZ2500 is FZ2000 in some markets.)
  2. $900: 29 oz for 25-400mm equivalent 16x zoom lens on 1″-Type sensor: Panasonic LUMIX DMC-FZ1000 camera (2014, 20mp) with f/2.8-4 lens, fast autofocus, fully articulated LCD. Good quality lets you crop down from 20mp to digitally extend telephoto reach.
  3. $600: 32 oz for 24–2000mm equivalent 83x zoom lens on 1/2.3″ sensor: Nikon Coolpix P900 (2015, 16mp). The tiny 1/2.3″ sensor should beat cell phone quality, suitable for web sharing or small prints, though requires bright outdoor light.
  4. $400: 21 oz for 24-1200mm equivalent 50x zoom lens on 1/2.3″ sensor: Olympus SP-100 camera (2014, 16mp, 1 cm close focus, nice 920k dot EVF): innovative On-Camera Dot Sight helps track distant birds or moving subjects.

See Tom Dempsey’s latest camera recommendations. Buy at Amazon.com product links on this page to support my work.

More Information

No longer is a DSLR camera with a mirror required for excellent birding and wildlife photography with quick autofocus. The following compact camera with excellent 20-megapixel 1″-Type sensor has a high-quality 25x zoom lens which reaches 600mm equivalent birding territory:

Or for Sony A6300, A6000, NEX-6, and NEX-7 mirrorless E-mount cameras (read article):

Cropping 24 megapixels can beat better lens on older 12mp camera

In 2012, cropping my 24-megapixel Sony NEX-7 with all-in-one 18-200mm lens handily beat the real resolution formerly obtained from 70 to 250mm on Nikon’s good 70-300mm F4.5-5.6G VR lens used on my 12mp D5000 DSLR camera. But upgrading to a 24mp Nikon D3200 camera (2012) or Nikon D3300 camera (2014, 16 oz) restores the advantage of Nikon VR 70-300mm lens. In 2016 came the excellent Sony FE 70-300mm F4.5-5.6 G OSS lens (30 oz, SEL70300G), great for use on Sony A6300 making 105-450mm equivalent. But I prefer the all-in-one 25x zoom Sony RX10 III, introduced around the same time.

However, because the DSLR legacy still runs strongly among professional photographers, the remainder of this article discusses suitable DSLR telephoto lenses…

Wildlife telephoto lenses for DSLR (mirror) cameras

DSLR wildlife telephoto lenses optimal for on-the-go travelers

An optimally “lightweight” wildlife lens for Nikon DSLRs is Nikkor AF-S VR Zoom 70-300mm F4.5-5.6G ED-IF lens (26 oz, 105-450mm angle of view equivalent), which resolves detail throughout its range 5 to 20% sharper (for bigger prints) than the versatile Nikon AF-S DX 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II Zoom (20 oz, 3 x 3.8″, 2009) travel lens. Alternatives:

A good DSLR camera is Sony Alpha SLT-A65V camera (buy at Amazon.com) (2012, 22 oz body with SteadyShot INSIDE Stabilization) with good travel lens Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 16-80mm f/3.5-4.5 ZA DT lens for Sony Alpha (24-120mm equiv, 16 oz). For wildlife and sports, add an excellent Sony 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 SSM G A-mount lens. Sony’s Translucent Mirror Technology speeds past very slow Live View autofocus of rival Nikon and Canon DSLRs (except the fast Canon 70D). The tilt/swivel 3.0-inch LCD aids hand-held macro and candid travel shots at arms length. Nikon or Canon lens-based image stabilization may beat Sony’s sensor-shift SteadyShot by up to a full stop of slower shutter speed.

For sharper handheld shots, get optical image stabilization built into the lens (Nikon VR, Canon IS) or body (Sony SteadyShot INSIDE). Superior lenses having fast f4 or f/2.8 brightest aperture excel for indoor action but are a heavy burden when traveling.

Newer DSLR lenses optimized for digital

Today, many lenses sold for DSLR cameras are still the older, heavier ones designed for full frame (35mm film size) cameras. By upgrading to newer lenses that are “Optimized For Digital APS-C”, you can save bulk and weight and enjoy comparable image quality with less vignetting.

A few newer lenses are “designed for APS-C only” and 250mm or longer, useful for a wide range of subjects including wildlife shots:

  • Nikon AF-S DX 18-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR lens (29 oz, 3.3 x 4.7″, 2012)
  • Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS (Image Stabilization): 2.8 x 4.3 in (70 x 108mm), 13.8 oz (390g). Canon Rebel APS-C crop factor of 1.6 gives it a field of view equivalent to a 88-400mm lens on 135 film.
  • Tamron 16-300mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC PZD MACRO lens for Nikon (2014, 19 oz) 18.8x zoom with splash-proof design for cameras with APS-C sensor, for Nikon F-mount, Canon EF-mount, or Sony A-mount.
  • Tamron Di II VC AF 18-270mm F/3.5-6.3 LD Aspherical (IF) MACRO (2008, Model B003)
    • 15x zoom lens for Canon mount and AF motor supporting Nikon.
    • Lightweight 19.4 oz (550g), compact 101mm × 80mm (3.8″ × 3.1″).
    • Di-II is Tamron’s lighter weight design exclusively for APS-C sensors.
    • Minimum focus distance 19.3 inches throughout. Magnification ratio 1:3.5 at 270mm (74 x 49 mm coverage).
    • Tamron claims image sharpness similar to competitors (18-200mm Canon IS, Nikon VR, Sigma OS lenses) at same light weight, while zooming more, 15x versus 11x. Canon 18-200mm IS stabilizes images best of the bunch. Canon’s crop factor 1.6 makes 18-270mm equivalent to 29-432mm. Nikon’s 1.5 crop factor makes a 27-405mm equivalent.
    • I didn’t like the Tamron 18-270mm VC lens (returned) and instead upgraded to Nikon AF-S DX 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II Zoom Lens. The Nikon 18-200 “VR I” focused more reliably in low indoors light on a tripod and cropping its 200mm images beat Tamron’s 270mm. The Tamron autofocuses slower and lens creeps badly when pointed up or down.
      • Avoid older version which lacks VC: Tamron Di-II AF 18-250mm F/3.5-6.3 LD Aspherical (IF) Macro. 430g (15.2oz).

Brand terminology for image stabilization, APS-C-optimization, and fast ultrasonic focusing motors

Lighten your load by shopping for the new, smaller lens formats DX, EF-S, DC and Di IIdesigned for digital for APS-C size sensor cameras only:

  • Nikon/Nikkor DX format lenses for APS-C only (with “VR, Vibration Reduction” desired)
    • Nikon DX 18-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR lens (29 oz, 3.3 x 4.7″, 2012) all-in-one travel lens
    • Nikon AF-S DX 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II Zoom Lens (new in 2006 with VR I) is great for travel because its size and weight are optimized for Nikon cameras with DX sensors (APS-C size, as in Nikon D3300, D3200, D3100, D5100, D60, & D40X cameras). The DX lens design eliminates the extra glass which would have been required to cover a full 35mm size frame. Nikon DX format cameras have a “field of view crop factor” of 1.5, so this lens labeled 18-200mm can be thought of as a 27-300mm in 135 film terms.
  • Canon EF-S lenses for APS-C only (with “IS, Image Stabilization” desired)
  • Sigma DC lenses for APS-C only (with “OS, Optical Stabilization” desired)
  • Tamron Di II lenses for APS-C only (with “VC, Vibration Compensation” desired).
  • Note: Because the above DX, EF-S, DC and Di II lenses are designed for cameras with APS-C size sensor only, they will cause vignetting (darkened corners) at the wide angle end of their zoom if used on “full frame sensor” SLR cameras, such as on the expensive Nikon D3 (FX format), Nikon D700, Canon EOS 5D, or pricier Canon EOS 1D camera.
  • For sharper handheld shooting in significantly dimmer lighting situations without a tripod, insist on lenses designed with image stabilization (VR, IS, OS or VC above). By eliminating much time formerly spent setting up a tripod, I can better keep pace with non-photographers on group treks.
    • Note that the Sony Alpha (A-series) builds the image stabilization into the camera body with sensor-shift technology, which is a fine idea, except that comparable Nikon D60 and Canon Rebel cameras of 2009 gain back Sony’s handheld advantage through lower noise at a higher ISO settings. Then using a Nikon VR or Canon IS lens beats Sony’s handheld low light performance.
  • Also look for the fastest focusing lenses with ultrasonic motors to capture flighty animals, a feature branded as follows:
    • Canon – USM, UltraSonic Motor
    • Nikon – SWM, Silent Wave Motor
    • Sigma – HSM, Hyper Sonic Motor
    • Tamron – PZD, Piezo Drive autofocus system powered by a fast and quiet standing-wave ultrasonic motor
    • Olympus – SWD, Supersonic Wave Drive
    • Panasonic – XSM, Extra Silent Motor
    • Pentax – SDM, Supersonic Drive Motor
    • Sony & Minolta – SSM, SuperSonic Motor
  • The quality of new lenses usually equals or exceeds comparable past models.

Wildlife and birding lenses for APS-C cameras

For serious photography of wildlife or birds using an an APS-C size sensor camera, use telephoto lens labeled at least 300mm (angle of view equivalent to 450mm lens on 135 film or 35mm sensor). If your telephoto lens falls short of this, then you can crop to enlarge, at the cost of fuzzier images due to lowered resolution. A maximum aperture of f/5.6 or f/6.3 saves money and weight, yet can take decent images in good daylight (usually sharpest if stopped down one or two stops from wide open). Professional wildlife and bird photographers can sharpen image quality with heavier, more expensive lenses with f/4 or f/2.8 brightest aperture, in a 500mm or longer conventional lens (equivalent in terms of 135 film or 35mm sensor), possibly using a full frame 35mm-sensor camera.

CROP FACTOR: Cameras with APS-C size sensors have an “angle of view crop factor” that extends the telephoto by 1.5x for Nikon (or 1.6x for Canon) cameras, when compared to using the same lens on 135 film or 35mm sensor. For example, a favorite travel lens labeled “18-200mm” focal length has the angle of view of a “27-300mm” in terms of 135 film or 35mm sensor, on a Nikon DX format camera such as the Nikon D5100, D5000, D3300, or D60. A Nikon AF-S DX 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II Zoom Lens makes a great all-around travel lens, with a big 11x zoom that minimizes lens changes so that you don’t miss a shot. However, this 200mm telephoto is too short for serious wildlife photo enlargements, unless you are satisfied with web display or small 4×6 prints of animals. A Nikon DX 18-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR lens would better reach distant birds.
An iridescent blue, orange and green Danfe (or Danphe) Pheasant, the national bird of Nepal, Namche Bazaar in Sagarmatha National Park.

Photo: In Sagarmatha National Park near Mount Everest, that flash of iridescent blue, orange and green is a Danfe or Danphe Pheasant, the national bird of Nepal. Telephoto tips: 

  1. On APS-C size sensor cameras (such as Nikon DX format), for bigger prints of wildlife or birds, use a lens focal length of at least 300mm (which has an angle of view equivalent to a 450mm lens on 135 film or a 35mm-size sensor, a diagonally field of view of 8 degrees & 15 minutes). 
  2. An editor can act as a digital zoom: In Adobe Lightroom editor, I cropped to 10% of the original image to make an acceptable 4×6-inch bird print (but any larger print would look fuzzy at reading distance). The pheasant, 70 feet away in fog, would have been sharper if I had used a telephoto longer than 200mm on my APS-C sensor camera.
    [
    2007 photo: Nikon D40X DSLR, 10mp 3872 x 2592, cropped to 858 x 1002 pixels; published in “Light Travel: Photography on the Go” book by Tom Dempsey 2009, 2010. ]

Full-frame conventional lenses are bigger and heavier

The expensive “full frame” DSLR cameras (such as Nikon D600 camera, Nikon D700, or Nikon D3 with FX format; Canon EOS 6D, 5D or pricier Canon EOS 1D) require the conventional lens size which focuses sharply to the area of 35mm film, about 36 x 24 mm. Many new lenses are “optimized for digital” to work with both conventional and APS-C size sensors, to reduce vignetting (darkening at corners). For example, Sigma brand lenses labelled DG and Tamron Di lenses are the conventional size, optimized for both full frame and APS-C sensor cameras (though sometimes working better for one particular format).

Using these large, conventional lenses on APS-C size cameras can have some plus and minuses:

  • Advantages of conventional size lenses: The small APS-C size sensor (measuring about 22 x 15 mm) uses just the central area of the conventional 35mm lens, or the “sweet spot”, where images are usually sharpest, with lowest distortion (by not using the outside edges). Also, older lenses may be cheaper, easier to obtain, or already owned in your kit. And if you upgrade from an APS-C camera to a full frame DSLR, the conventional lens may stay compatible.
  • Disadvantages: Conventional size lenses are bigger and heavier (versus the newer Nikon DX, Canon EF-S, Sigma DC, and Tamron Di II lenses “for APS-C size sensor cameras only”), and most people won’t eke an advantage from conventional lenses versus the APS-C-only lenses.

In the lens brand list below, Popular Photography magazine October 2008 rates the following excellent travel lenses as roughly equal in image quality: Nikon 70-300mm 4.5-5.6G VR (which I’ve enjoyed using); Canon 70-300mm DO IS USM; and Sigma 120-400mm 4.5-5.6DG APO OS HSM AF:

Canon full-frame (EF-mount) conventional lenses with IS (Image Stabilization) for wildlife & travel images:

  • Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM. 3.2 x 3.9 in., 25.4 oz (82.4 x 99.9 mm, 720g), makes a great extension to the IS kit lens sold with the Canon EOS 450D / Rebel XSi
  • Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM lens (new December 2014, 55.3 oz) 3.7 x 7.6″, 77mm filter, 4 stops image stabilization, L-series weather resistance, reduced ghosting and flaring, 3.2-foot closest focus, new Rotation-Type Zoom Ring prevents dust sucking.
    • 1998 version: Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS USM Lens. 48.0 oz (1380g), 3.6 x 7.4″ (92 x 189mm), 77mm filter, 1.5 stops image stabilization, 6.5 feet closest focus, push-pull zoom (sucks dust)
  • plus bigger professional lenses with wider maximum aperture

Nikon/Nikkor full frame (F Mount) conventional lenses with VR (highly desirable Vibration Reduction) for wildlife & travel photography, in order of increasing price:

  • Nikkor AF-S VR Zoom 70-300mm F4.5-5.6G ED-IF lens (equivalent to 105-450mm angle of view in terms of 135 film). 26 ounces; 5.6″ length; 4.9 foot minimum focus. Compatible with full frame Nikon D3 DSLR. Lens size and price point attract sports and wildlife/birder photographers. Nikkor 70-300mm is sharper than Nikkor 18-200mm VR.
  • Nikon 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED Autofocus VR Zoom Nikkor Lens: (120-600mm equivalent angle of view when used on a Nikon DX mount/APS-C camera) 3.6 x 6.7 inches; 48.0 oz (1360 g). Ken Rockwell says “This lens is a miracle…to shoot still subjects with long exposures without needing a tripod…but for sports you may want the 70-300 AF-S VR.” One reader complained that this lens “does not have AF-S, so I found the focusing too slow for moving birds…and it didn’t bring birds in close enough”.
  • Nikkor AF-S VR Zoom 200-400mm f/4G IF-ED lens: 4.9 x 14.4 inches; 115.5 oz (3275 g). One of my readers was “impressed with the speed of its AF and the quality of the pictures, but the lens is awfully large and heavy”. About $5500.
  • Nikon 500mm f/4G ED AF-S Vibration Reduction (VR II) Nikkor Lens: 5.5 x 15.4 inches; 137 oz/8.54 pounds.
  • plus bigger professional lenses with wider maximum aperture

Sony Alpha DSLR full frame conventional lenses:

  • Sony SteadyShot INSIDE Stabilization (the sensor-shift built into Sony Alpha DSLR camera bodies) is a half or full stop of shutter speed worse than Nikon or Canon lens-based image stabilization, but Sony lenses may cost less for similar quality.
  • Sony A-mount 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 SSM G (SAL-70300G) lens for Alpha DSLR (27 oz/760g), 1.2m minimum focus distance, filter size 62mm. Tip: for sharpest images, set aperture at f/8 to f/11 at zoom settings 70 to 300mm.
  • Sony A-mount 70-400mm F4-5.6 G SSM II lens (53 oz/3.3 lb/1500g, 3.7 x 7.7 inches, SAL-70400G2, 2013) (or SAL-70400G lensboth for Alpha DSLRs) can be adapted onto a NEX camera using Sony LA-EA2 mount adaptor (7 oz, with translucent mirror for fast phase detection autofocus) but lacks OSS, thereby limiting hand-held photography and increasing tripod usage. Minimum focus distance 1.5m, filter size 77mm. This SAL-70400G2 SSM II lens is very sharp wide open at 400mm, has 4x faster autofocus, less flare/ghosting, and higher contrast images than previous version. As with comparable rival lenses, they have poor bokeh >250mm compared to prime lenses.

By the way, I don’t recommend using Sony A-mount lenses (such as 70-300mm or -400mm) on E-mount bodies (such as A6300, A6000 or NEX). Designed for in-body stabilization for Sony Alpha DSLRs, A-mount lenses all lack OSS (thereby requiring more tripod use on E-mount bodies). A-mount lenses also require a hefty A-mount adapter on E-mount bodies:

  • Sony LA-EA2 adaptor (7 oz, with translucent mirror for fast phase detection autofocus)
  • Sony LA-EA1 adapter (with Manual focus only, NO AUTOFOCUS).
  • You’d be better off using E-mount lenses on Sony A6300, A6000 or NEX.

Tamron and Sigma make good value full-frame conventional zoom lenses suitable for shooting birds and wildlife plus a wide range of other subjects, fitting many different brand camera bodies:

  • Tamron 28-300mm F/3.5-6.3 Di VC PZD Zoom Lens (2014, 19 oz) for Canon EF, Nikon F (FX), Sony Alpha mounts: attractive for wildlife/travel photography with ultrasonic PZD motor. Tamron “Di” lens designed for both full frame and APS-C sensor cameras. 42-450mm equivalent lens on Nikon DX format cameras (APS-C with 1.5x field of view multiplier), where the angle of view zooms from 75°23′ to 8°15′. Close focus 19 inches. Internal Focus (IF).
  • Tamron SP 150-600mm F/5-6.3 Di VC USD (2014, 69 oz/4.30 lb/1951 g, 4.2 x 10.2″) for Canon EF mount, Nikon F mount, and Sony Alpha A-mount: 225-900mm equivalent on APS-C. UltraSonic Drive autofocus motor. Shoot at around f/8 for sharpest results (given sufficient tripod use and/or shutter speed). Excellent dollar value. Comparisons:
    • The 2008 Sigma 150-500mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM is no sharper at 500mm than the Tamron is at 600mm.
    • This Tamron 150-600mm matches image quality at half the price of Nikon AF-S Nikkor 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR.
    • The Tamron’s modern optics easily beat the 1999 Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM.
  • Tamron AF 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di LD Macro lens. 3.0 x 4.6 in. 435g (15.3 oz). Not image stabilized.
  • Tamron SP AF200-500mm F/5-6.3 Di LD (IF) lens. 3.7 x 8.9 in. 1237g (43.6 oz). Not image stabilized.

The following full-frame conventional zoom lenses by Sigma are a good price-value, fitting several different brand camera bodies:

  • Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary Lens (2015, 68 ounces, 4.1 x 10.2 in). Note: Sigma’s heavier, professional 150-600mm Sports version (2015, 101 ounces, 11.5-inches long) is splash and dust-resistant, focuses as close as 102-inches, and has 24 elements in 16 groups.
  • Sigma APO 150-500mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM lens (2008, 67.4 oz, 3.7 in. x 9.9 in.) filter diameter 86mm.
  • Sigma APO 120-400mm F4.5-5.6 DG OS HSM lens: (61.7 oz/1750g, 3.6 in. x 8 in)
  • Sigma APO 80-400mm F4.5-5.6 EX DG OS lens: Optical Stabilization helps by about 2 stops or so. Does not have HSM and may be slow to focus. 1750g/61.9 oz, 3.7 x 7.6 in.
  • Sigma APO 50-500mm F4-6.3 EX DG HSM lens: 1,840g/64.9 oz; 3.7 in. x 8.6 in. It has no optical stabilization; but good DSLR cameras can compensate by a few stops using high ISO settings.
  • plus bigger professional lenses with wider maximum aperture.
  • Sigma glossary of terms: DG = Sigma’s conventional full-size lens. In the future, look for newer, smaller 300mm and longer SigmaDC” lenses for APS-C only. OS = Optical Stabilization, very desireable. HSM = Hyper Sonic Motor for quiet and high-speed AF (Auto Focus), very desirable.

Tokina full-frame conventional lens for wildlife:

  • Tokina 80-400mm f4.5-5.6 ATX 840 AF D: Angle of view 29° 50’ to 6°13’ on APS-C camera; Minimum focus distance 2.5m (8.2 ft.); dimensions 3.1 in. (79mm) X 136.5 mm (5.4in.); 1020 g (35.9 oz); introduced June 2006, for Canon EOS and Nikon D. Unfortunately no image stabilization.

Check prices at Amazon.com. — buying at the links on this page supports Tom Dempsey’s work.

TELEPHOTO TIPS: How to avoid out-of-focus shots on any camera

  • Make sure image stabilization (IS, VR, OS, VC, or OIS) is turned on for all hand held shots (especially when using telephoto), to counteract blurring due to hand shake at slower shutter speeds.
  • Focus will be most difficult towards longest telephoto end of the zoom, due to hand shake and lens limitations, especially in low light. At 400mm using Canon IS or Nikon VR on an APS-C sensor, shoot at about 1/125th second or faster for sharper shots. For APS-C cameras in general, divide the lens mm by two, and the inverse is near the slowest possible sharp shutter speed when image stabilization is turned on. Raising ISO will help achieve faster shutter speeds.
  • Most DSLR lenses are sharpest stopped down by one or two stops from wide open: f/8 is easiest to remember as a good optimum that reduces the chromatic aberrations of wide open and prevents the light diffraction of small openings at high aperture numbers such as f/22.
  • Automatic multi-point focus usually hunts for the closest, brightest object, and is often not what you wanted to focus on, but can react faster than your fingers for capturing wildlife, sports, and action.
  • For shooting non-moving subjects on most cameras, a single AF point in the center (not multi point automatic) is more accurate. Lock focus, recompose, then release the shutter. On many cameras, when using single AF point, it’s easy to accidently press the “AF point selection” off center or forget that it’s off center, focusing on a location different than you thought. Some of the heavier, pricier DSLR models can lock AF point selection to avoid the common problem.

Terminology and metric conversions

  • oz = ounces. Above camera weights in ounces (oz) include battery and memory card.
  • g = grams. Multiple ounces by 28.35 to get grams.
  • sec = second.
  • mm = millimeters. A centimeter (cm) equals 10 millimeters. Multiply centimeters (cm) by 0.3937 to get inches.
  • ILC = Interchangeable Lens Compact = “midsize mirrorless camera” term used above
  • DSLR = Digital Single Lens Reflex = a traditional camera where an optical viewfinder uses a mirror to see through the interchangeable lens.
  • EVF = Electronic Viewfinder.
  • LCD = Liquid Crystal Display.
    • OLED (Organic Light-Emitting Diode) beats an LCD in dynamic range from darkest to brightest and consumes less power.
  • equivalent lens = To compare lenses on cameras having different sensor sizes, equiv or equivalent lens refers to what would be the lens focal length (measured in mm or millimeters) that would give the same angle of view on a “full frame35mm-size sensor (or 35mm film camera, using 135 film cartridge).
    • Compared lenses are “equivalent” only in terms of angle of view. (To determine sharpness or quality, read lens reviews which analyze at 100% pixel views.)
    • Crop factor” = how many times smaller is the diagonal measurement of a small sensor than a “full frame” 35-mm size sensor. For example, the 1.5x crop factor for Nikon DX format (APS-C size sensor) makes a lens labeled 18-200mm to be equivalent in angle of view to a 27-300mm focal length lens used on a 35mm film camera. The 2x crop factor for Micro Four Thirds sensors makes a lens labeled 14-140mm to be equivalent in angle of view to a 28-280mm lens used on a 35mm film camera.
  • Superzoom lenses
    • In 2013, superzoom often refers to lenses of about 15x zoom range or larger. Steady quality improvements in the resolving power of sensors has made possible superzoom cameras in ever smaller sizes. As superzoom range increases, laws of physics require lenses to focus upon smaller sensors (light detectors) or else to increase lens size. For a given level (most recent year) of technological advancement, a camera with physically larger sensor (bigger light detecting area) should capture better quality for a given zoom lens range.
    • 10x zoom” = zoom lens telephoto divided by wide angle focal length. For example, a 14-140mm focal length zoom has a 10x zoom range (140 divided by 14). An 18-200mm zoom has an 11x zoom range (200 divided by 18).
  • equivalent” F-stop = refers to the F-stop (F-number) on a full-frame-sensor camera which has the same hole diameter as the F-stop of the camera lens being compared. The concept of “equivalent” F-stop lets you compare capabilities for creating shallow depth of focus (depth of field) on cameras with different-size sensors. Smaller-sensor cameras use shorter focal lengths for the same field of view, so at a given F-stop they have a smaller physical aperture size, meaning more depth of field (with less blur in front of and behind the focused subject). Formula: F Number (or Relative Aperture) = actual focal length of lens divided by diameter of the entrance pupil.

Buying anything at the above Amazon.com links supports my work.

Canon PowerShot G9 versus Canon 40D DSLR with f/2.8L IS lens

For family travel, Tom compares a big f/2.8L IS lens on heavy Canon 40D DSLR to a compact Canon PowerShot G9 camera on tripod:

Asia Contemporary: A demon guards at the bottom of a gilded chedi (or stupa), at the Temple of the Emerald Buddha (Wat Phra Kaew), which is a shining complex of buildings within the grounds of the Grand Palace in Bangkok, Thailand. The Grand Palace (or Phra Borom Maha Ratcha Wang, in Thai) in Bangkok, Thailand, was built on the east bank of the Chao Phraya River starting in 1782, during the reign of Rama I. It served as the official residence of the king of Thailand from the 18th century to the mid-20th century. Photo by Carol Dempsey. Published in "Light Travel: Photography on the Go" by Tom Dempsey 2009, 2010. (© Carol Dempsey / Photoseek.com)

Asia Contemporary: A demon guards at the bottom of a gilded chedi (or stupa), at the Temple of the Emerald Buddha (Wat Phra Kaew), which is a shining complex of buildings within the grounds of the Grand Palace in Bangkok, Thailand. Photograph by Carol Dempsey, using a Canon Powershot SD700 IS ELPH, which is a camera about the size of a deck of playing cards.

Photographer Tom Dempsey replies to Raul Panelo’s message (shown at bottom) March 03, 2008:

Dear Raul, You probably already know that your skills as a photographer are much more important than the camera you choose. That being said, your high quality Canon 40D (and 20D) DSLR outfit has some important differences versus the 13-ounce Canon Powershot G9:

Here are the main advantages of your excellent DSLR camera outfit:
  • Prints larger than about 16 inches will be noticeably sharper and less distorted from the DSLR, versus from the Canon G9.
  • The shutter response is instantaneous on a DSLR, whereas the G9 has a slight delay of 0.4 to 0.6 seconds. (Workaround: half-press the shutter to pre-focus, then click at the right moment).
  • On the DSLR, for a given image noise/quality level, you can hand hold shots in 2 to 4 stops dimmer light using ISO 800-3200 (versus the G9 set at ISO 100-200; assuming you turn on IS image stabilization in both cameras for sharpest hand held performance). Using these settings, images may be indistinguishable in quality from DSLR versus G9, when viewed on any High Definition HD monitor or projector, or when printed less than about 12 inches in size. Your f/2.8L lenses for your Canon 40D are so good and sharp, that your personal judgement is required to determine the G9 breakeven point for print size, which I estimate at between 16 and 8 inches. Larger prints will look sharper from the Canon 40D.
  • DSLR cameras perform much better in dimmer light, because their larger lens glass diameter focuses much more light onto a sensor 6 times larger in area than in the G9.
  • Your proposed 1.4x lens extender loses a stop, but costs less than buying a new lens, and reduces bulk versus carrying an extra lens. Offhand I don’t know the actual quality difference when you extend your 70-200mm 2.8L IS by 1.4x. The tele extender might duplicate the effect (and quality?) of your Canon 75-300mm 4-5.6 IS, thus saving you extra bulk of carrying the 75-300mm when traveling.

…versus the Canon Powershot G9:

  • The G9 can work around many of its low light limitations by shooting always at ISO 100-200 (even 400 looks surprisingly good), and by mounting on a tripod, in the case of low light shots that exceed its excellent 2-4 stop hand-held “IS” capability. You may not see much difference between G9 images and DSLR images when you compare shots at ISO 100-200 and prints smaller than about 12 inches.
  • The G9 has big advantages of portability, fun factor, movie & sound recording, and good built in macro focusing down to 1 cm (very useful small macro image area 17 x 22 mm, better magnification than your DSLR lenses, unless you have a dedicated DSLR macro lens).
  • Underwater camera: The $170 Waterproof Case WP-DC11 converts the Canon G9 into a high quality underwater camera for snorkeling Maui, Hawaii, Galapagos Islands, Belize, Mexico, the Caribbean Sea or other great destinations. However, our camera’ s waterproof housing fogged up in the cold Galapagos waters. Instead, get a dedicated underwater camera listed on my BUY page.
  • Compact cameras are great for traveling with family, because they are more portable and faster to whip out, as you juggle family gear and interact socially. (However, to capture better quality in dim light, the G9 needs a tripod about 2 to 4 f/stops sooner than DSLR cameras with APS-C size sensors, such as the Canon D40.)
  • With the G9 shooting RAW, you can capture publication quality images up to about 12 inches (maybe larger).

  • To put this discussion in perspective: using a JPEG image from the Canon SD700IS ELPH (which has image quality lower than the Canon G9), I printed one of my wife’s Bangkok Grand Palace shots 16×12 inches for display in our living room, and the quality looks the same as my own prints using better cameras! In my mind, that infers the G9 quality on par with your DSLR up to 16 inches, in good daylight shooting.

Recommended travel tripod for compact or DSLR cameras:

  • I love my travel tripod, which I have tested 2005-2008 with both small and DSLR cameras:
  • Slik “Sprint Pro GM” Tripod ($90), which weighs only 2 pounds and is great for travel, superior to other travel tripods that I’m aware of (including Velbon MAXi343E, Manfrotto, or even Gitzo tripods costing three times more).
  • For quickest on/off camera mounting, add the Manfrotto 3299 Quick Change Plate Adapter ($35, quick release).
  • The stiff aluminum legs are sufficiently stable for cameras up to 3 or 4 pounds (especially if you don’t extend the bottom leg section; or if you hang on extra weight) and have very fast locking levers (of sturdy plastic). At this good price, simply buy a new tripod if it breaks.
  • The Slik “Sprint Pro GM” tripod rises to eye level (64 inches), collapses to 19 inches (or 16 inches if you remove the quick-release ball head). The metal ball head swings 90 degrees each way, to two vertical positions, and turns freely around, all tightened with one effective lever. Legs can optionally splay out independently in 3 locking positions down to 6.4 inches off the ground. For macro, the center column can be reversed underneath for great shooting flexibility at ground level, and unscrews into a short section (saving 3.5 ounces). Leg tips convert from spike (outdoor) to rubber (indoor use) with a simple lockable twist.

Tom’s 2008 equipment:

  • My own travel preference is to carry the lightweight Nikon D40X (with image quality equal to the more expensive Nikon D200) mounted with just one do-everything lens, the Nikkor AF-S DX VR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED (2-4 stops hand held vibration reduction), which makes a good quality 38-ounce camera+lens system carried in a chest bag.
  • Compared to using a Canon G9, this Nikon D40X system eliminates most tripod use, shoots faster in dimmer light, shoots a wider angle and longer telephoto (27mm-300 equivalent Nikkor lens; versus 35mm-210 for Canon G9) and captures better quality, sufficient for me to sell 24 inch or larger prints (when viewed at 24 inches or further).
  • The 13-ounce G9 is still very attractive as a camera for family travel and 16-inch prints. I would not mind having a G9!

Have a great trip in Maui!
— Tom Dempsey, photographer, Seattle, Washington

——————————————————————————————-

Above, Tom answers the following questions … From Raul Panelo, March 03, 2008 To: tom @ photoseek.com
Subject: Travel Advice Needed

Hi Tom! First of all, thank you for sharing your expertise in travel photography. I have learned a lot from your site www.photoseek.com I need advice on what equipment to bring on my upcoming vacation to Maui. I currently have the following: Canon 20D, Canon 40D cameras; lenses: Canon 16-35mm 2.8L, Canon 24-70mm 2.8L, Canon 70-200mm 2.8L IS, Canon 50mm 1.4, Canon 75-300mm 4-5.6 IS. I want to shoot landscapes, people and macro shots. After reading your website, I’m now thinking of buying the Canon G9 for a take it anywhere camera. Do you think this is a good choice for me? I’m also thinking of buying the 1.4x extender for the 70-200mm to extend my range. Lastly, I am looking for the best tripod to use with either my SLRs or the G9 if I end up buying it. I’m traveling with my wife and 2 daughters ages 6 & 11. I’d like to travel as light as possible but at the same time have the ability to capture wonderful images. Thanks in advance for your help. — Raul Panelo

———– Reply from Raul March 03, 2008: —————————————
Tom, Thank you so much for your quick and detailed response. Based on your answer, I’ll definitely take my SLR in case I capture something I’d like to print and hang on the wall later. I’ll also check your tripod recommendation. The price on the Sprint Pro GM is definitely reasonable given your description. You may post my question and your answer on your blog. Your blog is a great resource for many and if your answer helped me, I’m sure many more will benefit. Thanks again for being so generous with your expertise. — Raul

2008: Panasonic FZ8 vs FZ7, Canon G7, G9, SD700

Tom compares Panasonic FZ8, FZ7, Canon G6, G7, G9, SD700 IS (2008 cameras), and JPEG versus raw.

“Hi Tom …I was very keen to buy Canon G6 , but as now out of production & very difficult to get hold of , even second hand . The G7’s reviews are mixed especially the absence of RAW [file support]. Do you think this is a big disadvantage , is it something an amature would have much use for ? What are your views of the G7 ? Your photos on your website look great , do you use a Polariser filter to get the colour contrasts ? Particularly enjoy your trekking photos in Switzerland.”  — Regards, from Tony Lord February 6, 2007
[ Information here dates from 2008 for people interested in older cameras. Click BUY > CAMERAS to see the latest recommended gear. ]
Tom Dempsey replied as follows including new information as of February 2008:
  • If like Tony you are attracted to a camera such as the Canon G6, I suggest upgrading to the class-leading image quality of the Canon G9, with 3-inch LCD, raw file support, and 12 megapixels; introduced 10/2007.
  • To save money, try ebay.com or craigslist.org for finding a Canon G6.
  • From compacts to SLRs, today’s digital cameras are much better than cameras of only 2 years previous. Performance of pocket cameras today can sometimes exceed older 35mm film SLRs.
  • Note that your photography skills are much more important than the camera you use. One of the best cameras to have is a small one which you can carry everywhere, such as the shirt-pocket sized Canon SD700 IS, with which I captured these images:

    Powdery snow islands dot Commonwealth Creek in Commonwealth Basin, Alpine Lakes Wilderness Area, Snoqualmie Pass, Washington, USA. (© Tom Dempsey / Photoseek.com)

    Powdery snow islands dot Commonwealth Creek in Commonwealth Basin, Alpine Lakes Wilderness Area, Snoqualmie Pass, Washington, USA. (© Tom Dempsey / Photoseek.com)

Image on right: Snow & ice saucers formed on rocks in Commonwealth Creek, Alpine Lakes Wilderness Area, Washington. Commonwealth Basin makes one of the best snowshoeing trips in the Snoqualmie Pass area along Interstate 90.
A tiny camera such as the Canon SD700 IS ELPH is easy to keep warm in your pocket to capture winter snapshots while snowshoeing or skiing. The Canon SD700IS also lets us record movies of our tango dance instructor (with permission) to remember the steps. It handily records pictures of different flooring, cabinet, and lighting designs as we comparison shop for our kitchen remodel. My wife Carol likes to keep this tiny Canon ELPH (about the size of a pack of playing cards) handy in her purse or daypack for capturing images that inspire her quilting designs.
A yellow flower of a Glacier Lily grows on Scorpion Mountain, a hike (9 miles round trip, 2500 feet total gain) near Skykomish, US Highway 2, Washington, USA. Published in "Light Travel: Photography on the Go" by Tom Dempsey 2009, 2010. (© Tom Dempsey / Photoseek.com)
Above left: A glacier Lily on Johnson Ridge in late June, on the hike to Scorpion Mountain (9 miles, 2900 feet round trip), a hike in Mount Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest, accessible from US Highway 2 near Skykomish, Washington. Digital cameras like the tiny Canon SD700 IS have great macro abilities.
  • If a camera is too big, then you might decide not to carry it everywhere, thus missing many great shots.
  • The Canon G7 is a better camera than the smaller Canon SD700IS. You could be very happy with a G7 which can conveniently fit into a big shirt pocket. The G7 has 10 megapixels, image stabilized 35-210mm f/2.8-5.9 lens, great 0.4″ macro close focus (about 1 cm ) at 35mm, sophisticated DIGIC III processing, bright 2.5″ LCD visible at high angles. [Upgrade to Canon G9for 3-inch LCD, raw and 12 megapixels; introduced 10/2007.]
    • Unfortunately the G7 has no flip-out-and-twist LCD which was a great feature of the Canon G5. [See the excellent Fujifilm FinePix S9100 for a tilting LCD.]
    • The G7 has no raw mode (and battery life is shorter than the G5). [The excellent Canon G9 offers raw.] Also, I prefer a camera which starts zooming with a wider angle such as 28mm equivalent for flexibility indoors, tight spaces, or wide landscapes (workaround: stitch images together).
    • If you want to print images bigger than about 18 inches, you would need a camera with a lens diameter larger than the G7, to capture more light.
  • Also consider the Panasonic FZ8 as an inexpensive and versatile travel camera for standard sized prints. [FZ8 is cheaper than G7 or G9, but image quality suffers in comparison due to smaller sensor.] FZ8 features: 36-432mm (35mm equiv) 12x zoom lens with stabilization, now includes raw mode, 7.1 megapixels, weighs only 310 g (11 ounces). My brother who is a very discriminating photographer bought a Panasonic FZ7 (which has no raw mode) as a travel & backpacking camera for convenience such as when traveling with children — he likes the FZ7 (versus his older bigger & heavier film system Olympus OM-1). [He later upgraded to the FZ8.] The FZ8 improves upon the FZ7, and probably can make bigger prints.
  • Raw vs JPEG: Most consumers (not professional photographers) are usually happy with JPEGs and not using raw, since raw requires an extra conversion step, which takes a few extra seconds per image (or minutes if you adjust the image). The extra step in using raw adds a lot of extra time when processing dozens or thousands of images like I do — but for me raw is very much worthwhile due to the extra 1 to 2 stops exposure & white balance latitude and editing headroom, which translates into larger print capability, such as 20×30 inches from my Canon Powershot Pro1 (when print is viewed at 30 inches). Sometimes the extra information in raw gives you enough exposure & editing headroom to let you print up to twice as big versus JPEG. The raw conversion step need not take much extra time since you can automate raw conversion to make the defaults look much like the JPEG would have. Raw is much more forgiving than JPEG and lets you adjust white balance, exposure, tone, contrast, saturation, sharpness and so forth after shooting. With JPEG you need to be careful to shoot with the right exposure & white balance, at the risk of irretrievably losing highlight or shadow information (or both).
  • Be cautious when using a polarizer with digital, since may oddly affect white balance, and can make skies look unnaturally dark. But sometimes a polarizer is very important in removing reflections on water & green plants or increasing contrast in the sky, so I keep a polarizer in my kit.
Good luck with your photography.
Bright yellow algae grows in a tarn (mountain pond) which reflects peaks of Dents des Veisivi (left) and Aiguilles de la Tsa (right) above Arolla Valley, part of Val d'Hérens, in Valais (Wallis) Canton, Switzerland, Europe. Hike the High Route (Chamonix-Zermatt Haute Route) for classic mountain scenery. Panorama stitched from 2 images. Published in Ryder-Walker Alpine Adventures "Inn to Inn Alpine Hiking Adventures" Catalog 2006-2009, 2011. (© Tom Dempsey / PhotoSeek.com)

Above: Striking yellow algae in a tarn reflecting Les Dents des Veisivi, above the Arolla Valley, Switzerland. On this day we hiked about 8 miles (2900 feet up, 3300 feet down) from Arolla to La Gouille, then we bused to our hotel in Les Haudères. Published in Ryder-Walker Alpine Adventures 2006 & 2007 “Inn to Inn Alpine Hiking Adventures” Catalog. Photographed with a Canon Powershot Pro1 camera.

Clint Janson wrote Feb 7, 2007:
“I just discovered your website and viewed all of your Alp hike pages. I have to go back!!! My wife and I stayed in Gimmelwald a few years ago and did some hiking, but it was in march and in the snow and low clouds. Thank you for posting your wonderful pictures of one of the greatest and most beautiful areas in the world. I sent the linkto my Wife (who grew up in Europe and spent many holidays in the Alps) and I know she will be home sick. (which means a trip soon!) Thanks again, you are a very talented Photographer.”