A new contender for best climbing camera?

It seems like every few months, pocket cameras take a leap forward in quality and function.

Just when I thought that the new Sony RX100iii was going to be the "best" all around climbing camera for some time, the folks at Panasonic have introduced a very interesting competitor. Micro 4/3 sensor, built in view finder, good (24-75mm equivalent) lens, nice controls. A bit larger than the Sony RX100iii, but if I were in the market for a climbing camera, I think that the LX100 would be on my shopping list. It seems like a very nice combination of good image quality in a reasonably small package.

Preview here:

dpreview.com/previews/panas…

My Luminex lasted about a month. Dust/dirt etc. I have destroyed several cameras. Now I only buy "tough" or "rugged" cameras. Waterproof is a must. Ok, I destroy them also. RIP Fuji. My GoPro and the Olympus Tough Camera have lasted the longest, almost 6 months now. Either they are pretty good or I am slowing down.

Sorry. But from my experience, this isn't a good choice. Either you are taking semi-pro level photos, or you're just like the rest of the climbers around and you'll end up banging this around. A lot.

$900 is a crazy amount to spend on something you WILL break. I've gone through many cameras and have many cameras. And I'd advise anyone to buy small, tough and cheap; like, expendable cheap.

Canons in this series are good:

usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer…

small, cheap, hold up to abuse fairly well. Takes way better pictures than a phone.

I have mine in a case I can clip to my harness

Pros bang their cameras a lot too. But they are getting paid. I think if you aspire to take magazine publishable photos but don't actually have a dedicated photographer, this can be a very good lightweight package. At least on paper, this thing is fast enough (AF/frame rate) for climbing action, with an enviable fast lens & excellent video specs.

Of course, if you don't think what you are photographing is impressive, anything, even a camera phone will work.

I was thinking about this topic JUST this afternoon. I have a Canon T3i and Fuji X100s, and barely use either of them. Both take fantastic pictures but I never seem to bring them. The Fuji sensor has INCREDIBLE color but I'm finding myself really wishing it had a zoom. It makes a phenomenal street and portraiture camera, but not a great adventure camera.

Curious to hear what other people are using and carrying.

Simon W wrote:Canons in this series are good: usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer… small, cheap, hold up to abuse fairly well. Takes way better pictures than a phone. I have mine in a case I can clip to my harness

I've been using the Olympus Tough, as mentioned above. Im not a photographer and am not interested in photography, but I like being able to take 'ok' shots while Im up there. I bought the camera used on craigslist for $60. Here's a shot of Jaimie following me up an FA last week:

--- Invalid image id: 109503006 ---

Kai Larson wrote:It seems like every few months, pocket cameras take a leap forward in quality and function. Just when I thought that the new Sony RX100iii was going to be the "best" all around climbing camera for some time, the folks at Panasonic have introduced a very interesting competitor. Micro 4/3 sensor, built in view finder, good (24-75mm equivalent) lens, nice controls. A bit larger than the Sony RX100iii, but if I were in the market for a climbing camera, I think that the LX100 would be on my shopping list. It seems like a very nice combination of good image quality in a reasonably small package. Preview here: dpreview.com/previews/panas…

I second the powershot ELPH series. Best climbing camera I have found. Takes amazing shots, records 1080, IS, and can fit in your shirt pocket or pants pocket.

Amazing little bugger... and u can get them direct from Canon refurb for CHEAP!

I picked up a Nikon CoolPix s9700 at the start of the year and I've been very happy with it. The MSRP is in the $300 range but I was able to find mine on sale for $240. That was still more than I wanted to pay but it also had a better zoom than what I had been looking at.

This is one of the first pictures I had take with this camera. This was taken from on the ground with the climber on the belay ledge ~75 feet up.

The Lumix LX100 is not even close to the size of a small DSLR. Even though DSLR's are getting smaller, they still use big lenses. The LX100 is certainly a lot smaller than a DSLR coupled with an equivalent zoom lens.

I happily carry pocket cameras like this one up climbs. I just keep it in a padded camera pouch and clip the pouch to my harness. I find that a DSLR (or even a smaller mirrorless interchangeable lens camera) is too large for climbing unless I keep it in a pack, which means it don't get used that much. High quality pocket cameras are what I use to take most of my climbing photos. I'm hard on my gear, but haven't managed to break any of my pocket cameras yet.

I've had several different waterproof/tough cameras, but in my experience, none of the "tough" cameras have adequate image quality if you are interested in making enlargements.

I'm currently carrying either a Ricoh GR or a Sigma DP1 Merrill. Both fit nicely into a smallish pouch that easily clips to my harness. Both have excellent image quality. The only thing missing from these cameras is a zoom (both are fixed 28mm equivalent lenses.) The LX100 is the first large sensor pocket camera I've seen with a zoom that still remains small enough to climb with. It's about the same size as my Sigma DP1 Merrill.

I'm not going to run out and buy one, because I'm pretty happy with my current cameras, but if I were in the market for a new camera for climbing, the LX100 would definitely be on my radar.

Tony B wrote: Almost the size of a small DSLR. I've got one of those and a cheapy small camera. The "tweener" seems like an awkward thing to rack up with, frankly.

I am a little rough with my cameras. I have gone through at least 10 over the past 10 years. For multipitch climbs I picked up the Panasonic Lumix tough camera. It is about the size of the digital Elph cameras but is far more rugged. It takes nice photographs in good light.

This camera has lasted for about two years now, a record for me.

Kai Larson wrote:The Lumix LX100 is not even close to the size of a small DSLR.

I like a more rugged camera. The buzz word I guess is "adventure proof."

I used to have a Cannon D-10 a long time ago and had an accidental mishap of falling off my harness on a multipitch. Since then they have have come out with the Cannon D-20, and I just noticed the D-30 now. At the time of my cameras successful suicide attempt, the D-10 was considered old and outdated, and the D-20 wasn't available. I really liked my D-10 because Cannon seems to have the best image stabilization and low light sensitivity out of other cameras. It was also water and shock proof, but not 300' drop proof. If there was a more current Cannon out, I would have purchased it.

I ended up getting a Pentax WG-1, which I still have. It's small, compact, good zoom, and rugged, but really old now. The image stabilization isn't like a Cannon. It's pretty good at low light, but again, not like my Cannon. The WG-1 has been on countless climbing, backpacking, canyoneering, and snorkeling trips. It has never had a water leak and taken a few drops.

Since then, Ricoh has purchased Pentax, they have the WG-4 out now. They also have an "entry" model for adventure proof cameras, the WG-20 :

dpreview.com/articles/74722…

It's cheap... *shrug*

Here are some photos from my WG-1 from my latest backpacking trip :
plus.google.com/photos/1050…

Most of them are unaltered and just right out of the camera. I have gotten too lazy to touch up images unless it's a really great one.

I would say what makes a good "climbing" camera gets the same answer as "what's the best way to do....." That answer would be, it just depends on what you really want.

John...
(In a hurry to get out of work for the day, no proof reading was done)

I have loved Sony's offerings of the last couple years. The RX100 is too small and the image quality too good NOT to take! Unfortunately, mine fell into a creek and while it is all dried out and works mechanically and electronically. There are waterspots all over the sensor and glass. IF the photography becomes a primary focus of the climb, then the A7r (or any other A7 series body) is another great camera especially now that they released the FE 16-35. I carry mine in a Mindshift camera cover, and its not in the way too much.

I've had Panasonic compacts in the past (ZS-19 and such), and liked them. I would probably wait for a ruggedized version of this one before I dropped $900, though. This season I used a Sony NEX-6 , which is almost the same size, but with a larger sensor and removable lens. It's not ruggedized or anything, but it seems pretty tough -- it survived everything from the dust of Utah, to the rains of Washington, to the snows of Canada -- and it's light enough (barely) to carry like a compact.

I've dragged my 5D mkII up multi pitch routes as long as about 200m and can recommend firmly against that, as excellent as the 16-35L II is in that setting. Anything that has to be in a bag is useless and might as well not be there at all.

I bought a Sony RX100 II before a Red Rocks trip in May along with a hard shell Lowepro case. Camera was around $100 off as open box/previously returned. I completely ruined the case in the chimneys of Epinephrine (the camera was on my haul loop much of the time), but the camera was fine. Tied a piece of accessory cord onto it to keep it on my wrist when shooting.

Honestly though, wasn't blown away by the outcome. Didn't have much time to play with it before the trip, but the shots were only alright, definitely not incredible in most cases. In any case, it had an obvious dark spot on the sensor, so I returned it when I got back. Haven't settled on a next attempt.

The RX100 II did get this though, which is nice with a small amount of post processing.

I have a t3i and for a million reasons never take it climbing. The main reason is the Canon S110, which is tiny, cheap and takes awesome photos. Another option is a good phone camera. I've seen some truly amazing things done with an iphone. I'm an android girl (galaxy S4) and like the quality quite a lot.

For some things (landscapes, portraits, video), it does pay to have a better camera/technology. But so much of climbing photography is about the position the photographer gets himself or herself into/opportunities/subject matter, that the equipment does not matter as much, IMO.

If you're interested..
instagram.com/andrews_lm/
About 50% Canon S110 and 50% galaxy

DP Review now has a review posted of the Panasonic LX100.

dpreview.com/reviews/panaso…

I've got one, but haven't used it enough to draw a definite conclusion as to whether I like it or not as a climbing camera.

My IPhone is always in my pocket. That works best for catching the shots I want whether a great landscape or evidence of a personal victory. I either 1, never pack the camera. 2, don't wanna stop to take the shot. I feel like there's no time. Or 3, forget the camera.