Photography Camera Recos

Looking to bring a camera into the Backcountry (skiing/touring) as well as climbing objectives - similar shots: focused subject amongst vast landscape, landscape, zoomed feature on landscape. 

I have my dinky Canon Rebel t1 (old) looking to upgrade.. anyone have some good recommendations for under $1k kits/all-in? 

Mirrorless vs DSLR? Prioritize Lens (recs?) over body?

currently debating Nikon D5600/Canon T8i vs Nikon Z50/Canon RP... thx! 

I have always liked the Sony DSC-RX100 series for backcountry use.  It has a 1" sensor and can take raw photos all in a compact body.

Sony A6000, various lenses can be found to fit the bill.  APSC so not full frame, but can find for cheap and get great photos.

I picked up a Lumix FZ1000 and have been enjoying it for taking photos at the crag, as I wanted an upgrade from my phone. I don't know much about cameras honestly, so I'll leave the technical reviews to the ones you see on Google. It seemed especially attractive as a very capable point-and-shoot basically. Lowlight gets grainy I suppose, but maybe that's because I don't know how to use all those little buttons and settings. I do like the image quality a lot though, and a touch of editing can really bring out the colors when the lighting is good!

i picked up a fuji x-s10 and i think i love it but it’s been so cold out i’ve yet to take it out of the pack much skiing. or even go skiing since it’s either been -40 or raining. i can’t catch a break! but i like it and the lenses are smaller than they used to be but also of sufficient quality. 

that sony rx is a nice point and shoot. i had the mark ii and it was impressive so i imagine the 7 must be really good (if you’re looking for something small). 

basically dslr is dead, if you don’t mind the bulk you can pick up really cheap pro canons, like a 5d3 and amazing glass depending on the used market by you for a grand. 

edit to add: there are a few downsides to this fuji i’d be remiss not to mention

battery life
not fully weather sealed
incompréhensible menu system if you’re used to something else (hopefully that gets better over time)

it gives back really good color, film sims that are fun and useful and not hokey, value for the glass, and it’s just kind of fun. i don’t think i’m a camera fanboi and have respect for everyone making great stuff but the fuji’s are just kind of fun lately. obviously that fun isn’t worth a blown focus, and i would put the autofocus of the expensive sony ahead of this, maybe. but i am still stoked and can’t wait to shoot rock with warm fingers this summer.

out of the camera (snow in stupid cold) and then one compressed for text in a basement:

anyway, in body stabilization is cool on all the new cameras and photography is fun unless you're making big bucks and then it is serious business.

Used Sony a6300 $500

Used sony 16-70 f4 $500

If I could only own one camera setup this would be it.

If ask a bunch of rednecks in a honky tonk if a Chevy or Dodge or Ford is best you'll get a bunch of passionate personal preference but they all work.  Same with cameras.

I love my Olympus. 

Jake907 wrote:

If ask a bunch of rednecks in a honky tonk if a Chevy or Dodge or Ford is best you'll get a bunch of passionate personal preference but they all work.  Same with cameras.

I love my Olympus. 

I’m assuming with that logic we should all be happy with the cameras on our iPhone or Samsung phones?   ;)

What is the cliche saying?  “The best camera is the one you have with you!”  I actually think I was one of the first people to get a photo published in National Geographic Magazine that was shot with an iPhone so the saying is at least partly true.

I’m fairly brand agnostic and have owned full pro kits from Nikon, Canon and Sony.  I’d say each brand makes good cameras that fit different roles.  That being said, for small size and IQ Sony has pretty much been the leader for awhile (either the A6000 range or smaller Rx100).  If you are more interested in durability, range of lenses, customer support, amount of used gear than Canon is the winner.  Though canon lacks a great compact range of cameras.  Nikon is just sort of the all arounder that keeps chugging along… nice colors, good lens selection, use to have great UI/UX (haven’t used the new z-line).   Oddly enough most other pros I know aren’t super passionate about what they shoot with.  It comes down to what tool is best suited for a job. If you ask people in the cinema world it is a whole different story though!

I'll second what Mikey is saying, go RX100 (or equiv) or get an a6000's series with either the 16-50 kit lens or the Zeiss 16-70 he linked. Better lenses or ones with more zoom are generally too big and heavy for amateur use and a camera that's a pain in the ass to retrieve doesn't get used or gets left at home.

Also I'll throw in my unsolicited recommendation for best camera strap for shooting on the go, keeps the camera close to the body in winter so you don't need to fuss around with keeping batteries warm.

https://www.psbagworks.com/shop/riderstrap

Which Sony RX100 version is the best value at this point? Thanks!

Not Hobo Greg wrote:

Unless you’re gonna print, you won’t see much difference between a high end SLR and an iPhone 11 or later. Most people look at photos on a five inch screen, so all that resolution and awesome glass you could spend tons of money on is moot.

I use a couple hundred of my favorite photos as a rolling desktop on my work computer monitors.   Unfortunately I spend more time in front of the computer than I do in the mountains.  The photos are a brief escape from soul sucking desk work.  

At that resolution this a big difference between the pics I get from a mid-range mirrorless camera with good glass vs a smartphone.  

A few things to think about. You also mention landscapes. Will you be making large prints? If so and you are going to be lugging a tripod the A7r series isn't much bigger than the A6xxx, especially once it has a non-pancake lens sticking off the front. No tripod and those extra pixels aren't going to mean extra resolution. Does this need to fit in a pocket? RX100 will fit in a pocket. A6xxx with a pancake will fit into a really big pocket, same with A7r.  Any bigger camera or lens and how to carry and access it becomes the crux. A used A7r and FE 35 f/2.8 will be right around that $1000 mark as well. 

Not Hobo Greg wrote:

Unless you’re gonna print, you won’t see much difference between a high end SLR and an iPhone 11 or later. Most people look at photos on a five inch screen, so all that resolution and awesome glass you could spend tons of money on is moot.

Fwiw, after a few years with only a camera phone, having my FZ1000 makes me want to print the photos and I can definitely tell the difference between the photos I took on my camera and those with my phone. I mostly take the photos for myself as a low-effort artistic side quest to climbing since I don't have time or patience for drawing anymore, but it would be nice to see them around the apartment... Plus having a good zoom is great for recon shots of distant cliffs! 

Edit to clarify if it isn't obvious: all these photos were taken from the ground

Zach L wrote:

Which Sony RX100 version is the best value at this point? Thanks!

I use the Sony RX100 III, it is the first one in the series that had an electronic view finder and the battery would last the longest.  I don't use the EVF a lot but it is nice to be more stable when I don't want to use a tripod.  I also did not want the longer 200m lens that the new ones had.  I found the 24-70mm lens to be good for landscapes and taking action photos of others I am with.  

I found this article helpful alpineexposures.com/phototi…

Mikey Schaefer wrote:

Used Sony a6300 $500

Used sony 16-70 f4 $500

If I could only own one camera setup this would be it.

Another vote for this.  Well, sorta this: I have an A6500 and the kit 16-50 lens. (I also have a zoom tele but don't bring that on climbs.)  A potential problem is that the kit lens is retractable (very good for carrying) but a motorized retractable lens is bound to be delicate. (I haven't tried it in very cold temps and don't think precipitation can be very good for it.) Mine has made through a few years so far...

With the retractable kit lens I can carry the camera in a large chalk bag when climbing. 

When hiking, I wear the camera around my neck, protected by a cheap neoprene case that comes off completely. I tie a loop of shock cord around my waist and tuck the camera under it to keep it from swinging around.

I shoot raw and do some post-processing.  The results are usually better than what i can do with a cell phone, but I'm way back in the pack with an iPhone 7.  Here's a shot from a recent trip to Hawaii.  

the best camera is the one on you but i hear great things about the kit 18-55 fuji. they say it’s the best kit lens ever on dpreview. i upgraded to the 16-80 because of the weather seal, probably wasn’t worth it but still having fun with these fuji’s. we got 8-12 when the rain stopped, made for a fun day today. 

(out of the camera)

Any experience with Panasonic Lumix G85? Wondering how important is weather sealing for climbing photography purposes.. 

[definitely non-current, non-technical thoughts on what is important to me in images]

I tend to click a frame or 5 with my phone, because it's so damn easy, but many times I am disappointed by the results when looking at the images on a big screen. (and I am probably the only person who ever will..)

I have a long-time film and commercial lab printing background with loads of film camera kit that sits idle in storage for the most part. A bunch of years ago, I wanted a decent small digital camera and got the m4/3 Lumix GF1 and kit zoom. It makes pretty good images and has pretty good controls, and I got a couple adapters for the many manual prime lenses in my stable. It was fun to tinker with, but the auto-focus zoom has trouble in low light, and it was too big to stuff in a pocket to make it convenient to whip out and shoot quickly. I solved those problems with a tiny F1.7 20mm fixed lens and I don't think I've mounted the kit zoom in over 5 years. It is an up close and personal portrait master, as well as being good, but not great, at capturing the big scene. The size and convenience are what make this camera useful to me, when I want an image better than my pocket potato. Making it quickly available to be grabbed when the moment is right is what gave me many images that I'm very happy with, and without that ability, it mostly remained stuffed in a pack without taking a single frame. It's made lots of fond memories for me and my partners and continues today.

..but I really miss film images. There is just that something about them. I have a specific type of feel that I miss from my images, and I generally despise spending much time in post production digital faffing. I kind of laughed when I saw this thread and debated writing this, but I pulled out all my film gear and pondered what I wanted to take pictures with on a couple upcoming trips. I really didn't want to use any of the 35mm stuff I already have, and I sold or gave away all my medium & large format gear and darkroom equipment decades ago, when I moved to the mountains. This is going to be way off for the convenience angle, but I am currently looking for an image depth and warmth that requires a very different, but well proven machine. So I spent some time searching my soul, camera shops, and Craigslist.. This is going to make me happy, I'm quite certain after a few rolls, and I'm determined to blast a ton of images to hopefully find that something I've been missing. It will be fun trying, at least. My new-to-me adventure portrait and memory maker:

Less expensive, but arguably equal in quality to a Rolleiflex. Tough, a brilliant lens, and good in low light. It takes amazing images and the light meter is spot on, after testing. Feel free to call me an idiot, but it's what inspires me.

I guess my rambletron summary could be distilled down to:

- fit the physical camera to something you will pull out and use
- fit the camera's capabilities and resulting images to something that makes you happy

Which is more beginner friendly between the A6300 and the RX100? Sounds like both are equally portable, biggest problem for me is not wanting to carry something around with me/actually taking it out to shoot.

If you plan on selling photos and/or printing them larger than a poster I would recommend the Sony A7II or A7III…If you want to get into photography and the fun of changing lenses and such then get a Sony A6XXX and if you just want really nice photos for Facebook, insta, and your side table them get a Sony RX100iii