Camera for holiday - advice and suggestions sought please.

FishyFish

FishyFish

Suspended / Banned
Messages
8,792
Name
Nige
Edit My Images
No
Hi,

I'm off on a family holiday later in the year and am wondering what camera to take. It's just a family beach holiday to Spain rather than a photographic expedition, but I'll want to take photos (plus I need to maintain my photo 366 project!). These are my current options, but I'd be interested in people's opinions and advice.

Option 1 - Don't take a camera, just make do with my phone (Galaxy S5). This has the pros of being very convenient, but the cons of being pretty restrictive photographically. It's not really my preferred single option - plus I'll have it with me anyway whatever else I choose to take.

Option 2 - Nikon D3200 & 35mm f/1.8. This is the least bulky of my DSLR options, and the 35mm is great for low-light if needed (and is a lovely lens to boot), but will be restrictive in terms of focal length.

Option 3 - Nikon D3200 & 18-55mm kit lens. Better versatility in focal length, but losing some of the speed. A little more bulky (but not much).

Option 4 - Nikon D3200 & 18-140mm kit lens. Much better versatility in focal length, but far bulkier than the other options.

Option 5 - Buy a mirrorless camera kit. Less bulky than my DSLR and likely with the same focal length versatility as option 3, but will cost me a few hundred quid.

The major pro of taking my D3200 is that it won't cost me anything and will produce good results. The major con is that, even though it's not big in terms of DSLRs, it's still pretty bulky - especially with the 18-140mm, so maybe not so convenient for when I'm just hanging about around the pool or going for a stroll around the shops. I don't want to be taking a bag of lenses with me either, so I'd need to decide on the best focal length option and then just resign myself to the fact that there may be some shots I come across that are out of the scope of my available kit.

The pro of getting a mirrorless is that I'll have a more compact solution. I also like the idea of having a mirrorless with a flip-out screen just for walkabout trips back home and maybe street shots. I'm looking at the Lumix GX7 with some interest at present as it's within my budget if I decide to go ahead and get one. It also has an EVF, which is something that I would like. The cons are the additional outlay (I could probably buy a new lens for my DSLR otherwise), plus if I do go for the GX7 it's Micro Four Thirds format and I'm wondering if this will mean a noticeable drop in image quality over my DSLR in terms of low light and depth of field? The other option is an APS-C mirrorless (such as the Sony A6000), but this will be adding a considerable chunk to the cost. I also suspect there's a little bit of Gear Acquisition Syndrome coming into play with my desire to get a mirrorless camera. :)

Anyway, thoughts and advice are very welcome.

Thanks.
 
odd jim said:
What about a Sony RX100? I bought one (a mk1) to take with me travelling where I didn't want the weight. Not only did it fit in my trouser pocket, it's raw files are stunning, especially for a 1" sensor.
Click to expand...

Those are lovely pictures Jim. Do you find the lack of a viewfinder or a flip-outLCD had any impact (due to reflections etc.)?

My DSLR doesn't have a flip-out screen and it's one of the things I do miss from my old bridge camera so if I am to buy another camera, it'd be a good selling point.
 
FishyFish said:
...looking at the Lumix GX7 with some interest at present as it's within my budget if I decide to go ahead and get one. It also has an EVF, which is something that I would like. The cons are the additional outlay (I could probably buy a new lens for my DSLR otherwise), plus if I do go for the GX7 it's Micro Four Thirds format and I'm wondering if this will mean a noticeable drop in image quality over my DSLR in terms of low light and depth of field?
Click to expand...

Just a quick view on these points. As a MFT user and GX7 owner I think that the image quality is good and I think you'll have to look very closely to see any significant image quality loss compared to an APS-C DSLR and I wouldn't worry about not being able to get shallow DoF as the difference between MFT and APS-C is pretty minimal.

Other than that, I'm not a great fan of the GX7's evf (although I'd insist on a vf of some sort, arms length back screen squinting and shooting isn't for me) and although many users are perfectly happy I recommend you try before you buy but I don't see any other things to worry too much about. I'd certainly forget any image quality and DoF worries.
 
FishyFish said:
Those are lovely pictures Jim. Do you find the lack of a viewfinder or a flip-outLCD had any impact (due to reflections etc.)?

My DSLR doesn't have a flip-out screen and it's one of the things I do miss from my old bridge camera so if I am to buy another camera, it'd be a good selling point.
Click to expand...
No I didn't find it a problem. You can turn the brightness up pretty high and I was in some very sunny climates and I had no issue :)

I'd have preferred a VF but the end results didn't suffer.
 
I went down the A6000 route - the A6000, 16-50, 55-210 and 50 f/1.8 fit in a small shoulder bag, which in turn fits in the bottom of my rucksack (together with books, tablet, etc) as my carry on bag.

It gives my a lot of options in a small and light kit (But GAS has me wanting to upgrade to an A6300...)
 
Faldrax said:
I went down the A6000 route - the A6000, 16-50, 55-210 and 50 f/1.8 fit in a small shoulder bag, which in turn fits in the bottom of my rucksack (together with books, tablet, etc) as my carry on bag.

It gives my a lot of options in a small and light kit (But GAS has me wanting to upgrade to an A6300...)
Click to expand...
As soon as you do this though, aren't you going nearly into entry DSLR issues (with size, weight, ergonomics and conspicuouncy, not sure that's a word but you know what I mean!) and back to square one with regards to downsizing and having a small package for holiday?
 
odd jim said:
As soon as you do this though, aren't you going nearly into entry DSLR issues (with size, weight, ergonomics and conspicuouncy, not sure that's a word but you know what I mean!) and back to square one with regards to downsizing and having a small package for holiday?
Click to expand...
The bag is the one I got with my first DSLR (a Sony A200, several years back now!), and would take the A200, 18-70 kit and 75-300 (just).
So it's not a lot smaller altogether - but it is lighter (I think), and has the advantage that I can opt to just take the A6000 with 16-50 - which on it's own will fit in a large coat pocket, something even a small DSLR will not do. The A6000 + 16-50 also looks a lot more like a 'large compact' than a DSLR, but I do understand what you mean.

Compared to my main bag it is a LOT smaller and lighter (Lowepro Nature Trekker II, not a small or subtle bag!),

I guess it all comes down to how small you want to go. I did consider the Sony RX100 III before I got the A6000, but found it just felt too small in my hands - while the A6000 was a much more 'natural' size.
 
odd jim said:
As soon as you do this though, aren't you going nearly into entry DSLR issues (with size, weight, ergonomics and conspicuouncy, not sure that's a word but you know what I mean!) and back to square one with regards to downsizing and having a small package for holiday?
Click to expand...

These camera and lens combinations are a fraction of the size of a DSLR + similar lenses. The dimentions and weights are easy to Google your way to and compare and then you need to decide if the bulk and weight savings matter to you
 
woof woof said:
These camera and lens combinations are a fraction of the size of a DSLR + similar lenses. The dimentions and weights are easy to Google your way to and compare and then you need to decide if the bulk and weight savings matter to you
Click to expand...
Yes they're smaller and lighter, never said they weren't, but size (combined with a standard -100mm lens) is clearly an issue for the OP so something that's not significantly smaller might not meet his requirements (not when there's something with the size / performance ratio of the RX100 etc available).
 
Last edited:
Used Fuji x100 for around £250 is a great solution for a holiday.
 
odd jim said:
Yes they're smaller and lighter, never said they weren't, but size (combined with a standard -100mm lens) is clearly an issue for the OP so something that's not significantly smaller might not meet his requirements (not when there's something with the size / performance ratio of the RX100 etc available).
Click to expand...

Maybe I remember when you insisted that an A7 is the size of a DSLR? :D

CSC lenses may sometimes be the same size as DSLR lenses but CSC bodies are 99% of the time smaller than a DSLR body and any Sony Nex/A6xxx body is certainly smaller than a DSLR so even if you use a lens which is the same size as a DSLR lens you will always have the benefit of the smaller body. You'd have to fit a larger than DSLR equivalent lens to make a smallish CSC such as the Sony the same size or larger than a DSLR and lens combination.

I mention this as the "CSC's are the same size as a DSLR once you fit a lens" view seems prevalent even though it's simply wrong. The dimensions and weights are there to be Googled and compared and the question of if the bulk and / or weight saving is significant for you can then be answered.

I do think that CSC's make the most sense when coupled with a compact prime but I'm a compact prime kind of guy and there's still a bulk and weight saving in favour of the CSC v DSLR most of the time... unless you fit an unusually big fat lens to the CSC.
 
Last edited:
I went the mft route and hardly use my APS-C Canon any more, for holidays and trips out I find mft unbeatable. My walk around is now a GX1 with 20mm prime and it fits in my coat pocket without any problems buts gives DSLR image quality for a bargain price. Apart from the lack of VF what's not to like?
 
woof woof said:
Maybe I remember when you insisted that an A7 is the size of a DSLR? :D

CSC lenses may sometimes be the same size as DSLR lenses but CSC bodies are 99% of the time smaller than a DSLR body and any Sony Nex/A6xxx body is certainly smaller than a DSLR so even if you use a lens which is the same size as a DSLR lens you will always have the benefit of the smaller body. You'd have to fit a larger than DSLR equivalent lens to make a smallish CSC such as the Sony the same size or larger than a DSLR and lens combination.

I mention this as the "CSC's are the same size as a DSLR once you fit a lens" view seems prevalent even though it's simply wrong. The dimensions and weights are there to be Googled and compared and the question of if the bulk and / or weight saving is significant for you can then be answered.

I do think that CSC's make the most sense when coupled with a compact prime but I'm a compact prime kind of guy and there's still a bulk and weight saving in favour of the CSC v DSLR most of the time... unless you fit an unusually big fat lens to the CSC.
Click to expand...

compact prime or small zoom, the 1650 sony zoom is weely small, ill give it that.

theres the ricoh gr? but thats 28mm equivilent, which is about the same focal length as the average phone camera, sigma dp1 is too, dp2 is 42mm equiv, which is excellent focal length :), but you would need a battery charging solution as it eats them, and has no flash, and is slow to review pics.

one thing i can easily recommend is phone add on lenses, the 235degree fisheye ones, normal fisheye and wide are all resonable, the teleconverter ones tend to be worse :/, but you can get them really cheap, and they are fun :)
 
Wayne Els said:
It is and that's why I'd recommend to the OP to not get anything and just take his camera with his 35. But I think he's got gas and will buy something anyway. ;)
Click to expand...

Yeah, there's definitely some GAS involved - it's just a question of whether it results in a new compact camera, or goes on a wide-angle lens or something for my DSLR. Providing my willpower holds, I've got a couple of months in which to let the money burn a hole in my pocket before I make a decision. :)

Thanks for all the suggestions and advice though everyone. Much appreciated. Please keep it coming.

The Olympus Stylus 1S is another candidate that's drifted into view. While I like the idea of an interchangeable lens camera, the Stylus 1 has a great focal range (28-300mm) and a constant f/2.8 aperture to boot, which is tempting. Not sure how an f/2.8 aperture on a small sensor compares with the same aperture on a crop or full-frame DSLR though. It's a lower resolution of 12MP too, which, while it should be fine, would mean I'd just need to be more careful with my composition as I wouldn't have the safety net of cropping that I have with my 24MP DSLR.
 
Photopaque said:
Used Fuji x100 for around £250 is a great solution for a holiday.
Click to expand...

That is my suggestion too!

I love my DSLRs and nothing can touch the IQ but they can be bulky especially on holiday. Never got on with my RX100, I like to shot manual so a compact was always going to be tricky. Had an X100 (now have the X100T) and it is a brilliant camera. Yes, its fixed 35mm equiv but thats a nice focal length. I will often take mine to travel light and although I took by D750 round Disney, most days I had just the Fuji and it was great. It is different to the Nikon, and AF is not as quick, but its a great little camera!

If not, take the Nikon and 35mm lens, it can be restricting with just a prime but primes are great and make you think more.
 
WingTsun said:
I like a viewfinder, especially in sunny climes where the screen can struggle with the sun, so my Fuji X30 is the one that accompanies me on trips and holidays. That would be my recommendation.
Click to expand...
I'd second that. Not a camera for pixel-peepers but great images and a pleasure to use.
 
FishyFish said:
Yeah, there's definitely some GAS involved - it's just a question of whether it results in a new compact camera, or goes on a wide-angle lens or something for my DSLR. Providing my willpower holds, I've got a couple of months in which to let the money burn a hole in my pocket before I make a decision. :)

Thanks for all the suggestions and advice though everyone. Much appreciated. Please keep it coming.

The Olympus Stylus 1S is another candidate that's drifted into view. While I like the idea of an interchangeable lens camera, the Stylus 1 has a great focal range (28-300mm) and a constant f/2.8 aperture to boot, which is tempting. Not sure how an f/2.8 aperture on a small sensor compares with the same aperture on a crop or full-frame DSLR though. It's a lower resolution of 12MP too, which, while it should be fine, would mean I'd just need to be more careful with my composition as I wouldn't have the safety net of cropping that I have with my 24MP DSLR.
Click to expand...


Well, if GAS is involved...

Nikon 1AW. Ideal for beach holidays, although less ideal to use in bright sunshine (no viewfinder.) (Slight) joking aside, a waterproof compact so you can take it snorkelling will be beachproof - most cameras aren't! As a non beach solution, another vote for a Fuji X?0, with the 30 being my favourite of the bunch (had them all, still got the 10 and 30.)
 
A sort of word of warning. I had the same quandry a couple of years ago. Saw a second hand Fuji X-T1 in the classifieds at a good price so bought it. Now it's the only camera I have. I used to have a Canon 5D3 with all the lenses etc. I decided the results from the Fooj were damned near as good as the Canon, so I sold it all and instead of the weight of camera gear I only have to carry the weight of the cash I got for it!
 
Be aware though that Fuji lenses are on a par (pricewise) with Canikonentax offerings (but arguably better to boot!)

Like Mikledore, I run a Fuji system but unlike him, I have kept the Nikon D750 as well since some of my interests suit that much better than the Fujis do.
 
Another vote for the Sony Rx100 Mark 2 this time though, gives you the flip out screen, excellent IQ and massive control options. Solidly built too. I thought I'd miss a viewfinder but haven't at all with this one.
 
I'd say option 2 and 3.
The kit lens will serve you well during the day on the beach etc, and the 35mm can come out at night if need be ( it's pretty small right? )
35mm on its own would be ok as well ( about 50mm on that camera right )

Ricoh GR is a fab travel camera as is the Fuji X100T. Own and love both cameras to bits. But unless you want or need to update your kit I'd keep what you have.
I sold my old kit ( canon 550d, kit zoom & 50mm 1.8 ) to fund my original X100 and have never regretted it.
 
Spend a day with 600mm f/4 bazooka and you will appreciate what bulky really means.

I would base your decision on what gets the job done well, fits your credit card limit and is comfortable in your hands.
 
I've started and finished this thought process over the weekend and was similarly looking at a mirrorless system to save weight, however the cost would have meant me selling my DSLR to get there with only a single lens to show for it (was looking at the X-T1).

Ended up buying a used Fuji X30 from MPB and tbh am looking forward to using it both on holiday and when I can't be bothered lugging the DSLR about.

For the price I got it the only alternative for me was a new RX100 (mk1) and I just preferred the Fuji both aesthetically and the features available for the use it will get.

Best of luck deciding for yourself :)
 
juggler said:
Just for a beach holiday? Take what you've already got. Leave the 35mm on most of the time and have the 18-140 available back in the hotel for those rare occasions when you actually manage to devote some time to photography.
Click to expand...
It's a point, depending on how many photos you're planning on being able to take. It's our first holiday abroad with our son and I'm taking as many as I can. The rest is a mixture of GAS and wanting something a little easier to pocket for quick days out.
 
Well, after considering all the advice posted here (thanks everyone!) I ended up going back to my original choice of getting a smaller mirrorless camera in the shape of a Lumix GX7. The reasons for picking this were: The price - got it for £299 with the 14-42mm kit lens; smaller form factor which means it'll be much more convenient on holiday (and for impromptu trips where I don't want to be carrying my DSLR); the reviews (where it seems to get almost universal praise); various features that it has over my DSLR (a flip-out screen, focus peaking, and the ability to control if from my phone); plus a bit of GAS and the fact it looks nice :). Depending on how I fare with it, I might consider one of those Metabones Speed Boosters for it so I can use my Nikon F-Mount lenses with it too.

I did seriously consider getting a high-end compact such as the RX100, but I'm the sort of person who likes having the option of faffing around with adapters and the like to get different lens choices, and I think I'd have missed that with a fixed lens system.

To those people who suggested just sticking with what I have - even though I know I'd have lost some of the convenience and features I'm gaining with the GX7, I do know deep-down that that would probably have been the wisest choice. :)

Thanks again to all who've contributed. I appreciate your thoughts and advice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top