Travel camera

[Jackp93]

Hi all

I still can not make my mind up, however I have now decided on my exact requirements so I would appreciate any suggestions on cameras that meet all the requirements either new or second hand

1. actually pocketable
2. easy geotagging so probably Bluetooth enabled
3. Upto about £600
4. High quality images
5. I prefer either fixed or interchangeable to zoom lens but not a deal breaker

I’m sure there will be another few requirements but can’t think of any other bits at the moment

Thanks

Jack

 

[woof woof]

I don't know about bluetooth or geotagging but a 1" sensor compact sprung to mind.

I went for the Panasonic TZ100 which is pocketable and has a 25-250mm zoom. The Sony RX 100 range is popular.

 

[TimHughes]

+1 for TZ or RX100

Ive had both, however I’ve found for travel I prefer something that is definitely not pocketable!

 

[redhed17]

For me, the Sony RX100M7 is the ultimate pocketable travel camera. I got one recently on eBay for £740, but I was initially going to get the M6, which can be had for under your £600 budget looking at recent sales there. It has the image quality, AF and fps.

DPReview did a good Head 2 Head with the Panasonic TZ100 and TZ200, and whilst the RX100M6 lead in most areas, the other cameras lead in others. Worth a look to show the differences between them.

If buying any of these, budget for a few extra batteries, especially for the Sony. Most used deals come with multiple batteries and charger.

 

[DumfriesDik]

I recently bought a Canon G5X mkII. A new one might stretch your budget a bit too much, but you might chance eBay?

 

[viewfromthenorth]

Define pocketable?

I use a Canon G1X Mk 3, which is a crop sensor sized compact with a zoom lens. It’ll certainly go in a coat pocket, but not a trouser pocket! If you buy second hand you should get one for about £600.

 

[woof woof]

DPReview did a good Head 2 Head with the Panasonic TZ100 and TZ200, and whilst the RX100M6 lead in most areas, the other cameras lead in others. Worth a look to show the differences between them.

The Sony's do have their fans but the deciding factor for me was the EVF. The Sony RX100's have a pop up evf whereas the Panasonic TZ100 has a conventional evf in the top left corner. I use the evf most of the time so having to pop the Sony's up and down or leave it up and have an awkwardly shaped camera (might flat the battery too?) would annoy me so I didn't even look at the Sony and went straight for the Panasonic. Some may be happy using just the back screen and if that's the case a pop up evf would be irrelevant.

 

[garryknight]

I went for the RX100m7 because it's tack sharp and has a 200mm equivalent lens. I've also got the Panasonic TZ70 for a 720mm equivalent, which can be better as a travel camera because of the reach. But at high zoom levels, although you can get a decent enough picture, pixel peeping shows some smearing. The TZ70 is the cheaper of the two options. My RX100 cost £800, the TZ70 cost £75.

 

[Nod]

I have an assortment of compacts and like using the Fuji X-30 more than any of the others. When I wanted pocketability (in a shirt pocket), I went for a Panny TX100 but made the mistake of having a play with a mate's Sony RX-100 which delivers better (and more pleasing to my eyes!) images so it's that that gets taken on holiday (as a backup to a full system for when I want to travel light.)

 

[Dale.]

I was going to suggest the Leica C-Lux but it's already been suggested, in its Panasonic guise, ie the TZ200.

The Leica is a camera I've always wanted but not needed, I think would make a nice travel camera though.

 

[redhed17]

The Sony's do have their fans but the deciding factor for me was the EVF. The Sony RX100's have a pop up evf whereas the Panasonic TZ100 has a conventional evf in the top left corner. I use the evf most of the time so having to pop the Sony's up and down or leave it up and have an awkwardly shaped camera (might flat the battery too?) would annoy me so I didn't even look at the Sony and went straight for the Panasonic. Some may be happy using just the back screen and if that's the case a pop up evf would be irrelevant.

I think it is amazing that the RX100's can fit in a retractable EVF, and all the tech and lens, and still be a smaller camera than, in this case, TZ100. I also have, atm, the RX100M3 and M5, and the newer design on the M7 (and I think M6) where the EVF pops up and extends in one movement, and the opposite when putting it down, is a big improvement. I was OK with the pop up, and manual pull out extension, but appreciate the newer design. If anyone feels the retractable EVF is not for them, then it is another factor in narrowing their options.

 

[Nod]

If anyone feels the retractable EVF is not for them, then it is another factor in narrowing their options.

I don't like it much BUT I still prefer the images it gives me to the Panny ones enough for the Sony (Mk 3, IIRC) to be the one that gets taken.

I did actually take the X-30 in late Summer but kept leaving it behind when I would have taken the Sony with me - that pocketability is a real asset IMO.

 

[woof woof]

I think it is amazing that the RX100's can fit in a retractable EVF, and all the tech and lens, and still be a smaller camera than, in this case, TZ100. I also have, atm, the RX100M3 and M5, and the newer design on the M7 (and I think M6) where the EVF pops up and extends in one movement, and the opposite when putting it down, is a big improvement. I was OK with the pop up, and manual pull out extension, but appreciate the newer design. If anyone feels the retractable EVF is not for them, then it is another factor in narrowing their options.

The pop up and down evf just killed it for me, so much so I didn't look closer. The Sony may well give better IQ but it and the TZ100 are both 1" sensor cameras and I wasn't bothered about the nth degree of IQ and so went for the TZ100 and I think it has a longer if slower lens and more controls too.

I can understand why people would go for the Sony and on this site it seems that the Sony is the more popular camera. I can't say that I'm overly disappointed with the TZ100 though and the lens does seem plenty sharp enough for me.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

The original 1Dx may be just about within your budget. That was the ultimate travel camera, handle Afghanistan, Ukraine, jungles, all of that nonsense.

 

[Sangoma]

I went for the RX100m7 because it's tack sharp and has a 200mm equivalent lens. I've also got the Panasonic TZ70 for a 720mm equivalent, which can be better as a travel camera because of the reach. But at high zoom levels, although you can get a decent enough picture, pixel peeping shows some smearing. The TZ70 is the cheaper of the two options. My RX100 cost £800, the TZ70 cost £75.

The only cameras I have found to be a good compromise for travel are the Panasonic TZ series. I have used them on holidays since the TZ1.
I have a TZ70 and a TZ60, and I find the TZ60 to be better. The idea of putting a lower pixel count sensor didn't really work on the TZ70
The TZ100 would of course give a better quality image (which you probably wouldn't notice on holiday, and if you did, you should not be using a compact ) but the extra reach of the smaller sensor camera is probably more useful on holiday.
The TZ60 does have GPS.

The lenses and image stabilisation are excellent on the Panasonics.

If you are going somewhere where the sun shines, and EVF is especially important, and if you are going somewhere where the camera may be liberated, being small and not too expensive is also important. I would never travel with a camera costing 10X what another costs (as per above example) for little real life benefit.

If it is somewhere with snow or bright beaches, being able to easily do exposure bracketing for later HDR merge is also useful.

Perhaps you could add to your list what you want to use it for, and what part of the world and season, my feelings are based on non-specific photographs and a bright sunny climate, and would be different for northern Europe in winter

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

The only cameras I have found to be a good compromise for travel are the Panasonic TZ series

I'll second that.

The Sony HX90 is also worth considering, if you find a tilting screen useful ...

 

[d00d]

Here's my two:

Ricoh GR3X, Canon G7X ... love them both.

 

[redhed17]

The only cameras I have found to be a good compromise for travel are the Panasonic TZ series. I have used them on holidays since the TZ1.
I have a TZ70 and a TZ60, and I find the TZ60 to be better. The idea of putting a lower pixel count sensor didn't really work on the TZ70
The TZ100 would of course give a better quality image (which you probably wouldn't notice on holiday, and if you did, you should not be using a compact ) but the extra reach of the smaller sensor camera is probably more useful on holiday.

I've rarely found the need for anything wider or longer than about 24-80mm traveling around European cities. It depends on the types of pics one intends to take of course. Quality is quality, if you can get close to any higher sized(and maybe resolution) cameras you may own, you may be more inclined to use it more. I have found the RX100 20Mp sensor and lens quite close to my Nikon D500 for images in good light, and so don't feel so compromised using them, and so get more and better pics.

The TZ60 does have GPS.

GPS could be nice to have built in, but it could impact the battery. The cameras I have can sync with a phone/tablet, but I have found it hit and miss with the Nikon D500 at least, and so rarely use it. Seeing as most of my travel images are in or around cities, I can usually find the GPS coordinates if I need to from Google maps. I have not tried GPS syncing with the RX100M7 yet.

The lenses and image stabilisation are excellent on the Panasonics.

If you are going somewhere where the sun shines, and EVF is especially important, and if you are going somewhere where the camera may be liberated, being small and not too expensive is also important. I would never travel with a camera costing 10X what another costs (as per above example) for little real life benefit.

If it is somewhere with snow or bright beaches, being able to easily do exposure bracketing for later HDR merge is also useful.

I have found the RX100's and Nikon DSLR's excellent for bracketing, and can be done in a high speed burst of up to 3 in the RX100's, and up to 9 shots in the D500.

Perhaps you could add to your list what you want to use it for, and what part of the world and season, my feelings are based on non-specific photographs and a bright sunny climate, and would be different for northern Europe in winter

Intended use, and intended locations for use, are always good information for narrowing down options for a question like this.

The OP has not replied since their initial post, but it is good to talk about the different options, and people's experiences.

 

[Sangoma]

I've rarely found the need for anything wider or longer than about 24-80mm traveling around European cities. It depends on the types of pics one intends to take of course. Quality is quality, if you can get close to any higher sized(and maybe resolution) cameras you may own, you may be more inclined to use it more. I have found the RX100 20Mp sensor and lens quite close to my Nikon D500 for images in good light, and so don't feel so compromised using them, and so get more and better pics.

GPS could be nice to have built in, but it could impact the battery. The cameras I have can sync with a phone/tablet, but I have found it hit and miss with the Nikon D500 at least, and so rarely use it. Seeing as most of my travel images are in or around cities, I can usually find the GPS coordinates if I need to from Google maps. I have not tried GPS syncing with the RX100M7 yet.

I have found the RX100's and Nikon DSLR's excellent for bracketing, and can be done in a high speed burst of up to 3 in the RX100's, and up to 9 shots in the D500.

Intended use, and intended locations for use, are always good information for narrowing down options for a question like this.

The OP has not replied since their initial post, but it is good to talk about the different options, and people's experiences.

Fair comments, but usage comes into play here
I don't travel round European cities, if I did I would probably not use a compact most of the time.
And the reason I take a TZ is because it takes very good pictures, and I do use it, rather than worrying about it getting liberated, dropped or drowned The best camera is the one who have with you.
I use the long zoom nearly everyday, probably wouldn't in a European city

Yes, GPS does affect battery life, but again when travelling I don't carry round a laptop or tablet. I usually take an old laptop just to back up cards to a USB drive, then leave the laptop behind with some one who can use it. But I do take plenty of batteries and cards.

Most modern cameras have bracket facilities, the important part of that is easy to use.


Just shows how important it is to know where and what the camera will be used for to make comments that relate directly to the question.

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

And the reason I take a TZ is because it takes very good pictures

Oh dear.

While I agree with you wholeheartedly, that's a statement likely to bring the "full frame or nothing" advocates out in force. I prefer to use the phrase "because it lets me get the pictures I want".

 

[redhed17]

Fair comments, but usage comes into play here
I don't travel round European cities, if I did I would probably not use a compact most of the time.

I don't use a compact camera whilst travelling most of the time, but I did use the RX100M5 more often than on previous trips with the M3, when I got to go away in July for the 1st time post pandemic. I used the RX100M3 for timelapses, using the installed app, which was a great bonus for that range up to version 5. One of the reasons I got the M7, rather than the M6, was for the built in intervalometer, as they stopped the RX100 range being able to instal extra apps from the M5A onwards.

And the reason I take a TZ is because it takes very good pictures, and I do use it, rather than worrying about it getting liberated, dropped or drowned The best camera is the one who have with you.
I use the long zoom nearly everyday, probably wouldn't in a European city

The RX100M5 (and M3) take very good pictures, and I don't feel they need to be hidden or coddled for fear of theft or damage. Maybe I should. I always make sure I have the wrist strap on though, because of the size and the slippy-ness of the body, even with the added grip. When I use the D500 it fits my hand like a glove whilst walking round, and don't need a wrist strap. I have the neck strap on when on riversides, bridges, high buildings etc, just in case.

Yes, GPS does affect battery life, but again when travelling I don't carry round a laptop or tablet. I usually take an old laptop just to back up cards to a USB drive, then leave the laptop behind with some one who can use it. But I do take plenty of batteries and cards.

You can also sync the camera and phone to get the GPS coordinates embedded (phone dependent). I also have a tablet, as I prefer the larger screen for using the maps, and I had a tablet before I had a smartphone. Always need batteries though, if not cards so much.

Most modern cameras have bracket facilities, the important part of that is easy to use.


Just shows how important it is to know where and what the camera will be used for to make comments that relate directly to the question.

 

[TimHughes]

Oh dear.

While I agree with you wholeheartedly, that's a statement likely to bring the "full frame or nothing" advocates out in force. I prefer to use the phrase "because it lets me get the pictures I want".

Haha only full frame? go medium format!

GFX 50R with a standard prime is my favourite travel camera. Not exactly pocket-sized. It all depends what you want, what sort of pictures you're planning on taking and how much time you have for that. I doubt whether this is a good option for many other people.

TZ or RX as above are much smaller and more versatile and still take great images.

 

[Topsy]

Haha only full frame? go medium format!

GFX 50R with a standard prime is my favourite travel camera. Not exactly pocket-sized. It all depends what you want, what sort of pictures you're planning on taking and how much time you have for that. I doubt whether this is a good option for many other people.

TZ or RX as above are much smaller and more versatile and still take great images.

I've always thought of the 50R with a standard or wide prime with that 24x65 aspect ratio to be the ultimate replacement for the Hassy X-Pan in digital .

 

[TimHughes]

I've always thought of the 50R with a standard or wide prime with that 24x65 aspect ratio to be the ultimate replacement for the Hassy X-Pan in digital .

I'd forgotten about that, good point. I'll put it on 24x65 next time I take it out!

 

[Topsy]

I'd forgotten about that, good point. I'll put it on 24x65 next time I take it out!

Might be a good mini-project to shoot a Pano day. I'll look forward to seeing the photos.

 

[stevewestern]

Rather than starting a new thread I hope that the OP doesn't mind me opening up the discussion a bit by asking what about slightly larger travel cameras?
I'm hoping to go on a trip to Vietnam, Cambodia, Borneo etc in the new year and am wondering about taking a camera with a decent length zoom that doesn't need to be pocketable at all. I don't want to take my old Fuji X-H1 and a bag full of lenses, so some sort of bridge camera comes to mind, but I don't think I need a super-super-zoom. Obviously I'm familiar with the way Fuji's feel to use which is a factor but I've got time to adapt and adjust.
I have fairly large hands so don't want anything too small.
I'd like a fairly decent sized sensor for image quality, am happy to buy used and may well sell it on after so budget is fairly open.
Any thoughts?

 

[redhed17]

Rather than starting a new thread I hope that the OP doesn't mind me opening up the discussion a bit by asking what about slightly larger travel cameras?
I'm hoping to go on a trip to Vietnam, Cambodia, Borneo etc in the new year and am wondering about taking a camera with a decent length zoom that doesn't need to be pocketable at all. I don't want to take my old Fuji X-H1 and a bag full of lenses, so some sort of bridge camera comes to mind, but I don't think I need a super-super-zoom. Obviously I'm familiar with the way Fuji's feel to use which is a factor but I've got time to adapt and adjust.
I have fairly large hands so don't want anything too small.
I'd like a fairly decent sized sensor for image quality, am happy to buy used and may well sell it on after so budget is fairly open.
Any thoughts?

I'm not sure the OP has been back to see this thread.

If I were you, I would start another thread asking about Bridge cameras for travelling, as anyone with a Bridge camera, reading the initial post, will probably not get down this far to see your message.

Just to give you something to look at though, look at the options here. I've limited the search to 1" sensors.

 

[stevewestern]

I'm not sure the OP has been back to see this thread.

If I were you, I would start another thread asking about Bridge cameras for travelling, as anyone with a Bridge camera, reading the initial post, will probably not get down this far to see your message.

Just to give you something to look at though, look at the options here. I've limited the search to 1" sensors.

Thanks for that - I'll start another thread. I've never had or even used anything smaller than an Olympus EM2. And good of you to start a DPReview search too!

 

[TimHughes]

Might be a good mini-project to shoot a Pano day. I'll look forward to seeing the photos.

Ok I’ve spent the evening in this project with a walkabout in the city. It was fun and tricky with no IBIS. I’ll post results on the digital MF thread if there are any good ones.