I just wanted to add to the thread about walking and cameras so started another one if that's ok? I enjoy beach and country walks, I usually take a small rucksack with a dress I can slip on if required, water a snack and my phone. I enjoy taking photographs and I'm thinking of buying an SLR camera, I bored one and found the pictures I took were much better than my phone pics, the quality wasn't much different but I think it might be I spent more time looking at the subject with the SLR than I did with my phone so the pics came out better. In an ideal world it would be nice not to have any clothes or bags but it's not a bad compromise.
A DSLR will give you much greater control over the quality and look of your photographs. As you are looking directly through the lens you do see what the picture will capture within the frame. It's well worth taking the time to go to a good camera shop and see how they feel in your hands. It must be that for walking, especially in the nude that a smaller camera may be easier. The choice is huge and quality can be found with bridge cameras and high end compacts. A camera with a "standard zoom" would be best for taking pictures "on the hoof". More lens can be added later when you get to know the camera better. Photography is a wonderful hobby. Good luck!
R.B.
I have a Nikon DSLR and I have a couple of Lumix camera - a TZ9 and a TK60.
I find the DSLR far to heavy to cart around on a walk so if I'm somewhere were the ground is a bit rough I take my older TZ9 which gives perfectly adequate results. If I'm walking with my wife or on holiday I use the TZ60. It gives great results and seems to be a sturdy built camera. My son-in-law a Member of the Royal Photographic Society was impressed. He kept saying Oh it's got... artificial horizon, electronic viewfinder for the eye as well as the usual big screen, RAW files, wifi, GPS, a huge zoom and many alternative modes. I suspect he thinks he bought the wring small camera! As for the quality of his pictures, well I can't get near.
Davie 8)
ive got a pentax dslr with std and big zoom, its my preffered walking camera
i take a shoulder bag for the spare lens, car keys , shorts etc.
ive also got a fuji bridge camera with a screen that flips up , we use it for most of our ebay listings and when we fly with only hand baggage.
the small cameras with just the rear screen and no viewfinder are largely a waste of time in sunlight as i cant see the screen image... point and guess
Thanks for all the advice. I have started to really enjoy photography so thinking of taking the plunge and buying a DSLR and I'll try and find a rucksack that it doesn't rattle around in too much. Is it possible to take selfies with them?
Selfies? Yes of course, using the self timer.
If you do go down the DSLR route (and I would), a great idea is to buy an independently made strap. They are very comfortable, especially on bare shoulders.
R.B.
in addition to the self timer most dslr will work with a remote control.. either wired or wireless... just do a search on fleabay for a cheap chinese one, no need to pay megabucks for one with the proper name on it.
yes an inch wide strap is better than a thin one.
An alternative to a DSLR is a Compact system camera known as CSC. These cameras have all the benefits of a DSLR, but don't have through the lense view finder.
I would recommend choosing one with a separate view finder, because as mentioned earlier in bright sunlight it is sometimes difficult to see the screen, a mistake I made when getting mine.
I wanted a more advanced camera to replace my aging bridge and seeing that it would be my only camera used for every occasion,the lumex did the trick. I find DSLR'S a bit clunky and a bit pretentious.
"Try to live a good life. Don't be afraid to be what you are'. some bloke in the pub.
thanks for the pointers.
As others have mentioned it depends what you want it for - not all DSLRs are heavy (Nikon are since they use metal cases - Cannon are very light since the case and lenses are plastic but still take great photos).
If you are going to take selfies (as I do) a bridge camera is better with a remote IR - you don't need a heavy tripod to handle the camera, a small one is quite adequate, the remote allows the camera to focus on you - especially if you set it up correctly and you can get some very good depth of field remote shots as well - most also do good videos. Main issue with bridge cameras is you are often tied into one lense.
I have a pentax DSLR which is big and bulky, I also have a FujiFinepix compact camera for the times (which is most of them) when a DSLR is inconveninet, it is the Fuji T410 which you can stick in a small back and attach to a belt and forget it is there. They can be found quite easily second hand or on ebay.
I bought Rosie a little Olympus Stylus Tough for using when riding, with a quick-release clip to hold it on her belt. She can drop it into a puddle from horseback (apparently!) so she doesn't have to worry about it. We both have Canon DSLRs which take better quality photos due apart from anything else to size of lens, but sometimes small is convenient!