Need advice - Point and Shoot - Super zoom vs shirt pocketable zoom for traveling in Japan

Greetings! I shall be taking an escorted tour of Japan for 12 days
from 15th September to 15th October 2007. I am an USA citizen. Then I
shall travel to Bangkok and Siem Rep to photograph Ankor Wat. I shall
be probably take 2000 to 3000 pictures during that time. Pictures will
be tourist type. All pictures will be viewed on Computer monitor.

Which camera you will take if you are given choice between two
cameras- [a] Canon Super zoom - power shot S5 IS weighing 16 oz or
Canon SD 1000 weighing 4.4 oz.

The lighter shirt pocketable camera will be carried by me all the
time. I have to make a conscious effort to take the heavier camera
with me.

What is your experience ? With thanks.

 

Personally, I'd go with neither. When my wife and I go to Yellowstone
(several times per year) we go with a Kodak P850 and a Nikon Coolpix 2100.
I chose the P850 of similar cameras from canon and other vendors primarily
because I cannot stand an EVF with under 200k pixels - it is so blocky I
can't tell what I'm doing. YMMV.

Bottom line, why not both? They're not that expensive.

 

Why choose when you can get the best of both worlds? 28 - 280mm zoom,
8oz.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonictz3/

David

 

No viewfinder?

 

I'm not sure that I understand the question, or perhaps you didn't
phrase it too well. If you'll always take the SD1000 with you, the
question might be when should you take the S5 IS, or should you not
take it at all? Personally, I'd try to take the S5 as often as
possible, as it should produce better pictures. The SD 1000 I'd
maybe take all the time, mainly for when the S5 (still a fairly
small camera) might be too cumbersome or inappropriate for the
location, and also as insurance when you'd be using the S5, in case
it's stolen, lost or something else unfortunate happens. You may
not care about taking videos, but if you have any good
opportunities, the S5 IS is one of the best for video quality, and
it also records sound in stereo, which is pretty rare. My only
similar experience has been very brief, with the S3 IS, and it
performed better than I expected handheld at the lens's maximum tele
extension. Having the S5 IS might allow some shots to be taken that
wouldn't turn out nearly as well using the SD1000.

 

David J Taylor

: Why choose when you can get the best of both worlds? 28 - 280mm
: zoom, 8oz.
: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonictz3/

Good recommendation among the currently available choices.

I consider myself a serious traveller and photographer. For me, the
single most important consideration is compactness: not to look cute,
but size should be so so I would always have the camera with me.

The second most important consideration is good wide-angle. (I do
understand that others may prioritize differently.)

One step lower are (i) telephoto as well as (ii) manual control. I
haven't been able to choose between them, and choose I must if I want
to buy something.

For relative compactness, good wide and telephoto, IS, but without
manual control, the best choice is the above recommended Panasonic
Lumix TZ-3.

For relative compactness, good wide angle, IS, manual control, but with
very limited telephotol, the best choice is Panasonic Lumix LX-2 or its
more expensive and possibly better version Leica D-Lux-3.

The camera which seems to have everything, except perhaps the
compactness, is about-to-be-released Panasonic Lumix FZ-18. I shall
look at it to decide if I can live with its size.

I suppose there are more choices if you don't care about 28mm.
Similarly, Ricoh has 24mm-72mm models. However, I haven't paid them
much attention.

 

Yes, it has an LCD screen on the back.

David

 

or even better
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Olympus/oly_sp550uz.asp

 

According to reviews, that's a klunker, Kalinka.

 

Not the best choice for someone who wants a light, compact camera they can
carry all the time. Quite apart from the poor reviews as ASAAR mentioned.

David

 

Cute answer, but it is not a good response.

 

according to me it works fine......
http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/
and its less hassle to have one camera that weighs less than the other
2 and does more !

 

irwell wrote:
[]

What is the LCD, if not the viewfinder, then?

The TZ3, in common with most very compact cameras, does not have room for
either an EVF or optical viewfinder. It would be most unusual to find an
optical viewfinder for a camera with 10:1 zoom range in any case.

Some people find the EVF unusable, although I've been happy with mine.
The best EVF I used was the VGA-resolution finder on the Minolta A2, but
no other manufacturer has taken these up.

If you want, you can cut up an old hand-held slide viewer to make an
adaptor for using an LCD close-up, and keeping the sun off. Someone
probably makes these commercially.

Cheers,
David

 

: according to me it works fine......
: http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/
: http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/
: and its less hassle to have one camera that weighs less than the other
: 2 and does more !

Nice pics, but what is with the airplane fetish?! Just kidding.
Glad you found the right camera for your needs.

 

here are some better examples of what 504mm can give you,
from Windsor to the centre of London is about 20 miles as the crow
flies (and in between Heathrow airport)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/870797509/

or (in the same camera) using 28mm
http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/695296539/

 

The OP was interested in the Canon SD 1000, listed as an Ultra Compact
with an optical viewfinder.

So now we have a gimmicky optical viewfinder,
I rest my case!

 

Well, no. The optical finder would have parallax errors for close-up
work, and would not have the gain-up which can make electronic finders
such a delight to use in dimmer conditions.

But I still don't think you will find an optical finder in a compact,
ten-times zoom camera.

David

 

N
I have nothing against EVFs, in fact I liked them on
the two cameras I once owned that had them, my
original query was that you had touted a camera that
had no view finder, optical or otherwise. The LCD
is a display IMO, not a viewfinder, and has limitations
in bright sunlight conditions.

 

irwell wrote:
[]

Well, if you only have an LCD, like it or lump it, that /is/ the
viewfinder.

I've also used EVF cameras and quite like the camera-to-face way of
operating. I would struggle with an LCD were it not for the fact that I
am short-sighted, and can look over my glasses when needed. My LCD-only
camera is my least favourite viewfinder.

Cheers,
David

 

how about Canon 710IS with a teleconverter, that gives you ~368mm
according to camera manual