back when I did that I had a Canon AE-1, real film. own a digital Canon now, dslr or whatever its called....... i find when it was film with 24 or 36 possible shots I spent a good amount of time looking for great moments in architecture and think a good deal of my architectural education was due to travels and taking limited photos....
Sony RX100. Any of them (mark I - III) would suit your needs. It's a premium compact camera that at times exceeds the capabilities and quality of my Canon 40D.
I take it everywhere with me. To me its portability and quality make it one of the best pieces of tech I own.
If you want to see sample shots, I'm attaching some of my travel albums from flickr.
The best camera is the one you'll use most. The camera I use most is the one in my phone, which is an LG-G3 I bought specifically because it has a very good camera in it. It takes fantastic pictures and I use it all the time.
For more serious photography, I have a Panasonic Lumix GH3. It's a great interchangable-lens SLR-style mirrorless digital camera that takes very high-quality photographs. Because it doesn't have a mirror like the SLR camera bodies, it's much lighter and less damage-prone. But the main thing I use it for is video. It's far better at producing film-quality HD video than any of the Canon or Nikon SLRs, mainly because Panasonic has been specifically targeting this market and putting lots of their pro-quality video tech in these cameras. I think the newer version is the GH4, which does everything the GH3 does, but better. Including 4K resolution at 24p and 30p and 1080 HD at 60p for slow motion.
The Lumix models also do exceptionally well in low and natural light conditions, both still and video.
I have the Canon Rebel t3i, its a DSLR that's known for a surprising photo and video quality / price ratio. Coems with an 18-55mm zoom lens out of the box, which is pretty good at emulating long / wide lenses when zoomed fully in / out. I shot a short film on it a few weeks back, and even in really low lighting conditions the footage came out great.
Next lens I'm going to invest is will probably be a very long lens (I like the super crushed-down effect they produce).
Stephanie: I have been looking at the RX100 range but at the moment I'm more inclined towards either the Fuji X100T or a Sony A7r ii, with Fuji X pro/XT1 being a contender.
Problem with the X100T is the slow autofocus and that it's a fixed 35mm lens, I'd kick myself if I couldn't take a shot because I took a fixed lens camera with me.
The Sony is the one I'd definitely have however it's quite pricey and I'd be travelling through some pretty dodgy areas. I wouldn't want it to be damaged or stolen.
Anyone have any of these?
I guarantee you will attract less attention with a tiny compact camera as opposed to a mid-large DSLR, even the mirrorless ones. I wasn't about to bring my Canon DSLR along with me in Capetown - they have superduper high petty crime (also violent crime, but that's a different topic). The small sony was perfect. Diminutive, easy to take out and put away, and not at all flashy looking. Aside from a good camera phone (gwharton ++), I can't recommend a premium compact enough.
As soon as you need a dedicated camera bag and are carrying / switching multiple lenses, you are screaming 'please steal my shit!'
i'm a fan of cell phone cameras now. they've come a long way. it's not quite the same as a good camera, but should be close enough in almost every situation you'll find yourself in, especially if your taking photos for memories instead of for magazines.
+1 curtkram. You can get great results from a camera phone. My LG G3 has a 13MP camera and has taken photos that rival single-purpose cameras with detachable lenses.
Recent examples (straight from the phone camera - no post-processing or editing):
I used a little Leica D-LUX 3 for years and years. It served me very well, and I had quite a few photos published, shot with that little camera. Eventually I wanted to try out an interchangeable lens system and picked up Canon's EOS-M, and recently picked up a used Canon 70D dslr because I was getting more and more annoyed with the autofocus speed on the M. Now I've got two camera bodies and a handful of lenses in a too-heavy bag, and I feel a little ridiculous.
While I'd like to minimize camera set up a bit, I don't think I'll be going back to a point-and-shoot any time soon for a couple reasons:
battery life: my DLSR has incredible battery life compared to the others which both have always-on screens. Likely due both to the physical size of the battery and the lowered power usage; but I like being able to leave the camera on standby, pull it up quickly if i see a good shot, and snap a few without waiting a second for the camera to power up. And one battery pack can take me through a full day while traveling.
depth-of-field: While I'm still not convinced that multiple lenses are necessary for great photos, I have been able to get much better depth effects with the interchangable lens cameras. (This may be due to the wider aperture and larger sensor; or maybe it's just that by having to reckon with different lenses I've learned more about photography.) . In most architectural photography this doesn't matter - especially if you're looking at wide angle views and want everything crisply in focus. But by thinking about aperture more you open up the possibility of isolating nice details.
as for your question; i would look closely at the sony A7 series, Or the fuji mirrorless interchangable lens system; both of which seem to be a nice balance of form factor and creative possibilities.
After shooting medium format almost exclussively for ~6 years I recently purchased a factory refurbished A7 for a steal at $800. The camera is a dream. Full-frame and the ability to use my old Canon FD lenses. It's a great size for travel, especially if you use a couple of small prime lenses. Low light is fantastic, I don't even think twice about shooting 3200iso and noise stays pretty reasonable up to ~8,000 depending on what you're intended output is.
I'm pretty sure I'm going to purchase a Fuji X100T as my no fuss camera and maybe a Sony A7 series for my professional body of work. I hope they survive Antarctic weather....
I will take a look at the Sony RX100 this weekend and see if I like it or not.
Evan:
Only problem with DSLR's is that they're so inconvenient and heavy unless I was in a studio, I'd never take it out with me. It's exactly the reason I sold all my canon gear, it'd become cumbersome and annoying to carry around. on the issue of battery life, I'd rather carry several batteries than the weight and size of the camera to be honest.
The EOS M has been known to have terrible autofocusing and battery life anyhow, that's why it was so lowly rated when it came out, however now that the price has dropped and can be bought for sub £200 with lenses and flash. It has attracted a small following for it's video qualities which is one reason I'd get one. Loads of vloggers now use it for youtube and amateur videographers.
I hear you on DSLR size. You should look into local photo rental places near you and rent an A7 for a day to see how you like it. Especially since this is for a massive trip, that extra bit of money to find something you really like before plunking down a decent amount of money and setting off is probably a wise idea.
Jan 14, 16 4:47 am ·
·
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.
Camera Talk
What camera do you guys use and what camera/lenses are you getting next?
Getting ready to go on a few trips around the world and need to get something light but works well in low light.
Advice?
back when I did that I had a Canon AE-1, real film. own a digital Canon now, dslr or whatever its called....... i find when it was film with 24 or 36 possible shots I spent a good amount of time looking for great moments in architecture and think a good deal of my architectural education was due to travels and taking limited photos....
Sony RX100. Any of them (mark I - III) would suit your needs. It's a premium compact camera that at times exceeds the capabilities and quality of my Canon 40D.
I take it everywhere with me. To me its portability and quality make it one of the best pieces of tech I own.
If you want to see sample shots, I'm attaching some of my travel albums from flickr.
Capetown
Bruce Peninsula
Kenya
The best camera is the one you'll use most. The camera I use most is the one in my phone, which is an LG-G3 I bought specifically because it has a very good camera in it. It takes fantastic pictures and I use it all the time.
For more serious photography, I have a Panasonic Lumix GH3. It's a great interchangable-lens SLR-style mirrorless digital camera that takes very high-quality photographs. Because it doesn't have a mirror like the SLR camera bodies, it's much lighter and less damage-prone. But the main thing I use it for is video. It's far better at producing film-quality HD video than any of the Canon or Nikon SLRs, mainly because Panasonic has been specifically targeting this market and putting lots of their pro-quality video tech in these cameras. I think the newer version is the GH4, which does everything the GH3 does, but better. Including 4K resolution at 24p and 30p and 1080 HD at 60p for slow motion.
The Lumix models also do exceptionally well in low and natural light conditions, both still and video.
I have the Canon Rebel t3i, its a DSLR that's known for a surprising photo and video quality / price ratio. Coems with an 18-55mm zoom lens out of the box, which is pretty good at emulating long / wide lenses when zoomed fully in / out. I shot a short film on it a few weeks back, and even in really low lighting conditions the footage came out great.
Next lens I'm going to invest is will probably be a very long lens (I like the super crushed-down effect they produce).
Stephanie: I have been looking at the RX100 range but at the moment I'm more inclined towards either the Fuji X100T or a Sony A7r ii, with Fuji X pro/XT1 being a contender. Problem with the X100T is the slow autofocus and that it's a fixed 35mm lens, I'd kick myself if I couldn't take a shot because I took a fixed lens camera with me. The Sony is the one I'd definitely have however it's quite pricey and I'd be travelling through some pretty dodgy areas. I wouldn't want it to be damaged or stolen. Anyone have any of these?
I guarantee you will attract less attention with a tiny compact camera as opposed to a mid-large DSLR, even the mirrorless ones. I wasn't about to bring my Canon DSLR along with me in Capetown - they have superduper high petty crime (also violent crime, but that's a different topic). The small sony was perfect. Diminutive, easy to take out and put away, and not at all flashy looking. Aside from a good camera phone (gwharton ++), I can't recommend a premium compact enough.
As soon as you need a dedicated camera bag and are carrying / switching multiple lenses, you are screaming 'please steal my shit!'
I'd love an A7 II too, but.... money.
i'm a fan of cell phone cameras now. they've come a long way. it's not quite the same as a good camera, but should be close enough in almost every situation you'll find yourself in, especially if your taking photos for memories instead of for magazines.
+1 curtkram. You can get great results from a camera phone. My LG G3 has a 13MP camera and has taken photos that rival single-purpose cameras with detachable lenses.
Recent examples (straight from the phone camera - no post-processing or editing):
I used a little Leica D-LUX 3 for years and years. It served me very well, and I had quite a few photos published, shot with that little camera. Eventually I wanted to try out an interchangeable lens system and picked up Canon's EOS-M, and recently picked up a used Canon 70D dslr because I was getting more and more annoyed with the autofocus speed on the M. Now I've got two camera bodies and a handful of lenses in a too-heavy bag, and I feel a little ridiculous.
While I'd like to minimize camera set up a bit, I don't think I'll be going back to a point-and-shoot any time soon for a couple reasons:
battery life: my DLSR has incredible battery life compared to the others which both have always-on screens. Likely due both to the physical size of the battery and the lowered power usage; but I like being able to leave the camera on standby, pull it up quickly if i see a good shot, and snap a few without waiting a second for the camera to power up. And one battery pack can take me through a full day while traveling.
depth-of-field: While I'm still not convinced that multiple lenses are necessary for great photos, I have been able to get much better depth effects with the interchangable lens cameras. (This may be due to the wider aperture and larger sensor; or maybe it's just that by having to reckon with different lenses I've learned more about photography.) . In most architectural photography this doesn't matter - especially if you're looking at wide angle views and want everything crisply in focus. But by thinking about aperture more you open up the possibility of isolating nice details.
as for your question; i would look closely at the sony A7 series, Or the fuji mirrorless interchangable lens system; both of which seem to be a nice balance of form factor and creative possibilities.
After shooting medium format almost exclussively for ~6 years I recently purchased a factory refurbished A7 for a steal at $800. The camera is a dream. Full-frame and the ability to use my old Canon FD lenses. It's a great size for travel, especially if you use a couple of small prime lenses. Low light is fantastic, I don't even think twice about shooting 3200iso and noise stays pretty reasonable up to ~8,000 depending on what you're intended output is.
rx100 rules
I'm pretty sure I'm going to purchase a Fuji X100T as my no fuss camera and maybe a Sony A7 series for my professional body of work. I hope they survive Antarctic weather....
Stephanie & Chigurh:
I will take a look at the Sony RX100 this weekend and see if I like it or not.
Evan:
Only problem with DSLR's is that they're so inconvenient and heavy unless I was in a studio, I'd never take it out with me. It's exactly the reason I sold all my canon gear, it'd become cumbersome and annoying to carry around. on the issue of battery life, I'd rather carry several batteries than the weight and size of the camera to be honest.
The EOS M has been known to have terrible autofocusing and battery life anyhow, that's why it was so lowly rated when it came out, however now that the price has dropped and can be bought for sub £200 with lenses and flash. It has attracted a small following for it's video qualities which is one reason I'd get one. Loads of vloggers now use it for youtube and amateur videographers.
I'd love to get a Leica M series one day though.
I hear you on DSLR size. You should look into local photo rental places near you and rent an A7 for a day to see how you like it. Especially since this is for a massive trip, that extra bit of money to find something you really like before plunking down a decent amount of money and setting off is probably a wise idea.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.