Best point and shoot/rangefinder?

[Messiah Khan]

Over the last year or two I have been trying to make my kit lighter. At one point my fully loaded Pro Trekker reached over 20Kg! As I have been doing a lot of long distance trekking, I needed to get that weight down. Over time I have traded my 300mm f2.8 for a 300mm f4, bought a Gitzo Traveller Tripod and managed to get my loaded bag down to 8-10Kg which is much more manageable.

But now I am planning on trekking a lot further than I have ever before. 2650 miles to be precise! From Mexico to Canada along the Pacific Crest Trail in under 6 months. I am really excited by the idea, but there is so much to plan and organise before our intended kickoff of April 2012.

I am currently sorting out the kit list and trying to make it as light as possible. Unfortunately one thing that is still too heavy is my camera. There is just no space for a full DSLR. So I am on the hunt for a good point and shoot or rangefinder. My requirements are;

Small and light.
Good quality. (I don't want to regret not having my DSLR with me)
Mainly for landscapes, so a wide lens. (24mm equivalent should be about right)
May be used for some wildlife shots. I know it's not going to compete with a DSLR and decent tele, but decent zoom or optional lens would be useful.
Good battery life. (There will be points where I will be nowhere near civilisation for 10 days or more, so nowhere to charge the camera)
Ideally an optical viewfinder
Ideally good manual controls.
Budget is flexible, but as I have a lot of other kit to source and buy I don't want to go over the top. I would love the Fuji X100, but it is too expensive and I would be scared to damage it.

Any suggestions or ideas?

 

[AHarvey]

Can't comment on the camera, but if you are away from civilisation for that amount of time, it might be worth looking at a portable solar charger for them?

 

[D.P.]

Very jealous of your plans- would love to do the Pacific Crest trail.

I think the Olympus E-PL2 (maybe) with kit lens is a contender here, + 1-2 primes. I was never a fan of the MFT but the EPL2 is small, and the kit lens is compact. But not 24mm. MFT will give you reach with a small lens for wildlife. These MFt cameras come close to entry level DSLR IQ-wise, but are still not as good.

I am very interested in the Panasonic LX5 at the moment, it has a 24mm lens equivalent, and an interesting vairbvale aspect ratio sensor, which give you a 16:9 ratio with 9MP (and 3:2 at 9.5). This is not just an in camera crop like other cameras. The lens has a fairly good aperture helping low light, or to moderately decrease DoF for portraits (supposedly something like f/4.5 equivalent on a 50mm lens on a DX sensor, so not shallow but better than a kit lens on an entry level DSLR).
But you wont get much reach. There are a few similar camera form Olympus and Samsung, but neither offer a 24mm wide end or the 9MP 16:9.

The Canon G12 type cameras are quite a bit bigger but don't offer better IQ.

 

[D.P.]

In addition, given you have an extra year I might be tempted to wait to near Xmas and see if a new model comes out.

 

[Ksanti]

The point of the X100's price aside, I wouldn't be worried about damaging it - its build quality is apparently second only to Leica; you're much more likely to damage the M4/3 cameras

 

[Raymond Lin]

The lens on the fuji is fixed though.

I think the GF1 would be the best bet, but then it isn't that cheap, for the same price I would be incline to track down a second hand 5D mk1 and get a 35/2.0 and be done with it.

But 4/3 sounds like the best way to go, except I find them always fall short of a full DSLR which you don't want to lose out on you said.

 

[Mr_Sukebe]

I now have a 5D with 35mm F2.0. Lovely combo. If that's too heavy, then a micro 4/3rds with a 17mm pancake would seem the obvious route.

 

[bigredshark]

Wait for Canon or Nikon to produce a mirrorless system (I reckon one of them, likely Nikon, will cough one up this year). It'll be APS-C sensor based in all likelihood, which means shallower depth of field when you need it and easier to find wide angle options.

Basically, it should be a better NEX5. Wait a few months and see if it turns up.

Otherwise, I'd take the smallest DSLR I could use (A D5000/5100 likely) and an 18-200. The optical viewfinder will cut down your need to use the screen and help with battery life. Either way though you need 3+ batteries to go 10 days without charging I would think. For me the current 4/3rds options aren't enough of a benefit over a top end compact to justify the extra size and aren't close enough to a DSLR to replace one, too much of a middle ground. Whether you agree is the question though...

 

[Messiah Khan]

Can't comment on the camera, but if you are away from civilisation for that amount of time, it might be worth looking at a portable solar charger for them?

This is something I had considered, but unfortunately the power output is pretty poor compared to the size and weight. Carrying spare batteries is going to be a better option imo.

Very jealous of your plans- would love to do the Pacific Crest trail.

I think the Olympus E-PL2 (maybe) with kit lens is a contender here, + 1-2 primes. I was never a fan of the MFT but the EPL2 is small, and the kit lens is compact. But not 24mm. MFT will give you reach with a small lens for wildlife. These MFt cameras come close to entry level DSLR IQ-wise, but are still not as good.

I am very interested in the Panasonic LX5 at the moment, it has a 24mm lens equivalent, and an interesting vairbvale aspect ratio sensor, which give you a 16:9 ratio with 9MP (and 3:2 at 9.5). This is not just an in camera crop like other cameras. The lens has a fairly good aperture helping low light, or to moderately decrease DoF for portraits (supposedly something like f/4.5 equivalent on a 50mm lens on a DX sensor, so not shallow but better than a kit lens on an entry level DSLR).
But you wont get much reach. There are a few similar camera form Olympus and Samsung, but neither offer a 24mm wide end or the 9MP 16:9.

The Canon G12 type cameras are quite a bit bigger but don't offer better IQ.

Thanks for the suggestions. I think the LX5 was actually the one that caught my eye when quickly looking through the options last night. But 16:9 aspect ration? Sacrilege! Cameras should be 3:2, 5:4, 6:7 or 1:1, not 16:9!

Yeah, I'm pretty excited by the idea of the PCT. Me and my GF are up for the idea, but the main hurdle will be getting a US B2 visa. Our life seems to be a visa nightmare at the moment, as we are in the middle of the process for a permanent residency visa for Canada at the moment as well. If all goes to plan, we aim to do the PCT in just under 6 months, then go straight into a year in Canada on a bunac visa.

I now have a 5D with 35mm F2.0. Lovely combo. If that's too heavy, then a micro 4/3rds with a 17mm pancake would seem the obvious route.

The 5Dmk2 would be way to heavy. It's 810g for the body alone. In the deserts of southern California we will be needing to take food for 10 days, and up to 8 litres of water each, so the camera really needs to weight an insignificant amount.

What are the better micro 4/3rds options out there?

Wait for Canon or Nikon to produce a mirrorless system (I reckon one of them, likely Nikon, will cough one up this year). It'll be APS-C sensor based in all likelihood, which means shallower depth of field when you need it and easier to find wide angle options.

Basically, it should be a better NEX5. Wait a few months and see if it turns up.

Otherwise, I'd take the smallest DSLR I could use (A D5000/5100 likely) and an 18-200. The optical viewfinder will cut down your need to use the screen and help with battery life. Either way though you need 3+ batteries to go 10 days without charging I would think. For me the current 4/3rds options aren't enough of a benefit over a top end compact to justify the extra size and aren't close enough to a DSLR to replace one, too much of a middle ground. Whether you agree is the question though...

Yeah, the Canon or Nikon (especially Nikon) mirrorless options are definitely something I would consider. It all depends on when they are likely to get launched and how much they launch for.

 

[D.P.]

Wait for Canon or Nikon to produce a mirrorless system (I reckon one of them, likely Nikon, will cough one up this year). It'll be APS-C sensor based in all likelihood, which means shallower depth of field when you need it and easier to find wide angle options.

Basically, it should be a better NEX5. Wait a few months and see if it turns up.

Otherwise, I'd take the smallest DSLR I could use (A D5000/5100 likely) and an 18-200. The optical viewfinder will cut down your need to use the screen and help with battery life. Either way though you need 3+ batteries to go 10 days without charging I would think. For me the current 4/3rds options aren't enough of a benefit over a top end compact to justify the extra size and aren't close enough to a DSLR to replace one, too much of a middle ground. Whether you agree is the question though...

I tend to agree, I think the only MFTs camera that starts to make sense is the EPL2. By no means the best MFTs, but the smallest and the kit lens is small. Even then it is not so much smaller than an entry level DSLR, yet the performance margin is noticeable. Whether it is worth the extra size and weight above a good compact I don't know.

 

[D.P.]

16:9 may not be ideal, but it still gives you the ability to crop wider and maintain a higher resolution than other 4:3 ratio point and shoots. 16:9 also display nicely on most peoples monitors and TVs, which in todays world is a common viewing platform.

The LX5 gives you options to shoot at 1:1, 4:3, 3:2 and 16:9. Of course any camera can be cropped but you don't loose as much resolution with the LX5.



One option to consider is a 2 camera setup. For shorter easier sections you could take a mirror-less camera (and your GF the P&S), for the 10 day dessert stretches you could try to ship the mirror-less camera to the destination. Of course the logistics of this is very difficult, but would work if you only had to do this a few times. Also depends if you are planning to trek straight through, or do it is pieces with a few days rest at major stopping points. If the weight of the mirror-less setup gets to you you could also ship the camera home.

I would tend to go light though. From my long distance trekking back-pain is always an issues, and weight really starts to reduce the fun factor.

 

[bigredshark]

Yeah, the Canon or Nikon (especially Nikon) mirrorless options are definitely something I would consider. It all depends on when they are likely to get launched and how much they launch for.

I do wish something solid would emerge about them, I'm currently reluctant to buy a compact just before I know what they'll be like. There's all sorts of rumours, a few say the Nikon one will be more professionally targeted (I presume they mean fuji x100 market) but nothing solid at all.

Lots of rumours of a Nikon event on April 4th but it'll likely just be the D5100 release...

 

[Messiah Khan]

One option to consider is a 2 camera setup. For shorter easier sections you could take a mirror-less camera (and your GF the P&S), for the 10 day dessert stretches you could try to ship the mirror-less camera to the destination. Of course the logistics of this is very difficult, but would work if you only had to do this a few times. Also depends if you are planning to trek straight through, or do it is pieces with a few days rest at major stopping points. If the weight of the mirror-less setup gets to you you could also ship the camera home.

I would tend to go light though. From my long distance trekking back-pain is always an issues, and weight really starts to reduce the fun factor.

I think I would like to steer away from the shipping the camera option. I am likely to be shipping some of the kit (Crampons and ice axes aren't much use in the desert!) forward to the major resupply points. I am planning on thru hiking the PCT, but have allocated a day at each resupply town, and a few days between the major sections (Socal desert, High Sierras, Oregon and the Cascades) to allow time recover, swap out kit and resupply.

Yeah, the plan is to go as light as possible without compromising all comforts. I am taking a tent rather than a tarp, and am considering an F-Stop Tilopa rucksack (I know it is a camera bag, but without the ICU my F-Stop Loka is also one of the best rucksacks I have owned!) rather than one of the ultralight sacks as I know how comfortable and well built my Loka is.

From my initial spreadsheet calculation, my rucksack weight is 20Kg with 3L water and food for 8 days. My GF's would be 15Kg with 3L water and food for 8 days. This needs to come down, and I would really like to see no more than 15Kg for me and 10Kg for Sarah.

 

[Messiah Khan]

I do wish something solid would emerge about them, I'm currently reluctant to buy a compact just before I know what they'll be like. There's all sorts of rumours, a few say the Nikon one will be more professionally targeted (I presume they mean fuji x100 market) but nothing solid at all.

Lots of rumours of a Nikon event on April 4th but it'll likely just be the D5100 release...

Yeah, the Nikon EVIL rumours have been around for ages! I would be quite happy if it ended up like an X100. A Digital F2 would be nice.

 

[bigredshark]

Yeah, the Nikon EVIL rumours have been around for ages! I would be quite happy if it ended up like an X100. A Digital F2 would be nice.

If they just stuck a digital back on an FM2 I'd be in heaven, screw AF...unfortunately a senior Nikon exec has been quoted previously as saying 'nobody would buy it'. I beg to differ...

 

[D.P.]

I think I would like to steer away from the shipping the camera option. I am likely to be shipping some of the kit (Crampons and ice axes aren't much use in the desert!) forward to the major resupply points. I am planning on thru hiking the PCT, but have allocated a day at each resupply town, and a few days between the major sections (Socal desert, High Sierras, Oregon and the Cascades) to allow time recover, swap out kit and resupply.

Yeah, the plan is to go as light as possible without compromising all comforts. I am taking a tent rather than a tarp, and am considering an F-Stop Tilopa rucksack (I know it is a camera bag, but without the ICU my F-Stop Loka is also one of the best rucksacks I have owned!) rather than one of the ultralight sacks as I know how comfortable and well built my Loka is.

From my initial spreadsheet calculation, my rucksack weight is 20Kg with 3L water and food for 8 days. My GF's would be 15Kg with 3L water and food for 8 days. This needs to come down, and I would really like to see no more than 15Kg for me and 10Kg for Sarah.

Sounds reasonable, I think a true tent helps a lot with poor weather, more in keeping moral up rather than anything else. I have a very light North Face tent (forget the name) for 2 people, weighs something around 1.6Kg, but is surprisingly spacious and sturdy. So I reckon some of the tents that are even lighter would be sufficient.

Backpacks are surprisingly heavy and you can save a lot of weight, however they should be in proportion to your carry load. 15kg is still not extremely light so a sturdy enough backpack will help. I have a 800g Black diamond backpack which works amazingly well for 2 day trips with alpine gear. But for a long trek with more weight I would definitely want something with more support, suspension, and padding.


I also find hat cutting useless bits and pieces off here and there helps a lot. On each item you might only save 20-50g, but you can save a KG or more, which helps a lot.

Another thing to think about is boots. You expend a lot of energy lifting your feet up and down all day, supposedly 1kg on your feet is like 5 on your back.

 

[Messiah Khan]

If they just stuck a digital back on an FM2 I'd be in heaven, screw AF...unfortunately a senior Nikon exec has been quoted previously as saying 'nobody would buy it'. I beg to differ...

Well at least 2 of them would sell.

Sounds reasonable, I think a true tent helps a lot with poor weather, more in keeping moral up rather than anything else. I have a very light North Face tent (forget the name) for 2 people, weighs something around 1.6Kg, but is surprisingly spacious and sturdy. So I reckon some of the tents that are even lighter would be sufficient.

Backpacks are surprisingly heavy and you can save a lot of weight, however they should be in proportion to your carry load. 15kg is still not extremely light so a sturdy enough backpack will help. I have a 800g Black diamond backpack which works amazingly well for 2 day trips with alpine gear. But for a long trek with more weight I would definitely want something with more support, suspension, and padding.


I also find hat cutting useless bits and pieces off here and there helps a lot. On each item you might only save 20-50g, but you can save a KG or more, which helps a lot.

Another thing to think about is boots. You expend a lot of energy lifting your feet up and down all day, supposedly 1kg on your feet is like 5 on your back.

Yeah, a tarp would probably be fine for the Socal Deserts and Sierras, but I can't imagine it being much fun in the rain of the Cascades. If it is anything like the rain we experienced in the Rockies last year then you would literally be washed away. I have never experienced so much water falling from the sky in my life! The main contender for tents at the moment is the Terra Nova Laser at 1.2Kg. It looks like a really nice design which opens right up if the weather is good. But also provides enough shelter to cook under cover if it is raining.

My main decision at the moment is do I go with an ultralight rucksack with less support (Gossamer Gear Gorilla at 668g) or a good, solid rucksack that is likely to be more comfortable (F-Stop Tilopa at 1392g)? I am leaning towards the heavier option at the moment.

As for footwear, it is very likely I am going for Keen trail running shoes. Nice and light and I know Keen footwear is really comfy for my feet due to the wider toebox. Will also be taking trekking sandles for crossing rivers and around camp.