Hiking cameras?

[The Ice Bear]

I have 3, Never stopped using the old ones when I'd get a new one.

One very old, like 03 or 04 Olypmus, Nikon D70, and...I believe the last one is an olympus too, but its a waterproof model, one of the first that came out a few years back.

 

[Shotgun]

I don't need to shoot at the highest resolution, a lower one works fine for my uses and a 4GB card is more than sufficient for me. A lot of people seem to think they need to use a higher resolution when they don't....that's really only applicable if you want to print the photos.

That's what I want. Something that just takes pics. Extra features, video, and the ability to store a 1000 pics is really more than I need. What are you using?

 

[BlackHills]

That's what I want. Something that just takes pics. Extra features, video, and the ability to store a 1000 pics is really more than I need. What are you using?

My primary camera is an older Nikon Coolpix S5 and I also have a 10yr old Sony that I still use on occasion. I agree with the others that any of the lower end brand name cameras would work just fine.

Pretty much every camera comes with video capability these days. The number of pics you can store depends on a lot of variables but even with a small card and decent resolution you'll be able to store 1000....I use the 3.1mp setting and a 4GB card will hold a little over that number.

 

[LUW]

I'm very interested in the Olympus Stylus series, specially the 8010.

Tough, waterproof and very good optics. I'm planning on getting it as my "dedicated outdoors camera".

 

[JCavSD]

I use a five year old Canon. If I break it, not a big deal, it's fairly old tech at this point. I'd say go inexpensive and with relatively simple functions. I've always owned Canon for personal use, and a variety of others for work use. Fewest problems with Canon.

If you're taking pics for posting, no sense in getting a bazillion megapixel camera because you'll just have to reduce the size to post them. I'd say 4 or 5 megapixel is fine for most applications.

 

[Bushman5]

one can shoot extremely high megapixel, then rather than resizing (say from 4800 x 3000 down to 800 - 600), one can use software to COMPRESS the image down. This retains the intense color and vivid details.

 

[beaverballs]

I can definately recommend the Olympus waterproof point and shoot line. I bought the first model that came out several years ago (770sw) and it has served me very well. Now they have models with optical image stabilization which would be very cool. Mine is pretty heavily built and 100% waterproof as advertised. These are wonderful features for those who spend a lot of time in the outdoors, as you never have to worry about your camera getting wet. Plus, you can take shots like this.

 

[beaverballs]

or this

 

[stephen g]

Whatever you get, make sure it's smaller than mine, this thing sucks to take camping etc, plus it doesn't have a built in flash, so even for snapshots at night I have to use a clip on flash.
With the right (read, expensive enough, too expensive for a 17 yo) lenses it's water sealed though, I could go out and shoot in a torrential downpour for an hour with it and not worry, if I was using the right lenses. Though I hate the rain, so that would never happen.

I might add one more thing, this is a 4mp camera. It is enough for anything I'll ever use it for. Magazine spreads included.

 

[PayetteRucker]

If you want a bombproof water camera, I talked to a camera expert the other day and he says all of the brands use mirrored zoom except for Canon's, who uses a barrel and thus picture quality is much better.

 

[22-rimfire]

I carry a very small digital camera with me everyday for work. It is a cheapie GE brand that uses AA batteries which I like because I don't have to worry about charging the battery or wondering how charged the battery is. You can buy AA batteries just about anywhere. It takes pretty good pictures, but you don't have much control over the exposure or shot.

Bought a Sony DSLR camera around Christmas. It is a big camera and I'm still getting used to it. But so far I have been pleased with its performance. I used to lug around two 35mm SLR cameras on the trail just about all the time along with a number of lenses and a tripod. I was substantially into nature photography for about 15 years or so. My interest petered out when I broke my favorite Nikon lens along a trail in the Smokey Mts and everything started shifting to digital format. So, you could say I'm making my way back to old hobbies. But I don't see myself spending the kind of $$ I used on lenses and equipment and will content myself with a couple lenses.

You can keep a small camera quite dry even during a dip in the creek if you place it in two freezer bags. I wouldn't suggest you leave it in the water soaking, but the bags offer good protection for quick dips into water.

 

[mikeal]

Your camera has nothing to do with the quality of your photographs (though certain features may make getting certain results easier). Take no action until you have read this: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/notcamera.htm and Ken's other screeds on taking good pictures. He is a real eye-opener, and he happens to be dead-on right on this subject.

Off topic, but what he says in the link is applicable to much of what we do and talk about here. It's easy to get caught up in the gear.

 

[remmmm]

I would advise avoiding the Kodak brand, even though they can be tempting because of their prices. I have a few nice cameras, but picked up a really thin, really compact Kodak on a good deal for maybe $70 last year thinking it would be good for times I didn't want to carry something bigger. What a POS terrible camera. I have a 6 year old Cannon that's 4mp and takes better pics. That's another tip, don't get hung up on mp's. Unless your making 8x10 and up prints, anything over 6mp is not nearly as important as the quality of the lens and the image processing of the camera.

 

[baldtaco-II]

I think if you just want a point and shoot have a grummage about on a site for deals on something simple and sensible that'll last you a few years. I'm no good at photography but from what I've read there's a lot of sense in CountyRat's link. One does see some pretty spectacular shots taken on modest gear and in contrast I've lost count of the times I've ripped the EXIF out of someone's photo only to marvel at how someone took a pic that crap with a camera that good.

From that link I like this analogy on the MP race:

“That reminds me about the guy who breaks a wrist and asks his doctor: "Doctor, will I be able to play the piano after this heals?" The doctor replies "Absolutely, no problem!" The man laughs, and points out that that's great, because he never could play the piano before!”

That said, I do think the position there is a tad extreme for the lay person. I'm sure someone that knows photography can get the best from a crap camera, but then there's the learning, and it doesn't strike me that you're interested in learning this. Cool. Something with convenience features and a bit of future proofing will probably make you the weak link. It'll last you right up to the time when you break it. On that, I wouldn't scrimp too much. Your figure of about $100 might tempt you to always go lower. Personally, I'd spend the extra $20 if it was needed to have something you might still be using in 20yrs. Anyways, like I said, photography aint something I'm good at so any of the several declared professional photographers who post their photos on this forum clearly have more weight than I.

Onward -

Here is a link I have refined to display all the cameras these people have at between half price and nearly free. Have at it.

That said, if I were in your boat I'd probably snag this.

I wont bother linking to reviews but I found quite a few that like what it does. It's a little more bulky than others but ho hum that's because you can run it off rechargeable AAs. Not just an LCD screen is good in mah view. Little bit of stabilized zoom is a nice touch. Not frugal with the MP. It's got a bunch of auto settings that seem ideal for someone that doesn't want manual control...blah blah.

2cents

 

[Bushman5]

took this today with a canon powershot A560, on AUTO

clickable thumbnail (click once, open photo, then click again for full size)

 

[Ramm9]

I picked up one of those Cannon Powershots (it's labeled A1000IS) at Best Buy not long ago after a older Cannon's charger decided not to charge batteries anymore.

My big thing was to get a cheap camera with AA batteries for "no electricity" trips and for the money the camera does pretty well.

 

[joesrx]

I bought the olympus stylus after I smashed my cannon turkey hunting. I loved the cannon, but it couldn't take the abuse of the Olympus.

 

[Guyon]

I did start out thinking Olympus, but I have read some atrocious things about customer service. They sell you a waterproof camera and then when the seals fail, they say you voided the warranty because you got the insides wet. (At least I've read multiple reviews about this phenomenon.)

I'm now deciding between these two:

Canon D10

Pentax Optio W90

 

[remmmm]

I did start out thinking Olympus, but I have read some atrocious things about customer service. They sell you a waterproof camera and then when the seals fail, they say you voided the warranty because you got the insides wet. (At least I've read multiple reviews about this phenomenon.)

I'm now deciding between these two:

Canon D10

Pentax Optio W90

That Pentax sounds really cool, but $300 and no optical image stabilization would probably be a deal breaker for me....

 

[PayetteRucker]

As I said earlier, for waterproof cameras (Canon's customer service blows as well by the way) the Canon D10 has the highest drop rating and also uses a barrel zoom like a typical point and shoot, versus a mirror system that all the other brands use, which drastically reduces image quality (about 10% light transmission per mirror).