Camera for Alaska

[Rambler5678]

Whats a good camera to buy for an Alaska trip that's not's to expensive?

 

[adamki]

"Not too expensive" is too subjective (my "not too expensive" might be <$500, yours might be >$5,000). What kind of price range are you thinking?

Are you wanting/willing to invest in an interchangeable lens system (either DSLR or Mirrorless)? If so, are you prepared to carry the camera and lenses around with you? ... or do you want something more compact?

 

[anricat]

What the poster above said. We need more data. That said, I'm going to tell you about my camera (that I find to be "nice" but an "affordable" option in my book).

I have a mirrorless and I've found it to be a great compromise between the compactness of a point and shoot and the control of a DSLR. My mirrorless has the option of two lenses and then a $50 adapter that I can get that will allow me to use ANY Canon lens. I'm planning on investing in a new lens for my Alaska trip (hello Christmas money!) that probably sends your "not to expensive" out the window. A mirrorless is a good jumping off point, though, I will say.

 

[Aby]

It all depends on what you are looking for in a camera, regardless of where you are going. Do you want something light and portable? Do you plan to take a lot of indoor shots or will you be primarily shooting outdoors? Do you need something that can zoom in for wildlife viewing? How much do you want to spend?

The first camera I brought on my Alaskan cruise was a Canon Rebel T1i DSLR, for which I spent a fair bit of extra cash to upgrade the lenses. It took beautiful photos, and it does well in low light - BUT it is quite heavy, and it can be cumbersome to change the lenses out, and frankly I get tired of carrying it around on most of my trips. So, I also bought myself a Canon Powershot G7X, which is very light & compact, but also takes amazing photos, and even does fairly well in low light - not quite as well as the DSLR, but as I prefer photographing the great outdoors rather than indoor venues, it perfectly suits my needs. I took it on my next Alaskan cruise, my first caribbean cruise, and to Animal Kingdom & Animal Kingdom Lodge where I got some amazing shots. Without the zoom lens I didn't get as close up as I could have with the DSLR, but to me it was worth the trade-off not to have to lug all the big stuff around. It's definitely on the pricier side for a compact, but well worth it!

Hope this helps!

Aby

 

[Rambler5678]

<$750

 

[adamki]

If you just wand to take the camera out of your pocket and shoot, then you can get a Sony RX100 MkIII which falls into the "advanced point-and-shoot" category of cameras. It has a pretty fantastic lens on it (not interchangeable, but it will work well in low-light situations and for outdoor landscapes). It has the same sensor as the a6000 (below) and it shoots 10 frames per second. The advantage of this type of camera is that you are more apt to carry it around and take photos. The disadvantage is that you don't get a whole lot of zoom on the lens (I would argue that you are better off this way). The Canon G7X is another option in this range.

For more versatility, you could look at one of the mirrorless systems, if you want/are willing to carry multiple lenses and practice using them. The Sony Alpha a6000 with two lenses (16-50, 55-210) should be under your budget. It's compact, shoots fast and relatively easy to use. There are similar offerings from Olympus (OM-D E M10 with 2 lenses), Panasonic (Lumix GX7) or the more expensive Fuji X-T10.The down side to these systems (or similar DSLR kits) is that the kit lenses that you get are "slower" (aperture-wise) but you can slowly build a collection of better, more expensive, lenses over time (warning, lens collecting may become an obsession).