I'm looking for a really compact and light combo for travelling (as I'm right up against it weight-of-hand-luggage wise)
Up till now I've been using my 20D with a 24-85 as a travel kit (although I am a pro I'm not too bothered about ultimate quality here, I can shoot RAW and sharpen in PP) but it is quite a heavy combo for what it is - 8 meg and a short zoom
Would I be better off with a 400D/XTi with a different lens? In which case which lens?
Or perhaps I should look at a compact digicam, is there one out there that comes close to a basic dslr these days?
I note the G7 doesn't have RAW, I'm a believer that I can correct a little for the size of the sensor in RAW rather better than without RAW
Is the G6 as fast in operation as the G7?
David
G6 is still available from ebay. It has RAW, very sharp f/2 lens, articulated screen and remote contral. Uses the same battery as 20D/30D/5D and CF flashes.
I don't think it is as fast as G7 and it has DIGIC I processor. However, it's fast enough and images developed in RAW are very decent. Great travel camera.
I'm looking for a really compact and light combo for travelling (as I'm right up against it weight-of-hand-luggage wise)
Up till now I've been using my 20D with a 24-85 as a travel kit (although I am a pro I'm not too bothered about ultimate quality here, I can shoot RAW and sharpen in PP) but it is quite a heavy combo for what it is - 8 meg and a short zoom
Would I be better off with a 400D/XTi with a different lens? In which case which lens?
Or perhaps I should look at a compact digicam, is there one out there that comes close to a basic dslr these days?
If you don't mind moving away from Canon, I might suggest some of the Panasonic digicams. They are using some really nice Zeiss lenses now and I have been impressed.
nathanlake wrote:
If you don't mind moving away from Canon, I might suggest some of the Panasonic digicams. They are using some really nice Zeiss lenses now and I have been impressed.
The 400D is usefully smaller and lighter (and quieter) than the 20D. I traded out for exactly those reasons. I use the 17-85 IS and 70-300 IS as my travel kit with it, but for something even smaller and lighter I would go (and in fact did for a while, quite happily) with the Sigma 18-125 or 18-200. Note that Sigma has announced an OS (that's what they call IS) version of the 18-200, but no news on when it will actually become available.
There's no digicam that will come anywhere close to the low light performance of the 400D.
Nill Toulme wrote:
The 400D is usefully smaller and lighter (and quieter) than the 20D. I traded out for exactly those reasons. I use the 17-85 IS and 70-300 IS as my travel kit with it, but for something even smaller and lighter I would go (and in fact did for a while, quite happily) with the Sigma 18-125 or 18-200. Note that Sigma has announced an OS (that's what they call IS) version of the 18-200, but no news on when it will actually become available.
There's no digicam that will come anywhere close to the low light performance of the 400D.
Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
Thats the thing really, as I'm so used to dslr's I'm rather loathe to be without one. I had a 350D/XT for a bit last year and I thought it was really quite good except I didn't like the focusing, which I understand to have been improved on the 400D.
The IQ on the 350D was on a par with all my other 8 meg cams no question and I do have all the lenses so I would only need the body.
However the G6 is a lot smaller and lighter even than a 400D and my problem is my new (lovely) HP laptop is much bigger than my old one and eating up my cabin baggage allowance, hence the problem.
I do have an S70 (which of course has RAW), but I just find it too small and fiddly for my old eyes. It takes good shots but I'm not getting on well with it, so that'll go
