Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

3 4 5 end

Does a "no frills" travel camera exist, Canon or otherwise?

moondigger
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · Does a "no frills" travel camera exist, Canon or otherwise?

kezeka wrote:
Have bought and sold a couple M bodies but just cant get into the rangefinder focusing. Debating picking up an SL2 to use as an M with a built in EVF essentially…

Huh? None of the M models are rangefinders, and some of them have EVFs built-in, like the M5 and M50. If you use certain lenses in manual focus mode, the focusing interface is reminiscent of rangefinder focusing, but unlike rangefinders, it’s all WYSIWYG, as it’s done on sensor. And most manual focusing is done with focus peaking and/or a magnified view. If you’re using autofocus, the M series will outperform the SL2 easily in terms of accuracy, as it’s focusing on-sensor.

ETA: As Betacamman points out below, Leica also has "M" cameras (which I knew) and a model called "SL2" (which I didn't know about). Ignore my rambling above.

Edited on Aug 27, 2024 at 04:16 PM · View previous versions

Aug 27, 2024 at 07:03 AM

melcat
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · Does a "no frills" travel camera exist, Canon or otherwise?

If you can live with a fixed 35mm focal length, the Sony RX1 is simple. I set mine up once when I bought it 10 years ago and since then have only gone into the menus to change the time/zone/daylight saving.

Later versions progressively lost useful features. The RX1R deleted the antialiasing filter, and the Mk II lost the pop-up flash for an inbuilt viewfinder. (I’ve always just composed on the back screen, but there was an accessory finder for the original RX1.) It has a leaf shutter, so with that pop-up flash you can do fill at any shutter speed. The lens is a Zeiss f/2.

Aug 27, 2024 at 07:38 AM

Betacamman
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · Does a "no frills" travel camera exist, Canon or otherwise?

moondigger wrote:
Huh? None of the M models are rangefinders, and some of them have EVFs built-in, like the M5 and M50. If you use certain lenses in manual focus mode, the focusing interface is reminiscent of rangefinder focusing, but unlike rangefinders, it’s all WYSIWYG, as it’s done on sensor. And most manual focusing is done with focus peaking and/or a magnified view. If you’re using autofocus, the M series will outperform the SL2 easily in terms of accuracy, as it’s focusing on-sensor.

I think he's referring to Leica M bodies.

Aug 27, 2024 at 08:49 AM

moondigger
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · Does a "no frills" travel camera exist, Canon or otherwise?

Betacamman wrote:
I think he's referring to Leica M bodies.

I considered that might be what he's referring to, but he also said "Debating picking up an SL2 to use as an M with a built in EVF essentially at the moment." Which is a strange thing to say if he's actually referring to the Leica M bodies, as the SL2 is nothing like a 'Leica M with a built-in EVF.' Not least of which because the SL2 doesn't even have an EVF -- it has an SLR-design optical viewfinder.

Of course, the Leica M bodies are rangefinders, so you're probably right. But I'm still not 100% sure, given the above.

Aug 27, 2024 at 09:04 AM

kirbic
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · Does a "no frills" travel camera exist, Canon or otherwise?

Well I guess the OP didn't specify "modern" so...
I'm in line with those who have suggested the R8. It's capable, modern, small, and has good resolution at 24 MPx while keeping the RAW file sizes reasonable.

Aug 27, 2024 at 09:27 AM

alundeb
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · Does a "no frills" travel camera exist, Canon or otherwise?

The R8 is a fine camera. The instruction manual is 939 pages though.

Aug 27, 2024 at 10:26 AM

ronno
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · Does a "no frills" travel camera exist, Canon or otherwise?

Recently bought a used & mint EOS R for about $700. That camera is a steal at that price!
Good D.R., good focusing, good colors, battery life, decent video, etc.
Brought it to Amalfi, Paris etc and it was perfect.

And not the end of the world if it gets stolen/lost/etc while traveling.

Aug 27, 2024 at 10:35 AM

gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · Does a "no frills" travel camera exist, Canon or otherwise?

John Power wrote:
Is it possible to buy a travel camera that doesn't have million choices for things I NEVER use? I don't care about "scenes" or fish eye lens effects or toy effects or miniature effects, or taking "star" portraits. It goes on ad nauseam.....

How about one that lets me shoot in auto, aperture, shutter speed and manual modes.

Video capabilities would be nice but I have no intention of trying to re-shoot Gone with the Wind.

My G5x manual is 217 pages!!! For a camera I bring along to take photos of cathedrals; monuments; open air farmer's markets, interesting people and other...Show more →

Some thoughts:

Camera manuals are not great. Their organization makes it nearly impossible to quickly find important bits of information, and as tutorials they are not good at all.

Fortunately, in most cases you don’t need to read that whole manual. Just do enough to get the thing to work, perhaps playing with an automatic mode at first or else the one mode you prefer.

In the end, there are likely to be whole sections of the manual that are just plain irrelevant to you. Ignore them.

For many people, “simple and straightforward travel cameras” means a basic point and shoot model. There’s nothing at all wrong with that. I’m afraid that I no longer had any specific advice though, since I haven’t used or recommended one in a long time.

In many cases, your smartphone can be fine. If you are used to specialized point and shoot cameras, this might seem odd at first, but the results can be pretty darned good in many cases, and it is much easier to share you photographs when you use this device that you always have with you. (I always travel with a “real” camera, but sometimes I switch to the smartphone temporarily, and results can be very good.)

If simplicity is you thing and you want to use a better camera, don’t avoid the “program” or fully automatic mode. For many people this will produce excellent results with a minimum of fuss.

My notion of travel camera is perhaps different than yours but for the past dozen or so years I have used a Fujifilm APS-C system. I use the XT5 and a small set of prime lenses — but that’s perhaps not right for you. Fujifilm does have other small options, though not all of them are easy to find at the moment. (If you want your simple camera to have manual controls, these are nice.)

If you can find one, the tiny Fujifilm XE3 or XD4 equipped with the tiny 27mm f/2.8 pancake lens is about the smallest, lightest APS-C thing they offer. The newer X100vi (and its predecessors) are very popular with the single-focal-length crowd, though their popularity has made them expensive and a bit hard to obtain.

The alternatives from other companies mentioned above are also viable, popular options. (I “get” the Leica passion thing, but most folks are not going to be well served by those cameras at their extreme prices when there are excellent and far less expensive alternatives. If you are a Leica fan already, nothing I can say will convince you to change your mind. If you are not already a Leica fan, best to not go there.)

Regarding the term “rangefinders,” sometime folks are getting a little too hung up here. If you want to avoid the controversy just say “rangefinder style” camera. If you want to dive in: All cameras include range finding functions, whether manual or automatic. There’s nothing about using an electronic method to determine range/distance that negates the term. (In truth, what people are trying to identify is a style of camera body, typically with the eyepiece near a corner of the body rather than in the center, no center (faux) DSLR-style pentaprism hump, and a relatively thing and rectangular body design. See those Fujifilm bodies I mentioned for examples.)

Good luck.

Aug 27, 2024 at 10:44 AM

Pixelpuffin
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · Does a "no frills" travel camera exist, Canon or otherwise?

Can’t understand why anyone would recommend the SL2… it’s a dead duck!!

Bought one years ago, got rid, then like a fool bought another!!! Never used it once…absolutely detest the viewfinder with its 9 (or is it 11?) af points… just crap!!

Don’t know why but I prefer the SL1 over the SL2… ?? I loathe the SL2!!

Aug 27, 2024 at 11:33 AM

Betacamman
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #10 · p.2 #10 · Does a "no frills" travel camera exist, Canon or otherwise?

He might be referring to the Leica SL2, which is a MILC.

Aug 27, 2024 at 03:21 PM

rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #11 · p.2 #11 · Does a "no frills" travel camera exist, Canon or otherwise?

John Power wrote:
Oh, and "just don't use the other stuff" won't work for me. I just want a simple straightforward travel ready camera.

Thanks to anyone who chimes in.

Have you looked at any of the recent Canon mirrorless manuals? 900+ pages.

The 'problem' with lower end cameras is that they're aimed at inexperienced users and you end up with all those 'scene' modes and annoying animations cluttering up the experience.

I hate to say it, but Leica seems the best at understanding functional minimalism. And this means that with Leica you definitely pay a lot more to get less. In the travel camera realm right now, there seems to be love for the Leica D-Lux 8. If you can get over that it's based on a pretty old Panasonic P&S with m43 sensor, you may enjoy Leica's reworking of the user experience.

There's a thread about it over at the Leica board. Around page 5 is when the first users start providing feedback.

Considering the relative popularity of Leica's Q line, I'm really surprised one of the mainstream brands hasn't followed. And Sony hasn't done anything with their RX1 for ages, which in a third iteration with modern hardware and software, could be a very powerful performer (its lens is one of the best ~35mm lenses I've ever used).

Aug 27, 2024 at 04:00 PM

moondigger
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #12 · p.2 #12 · Does a "no frills" travel camera exist, Canon or otherwise?

Betacamman wrote:
He might be referring to the Leica SL2, which is a MILC.

That would explain it. I knew Canon and Leica both had "M" bodies. I did not know they both had cameras called "SL2."

Aug 27, 2024 at 04:12 PM

John Power
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #13 · p.2 #13 · Does a "no frills" travel camera exist, Canon or otherwise?

I can't quite understand why you would want a fixed focal length lens for a travel camera. When I go on trips there are many times when I want to get a shot but can't get close enough to the subject matter to capture what I want with say a 22 - 35mm fixed lens.

Maybe someone can explain this to me and maybe I am spoiled by the versatility of the lenses I have to go with my 5D4 but who wants to haul that camera bag around on trips.

Aug 27, 2024 at 05:00 PM

Mike_5D
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #14 · p.2 #14 · Does a "no frills" travel camera exist, Canon or otherwise?

RustyRus wrote:
The Leica Q3-

Taking out frills ain't cheap.

Aug 27, 2024 at 05:07 PM

ISO1600
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #15 · p.2 #15 · Does a "no frills" travel camera exist, Canon or otherwise?

no-frills, low budget, discontinued, non-Canon ok?

Fuji X-E1 with a 35mm f1.4.... either Fuji lens or a super cheap 7Artisans like I'm using. The camera is small, boxy, simple, spits out beautiful jpgs that need zero editing, has OK battery life, and shoots awful video so that won't be a distraction.

Some of my favorite images from my XE1 on various adventures around Japan, Korea, Taiwan and Thailand.
https://photos.app.goo.gl/SviGbJs3aPoVPwVw5

I have kept my X-E1 around just for this reason. The Canon M50 is just as fiddly as any R camera, and those that say the R8+28/2.8 is better than Fuji X100V(VI) are delusional. The R8 with the 28 CanCake is a good setup, but it's boring as heck with a very dated EVF, awful battery life, neutered controls compared to any other similarly-priced setup.

I'm going back to Thailand in October and this thread got me thinking about leaving my R7 kit behind, only bringing my XE1/35 combo. It's what I took on a 2 week trip over there last year and I got some fantastic images, it never once made me feel like I was missing out.

Aug 27, 2024 at 05:21 PM

rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #16 · p.2 #16 · Does a "no frills" travel camera exist, Canon or otherwise?

(See the post directly above this one.) They actually prefer bare bones, minimalist configurations that are often a camera and one lens, usually in the 28-50mm range (35mm seems the most popular).

Less to carry around = less to weigh you down and 'frees' you up in other ways (less is more philosophy). After doing this for a while you automatically see scenes that will suit the focal length you have on the camera and you kind of ignore the rest. Sure, you 'miss' opportunities that would benefit from one extreme or the other, but otherwise you 'zoom with your feet' or crop. There's also the challenge of making compelling images with the limitations of what you have immediately at hand. Not second-guessing lens choices, getting caught changing lenses at a critical moment, etc. Leica caters to this market and the M is the system at the core of this. The Q adds more modern niceties such as AF and an EVF, but with a fixed lens. Add a 60MP sensor and the Q3 is marketed as a 28mm camera you crop to get the framing of longer lenses.

This is actually the majority of 'photographers' when you include the vast majority making photos with their phone cameras, that are mostly fixed lens models.

But if you want to cover the bases, then an R8 with 24-240 or R10 with 18-150.

Aug 27, 2024 at 06:06 PM

moondigger
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #17 · p.2 #17 · Does a "no frills" travel camera exist, Canon or otherwise?

John Power wrote:
I can't quite understand why you would want a fixed focal length lens for a travel camera. When I go on trips there are many times when I want to get a shot but can't get close enough to the subject matter to capture what I want with say a 22 - 35mm fixed lens.

You should get the travel camera you want, obviously, but there are plenty of fine travel cameras that are fixed focal length. I went on a tour of Italy once with a 35 mm fixed focal length camera. The thing about that is, you work with what you have. I didn't spend the trip lamenting a lack of longer or shorter/wider focal lengths -- I took the photos I could with that camera. And I swear that some of my best photos from my film days were taken on that trip, despite the focal length 'limitation.'

You can never truly cover every possible shot when traveling, no matter how much gear you pack. Which is why I feel like just accepting the limitations of the gear you have is the only way to stay sane. I hypothetically could have carried a 12-15 lb bag of gear around Italy with me - an SLR or two, 16-35, 24-70, and 70-200 zooms, a 50/1.4 to help in low light, a big flash. Maybe a monopod too. But that would have profoundly changed the character of the trip. And still I would have been limited in some ways. "Damn, that shot of the blown glass miniature in the shop window would have been better if I had my 180 mm macro lens; the 16-35 zoom didn't really do it justice." Or, "I could have gotten a more interesting perspective at Trevi Fountain if only I brought my fisheye in addition to the 24-70. And I could have gotten a better shot of the Pope in the distance if I had my 150-600 zoom rather than just the 70-200."

It's a slippery slope. I could have covered those situations if only I carried a 25 or 30 lb backpack rather than the 15 lb bag, along with a tripod. But there would still have been limitations. "I missed the shot of the nun on the moped because I had the wrong lens on the camera and couldn't get the right one mounted before she disappeared around the corner." or "Despite having nine lenses worth $11,000 with me, I left the 17 mm tilt/shift lens home, which would have been PERFECT for that one shot of the Colosseum. It could have taken the spot in the bag where I had the 70-200, which I somehow didn't end up using at all, despite thinking ahead of time I couldn't be without it."

I typed all that so you might understand why the thought of a fixed-lens travel camera doesn't bother me. Regardless, you should get the camera that appeals to you. It sounds like your ideal travel camera must support a wider range of focal lengths. So that's what you should get. In an earlier post, I recommended the Canon M50 and a small selection of (mostly) prime lenses. Maybe instead you should get the M50 with three zooms -- the 11-22, the 18-55, and the 55-200. Or maybe just one lens -- the 18-150. I haven't used it myself, but I hear it's alright for an 8X zoom lens.

Whatever you end up with, make the most of it -- and don't let thoughts of what might have been ruin your trip.

Aug 27, 2024 at 06:41 PM

moondigger
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #18 · p.2 #18 · Does a "no frills" travel camera exist, Canon or otherwise?

I crossposted with rscheffler. He said the same things I did, but more efficiently.

Aug 27, 2024 at 06:49 PM

John Power
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #19 · p.2 #19 · Does a "no frills" travel camera exist, Canon or otherwise?

Except that I did not answer my own question. I said I did not want to carry around a bag of zooms i.e. "who wants to haul that camera bag around on trips"

As always there are pros and cons to each choice. Kinda like wives right

Aug 27, 2024 at 07:21 PM

ISO1600
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #20 · p.2 #20 · Does a "no frills" travel camera exist, Canon or otherwise?

having owned both the M50 and the R50, i personally thought the M50 was kinda a dog, and the R50 was very pleasant to use (for the level of camera it is).
That being said, R10 is a lot better handling. R10+18-150 would be a very capable travel setup if you really NEED something modern.

I've said it before, I'll say it again- Canon needs to deliver a $199 RF-S 22mm f2.0 plastic pancake. It would slot in perfectly with the limited RF-S options so far, and paired with the 10-18 and 18-150 would be a REALLY nice compact kit.

Aug 27, 2024 at 08:47 PM

1 2 3 4 5 end
FM Forums \| Canon Forum \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 4 5 end

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.