The pots don't make the food; the cook does. But good cooks generally use good pots.

Having said that, I think that a good photographer can get good photos with simple cameras. But I do like the control that comes with a DSLR. Shutter speed, depth of field, etc. More than that, though, I like being able to take photos at high iso (800+) and having relatively little digital "noise." I like shooting architectural interiors and in Europe that means you are shooting in marginal light.

I also think that the photos we take represent different things to different people. As xyz says, photos are memories. But to others, it might be more about art. I am not critical of either point of view.

As someone who has a P&S but often opts to haul along the large dSLR - my answer to the "to what purpose" would be - personal satisfaction. The same reason one might go to the trouble to cook a more elaborate meal, when in the most direct terms, a sandwich would serve the same purpose. If that purpose was defined as sustenance. Obviously it often isn't. This is true of those interested very interested in not just memories on paper rectangles, but in the enjoyment of the process.

Sometimes I can rationalize the hassle of lugging the bigger rig, when I hit that moment when I can control the depth of focus, spot meter the exposure and believe, at least for a moment, that I contributed more than aim. I usually turn out to be wrong, but every now and then I get past what I could have gotten with a p&s.

To the original question - sometimes I've been known to stick the SLR in a generic canvas grocery sack. Takes the visibility factor down a bit. Can't say that now that grocery prices have gone up people wouldn't be thinking about snatching your fake groceries though.

I take a camera overseas all the time. I don't worry as much about it in a big city like London as I do in a 3rd world country where a camera can easily be worth more than a year's salary. You might think about a small pocket camera for situations where you don't want to carry the camera bag.

---

Chris Christensen
Amateur Traveler podcast - http://AmateurTraveler.com

"However, I am quite intrigued that a number of Fodorites are so very proud of their equipment."

I'm not sure who those proud people are. I am not proud. I am just happy I finally found something that feels like the old SLR that I used to use twenty years ago but has all the advantages of digital photography-- virtually unlimited shots, instant monitoring of the shots, easy ability to share photos.

And having found it, I have fun using it when I travel; that's the main reason I bought it. Why would I leave it at home?

I don't fool myself into thinking my photos are wonderful, and I'm sure a better photographer could get more stunning photos on a point and shoot than I get on my DSLR. But I am really enjoying it.

I have a P&S which shoots raw. Tried it a couple of times but don't like dealing with the huge files.

More importantly, I lost interest in post-processing and editing.

You can shoot hundreds of photos a day and it's just too time-consuming to go through each one an tweak the settings. I take a laptop and load each day's shots, because I'd forget the place names otherwise.

I have considered DSLRs but don't like the bulk or the lack of video options. Also have a film SLR but don't want to deal with film, although I think film is superior especially in dynamic range.

I think I'll wait to see if new cameras offer easy geotagging over the next year or so. HD video is also a must.

Oh forgot to add, I always pack a pretty light tripod.

Night shots of magnificent architecture make great pics.

Shame most cathedrals ban tripods.