Do you take your DSLR on trips with you?
 

I have moved up to a DSLR - Pentax K10D and am loving it! There is a lot to re-learn.
It has been awhile since I travelled with a SLR. We head to France in September.
Do you take your DSLR and all the lenses or do you settle for your point and shoot? or only take one lens?
Have you ever considered packing it in your luggage?
How do you manage all your stuff?
Any tips?

We just bought a Pentax K100 ourselves to take to England and Normandy next May. DH is planning on taking the camera and both lenses. I will be getting a point and shoot Canon in the comming months to take along for me.

The pentax is a nice camera and we have enjoyed playing with it so far.

I went to DSLR last year and took it and two lenses to France, particularly so I could have the telephoto for long range shots. Beautiful pix, that's for sure. But for me, I decided it was just too much to lug and too much trouble. I have since switched back to my P&S for trips. OK, you're right - I'm lazy that way!

Yes, I take my dSLR, but not all the lenses. I find it for general trips, I can manage two lenses but not more. I take a ultra wide-angle 10-22 for my Canon 400D, and an all-purpose 17-55.

I will never put any of my photo stuff in checked baggage. Not even spare batteries or charger, as they may be somewhat hard to find replacement in remote places.

If it's a longer international trip and I decide to check bags, I'll put my camera and lenses in a large backpack designed for cameras. Plus my iPod, extra sets of clothes. That'd be my carryon. I'll put a smaller camera bag in my suitcase (stuffed with other clothings) to be checked for the flights.

For shorter domestic trips that I don't want to check bags, I just put my camera and lenses in that small camera bag, and then a rollerboard for my other belongings.

Because of the high resolution of the dSLR, I don't usually bring my 70-300 telezoom. I can later crop the photo on my home computer after I get home if I want to "zoom in" some detail.

I bought my DSLR (Canon 20D) especially to take travel pictures, so I hope I don't start leaving it at home!

I usually take landscapes, architecture and street scenes, and for those purposes have found that a wide angle lens is the most useful. Since this is a DSLR, that means a minimum focal length of 17mm. Luckily there are a few lenses that fit the bill in a 17-50 or so zoom. The other lens I take is a 50mm 1.8 for low light situations. I'd like to buy a fast wide angle prime but this is a vexed subject in the Canon line up.

I leave my 70 -- 200 zoom at home. It's heavy and large and of limited use for my kind of travel photos. Be different if I wanted to photograph wildlife.

I can carry my gear in a small Lowepro bag -- that's camera, zoom lens, lens shade and 50mm -- together with the "cheat sheet" instructions, a charger and sometimes extra memory.

Been meaning to get a travel tripod but wonder if I'll actually drag it around and use it.

When I fly, it all goes in the carry on luggage.

I think it is worth it even if you only take one lens because you get the benefit of the larger and higher quality sensor, and a presumably faster and sharper lens.

Pausanias - The Canon 10-22 is wonderful. Very sharp, and the ultra wideangle gives you some interesting perspective. I love it for travel.

Sigma and Tokina also has similar offerings. Cheaper, but also pretty good.

I love my DSLR, but it depends on the trip. On a hiking trip, where I'll need to have a backpack anyway, I'll take it. But if I want to travel light, I'll bring a smaller point-and-shoot. When we go to Germany in September, the DSLR will stay home -- I don't want to leave it in the hotel room, and I don't want to lug it around everywhere!

BUT -- I'm a freelance photog, so I need lots of functions and settings on my camera or I won't be happy. I have a Canon PowerShot A630 as my point-and-shoot, because it has most of the functions of a DSLR (except manual focus) but it's much easier to tote around. It has aperture and shutter priority, portrait mode, night mode, flash controls, and even a video camera with audio. I love-love-love it.

I find I take many more pixs when I travel with a good quality compact digital, such as panasonic/leica. DSLR is way to big for me to carry around Paris, I leave it at home.

I also have found that the new x-ray screening of luggage is a great tool for thieves to know exactly where your cameras are located in checked baggage. After I had my new Digital and Video cameras stolen, I decided to carry everything in my wifes purse. Last trip it cost me a one day shopping trip in Athens for new cameras!

rkkwan --

Thanks for the recommendation. I'll check it out next time I'm at B&H.

Yes I take my DSLr (Pentax Ds - still saving for the K10D) everywhere I go. And I mean everywhere. Well ok not the supermarket but otherwise....
Whilst travelling I choose which lenses will best meet my needs, rather than lug them all. Standard in my bag are a macro lens, a wide angle lens and one of my zooms, either the 28-300 or the 50-500 deopending where I am going and how strong I'm feeling. Also in the bag, two spare SD cards and an image tank, plus batteries, and cleaning gear. The K10D having a rechargable battery makes it less imperative to have a spare but always handy.
The gear goes into a Tamrac camera backpack, that meets onboard baggage regulations, and also has room for a paperback or two plus essential paperwork. It is all insured on a special photographic insurance, which also covers it all should I have to check it for any reason - many insurances do not cover checked items!
I often pack a smaller bag to use once I'm at my destination. My Tripod does get packed in check-in baggage and frequently goes on holiday too.

Hi,

I just got bact from a week in Belgium and a week in London. I took my new Olmpus E-510 with the two lens kit (14-42mm and 40-150mm which are in 35mm equivalents 28-84 and 80-300) and pretty much took it all everywhere I went. I know the E-510 is smaller than other dSLRs, but not sure by how much. Also, the Zuiko lenses are smaller as well as they are for use on digital only.

I bought a Crumpler 5 Million Dollar Home bag which is a shoulder bag. It carried my camera, extra lens, cards, battery and still had enough room for a travel book and small umbrella. I liked the shoulder bag because I could get at my stuff without taking off the bag and could easily hold it in front of me in crowded spaces.

I'm really glad I took it all and didn't find it overly cumbersome. Others may have found it too much hassle and been satisfied with P&S photos. That's a personal choice that only you can decide.

As for packing, carry-on only for my camera and electronics. I would never put my camera in checked baggage.

Seems about equal split on whether to take the DSLR or not...
I think... do I want to lug this around Paris
then
I think... then why did you buy it. Take it.

There seems little point in investing in an SLR and then not taking it when you can make good use of it.

I take a K10D with 16-45 and 50-200 lenses. Because I'm paranoid about cameras getting lost/getting bent/failing I take two on major trips, the second being a Panasonic FZ7. In circumstances where I might not want to change lenses, such as walking in dusty areas or at sea, I take the K10D/16-45 and also the FZ7 for very long shots, not ideal but a reasonable compromise.

I do sometimes take a monopod but rarely use it. However if you do certain types of work a tripod might be important (eg to help get depth of field with flowers).

I would be very unhappy about an SLR mirror in checked baggage.

I'm also paranoid about backing up and make certain that pics are downloaded to several memory sticks/HDs which are then spread around different bags.

The cameras (together with the stuff they need like chargers) are also carried in different bags.

Michael

Should have added that it's worthwhile ensuring you have a polarizing filter with you for landscapes.

Linear polarizers seem to work fine on K10Ds, no need for a circular one.

M

I just bought my first digital SLR, and I mostly want it for travel pictures. That's when I feel like taking pictures the most, so it seems silly not to take the camera. That said, I haven't taken it yet, and I hope I don't feel overly burdened and revert to a point and shoot as I did with my 35 mm SLR years ago.

I plan to take just one lens, so I can keep it in my large purse most of the time.

A tripod is not essential with a K10D of course as it has great shake reduction.
What lenses do you have?
Take it, you won't regret it. Don't pack it in your luggage though - I'd worried about light fingered baggage handlers or heavy handed ones throwing it about.

I got a "prosumer" Panasonic but I don't use the RAW mode or play around with exposure bracketing.

I'm disappointed with the lack of dynamic range in digital. If you take pictures inside a cathedral, you'll know what I mean, not being able to see details on the walls because you don't want to overexpose sunlight coming in through windows or stained glass windows. Otherwise, those little spots of sunlight will overpower the shot.

The other thing I notice is in shots of landscape in sunlight, you get lens flare and faded out shots of greenery.

I'm not completely convinced that the first problem would be fixed by a DSLR. From discussing the issue on more technically-oriented forums, looks like people use HDR techniques, which involve bracketing exposures and then blending the shots together with software as part of post-processing.

Well two problems with that. First is that you can't really take a good bracketed shots without tripods and those are rarely allowed inside cathedrals or other popular sights. Secondly, I'm not big on post-processing, like playing with histograms and such. I take tons of shots, go through them to pick out the best ones, and index them for easy search later on. That alone is time-consuming and I can't imagine adding digital editing and other processing to it.

But it does seem like lens filters and hoods might improve the situation with lens flare and of course, DSLRs let you use those accessories where most P&S models do not.

It's just whether I would want to carry around heavier, bulkier gear all day for the limited number of situations (if there are more let me know) where a DSLR would clearly yield superior results.

I do take a small tripod and will take night shots often with it. (BTW, I was forced to check my carryon roller because a screener at NCE said it could be used as a weapon, the first time they'd prevented me from carrying it on).

I used to carry an SLR, zoom lens, motor drive and tripod in a pretty heavy camera bag but I go out for much longer excursions than I used to.

Actually, a more interesting upgrade might be either digicams or camcorders which can record and output either 720p or 1080p video. I do take a number of 848x480 videos here and there but obviously, you want higher resolution.

Carrying a DSLR is a major chore, if you're carrying it. If you're USING it, it's fantastic. If you are actively looking for shots all the time, the camera will be part of your way of seeing the place you're in, and the weight and bulk won't affect you. I recommend keeping it in your HAND and not just around your neck.

I hate, hate, hate camera bags, and have never found one I like. I keep my extra lenses (I typically carry two, plus one on the body) in my jacket pockets for quick access. The only thing I need a bag for is if I'm carrying a small tripod, or a collection of other cameras (I often go out with three or four, a Holga, Olympus half-frame, XA, etc.) If I'm carrying a tiny P&S too, it goes in my shirt pocket -- but if the DSLR is glued to my hand, I won't reach for it.

I also recently got a Pentax K100D, which is relegating my monstrous Nikon F film camera to the corner of the room. If you have a Pentax, consider the 10-17mm wide lens. Like the Canon, it's razor sharp and great fun to play with -- and absolutely essential if you're trying to take pictures of close buildings and streetscapes where even the 18mm setting isn't enough. I wouldn't leave the house without it now.

One hint I just read in a camera mag, and tried, and loved, is to tape two rear lens caps together back-to-back, which makes quick changing much easier -- less fiddling. Beware of lint, though; most people worry far too much about gunk on the front of their lens, where it doesn't matter (too far out of focal range) and not enough about the back element (where even the tiniest mark will show in your pics).

scrb - It's specifically because of the limited dynamic range of most digital cameras that you should shoot RAW. The sensors are actually able to capture a bit more dynamic range, but most of the built-in JPEG converter clips the ends of them.

That's one of the main reason why I shoot RAW. You can recapture quite a bit of detail on both ends and then you can play with the curve.

And the other main issue with digital photography is white balance. Again, shooting RAW takes care of that, as you can play with it at home. If you shoot JPEG and the white balance is off too much, it's extremely difficult to get it right.

fnarf - I love your philosophy
" If you're USING it, it's fantastic."
I am going to adopt that!

1)Please tell me more about the 1017 lens and how you use it
2) I have heard about the back-to-back lens cap thing but am not quite sure what the point is