Taking your SLR camera and SatNav device while on overseas travel?

 
  DJPeters Deputy Commissioner

On the camera side of things I would be more inclined to take a point and shoot type of camera just so so that the expensive SLR does not get broken or something they are expensive to fix in Australia let alone in a overseas country. So I would be more inclined to leave the SLR at home and if your point and shoot camera does get broken or plays up buy another one there to replace it they are pretty cheap well cheaper than trying to get your SLR fixed at God only knows what charge. Fixing a SLR could take days as well, days that eat into your itinerary. For what you are really going to do a modern point and shoot should be able to do it. Even cameras in phones these days are excellent cameras for quick type photographs. You said you needed to be quick and setting up the SLR and then getting the settings right is not really quick even if you know what to do. The point and shoot would have captured the photo while you are still setting up the SLR almost.

Sure point and shoot cameras or phone cameras are not as good a quality photo as the SLR but most these days are not far from the standard of SLR type photos. I used to have a old film type SLR and a friend had a Kodak Intsamatic and he could get more photos than me at any one place. Mine looked better overall but he could take a few and then choose the best one once we both got our films developed that is. Modern day digital cameras are far superior to even old SLR film cameras.

Easy to store, less worry if it gets stolen or broken, easy to use, less worry actually taking photos, less worry all round.

You are after photos to record your travels, not necessarily great works of art.

Sponsored advertisement

  Ads Deputy Commissioner

Location: Melbourne
On the camera side of things I would be more inclined to take a point and shoot type of camera just so so that the expensive SLR does not get broken or something they are expensive to fix in Australia let alone in a overseas country. So I would be more inclined to leave the SLR at home and if your point and shoot camera does get broken or plays up buy another one there to replace it they are pretty cheap well cheaper than trying to get your SLR fixed at God only knows what charge. Fixing a SLR could take days as well, days that eat into your itinerary. For what you are really going to do a modern point and shoot should be able to do it. Even cameras in phones these days are excellent cameras for quick type photographs. You said you needed to be quick and setting up the SLR and then getting the settings right is not really quick even if you know what to do. The point and shoot would have captured the photo while you are still setting up the SLR almost.

Sure point and shoot cameras or phone cameras are not as good a quality photo as the SLR but most these days are not far from the standard of SLR type photos. I used to have a old film type SLR and a friend had a Kodak Intsamatic and he could get more photos than me at any one place. Mine looked better overall but he could take a few and then choose the best one once we both got our films developed that is. Modern day digital cameras are far superior to even old SLR film cameras.

Easy to store, less worry if it gets stolen or broken, easy to use, less worry actually taking photos, less worry all round.

You are after photos to record your travels, not necessarily great works of art.
DJPeters
Thank you for your response, you raise some good points and make a good argument.

I have a long list of pros and cons for the SLR camera.
On one had it is an item I have spent a lot of money on and as such, I would like to get my "money's worth" out of it.
However if did in fact get damaged it would not only ruin the enjoyment of the entire trip, the cost of the repair bill would potentially be devastatingly high as well.


That is the dilemma; trying to work out the 'risk Vs reward' of bringing the SLR camera.
I have some thinking to do....

Cheers
  duttonbay Minister for Railways

I'm wondering if there is a 'trick' to scoring a car with an in built SatNav - perhaps it comes standard with rental cars from a particular size category? Although I assume there wouldn't be any hard-and-fast rule to that.
I think it is just the luck of the draw. In my case the hire company was Hertz in the UK, car picked up from Gatwick airport. The car was described as "Mercedes C class or equivalent", the actual car provided was a Volvo V40, which incidentally was a superb car to drive, hire cost very reasonable.
Thank you Graham.
Somewhat confirms my theory that it would be the more 'high-end' cars, as I believe their 'standard/base model' would come with the built in SatNav, where as at the cheaper end of the market, the SatNav would be considered an additional feature and does not come standard with the base model.

From the cars I have rented in the past (mostly the cheapest hatchbacks and sedans), I gather that the hire companies only purchase the 'base model' of these particular vehicles. Which certainly makes sense given their purpose.
I did have luck a number of years ago when I hired a 'compact-suv' - a Nissan Dualis/Qashqui, which had the built in SatNav and was a very welcome bonus.
Ads
In my case, the car I rented in Auckland (November 2018) which unexpectedly came with SatNav, was a Toyota Corolla. SatNavs are becoming standard equipment on more and more cars.
  woodford Chief Commissioner

On the camera side of things I would be more inclined to take a point and shoot type of camera just so so that the expensive SLR does not get broken or something they are expensive to fix in Australia let alone in a overseas country. So I would be more inclined to leave the SLR at home and if your point and shoot camera does get broken or plays up buy another one there to replace it they are pretty cheap well cheaper than trying to get your SLR fixed at God only knows what charge. Fixing a SLR could take days as well, days that eat into your itinerary. For what you are really going to do a modern point and shoot should be able to do it. Even cameras in phones these days are excellent cameras for quick type photographs. You said you needed to be quick and setting up the SLR and then getting the settings right is not really quick even if you know what to do. The point and shoot would have captured the photo while you are still setting up the SLR almost.

Sure point and shoot cameras or phone cameras are not as good a quality photo as the SLR but most these days are not far from the standard of SLR type photos. I used to have a old film type SLR and a friend had a Kodak Intsamatic and he could get more photos than me at any one place. Mine looked better overall but he could take a few and then choose the best one once we both got our films developed that is. Modern day digital cameras are far superior to even old SLR film cameras.

Easy to store, less worry if it gets stolen or broken, easy to use, less worry actually taking photos, less worry all round.

You are after photos to record your travels, not necessarily great works of art.
Thank you for your response, you raise some good points and make a good argument.

I have a long list of pros and cons for the SLR camera.
On one had it is an item I have spent a lot of money on and as such, I would like to get my "money's worth" out of it.
However if did in fact get damaged it would not only ruin the enjoyment of the entire trip, the cost of the repair bill would potentially be devastatingly high as well.


That is the dilemma; trying to work out the 'risk Vs reward' of bringing the SLR camera.
I have some thinking to do....

Cheers
Ads
It largely depends on how good and how comprehensive one needs the images to be. I tend to got to places twice one to look around and the second to photograph the place.

I have three camera's, a Nikon D810 with f2.8 24-70 and f2.8 70-200. A sony A35 with above average quality standard zoom and a Nikon Coolpix 900. THe Sony was bought as kit with 2 lens for around $700, both lens were rubbish, these in the end were traded in for a good quality lens.

The Sony was purchased as a Smallish cheapish camera (less than 20% of the cost of the Nikon) capable of excellent results. The coolpix 900 was purchased as a camera one could take into places that did not allow much luggage.

The Coolpix produces reasonable images, the lens zoom range is massive but the quality of the images at the extreme ends of the range is VERY poor. It is not a patch on the Sony or the D8i0. The battery life on both the Sony and the Coolpix is quite poor where as the Nikon D 810 battery last for many hundreds of shots and one can leave the camera switched on for days with out  worrying the battery, thats NOT the case for the other 2.

There is NO issues about switching the Nikon D810 into some kind of point and shoot mode which will also give one a good deal better control over the image then either the Sony or the coolpix.

There's no simple answer to this problem (hence my three kits). If one is used to a decent SLR and one purchase's a smaller cheaper camera there WILL be problems one needs to get used to before one starts to commit some fond memories to images. For instance one has to watch what one does with the Coolpix is it can produce some REALLY awfull images.

Apart from the battery life I find the Sony A35 is an excellent compromise, compact a single lens with a reasonable zoom range and excellent image quality. It also has the advantage on can tale either stills OR movies WITHOUT changing the camera mode (it has a separate movie button, just below the normal shutter).

PS, in most cases the Nikon D810 is used, in cases where one is restiricted the Sony is used. I hardly ever use the coolpix any more, the Sony being not to much bigger and far more versatile.

woodford
  Ads Deputy Commissioner

Location: Melbourne
^ Thank you for your response woodford.
I can relate with all that you said. I too have noticed that since purchasing my SLR, any photos I have taken on the compact camera, really do look quite poor comparatively, in most cases.
Not to say the compact camera is completely useless, I took it on my last overseas trip and the photos came out to a sufficient quality, however it left me thinking "how much better would have the photos turned out if they were taken on the SLR?".

Yes, I can see how your A35 camera is of good size and quality to comprimise between your SLR and compact cameras.
If I had a camera like this I would be taking it and leaving the SLR at home.
  Ads Deputy Commissioner

Location: Melbourne
I'm wondering if there is a 'trick' to scoring a car with an in built SatNav - perhaps it comes standard with rental cars from a particular size category? Although I assume there wouldn't be any hard-and-fast rule to that.
I think it is just the luck of the draw. In my case the hire company was Hertz in the UK, car picked up from Gatwick airport. The car was described as "Mercedes C class or equivalent", the actual car provided was a Volvo V40, which incidentally was a superb car to drive, hire cost very reasonable.
Thank you Graham.
Somewhat confirms my theory that it would be the more 'high-end' cars, as I believe their 'standard/base model' would come with the built in SatNav, where as at the cheaper end of the market, the SatNav would be considered an additional feature and does not come standard with the base model.
In my case, the car I rented in Auckland (November 2018) which unexpectedly came with SatNav, was a Toyota Corolla. SatNavs are becoming standard equipment on more and more cars.
duttonbay
Thank you duttonbay. That somewhat upsets my theory then.
Good to know though.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Sat-Nav, why do you need one? You have a smart phone, get a roaming package or local sim and use it. I travel alot and just came back from Finland where I was driving and in Helsinki, Tallinn, Istanbul and Hamburg we used Google Maps for everything as we have for last few trips. The days of needing a Sat-Nav are over.

Last time I actually hired a Sat-Nav was in 2013 and when I got to the Slovenian border, white out! We relied on a map on my tablet I previously down loaded from a app Maps2go. Since then I have never wasted money on a Satnav since and hence why few rental car companies even offer them anymore.

Camera, place in your checked luggage that is secured and if need be wrapped in plastic and it will be fine. Get travel insurance to cover loss if you are that worried.
  Graham4405 The Ghost of George Stephenson

Location: Dalby Qld
Camera, place in your checked luggage that is secured and if need be wrapped in plastic and it will be fine. Get travel insurance to cover loss if you are that worried.
RTT_Rules
If you do put your camera in checked baggage I expect you'll have to have the battery removed, properly isolated and in carry on baggage.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Camera, place in your checked luggage that is secured and if need be wrapped in plastic and it will be fine. Get travel insurance to cover loss if you are that worried.
If you do put your camera in checked baggage I expect you'll have to have the battery removed, properly isolated and in carry on baggage.
Graham4405
Depends on the battery.

I checked in my drone, the main batteries had to be removed and taken as carry on as they are Li-ion batteries, but the rechargeable battery built into the remote control was ok. Normal batteries are generally ok, just not the Li-ion type.

The best approach is go to the airline website you will be using and look in their rules for checked and carry on baggage. For a long haul flight, you do not want to have anything around your feet unless you are very short or you are in the pointy end.
  Ads Deputy Commissioner

Location: Melbourne
Camera, place in your checked luggage that is secured and if need be wrapped in plastic and it will be fine. Get travel insurance to cover loss if you are that worried.
If you do put your camera in checked baggage I expect you'll have to have the battery removed, properly isolated and in carry on baggage.
Depends on the battery.

I checked in my drone, the main batteries had to be removed and taken as carry on as they are Li-ion batteries, but the rechargeable battery built into the remote control was ok. Normal batteries are generally ok, just not the Li-ion type.

The best approach is go to the airline website you will be using and look in their rules for checked and carry on baggage. For a long haul flight, you do not want to have anything around your feet unless you are very short or you are in the pointy end.
RTT_Rules
Thank you for your suggestions.
I will look into them further.
Cheers

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: Ads, RTT_Rules

Display from:   

Quick Reply

We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.