Where do I start figuring out which new camera to get for my Alaskan cruise?

[Sigyn]

I leave in a week for the first leg of my vacation to Alaska - a week in California beforehand - and then in two weeks I head to Vancouver before my July 7 cruise to Alaska. I've just decided to splurge on a new digital camera for the trip. I need to start researching, quickly, which one to buy. My husband has a 20-year-old digital Sony camera, but obviously we want newer technology than that. Would love to get recommendations on where to start my research and which cameras under $1,500 or so that are favorites among this group. I am not a photographer. I took one photography class in college and remember nothing, so I don't know how to adjust settings and f-stops and such, so it needs to be very user friendly. Thanks!

[pierces]

For someone not familiar with all the fussy bits involved in photography, I would strongly suggest the Sony RX100 Mark VII. Excellent zoom range, smart auto mode and is very compact and easy to use for travel. It is not inexpensive, but it is arguably the best compact camera on the market. 

 

Whatever you end up with, buy a couple of extra batteries. The best digital camera in the world is little more than a paperweight without power.

 

Dave

[TheOldBear]

Depending on your luggage space, you may want to consider a somewhat larger Sony - the RX10 Mark 4

 

It's a large camera, with a large lens, lots of smart processing modes - and it is weather sealed [no problems using it in rain/snow]. 

 

Another smaller/cheaper alternative is the Panasonic FZ300, also weather sealed, but without some of the Sony's fancier features.

 

Don't be afraid of letting the camera do the 'fussy bits' and use whatever 'intelligent automatic' mode is available - concentrate on the subject at hand, getting zoomed in or out to frame it - and take _lots_ of photos.

 

If possible - get a second battery, and more than one memory card.

[pierces]

TheOldBear is right about the RX10 IV. It is a fantastic camera. It uses the same excellent sensor as the RX100 but has a larger zoom range (24-600mm vs. 24-200mm) and would be easier to hold when taking those long shots (a couple hundred outside of your stated budget). Either is a good option with the RX10 being better for wildlife and the RX100 better as a walkabout general purpose camera. 

 

The size difference is significant if that matters to you.

 

 

 

 

Dave

[Victress2007]

I shoot a Sony Alpha 6600 with a 18-135 lens most frequently.  It has a great auto feature and separate scene options, plus all the manual settings as you get more used to it.  It is a perfect travel camera to me.

Vic

[TheOldBear]

For this instance, I think that a fixed lens camera would be more useful than an interchangeable lens system - particularly when comparing it to a body & only one lens. [the long zoom range on a weather sealed camera always has the 'right lens' mounted].

 

I have not visited Alaska, but the consensus seems to be this is one of the places where a long lens is frequently useful - the [equivalent] 600mm 'reach' of the RX-10 or FZ300 fits than need nicely.

[Gardyloo]

Let me ask a couple of questions.  I'm not trying to be confrontational, but what do you plan to do with the pictures you take on this trip?  Post them on FB or some other social media?  Or on the web in a blog?  Printing and framing some to put on the wall?  Snapshots for an album?  Roadside billboard?

 

The reason for asking is that most of the $1000+ cameras you'll see on the "best of" sites or some photo enthusiast sites - or with online merchants, et al - are capable of such incredible performance that overkill becomes the general rule.  Often the differences between a $600 camera and a $1600 one are so subtle, or so specialized, that the extra grand is - dare I say it? - a waste of money for all but the most enthusiastic or dedicated user.  Is that you?

 

Do you plan to take videos with your new camera?  Most "bridge" (aka "point and shoot") cameras offer very advanced video/movie production capacity - pin-sharp autofocus, vibration and camera-movement correction, very quick exposure adjustment, all that.  They have both 1080p and 4K resolution in most cases, and if you're not familiar with that jargon, then you're probably not looking at video as an important feature.

 

Now I'm biased.  I started with high end film cameras (Nikons, mostly) years ago, and got caught up in the "more is better" camp when it came to long lenses and all that.  When I went digital I HAD to have a Nikon DSLR, because, well, I did.  

 

But when my wife and I started going on African safaris, where you just don't have the time to switch lenses while the elephant or rhino is bearing down on you, and we bought a couple of bridge "superzoom" cameras (Panasonic Lumixes in our case) which had decent autofocus, okay low-light performance (important on morning and evening game drives) and a long zoom range.  

 

It was eye-opening.  You could do "grab" shots as we used to say, and because the sensors (even puny 8mp ones) had enough detail that later I could edit the images - crop them, etc. - and still have a printable (or sharable) picture.  

 

My current rig, which I got a couple of years ago, is the Panasonic DMC FZ1000, with a one inch sensor, rated at 20mp, 4K video, a long, long zoom range, even better low-light and autofocus performance, and several idiot-proof automatic settings, for true set-it-and-forget-it performance.  It's terrific.  It's discontinued now but cost around $600 when I got it.  It's successor, the DMC FZ1000-II is even more capable and costs around $850 from Amazon.  

 

That would leave something like $700 in your pocket.  If you're that keen on photography, use a fraction of that to purchase some decent photo processing software so you can turn all those images into award-winning billboards.  (Just kidding.)  

 

With Alaska (I used to live there and traveled back and forth a lot) I think what you need is versatility more than anything.  You need a long zoom to frame the beasts, quick autofocus, but also a good wide-angle setting to show the immensity of the land.  Almost any point-and-shoot/"bridge" camera on the market now will give you that, mostly well below the $1500 level.  

 

My two cents, worth what you paid for them.

[Heymoe]

I plan on submitting my best outdoor images to a stock photo site, and the best theatre photos to my site for use by the actors/dancers since few of them have production photos.

 

A couple of years ago I took my first Alaska cruise and was surprised at the range of subjects.  Not just ice and wildlife, but giant rainbows and mosses growing in chunks of marble.

 

On the prior Alaskan trip I brought a 70-200mm and 24-70mm lens, and a full frame as well as a crop sensor body just because "two is one and one is none".  To be honest, for outdoor photos taken in the daylight I could have used a current model phone camera.  The automatic processing on the phone does a lot to make captures look really good.  But production work needs a big sensor since there will be cropping, and a fast lens since the light is low.

 

This time I'm bringing a 38-300mm stabilized lens on the full frame body and a 50mm prime on the backup camera.  It's really tempting to bring my old Canon SX50HS since nothing I have tops its 1,500mm (equivalent) zoom and light weight.

[Sigyn]

This info is super helpful. I'm reviewing each model discussed to see the pros and cons. I plan to print out some of the best photos and blow them up for prints on our wall. I have done that with iPhone photos and had success, but I am always at risk of missing a good shot if it's a long range photo. 

[pierces]

On 6/24/2023 at 1:43 PM, Sigyn said:

This info is super helpful. I'm reviewing each model discussed to see the pros and cons. I plan to print out some of the best photos and blow them up for prints on our wall. I have done that with iPhone photos and had success, but I am always at risk of missing a good shot if it's a long range photo. 

 

Let us know what you ended up with.

 

And about the prints...

 

We have several of our favorites printed at 24x36 on metal. The colors are incredible (the compression here does not do them justice), and the metal print comes with a mounting frame on the back so it can be mounted on the wall gallery-style with no need for a frame. Sam's Club and some of the other online services do this. Sam's is the best price at about $130.

 

 

Good luck on the camera shopping.

 

Dave

[Hezu]

On 6/20/2023 at 3:51 AM, TheOldBear said:

Depending on your luggage space, you may want to consider a somewhat larger Sony - the RX10 Mark 4

 

It's a large camera, with a large lens, lots of smart processing modes - and it is weather sealed [no problems using it in rain/snow].

On the other hand, although RX10 IV is certainly not a pocket camera, it is still far more compact than the traditional ILC + long telephoto lens combo, that doesn't even cover the wide angle part of RX10 IV's lens.

[byargertx]

We just got back from our Alaskan cruise. I took my Sony RX10IV along with my Sony A7C and a couple of lenses. The RX10 still sells new on Amazon for about $1700, above your range, but it was a great performeron the cruise and excursions. Really fast auto focus, 24 fps burst mode, great range with the 600mm reach. Fantastic not to have to switch lenses. Great image quality. Those are all the reasons I took the RX10 instead of the rest of my fullframe gear. Samples below.

[TheOldBear]

Photos not displaying - just some black rectangles 😞

[Sigyn]

All of the info was much appreciated. We ended up using my husband's older Canon SLR to see how much we'd like using a separate camera since we'd gotten out of the habit. Turns out it was fine, we didn't mine the extra effort. So now we'll do a bit more research, etc., before our next cruise.