Skip Navigation


Travel Forums Travel Photography digital?

1. Posted by kater (Inactive 31 posts) 12y

kater has indicated that this thread is about Australia

i know there has been alot of discussion on this topic but i still have a few questions..

in places such as nepal or india will there be sufficient places to upload photos or buy/recharge batteries?

is there a risk of losing all your photos if your batteries go flat??

at this stage i am planning on buying a second hand canon eos100 35mm SLR for $700 with 28 - 200mm lens'. Am aware of the extra weight and processing costs so thinking of either getting a digital around the same price instead or a cheap digital with memory card to supplement??

what does anyone reccommend?

i am planning on travelling aust - north america - africa - europe - asia - aust, for 18months.

2. Posted by iloveflyin (Full Member 159 posts) 12y

Hi Kater,

I wouldn't count on places like Nepal to upload photos, although there might be a possibility. To recharge batteries, most places use 220V these days. You can check on the net to see what type of voltage used wherever you travel to. If you decided to buy a digital camera. I suggest that you purchase an extra battery, just in case you run out of power in the middle of your shooting. I own a Canon SLR digital 300D which let me shoot roughly 400-500 shots per charge. This is possible because my Canon does not use the monitor set the picture. I have to look through the view finder, just like film-type SRL. Otherwise, most other digital cameras let you take roughly 100-150 shots before the juice run out from your battery. It also depend on how many pixels is your camera, as far as memory is concerned. A 3.2 meg camera take roughly a 800K to 1.2meg picture in very good quality JPEG. My Canon SRL (6.3 meg) takes 3 meg. per very fine JPEG shot. If you are using a 1Gigabite memory card, you can take 1,000 shots with a 3.2 meg. Whereas with 3 meg per shots, it only gives you aroudn 300 - 350 shots. Ofcourse there are plenty of cameras in the 4 - 5 megapixel range. I enclosed a very respectable site below, where you can read reviews of digital cameras and use them as guide for your choosing and buying. I live in Texas and since last month, I have seen advertisement for Kodak 5 megapixel cameras as low as $299 USD, and 256 meg compact flash card is around 45-50 USD.

3. Posted by Benny (Full Member 17 posts) 12y

Hi there,
My advice is to stick with your original idea and purchase a film SLR camera. I am a travel photographer and have been using the Canon EOS 30 for over a year now. All of the cameras in this range are extremely reliable and even the entry level models offer good features and flexibility. The problem with digital photography is the price, in my opinion your budget will be best spent on a 35mm SLR, any digital model that you can purchase in this price bracket will not produce the same amount of quality. There is also too much that can go wrong with digital cameras, something to bear in mind while on the road. Then there is the problem of having to constantly download images, it is far easier to throw a used roll of film into your day sack and carry on shooting then to hunt for internt cafes. Finally, this trip will be important in your life and the images you collect will give you pleasure for many years, lots of people loose digital images in one way or another, film is a lot safer. I hope this advice is usefull to you. Have a safe trip.

4. Posted by iloveflyin (Full Member 159 posts) 12y

For $700 here in the US you can get a very good 5 megapixel Nikon, Minolta or Canon and a 1 gigabite memory card which allow you to shoot over 1000 exposures.
I've been using film cameras since 1966 for fun and profit, from 6X7 to 35mm format, but haven't touched my film cameras since I started using digital. Contrary to what have been said, I've found digital is more economical and safer to use. You might spend more at the begining, but in the long run, it's cheaper. A one gig memory card is about $200, gives you around 800 to 1000 shots of high quality images. These images you can blow up to 11X14 and hard to tell the difference w/ film imgages. To get a 1000 shots with film (36 exp each) you will need to buy 27 rolls of film ($3,4/per rolls) or around $100. Aout of that, If you are lucky, you will get 300 good shots. With a 1 gig memory card, you can take as many shots as you want, delete any bad shot, and continue to shoot until it's full. The fun part about digital is you can, use your memory card, over and over. I've use mine since 2,3 years ago, and they still work perfectly. About safety, you don't have to worry about Xray when going through checkpoints at the airport. When I get home, I down load my images to the computer hard drive, and make a couple of copies on the CD. I lost more pictures with film (negatives and slide, color and B&W) than w/ digital. About looking for the internet cafe to down load your images. Yes, you might run into problem if you go into very small cities, but then if the cities are too small to have internet cafe, chances are they might be too small to carry the type of film you prefer. Also, when was the last time you carry 27 rolls of film on your trip. This time, if you have a 1 gig memory card - you do.
I realize, different folk, different stroke. But, chances are one you crossover the digital line, you might not comeback to film, unless you are a serious professional. I already sold my 6X7 Mamiya Pro, and my Minolta Maxxum SRL is collecting dust since I bought my first digital. It's 1 am here in Texas, and I'm ready to go to bed. For the sake of discussion I voiced my opinion from experience, no offence to anyone.

5. Posted by kater (Inactive 31 posts) 12y

Thanks heaps for your help iloveflyin and benny. at least i am getting to the point where i just need to decide!!

congrats also to whoever set up this site and everyone who makes posts, there are so many helpful bits to read.

6. Posted by Benny (Full Member 17 posts) 12y

iloveflyin has raised some good points. I originally set out using a Fujifilm finepix 6 megapixel 'pro' digital camera, this is not a bad camera but it is not 'pro', it is a consumer model. The images i created were acceptable but i have always been inspired by the professional travel images that fill the pages of National Geographic and i am amazed at some of the exhibition quality lanscape photos that i have seen. In order to improve my photography and create similiar images, i ditched the digital and began using professional slide film and 35mm SLR cameras. iloveflyin is correct in pointing out that this option increases the amount of kit that you need to carry with you, for example, i carry 3 lenses, 2 body's, a small tripod, a monopod and a selection of filters. This might sound alot but in reality it is not heavy at all and is essentially a truly 'pro' set up. Each person has different requirements and there are a large number of digital and film options available, you just have to decide which option suits your requirments best. I guess the main reason why I personally prefer slide film and 35mm SLR cameras is because this system offers more flexability than any other, i can submit slides to magazines and agencies, get amazing enlargements of my favourite slides and scan them onto a file and have all the benefits of digital photography. A perfectly exposed 35mm Velvia slide scanned at 4000 dpi produces better results than top end digi SLR's!! Again, iloveflyin is correct in saying different strokes for different folks and what is best for me might not be best for the next person. Whatever you decide Kater, i recommend you buy the 'Lonely Planet Travel Photography' book by Richard I'Anson, it is full of usefull info on equipment and technique.
Take it easy, Benny.

7. Posted by iloveflyin (Full Member 159 posts) 12y

Hi benny,

Most National Geographic photos are taken from slide films such as 35mm Kodakchrome or Ektachrome. Funny, you mentioned about their pictures. When I was young, I wanted to be a National Geographic photographer, but realize it is not a sure way to make a living. I shoot landscape also (Ansel Adam's style, although his pictures are far more better than mine), that's why I had a 6X7 format. Maybe, one of these days, when I retire and have plenty of money, I would buy a good 4X5 and do serious landscape photography. In the meantime, every time I travel, I lug around the Canon 300D digital with a 18-55mm and a 70-300mm macro. They produce decent pictures for my need.

8. Posted by kater (Inactive 31 posts) 12y

I still haven't decided. but have recently been looking at some photos produced by digital cameras. close shots look fantastic! thing i am a worried about now is using them for landscapes, does anyone think that they look a bit strange? maybe just a little cut out or something? I guess this would be fixed by more mp?

9. Posted by tingo (Full Member 94 posts) 12y

I still prefer classical photography. I bought a digital camera 4 years ago, and I took in on a 2 month trip in South America. I took many pictures, but the memory card was full very quickly, and I couldn't find any place to upload the pictures (most connection are very slow in South America). Also when I print the pictures, the quality is not as good as with a normal classical reflex camera, especially when you want to make enlargements of your pictures.
Now I returned to South America for 3 months, and I took a 20 year old minolta camera from my father to make slides and classical pictures... And I can say that the quality of the pictures is much better with this camera, and I also don't have to worry about memory space...
What I did is buy a scanner to scan (such a scanner is cheaper then a digital camera) my negatives and slides, and I have to say that the quality of the scanned negatives and slides is really excellent. So if you want digital pics of your negatives, you can scan them. For me that's the best solution. If you are interested I can show some scanned slides and negatives on my website...