To SLR or not to SLR?

Travel Forums Travel Photography To SLR or not to SLR?

1. Posted by Glug (Full Member 1 posts) 16y Star this if you like it!

Ok, so I'm off travelling in a few months for a year. I'm a keen amateur photographer, and in the summer I treated myself to a Canon EOS 20D digital SLR. I also have an older G3. BTW, I'd recommend it to anyone keen on their photography - was a tough choice between that and the 350D, but think it was the better choice.

My concern is getting backpacker insurance on something like that. The G3 is covered by my normal policy, and so is my Mju (got to have a pocket snapper). Has anyone had this same dilema?

The trip is a once in a lifetime experience, and I don't want to miss any of it, but is taken something that valuable really worth it? I'll be taken the hostel/cheap hotel route, so I'm worried about it's security.

[ Edit: Removed link ]

2. Posted by Pardus (Respected Member 2356 posts) 16y Star this if you like it!

Hey Gregory,

nice pictures, I only just saw them. Very impressive...

Unfortunately I can't help you with insurance (haven't been there yet...) but here's a tip on security.

Get a load of duct tape and wrap it around your camera and lense(s) to make it look really old and battered. Also, cover up anything that says Canon and get a neutral camera strap. That way it makes your camera look less like a target for thieves.


3. Posted by limarent5 (First Time Poster 1 posts) 16y Star this if you like it!

yes pardus is right, you have to bring with you a not-brand new look camera, for example a Leica, thieves wonders that a Canon G3 is most expensive than a Leica for example, i prefer a no SLR camera for trips, most has interchangable lenses, Leica has digital models, but there`s a new Epson model call RD1 is great, it has a classic look and is a camara that is not gona catch the thieve`s attetion.