Serge:
I couldn't agree more. The iPhone 4 does a cool "HDR" job -- sometimes cartoonish but cheerful. I love to tweet from the trail (where possible) with a link to google maps as to my location. I use Photoshop express or Photogene to tweak it on the iphone. I am sure many other devices do at least as well or better and have similar editing apps. Cell phone cams are only going to get better! With your phone, can you get a mini SD card adaptor for use in you camera and then remove the adaptor and put the mini SD in your phone, then edit an email photos? Before I converted to Apple all around, I had a blackberry. This card exchange worked nicely. Of course, iphones do not take mini sd cards or much else. I sussed out a card reader for iphone but reviews are mixed -- works but clumsy.

Bob: I referring to shutter lag. Yeah, fast burst isn't that important to me at the moment.

Edited by backpackerchick on 08/08/2011 03:18:06 MDT.

I'd have a hard time trading the LX's 24mm equivalent for the S95's 28mm. As important, the aperture is wider throughout the zoom range (especially the tele end) which means you can keep ISO lower throughout. S95 battery life is also roughly half the LX, meaning you must carry lots of spares. The EVF option is compelling for shooting in sunlight, although Panny's EVF has disappointing resolution at about a quarter-million dots. FWIW I use an external flash on my LX3 quite a bit, but not for hiking.

Slotting somewhere in between, the XZ-1 only goes to 28mm eq but the lens is fastest in category throughout the zoom range and reportedly quite sharp. The rear AMOLED display has to be seen to be appreciated, so much better is it than the competition's LCDs. The kicker is the ability to use Oly's very high resolution EVF, with about a million and a half dots. (A less expensive 1M-dot display has been announced, and should be on the street soon.)

It's hard to discuss these gems and ignore the latest tiny µ4/3 bodies. Quadrupling the imager size while keeping the camera and lens so small is a powerful incentive to go that route. But it also strays pretty far from the OP's needs.

Cheers,

Rick

p.s. In your avitar shot, are you renewing your DWR finish?

"As important, the [Panasonic] aperture is wider throughout the zoom range (especially the tele end) which means you can keep ISO lower throughout."

Would you care to expand that thought?

Are you holding the shutter speed as a constant? So, if you have a wider aperture to start with, you can stick with lower ISO numbers.

Call me crazy, but I leave my camera in Program mode with the ISO constant. Then the only balance is shutter versus aperture, and I have only one dial to hit to change the depth of field. Cameras will always try to hit the sweet spot for Program mode.

--B.G.--

Hi Bob,

My typical LX3 setting is P mode with OIS enabled and ISO set to auto with a 400 ceiling. The camera's algorithm seems pretty good at holding ISO low until the other parameters hit their limits for a given focal length. These settings allow me to handhold in pretty dim light and still get sharp images. With a slower lens like the S95's, ISO will necessarily move upwards sooner using similar settings, eventually adding motion blur and/or heavy noise a stop or even two (vs. the XZ-1) sooner.

It's most relevant under forest cover and early and late in the day--often the most fun times to shoot! I don't have any Lightroom stats handy, but IIRC I can take it down to 1/8 second when zoomed full wide. Zoomed long it's a different story.

Cheers,

Rick

Edited by halfturbo on 08/08/2011 13:49:13 MDT.

"Zoomed long it's a different story."

I admit that lately I have been noticing the Canon S95 and Canon SX30IS cameras, but so much of what I do, I do with a long lens at wildlife. As you point out, that sets up a completely different set of challenges with image stabilization. But that leaves me far enough away from the wildlife that it does not feel so threatened by the human, and that tends to get me more natural poses.

It is interesting to see how slow a person can shoot and still avoid jiggle. Holding your breath, leaning up against a tree, etc., can work, but they are not quite as reliable as getting the camera features to do most of the work for you.

In June in Yellowstone, I shot one image of a sow grizzly with two yearling cubs, and you could see that she was teaching them how to dig up ground squirrels. The range to subject was 1000 yards! That's staying out of threat range.

I shoot super-wide scenery once in a while, but it gets too hard to get anything realistic going with a polarizer for the sky when that much angle is in view.

--B.G.--

I've been using the LX3 for a few years and find it to be reliable, easy on the batteries -- especially if I turn off the LCD -- and that it captures good images. I really like the wide end of the lens and its f2.o aperture. It is small enough to fit in my pants pocket or rain coat. I convinced a friend to buy the LX5 and he is even happier with it than I am with the LX3. I'll use my micro 4/3 camera for shorter trips, but the LX3 comes with us when we have miles to go.


Takes decent pictures.

Bob, that might be the ultimate deal breaker :( Sounds like you've made some amazing wildlife pictures!

I am increasingly using the LX5 in Aperture Priority mode and raising the ISO a tad if necessary to buy shutter speed. So far, I am primarily a handheld shooter except when I make photos of myself. Bob, interestingly, a textbook I am using (Ben Long) says not to hold your breath.

BTW, in P mode with auto ISO, I have not encountered high ISOs. I have not set an ISO limit. On a related matter, from what I've read about ISOs and my own test ISO series, I get the feeling the LX5 can handle higher ISOs relatively well. In my opinion, 800 is fine and even 1600 isn't too bad. I haven't printed anything!

Back to the OP and the S95 question, the LX5 would certainly be another one to consider :) I still think the S95 is a wonderful little package from a backpacking standpoint in that it qualifies as a pocket camera IMO. While there are pockets large enough to hold the LX5, it has solidly crossed the pocket camera threshold IMO.

Edited by backpackerchick on 08/09/2011 03:01:47 MDT.

I ordered a S95 yesterday so we will see how it goes. Thanks to everyone for their help!

"In my opinion, 800 is fine and even 1600 isn't too bad. I haven't printed anything!"

High ISO tends to lead to high color noise, pixel-to-pixel. If you are pixel-peeping on the screen, you may find an objectionable amount. However, once you try to print, you will see a rather different amount, normally none at all in the actual print, but that depends on how good your printer is and how good your paper is. I've printed up to 30"x40" and couldn't find any color noise in the print. That is a huge improvement from where we were just a few years ago, thanks to larger image sensors.

--B.G.--

Brad, I don't think you will be disappointed. Sounds like you know a fair amount when it comes to photography principles. The S95 is going to be such an amazing improvement over what you are using and it's probably not much bigger. Do post a new batch of photos for us. You know like...before and after camera makeover ;)

Edited by backpackerchick on 08/09/2011 21:12:20 MDT.

Rather than change the ISO to a higher number to get faster shutter speeds, use aperture prority and choose a low number (wider aperture) to get the faster shutter speeds.

Yes but if at the widest aperture your shutter speed is still not high enough, then you need to increase the ISO.
ISO400 F2.8 1/125 = ISO 800 F2.8 1/250
Franco

Currently, lots of lightweight backpackers are trying to avoid carrying heavy glass, such as an f2.8 or faster lens. So, with a slower lens, they are often already up against the wall on aperture, and the only way to push the shutter speed faster is to kick the ISO up. It's all a vicious cycle.

--B.G.--

To compound the problem , most (practically all...) start at one aperture on wide, say F3.5 and end at a much slower on tele, around F5.6

So that F2.8 at 125 (1/125) at 400iso becomes an F5.6 at 30 (1/30) 4x longer shutter speed...
to retain the 125th shutter speed (from F2.8 to F5.6) you need to bump the iso to 1600

But Fujifilm has just announced the X10 with a 4x zoom (28-112mm) starting at F2 on wide and at F2.8 on tele with also a largish sensor at around 12oz with batt.
http://www.dpreview.com/news/1109/11090102fujifilmx10.asp
Franco

A Canon waterproof case for $200 sounds like the case intended for scuba diving - they are bulky and in many cases don't give access to all the buttons on the camera.