Ok, so I read the thread with the question about how many photos taken on a thru hike. I've been a disposable camera section hiker, but am planning to do the northern half of the AT sometime soon in one long hike. I cant see doing it with the disposables (I've been taking an avg. of 1 picture per mi. so far), and the digital era is upon me. I would like to ask for recommendations from you all about something that is lightweight, and simple to use (I am not a camera techie). I just wanna point, click and get good pics. What features / size / memory /name of brand/ cost expectation etc.

Just bought a camera for my non-techie parents (55 yrs old) who wanted something VERY simple. I got them the Kodak Easyshare since it was voted #1 ease of use.

Here is what I suggest:
4.0 megapixel or higher
see if you can find a good zoom lense and remember that it is all about the OPTICAL zoom, not the digital zoom.
talk to the sales rep about how many pictures your camera can fit on a 128MB, 512MB or 1GB card. since different cameras take different picture sizes, it means they memory capacities are different.
Expect to spend around $300 for everything (camera, battery charger, case, memory)

Thanks for the reply. Battery Charger???? It sounds like we're talkin major weight there. Could I get by with replacing with AAA or AA batteries once or twice over the 1000 mi (1000 pictures) or so?

Thanks for the reply. Battery Charger???? It sounds like we're talkin major weight there. Could I get by with replacing with AAA or AA batteries once or twice over the 1000 mi (1000 pictures) or so?

I got a Nikon Coolpix 3.2. It's very similar to the Kodak easyshare; 4.9oz without batteries. Digital cameras go through regular batteries pretty quickly. I've gone to using lithium batteries. They last much longer.

i, too, bought the NIKON COOLPIX 3.2...

like LilRedMG...i love the simplicity & especially the LITE-WEIGHT feature.
i'm gonna put a couple of "fresh" NEW Lithium AA batteries in my camera just before i leave on my 23 day section-hike.

***BUT, i just saw an AD for the 4 mega-pixel version of the NIKON COOLPIX in the local paper for $199.

see u out there: Apr 28-May 5 (w/"the Model T crew")Hot Springs-Erwin
May 6 & 7 Carvers Gap-Erwin
May 8-20 Damascus-Pearisburg

I would buy the cheapest one that you can find under the assumption that unless you've got the skills and time, it really won't matter with a point-and-shoot. Most low end cameras are, I believe, pretty much the same in functionality. I'm not convinced that the megapixel count is in any way important for digital cameras and that anything in the 2-4 range will do quite nicely. Moreover, whatever you bring will take a beating in short order. Better to thrash something cheap than something expensive.

I've been happy with the Olympus D-395, which is a 3 megapixel $100 (on sale at B&H) with a fixed (i.e, non-zoom) lens. You can see pictures from it in the "Local Trips" section of

http://www.pierce.ctc.edu/faculty/cwillett

A few things that I would look for, however.

1) A camera that can take standard AA batteries. If you have a problem with a fancy battery (i.e, Li-Ion) on the trail, then you are stuck until someone can ship one to you. When you buy the camera, also buy two sets of something like a Ni-MH battery with a charger. The charger goes in a bounce bucket along with the spare set of batteries. One set of Ni-MH could well last the 1000 miles, but it is good to have backups.

2) Ignore the "Digital Zoom" features. Digital Zoom simply blows up an existing picture. You can do this on just about any computer.

3) Buy two memory cards. Shooting with a 3 MP camera on the "HQ" setting on a 3 MP camera, you'll get about 330 pictures with a 256 MB card. If you periodically delete boring or uninteresting pictures, the two cards should last you the 1000 miles. If you start to run low, you can take your card directly to a large grocery store or Walmart and have them burn you a CD of your pictures for a few bucks.

I would check out the Canon Elph series (digital). I have an S400 4MP and love it (I think the new one is called the 410, and there is a 5MP out too I think). It's the size of a pack of cigarettes and is built very well with well-thought out controls. And it makes fantastic photos (for a point and shoot, if you want more you need an SLR). One of my hiking buddies liked it so much he bought one too.

I have carried this camera on hikes up to 12 days between resupply, shot 220 pix and just barely used up the first battery (I carry a spare). Turn off the LCD display to conserve the battery otherwise only 75 pix. The charger is also a marvel, it plugs into the wall (no cord) and is very light (no transformer). A couple of 256 or 512 Mb memory cards will store a ton of pix. If you buy a spare battery get a Canon brand as some of the knockoffs have significantly less charge capacity.

I went with a Kodak camera that takes Lithium Kodak brand batteries.

I'm not worried about the added weight of batteries and chargers, since the charger is extremely light cause it plugs directly into the wall. The batteries are smaller/lighter than 2 AAs and therefore, I plan on taking 2 of them (at $4 a piece on Ebay, they aren't a bad buy). I just hope 2 batteries last me until I can get to some electricity.

As for the guy who says megapixels don't matter, I disagree. The higher MP, the better quality pictures, or should I say the larger you can print/display the pics because the resolution will be better.

ease of use... kodak is very highly reccomended, some models do just use aa's
if your doing critters form a distance make sure you get a decent amount of optical zoom. I got a photo op of a mating pair of mooses and at 3x all I ended up with was two black dots :datz

good sites for camera reviews,
http://www.dpreview.com
http://www.imaging-resource.com/


If ya want a great outdoor camera with some real zoom capability then you might want to look at a minolta DiMage z3 or z5. They come with a built in 12x optical zoom and run off 4 AA's , seems to take great pictures and the auto mode isnt hard to learn :)

do get a couple of cards so you dont have to worry about running out of room, I just picked up a 1Gb card for mine for 88.00....should hold about 400 pics or so. a few smaller cards can also be swapped with home base as well.

You might also look at belt carried powers packs.... they use d-cells and so on instead of AA to allow a very long run time.

http://www.beacon5.com/detail.asp?product_id=PP-A100

http://www.newworldvideodirect.com/productdetail.asp?productid=336

REgardless of which camera you buy, I strongly suggest disabling the LCD screen for taking shots. That screen sucks up much battery power. By using the optical view screen instead of the LCD screen for taking shots, you will save much battery power

With one battery, I took 300 shots on the Colorado Trail this fall. That includes low light shots with flash and the occasional use of the LCD screen for macro use (flower shots).

As for the guy who says megapixels don't matter, I disagree. The higher MP, the better quality pictures, or should I say the larger you can print/display the pics because the resolution will be better.

I have yet to see a difference in the 2-4 MP range, which is where most P&S cameras fall. There are some 5 MP P&S cameras out there, which might be better for making a 11 by 14 print or something than a 2 MP version. However, I've seen wonderful 11 by 14 prints taken on a 3 MP camera and doubt that they would be imroved much by adding 2 MP without also adding a better lens.

I have yet to see a difference in the 2-4 MP range, which is where most P&S cameras fall. There are some 5 MP P&S cameras out there, which might be better for making a 11 by 14 print or something than a 2 MP version. However, I've seen wonderful 11 by 14 prints taken on a 3 MP camera and doubt that they would be imroved much by adding 2 MP without also adding a better lens.

An excellent point, Mega pixels wont matter a bit if the lens is junk.... however, given the same lens a higher resolution will take better pictures overall and allow much larger blow-ups. Printing and viewing are very different things. when veiwing the screen resoluton is usually less then a 3 mp camera so anything beyond that gets lost under normal use. 3 will give you very good results but 5 tends to print a lot better.

Amen to Mags suggestion to turn off the picture viewer. It hogs batteries like crazy. We have two memory cards and trade them off and always use lithium batteries. You will be surprised to see how long the batteries last by resisting looking at the pictures...you can't see that much in the viewer anyway, usually not enough to tell if it is blurred or not. Looking at all the pics really uses the batteries.

My 2 megapixel Canon A20 powershot, that uses AA batteries, takes good enough pictures that I was able to get one printed at 17 x 24 inches and it looks fine. I've got a ton of ordianry point and shoot hiking pictures, but that one came out good enough that it warranted getting it enlarged and framed.

I agree with Chris, for most purposes the 2-4 MP range is fine. I have seen prints up to 11x14 taken with 3MP camera and it looks good.


However, though this does not apply to most of us, if your shots are going to printed in a book or magazine, I found out the standard digital P&S cameras won't work for large format. (two pages apprently) ) :(

Luckily, I had taken slide film for the PCT and the magazine[1] was able to make use of it. Since this is probably the only time I'll ever use shots that will get published in large format, doubt it will be an issue most of the time. Just something to keep in mind as I know it somewhat common to for many thru-hikers to publish books now. As more people use digital, something to keep in mind. Taking slides and having that converted to digital as your slides developed may be a good option if you plan on publishing a book.

Mags
[1] Regional mag..nothing too glamarous. Doubt you'll see it in your doctor's office anytime soon. :)