OK, I have to 'fess up. On several of my "ultralight" trips, I have been carrying a really heavy camera - namely my Canon 20D DSLR, with the rather heavy 17-40 L series canon lens. It takes fabulous photographs, and I treasure the photos that I have taken with it, but given that the body weighs 26.1 ounces, and the lens weighs 17.5 ounces, we are talking 43.6 ounces, which is pushing well towards 3 pounds. I am ready to look into other options.

Fundamentally, this is a decision involving many trade-offs. Weight is paramount, but image quality is a close second, cost is another, control and ergonomics are also significant, as is ruggedness. There are a myriad of point and shoot cameras on the market. I am, however, spoiled by the image quality produced by my Canon 20D DSLR and am reluctant to accept a major loss of image quality. The bottom line though is that the size of the image sensor limits what can be accomplished with regard to image quality, hence some kind of compromise is inevitable in this area and others with a smaller camera. Second to a concern about image quality, is a desire to have quick access to manual control (if nothing else exposure compensation). This limits my choices quite a bit. In making a choice like this, a reasonable question to ask is what size of prints you would like to be able to make (if you intend to make prints at all!) Given these requirements, here are some candidates:

The Go Pro

It weighs 5.9 ounces, which certainly makes it an ultralight candidate. It shoots 1080p video (over 4 hours on a 32G SD card) or 11 megapixel stills. The lens is fixed at f/2.8 with a 170 degree wide field of view. It is extremely popular with action sports participants, who mount the camera on helmets or gear. The price is $300. It comes with a housing waterproof to 197 feet (60 meters). It has features to make taking great time lapse video very easy. Unique and amazing. Battery life shooting video is about 4 hours, but batteries are quite cheap (on the order of $12 on Amazon).

The Rebel option

There is a new crop of "micro 4/3 cameras" on the market that could be considered if something intermediate in weight and cost was an option.

Beyond these "middle ground" cameras, there are some much lighter options, namely high end point and shoot cameras. Apart from weight, these cameras also have the advantage that they are completely sealed systems, and should be immune to the dust issues that plague DSLR cameras taken into the outdoors.

Three cameras that definitely stand out in the SPS (shirt pocket size) class, all are 10 megapixel cameras and will capture raw images. All have image stabilization. (Folks say that a 10 megapixel image will produce at most, a 13x19 inch print from these kind of cameras).

Each of these has it's own strengths and weaknesses (details follow). Some of them have reported bugs and problems. The G11 and the LX3 have hotshoes for flash (but only the G11 would do E-TTL with the Canon speedlite I own, which is a bit of a plus.) The 24mm wide end of the LX3 is a big plus. The G11 and the LX3 will do 1/2000 flash sync. The LX3 has selectable aspect ratios. The S90 is the lightest and most portable, and with nice ergonomics. Maybe too light, and there are reports of a lens retraction bug.

The Canon G11

One of the truly big pluses of the G11 is the exposure compensation dial on the top left of the camera. Putting this on a manual control gives me a way to do what I want to do most of the time without having to dork around with menus in the field.

Another plus (for me) is that this camera will do E-TTL with my Canon 580-EX-II flash. This would not be a big deal for most people (and definitely has nothing at all to do with the use of this camera for backpacking and landscape photography), but given that I also like to explore old mines and do underground photography, this could actually be a big deal. With regard to flash photography, take a look at this strobist review of the G11. Note that if you have fancy ideas about using this camera to get high speed flash sync, you should realize that with a canon flash mounted in E-TTL mode, the camera will self limit to 1/500 shutter speeds. Crazy high speed sync requires a manual sync cable, so the camera doesn't realize a flash is involved, and then you can do things with flash and 1/2000 shutter speeds.

It has a fold out LCD screen, which I am not excited about on a camera I would like to be rugged and abuse tolerant. Some people like the folding LCD, because you can fold the display against the camera to protect it. They also like it because they can hold the camera over their head in a crowd and see what they are shooting. (My view here is that I strenuously avoid being in crowds in the first place, and cannot even imagine wanting to be in this situation taking a picture.) The optical viewfinder (it does have one!) is said to be pretty marginal. Lots of people have had trouble with the lens sucking dust into the camera when it extends and some people say this is a major issue. (the LX3 by contrast has a fixed lens and lenscap).

The G11 has a 4:3 aspect ratio sensor (more square than the 3:2 aspect ratio sensor on my 20D). Note that the 3:2 aspect ratio is inherited from 35mm film. The G11 image is 3648x2736 (the 20D image is 3504x2336). In other words, since the G11 has a 10 megapixel sensor, you could crop the image to a 3:2 aspect ratio and have almost the same number of pixels (8 megapixels) as the 20D.

Here is an aspect ratio table:

The Panasonic LX3 gives you a choice of aspect ratios, as follows:

Panasonic could only do this by cropping the sensor in various ways, so the native sensor must be 3968x2736 or something close. This is indeed the case, and the actual sensor is 11.3 megapixels. Too bad there isn't a mode to read out the whole thing.

I played with a G11 briefly, and had some surprising impressions, all concerning ergonomics. There are 3 control wheels on top of the camera. The left wheel controls exposure compensation, which is a great idea. There is a stacked pair of wheels on the right that control ISO, and camera modes. My BIG complaint is that one of these wheels does not control aperture, given that I put my camera into Av (aperture priority mode) and shoot with it that way all the time. I would prefer the wheels on the right to be ISO and Aperture control, and I could select modes via a menu. I may need to rethink how I would use a camera like this and let it run in an automatic mode all of the time, making its own choices about aperture, and I can use the compensation dial along with a study of the histogram to get the exposures I like.

The Canon S90

The best thing about this camera is ergonomics. It has two control wheels that you can program as you see fit. One ring is around the lens. Some set this up to control exposure compensation, others use it to control zoom (in discrete steps). The back ring can be ISO, or aperture or shutter speed.

Another camera to consider is the SD4000IS. This is a 10 megapixel point and shoot with an f/2.0 lens, but that does not shoot raw, 11.2 ounces.

Now some negatives. A number of reviewers say that the G11 or LX3 are a better choice for the money and are much better built. This is basically a $200 point and shoot with a "pro interface" and an inflated price (by a factor of 2). Short battery life (they claim 220 shots for the NB-6L battery), but the LCD screen will also drain the battery. Ergonomics far superior to the Panasonic LX3, but the build quality of the LX3 is far better. Let the front ring select zoom (28/35/50/85/105). Watch the rear dial, it is easy to bump it and change settings. No "superfine" level of JPEG compression is available. The popup flash is extremely delicate.

Be sure and research the "lens error" bug in this camera which in some units prevents lens retraction, this is a serious problem which makes the camera useless for many people. This problem almost kills my interest in this camera.

Announced 8/19/2009

The Panasonic "Lumix" LX3

The new LX5 will have a greater zoom range, and this seems to be the primary big new feature with the LX5. I personally think that it is easier to design a good lens with a more limited zoom range, so I go for less range and more quality, hence I actually prefer the LX3.

It can shoot in 3 aspect ratios (16:9, 3:2, and 4:3 via a selection on the lens barrel), which is cool. It is a 10 megapixel camera. The lens zooms from 24 to 60 in 35mm equivalent. The body is a metal casting. There is no optical viewfinder, but some people purchase an aftermarket viewfinder (Voightlander 21mm) and snap it into the hot shoe. Panasonic even offers such a viewfinder accessory. Some people teach themselves to frame photos just eyeballing over the hot shoe. The proprietary raw format originally could only be processed by the panasonic "silkypix" software, but now Adobe Camera Raw and Lightroom provides support. Built in image stabilization! People hate the fact that this camera has a lenscap, but to my mind, this avoids the tiny motors and dust sucking issues that a retracting lens (like the G11) has.

It uses aftermarket $10 batteries just fine, and someone says it will take 3 or 4 batteries to fill a 8G card shooting just JPEG's.

Take a look at this Luminous Landscape LX3 review
as well as this Luminous Landscape G11 review
and in particular, this Luminous Landscape S90 review

Either of the above cameras would cut over 2 pounds from my pack weight. Alan Dixon carries the LX3 for its "excellent image quality and photographic control" (Don Wilson carries a Canon SD960 because it is video capable and light). Andrew Skurka carries an LX3.

Small sensors and small lenses are just going to be hard pressed to produce superb images. The laws of physics impose certain limitations, and given the technology existing at any point in time you can expect that bigger will be better as far as camera equipment. Tiny pixels collect less light and hence noise becomes more of an issue (this is all about signal to noise ratio and low light performance). For someone shooting landscape photos in full daylight, it is not clear how much of an issue this is, certainly dynamic range will suffer.

It is simply much harder to precisely shape a tiny lens than it is to shape the surfaces on a larger lens. If the lens doesn't produce a sharp image, what the sensor does really does not matter.

Conclusions: what should I do?

In August of 2010, I went ahead and ordered an LX3. It was a very tough choice between it and the G11, and honestly I think either would be a great choice. I liked the exposure compensation dial on the G11 a lot, and that almost carried the day. Also, I think the G11 does a better job of producing nice JPEG images in the camera than doe the LX3. What I didn't like about the G11 was the articulating screen (not what I want in a rugged backpacking camera), and the persistent reports of dust problems with the G series.

I actually like the fact that the LX3 has a lenscap and non-retracting lens. This means less in the way of tiny motors and mechanical things to get screwed up. I also like the wide 24mm lens.

Since I already have an investment in Canon Gear, this tended to bias me towards the G11. The only piece of gear with real relevance is my 580EX-II speedlite, which would do E-TTL mounted on the G11 hot shoe. However, this has nothing to do with ultralight backpacking.

Raw support for the LX3 and G11 was uncertain when they first came out, but Adobe Camera Raw 5.2 supports both the G11 and the LX3 (and the world has moved on to Adobe Camera Raw 6.0). The version of lightroom current at this writing (2.6) does properly support the LX3.

This has been a tricky issue for the LX3 because the raw images are not corrected for the large amounts of lens distortion that are produced by the lens on that camera. Apparently this is now (mid-2010) all worked out.

See this link: LX3 raw conversion