[Dovek916]

Background: I am out in the wilderness on and off for three weeks and I want to take pictures. I don't have anywhere to charge up my camera and I want the camera to be waterproof, or at least water resistant.

Criteria:

• Water Resistant
• Uses normal batteries, e.g- AA, or AAA or nine volt
• Somewhat cheap

I found the the HP m22 and HP m23, basically the same thing, and was wondering if a) anyone had had any experiences with these camera's and b) if anyone had any other suggestions



Thank you
-Drew Dovek

[Robo]

The digital camera's what, exactly?

[Dovek916]

This is the m22, but basically, i want something that will last while i'm on the trail, so i want a camera that will survive a splash of water, won't run out of battery, or at least be able to replace easily, and is somewhat cheap

[Robo]

Never mind. You missed my joke.

[Dovek916]

I think i got it but i was to focussed on getting to the bottom of this to think clearly about it.

[atomicbartbeans]

Looks like that's pretty much what you're looking for... I'd look for a few durability-enhancing features, such as the absence of optical zoom, plexiglass-covered display, hard plastic lens cover, and rubber covers for power and USB ports.

[Brad]

Thread title fixed.

[Perfecting_Zero]

Since I've never owned a digital camera, I suppose my input may be of limited value. But, a rough-and-tumble film camera with mechanical shutter, I should think, would serve you well in a remote, three-weeks-away-from-your-computer location. Quite likely, you would just have a 1.5 volt button-cell to power the exposure meter -- much less cumbersome than multiple "AA" and "AAA" cells.

Well, as I don't know if a film camera is even among your considerations for this wilderness excursion, I won't speak of them impertinently.


Good luck! And have a wonderful time.

[Dovek916]

Thnak you all for the advice, actually, i have done a few of these trips in years past and i have used normal film cameras without any protective covering and i have just found it to be hassle. If i'm on the trail, and i run out of film on a roll, i have to find a dark spot to change to film. I also have had experiences where i didn't have time to put my camera away before a storm came and so i had to hope for the best. Also, taking film through airport security is a hassle. Putting it in my checked baggage doesn't work because when they scan it, it ruins some of it, and i don't think that i can takee it on the plant now, so i think that a digital camera is better. Also, AA batteries are cheaper that camera batteries and if they die, i can replace them and pick some new ones up at the nearest town. Btw, i do have a digital camera, a Canon Powershot s410, which i love and whouldn't want to risk taking it on the trail

[PKIDelirium]

Uhh, you can carry film on the plane. Unless you have some weird-ass liquid film or something.

[Majost]

Originally Posted by PKIDelirium Uhh, you can carry film on the plane. Unless you have some weird-ass liquid film or something.

The problem isn't actually taking it on a plane; the x-ray machines have a potential for exposing very high ISO film.

[Dovek916]

yah, what Majost said is true, and they say that even low ISO film can be messed up by the x-ray machines

[turtle]

Originally Posted by dovek916 yah, what Majost said is true, and they say that even low ISO film can be messed up by the x-ray machines

What about getting film when you get off the plane?

[Dovek916]

The problem is that when you are coming back, and you have all these rolls of used film, other than like UPSing them home, which i don't even know would work, the film had to go through some kind of x-ray machine.

[turtle]

Good point. I don't blame you for wanting digital, but the quality of your image for the price you are looking to pay isn't going to be that great.

What about having the negatives developed in your destination city?

[Majost]

Back before the panic attacks at airports, I would simply take them out of my bag and walk through the metal detectors with the film in hand. Of course, I don't know that they'll let you do that now (I've really only used digital since).

[BarracksSi]

Originally Posted by turtle2472 Good point. I don't blame you for wanting digital, but the quality of your image for the price you are looking to pay isn't going to be that great. What about having the negatives developed in your destination city?

Image quality, to me, only TRULY matters if it's going to be published. Lots of cameras produce entirely acceptable images anyway, and anyone looking for a small point-n-shoot isn't going all-out for quality either.

Batteries might be bulky to carry, but they're easy to buy anywhere, and won't slow you down like finding AC power and plugging in a charger for a couple hours. Cheaper than buying multiple battery packs, too.

I'm sorry that I don't know of alkaline-powered cameras offhand, though. Searching for the term "alkaline" at Amazon's digital camera category brought up a bunch of results, but "water" found a pile of water-resistant and waterproof cameras, some of which are powered by regular batteries.

http://www.amazon.com/Kodak-EasyShar...e=UTF8&s=photo
http://www.amazon.com/Bushnell-Outdo...e=UTF8&s=photo
http://www.amazon.com/Sony-DSCU60-Me...e=UTF8&s=photo
(this last Sony camera comes with rechargeable NiMH batteries, but they're in the AAA size, so alkalines would work fine)

(among others)

[Matsu]

I don't know why more camerass aren't made to accept AA or AAA alkalines. They're ideal for the situation you describe. However, ther's plenty of new Li-ion batteries with 500-600 shot capacity. two of those, charged up before you travel, ought to cover you.

[Perfecting_Zero]

Dove, whether this helps you or someone else reading, one effective strategy for safely transporting film -- exposed or unexposed -- through airport security is this: mix in some rolls of 1600 and 3200 ISO film. Airport security is required to honor a request -- respectfully submitted, of course -- for hand (not x-ray) inspection if the film speed is above ISO 800. Film speed is an expression of light sensitivity -- whether x-ray or otherwise. And theory holds that film below 800-speed, (typically what a tourist would travel with), is beneath the threshold of light-sensitivity with regard to x-ray exposure.

Most of my photography relies upon "available light," and I routinely travel with twenty and thirty rolls of Kodak T-Max 3200 and Fuji Neopan 1600... all mixed in, of course, with plenty of slower-speed film -- as slow as ISO 50. I have never had airport security personnel refuse a request for hand inspection of all my film.

I made a trip to New Orleans, (post 9/11), with over fifty rolls of film. That is a lot of film to ask someone to individually scrutinize and swipe with explosives-residue-detecting towelettes, but my request was honored -- as airline policy stipulates that it must.

As a side note, I once tested the theory that sub-ISO 800 film is not harmed by airport x-ray examination: I purposely left a roll of film in my camera body and sent it down the conveyor belt into the bowels of the machine. After I processed the film (ISO 200, as I recall) and examined the negatives I could find no streaking, halation-effect or other anomalies related to erratic, x-ray-induced exposure.

Film is not appropriate (or desirable) for everyone, I realize, but if a person wants to travel and photograph with film, there is no reason that airport security should prove to be an impediment to that desire.


I hope this can be of help.

[Jamie240]

Very helpful. Thank you.

Also, people can buy pre-paid film mailers.

Here's a link:

http://www.adorama.com/catalog.tpl?o...=film_maile r

And another:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Kodak-PK36-prepa...QQcmdZViewItem

Mailers might be a useful idea for some people. I think it would definitely be worth a try.

Maybe try it out a few times 'before' taking a trip, just for peace of mind.

[Matsu]

might want to try this, it's a ruggedized weatherproof F30/F31

http://www.fujifilm.co.jp/press/img/ffnr0059_l.jpg

[digitalprimate]

Originally Posted by Matsu I don't know why more camerass aren't made to accept AA or AAA alkalines. They're ideal for the situation you describe. However, ther's plenty of new Li-ion batteries with 500-600 shot capacity. two of those, charged up before you travel, ought to cover you.

A lot of Canon digital camera's are still with AA or AAA compartiment - I think it's the Powershot Axxx series that has them - And relatively cheap too, I think...