photographers - is it worth taking an SLR?

Years ago, I brought my SLR (this was before digital), plus an extra lens, and 12-15 rolls of film. Plus, later, a point-and-shoot digital camera. The “good” camera(s) was/were essential, for getting the best quality pictures.

But I’m not printing them out anymore, nor posting photos onto a Website, blog, social media, etc. My iPhone gets the job done, and it’s getting filled up because I still take lots of pictures. Unless you need exceptional photos for a special reason, your smartphone does a generally very, very good job, is less cumbersome, and goes thru Security with much less anxiety.

It depends on you. If it were just me, I'd be OK with just my phone , but my 15 year old daughter loves photography so we took our (mirrorless) camera to Italy last year and are definitely taking it to Paris (in less than 2 weeks!). She took some great pictures and is looking forward to using the camera again.

SLRs usually have a level horizon. With a phone horizons are easy to end up skewed.

I always used a Canon DSLR from 2010 until 2017 . While the pictures were great , as I drifted further into my dotage, the size and weight of the camera began to wear on me . At that point I switched to a Canon mirrorless DSLR which is half the size and weight of my original camera and takes pictures that are even better . As I am an art fanatic, my collection of photos is extensive , and loaded onto my computer and displayed on a 60 inch TV , I can enjoy revisiting my travel experiences, in a way that's hard to beat . My wife uses her phone , and it does take nice shots , but for me the camera is the way to go . Especially for Rome and Florence, the camera wins hands down.

I used to carry a micro four thirds camera with a fast prime and a telephoto lens. Since then phone cameras have improved enough that I just use that. Some much less stuff and weight to carry around. Occasionally I do miss the camera in low light situations. But I have a little mini tripod that seems to work well.

Regarding level horizons. iPhones have a tool to help. Go to settings>>>>Camera and toggle the level to on. You can also edit photos to correct for small changes.

I’ve taken a DSLR on one trip and then I sold it.

A couple things, firstly it’s a continuous burden whether it’s around your neck or In a bag

Second, it makes you a target almost regardless of where you’re travelling. Nothing says tourist like a big camera around your neck.

Thirdly, if you don’t actually know how to use the camera WELL the results likely won’t even turn out as good as newer phones.

I’ll put some of the photos I’ve taken with my 16 pro max against amateur photographers almost any day of the week because I’ve learned what good composition looks like.

For me personally, the negatives far outweigh the positives, and with newer, higher end phones, the end result is very comparable.

I have a friend who was/is a professional photographer.
He has owned more SLR, DSLR Canon bodies that you can count.
Today, he does most of his photography with a full-frame mirrorless camera.
The remainder is with his iPhone.

If you are wondering then take just the phone. You don't want to be carrying both in Florence and Rome.

I take a Minox film camera, ASA 100 B&W works for me.

It is often stared that a phone camera has the immediate use that often gets you the shots that you would otherwise miss. Unless you need the telephoto aspects of an SLR as on a safari, a phone will get you what you need.

I have reduced myself to traveling with a Canon G1X, a small, light camera that allows me to adjust all the settings as usual. I have a mirrorless canon and lenses at home, but it is too heavy and big for international travel for me at this stage of life...unless I were going bird watching or such. I have an iPhone 15. I take the G1X and it takes better photos than my iPhone, when I'm good. The iPhone might take better photos, sometimes, when I'm bad, but those photos give me little joy. For me, the joy is working the camera and getting the shot, not maybe getting the shot. The iPhone does its own thing, basically. Half the time, due to no view finder, I can't even see if I'm getting the subject I want until I get out of the sun and see the result. LOL. So, I take the G1X so I can enjoy the process of taking the photos as well as the result. And my little camera makes a huge difference in the results, IMO. It weighs 14 oz., which is the heaviest thing in my personal item, but still worth it.

More importantly, and I seem to be one of the few on this forum with this opinion, I think my iPhone is the most important item that I carry. It's more important than my passport, my money or my credit cards. It has everything on it. I'm the eccentric gray haired lady with the phone attached to her small crossbody purse. I don't want to lose it and have a hacker in my phone... I use it for Apple Pay, etc. and a photo or two just when I don't happen to have the camera with me. On my next trip that means the Paris portion as I really don't need more photos of Paris...I keep telling myself. ;0

I guess the bottom line is, what is it about the process or the photos that makes you happy and decide which camera from there.

Regarding level horizons. iPhones have a tool to help. Go to settings>>>>Camera and toggle the level to on.

THANKS! Toggled on and ready to go!

Like others have said it depends on you and your needs. If you’re a photographer or amateur and print out pictures and want higher quality than what your phone may give, by all means take along your Dslr. I used to take a camera with us every single trip, even after having good phones. I even took my mothers old Canon EOS 5D Mark II once, and it weighs a ton, but, damn, even after 15 or so years it STILL takes excellent photographs, although not as good as mom would’ve taken. But, if you’re just like the rest of us and want great photos for social media or sending to friends and family, then don’t take it. My wife and I, combined, usually take an average of 500 photos on our vacations. I can’t imagine paying to develop 500 photos.

...wondering if it's worth the hassle of taking it...

In my opinion, no. The weight and bulk of an SLR are too much to contend with. I use a small Cannon "point and shoot" that has amazing capablilities. The results equal or exceed what I used to get with the big equipment. And it fits in a shirt or vest pocket. And I'm speaking as one who did photography for several publications back when there was only film.

I consider all of these to be essentially religious questions:

1. Do I really need an International Drivers permit when I rent a car in Europe?
2. Should I actually pay for all those speeding/ZTL tickets I got while driving around Italy last year?
3. Can I count on the insurance provided by my credit card for my car rental in Europe or will I regret it?
4. Is it worth taking my real camera to Europe or is my phone good enough?

There are other religious questions frequently asked here, but these are probably the ones most often asked. Like most religious questions, people will offer facts, opinions, their own beliefs, endlessly and with great sincerity. But ultimately it's up to you. As an aside: anytime a question contains the phrase, "is it worth it", nobody can answer that question except you.

On the dedicated camera versus phone question, I think it boils down to:

• How much you care about your photos, and how much of a priority you place on them for whatever reason. If you want the option to print them (though almost nobody does), take the DSLR. If you want to be able to shoot successfully in challenging conditions (low light, long distances, moving objects, etc), take the DSLR.
• What kind of photos you will be taking. Shooting wildlife (you're never very close), you must take the DSLR (and a serious zoom lens). For selfies, casual quick photos without interruptions, forget the DSLR. If you want to be able to take wide shots (sweeping landscapes, huge monumental objects), you will need a wide lens (many newer phones have this option).

There is no question, a dedicated DSLR is a burden. It's heavy (probably the heaviest thing you might bring). They're fragile. They're expensive. They're magnets for thieves. If you're going to bring multiple lenses, the same goes for each of those, and they add up quickly.

But phone's ain't cheap these days, either. And are also magnets for thieves. And are probably more easily "lost" (left behind) than a big DSLR.

Phones are very small, light, and you always have it with you and quickly accessible (maybe too accessible...) - which can make all the difference for capturing a fleeting moment. Phones are less intrusive. Phones don't quite mark you so clearly as a tourist, but honestly, everyone can see and instantly knows you're a tourist so there's no point in pretending otherwise. Phones may make it easier to manage your photos (but if you shoot a lot, the managing/uploading quickly becomes a major task).

Lots of other valid points are made in posts above, on both sides. Which is why it remains a question which nobody can answer except you.

For me, I bring a phone and a DSLR - and sometimes a drone. I use the phone for some photos, but rarely for any that I think I'm going to care much about. There are just times/places that the big camera won't work or is a bad choice, that's for the phone. I shoot most with my camera. Yes, it's heavy, very heavy, fragile, but it's reliable and takes great shots even under challenging conditions. I may or may not bring extra lenses - for wildlife or shots of anything at a distance, it can't be beat. I also bring a drone on some trips - it's just a camera that happens to fly, and I find it often captures the vibe of a place like no other camera can. Here are some drone shots that I think justified the hassle of bringing it along: Drone Shots

For me, the camera gear is "worth it." Photos are quite important to me (and my dear spouse will put up with a lot of waiting on me and will even carry some of the heavy gear for me occasionally, knowing that we will come home with some awesome photos to enjoy for years). YMMV.

Your own priorities may be (almost certainly are) different, and those should dictate your choices. There are no bad choices here, just tradeoffs - which is what all travel decisions really are, personal preferences and tradeoffs.

I’ve been tempted by a drone in the past, but I just find them to be so invasive/intrusive anywhere where there are other people.

I have brought a DSLR in my holidays for several years, till at some time photos shoot by iPhone were so high in quality that the burden of lugging the gear was no more worth the effort. I admit some kind of photos - for example if you want control on the depht of field - really need a SLR and a choice of lenses, so it really depends on your interest.

My two cents: if you really want to take photos in Florence and Rome, getting out very early - say at 7am, in any case no later than 8am - and shooting the photos before the crowds arrive will make a real difference and probably much bigger than having a set of different lenses.

@ Tyler - Yep, I've been in places where drones zooming around have annoyed me, too, so I get it. But there are plenty of places with no people (I tend to avoid crowded places anyway). I always try to be responsible, considerate (and follow the regulations), it's not hard to do so. Big cities and popular tourist locations are no places for them.

In many places, it's actually pretty easy to find a spot well away from people (not only is it more polite, it's generally illegal to operate over crowds). Typically I'll only fly in places without any people at all, or if there are people around, I'll go hike out of town a ways and fly from there. Or I'll just not fly at all. I shoot almost entirely from 400 feet high, the maximum legal altitude, and nobody notices a small drone up high (at that height, nobody can hear or see it at all...I know exactly where it is and it's still hard to see the dot in the sky). Shots are better from that height anyway (as you can see from the linked photos, they're almost all shot up quite high - only a couple were taken at low altitude, and in those, there was nobody around for miles). In all the linked shots, there was not a single other person who was even aware a drone was flying around there, just me. So they don't need to be annoying (the operators may be though...).

I think of the drone as effectively a 400-foot-high tripod. As long as you keep away from places with people, a small, quiet should be no more intrusive than any other tripod.

@ lachera - I agree that getting up early - sometimes painfully early - is often the key to get nice frames in popular places. It almost always helps at least somewhat (even in places where there are no people, morning light can make for lovely photos). I find more and more that I am seeking out destinations that don't have big crowds, and not just for getting nice photos.

depends on what you use the pictures for. If you want to blow them up to poster size or make professional quality competition prints then a SLR is probably best. But if you have a very good camera phone and your photos are for friends, family, photo blogs and such then that is adequate. I like having the phone available everywhere everytime -- I dont' want to luge a camera bag everywhere.

I think it's really a personal question. If you're accustomed to carrying a camera regularly it shouldn't be too much of a problem. I wouldn't worry about looking like a tourist personally. I still quite like the act of making a picture with a camera. I have a 5D mkIII. I think a 50mm lens with an (full frame) SLR is a decent compromise for travel. Just having a small, light fixed focal length lens with a fast aperture gets pretty much everything done. Sometimes you might have to walk instead of zooming.

I've never upgraded to any of the new fancy smartphones with multiple lenses, but at least that gets round the perennial smartphone problem of horrible wide angle lens distortion.

For a few years I carried a little Panasonic Lumix compact camera when I travelled. I found that was ok for mostly everything. I'd zoom just off the widest, to reduce cheap lens barrel distortion, and add +1 or +1.5 stops of exposure compensation because I found it tended to err on the side of underexposure, like many consumer cameras do. If I was taking pictures of people out in the daylight, I'd zoom as much as possible and force the flash on, even though it's only a tiny blip against sunlight. Just brightened things up a bit. Underexposure in difficult light is where small sensors fall down, whether it's phones or compact cameras.

I just got an I-phone 16Pro. Just how much can I enlarge a photo? I was at a neighbor's last week. He had framed an I-phone photo (landscape) to about 24"x36", if not larger- it was high on a staircase wall. Do any of you expert photographers know much much you can "stretch" the resolution, and still get an acceptable travel photo? Thanks so much!

If nobody is going to see it from less than six feet away, any modern digital photo is going to be fine up to the size you mention. You can get away with quite low resolutions if your viewing distance is large enough.

GerryM, thanks for taking the time to share!

If you zoom to 100% on the photo on your computer or double tap on the phone, look at fine detail and see if it's starting to look a bit "crunchy". Digital zoom within a phone or camera can make things a bit jaggy, as can cropping a small area and blowing that up into a print. If there's not a lot of fine detail you need to preserve, and folks can stand back from your print, you can get away with quite a lot, well beyond 36x24 possibly. If you look at a roadside billboard, the dots are pea-sized and it looks perfectly normal from a distance.

There's all sorts of AI for scaling photos up these days too, but that might be overkill.

The primary reason for my purchasing an Olympus micro 4/3 mirrorless "SLR" was the viewfinder - I find it to be a much more natural process for composing shots, especially with a zoom lens and manual focus. And then there's the challenge of working with a viewscreen in bright sunlight... no thanks. Plus I believe you need an iPhone Pro for RAW file formats.

Ive learned to compromise for ease of travel and weight - I've been carrying a Canon Powershot G7X Mark III for 5 years now. I'm less anxious knowing I'm not putting my phone in risky situations. I've compared the results I can achieve with the Canon vs. my current gen Samsung A24 and the Canon still has the edge. Canon had nearly stopped making point-and-shoots but in February Canon told investors it was ramping up production of its compacts, citing the popularity of the G7 X III. They have learned that a big demand exists for them among bloggers and strangely enough young people. That's good news for those of us who will still be needing their batteries. DPReview: Best enthusiast compact: Canon PowerShot G7 X III

I take a Minox film camera, ASA 100 B&W works for me.

When I was a wee tyke, my dad had a tiny Minox camera that was an absolute marvel in its time - real James Bond stuff (originally produced in Latvia - who knew!). I believe it was a Model B - the classic little spy camera prized by agents on both sides during the Cold War. My dad used it for vacation photos.

Such cool gear! I saw a lot of (rather poor quality) family photos from that little gizmo. I wonder what happened to it...it would be worth a fortune now.

That reminds me, I have an unused, still-in-the-shrinkwrap, original, first-release iPhone in my Old Tech closet...

Talking of cold war cameras, before digital I carried either a Zenit E or a Zorki 4 on holiday. I had a Nikon at home from quite young. The Russian cameras were tough and cheap which made them a good choice for putting them at risk in luggage etc. Both just with a 50mm lens and no bag or case. My Zorki still has a big dent in the end of the lens which would make screwing a filter on impossible without some massaging with pliers.

I had a little Lumix automatic that took great pictures and was small enough for my small cross body bag and then one day someone dropped it while taking a snapshot of our group at an opera in Milwaukee -- and that was the end of that camera. I bought a similar newer model Lumix and it was nowhere near as good although for a while I used it for establishiing shots while having the larger SLR for close ups/telefoto etc. Now I just use an Iphone 14 which has a pretty good camera with good telefoto and the portability makes it ideal

For me, in most situations, there is little benefit in carrying more than my phone. The caveat here is that I am using a current gen phone.

So why do I say this?

Most of my travel is with non-photographers. I don't often control the conditions when I am seeing something of interest. By conditions I am referring to weather, time of day, crowds, and time available to dial in as much as possible.

If I am traveling in summer, the days are long, and the lighting is less than ideal during peak sightseeing time. The odds of everything aligning for me to have an art worthy image where a full kit will matter are not zero but are relatively low.

So, what are the exceptions? A polarized filter can improve many daylight images, something hard to accomplish with a phone. For street or portrait photography, I still prefer the more natural subject separation I can get with a fast prime lens. It is also easier to control for things like motion blur with a standard camera. For example, you want pedestrians to stand still but fast-moving vehicles/objects to blur. That said, you do have this level of control with a phone, it's just harder to get at.

I will frame all of this another way. I've seen incredible works of art created with very simple cameras. I've never seen a bad image made better with expensive gear. Most of the time good technique and conditions matter far more than having the best equipment. For most people in most situations, current gen phones are better instruments than the best photo technology from just 10ish years ago.

I have always travelled with an slr/dslr even after getting a cell phone with a decent camera option. The reason is that I like the art of photography. Looking through a viewfinder, composing the photo, thinking about shutter speed and aperture etc. If these are not important to you, then just use your phone. I have recently switched to an Olympus mirrorless camera to cut down on size and weight, and I really enjoy using it. The key, though, is in knowing how to use the camera to the best of its ability. If you are a person who sets your slr camera to auto and leaves it there, then you will probably be fine with just your phone camera. On my recent tour in Turkey, I was the only person who had an actual camera, everyone else on the tour only had their phone, and many were commenting that they thought I would get really great photos. I still took photos with my phone, but mostly inside museums where it was easier to use the phone in a crowded space. I had a much better zoom option with my camera, also, so got a few photos that couldn’t be done with the phone. It really comes down to what kind of photos you take, and want.

The key, though, is in knowing how to use the camera to the best of its ability. If you are a person who sets your slr camera to auto and leaves it there, then you will probably be fine with just your phone camera.

Yes. This. I enjoy using a camera on manual to get the best out of it. I never used a camera on program or auto until much later in life. Even on auto, I'm fiddling with half presses of the shutter to lock exposure where I meter from and using exposure compensation to give me nice histogram. If you're not interested in that sort of stuff modern phones are great.

I have an Android app called "DSLR Camera" which makes the phone look and feel a bit more like a mirrorless camera. There's lots of similar alternatives, free and paid, to install and mess with from the Android or Apple stores.

I'd also recommend Adobe Photoshop Express on the phone to anyone interested. You can do pretty much everything you need to do to process a photo in a decent interface and it has Instagram-type filter presets too. Photos come out of it not that different to the full-blown versions of Photoshop or Lightroom if used carefully.

The Olympus mirrorless cameras look really smart btw. I like their retro styling like the old OM range.

Gerry M,
what's the best app to use to clean up a pix if you capture an incredible IPhone shot - then afterwards at home- notice you have power lines in the background, (or similar ?) This has happened to me twice, to what I thought were the best shots of the trip. This year, I paid a photo shop $20 to remove the power lines, then I could enlarge the photo. Would Adobe Photoshop Express serve that purpose?

Even tho you all have so much more expertise than I, I'm enjoying the discussion. Thanks so much!

I had a quick Google to see what there is for iPhone. I'm not a user. I'll link to something called Photomator below. That looks like the best option to me.

https://apps.apple.com/us/app/photomator-photo-editor/id1444636541?platform=iphone

There's also TouchRetouch -

https://apps.apple.com/us/app/touchretouch/id373311252?platform=iphone

You'll probably get other recommendations from the app store if you look at them.

I use Adobe Lightroom and Photoshop. Both very expensive if you have to pay for them, and Adobe have a terrible subscription model for their software.

I worked in photography and pro photo lab work straight from high school, so picked up Photoshop when it was almost brand new and we were just moving to digital. I'm much slower and rustier with it now than I was 30 years ago though!

Yo OP Hep,
Its really a matter of both personal choice and what your goals are for your Italian imagery. For some, there is the very real issue of the camera's weight.
I have stuck with a 15 yr old Nikon 7000 merely coz I am a technopeasant who dreads learning a new system yet again.
Chimps regularly beat me during tech competitions back in the day.

Below is our latest and very looooooong Trip Report ('Pyrennial' about the Spanish Pyrenees) from the Fodors travel Board. Over there I go by 'zebec'. As always, we have attempted to make it more interesting than yet-another Photo Essay. And so added music, humour and logistical tips. My wife and I both prefer Adobe Lightroom.

Whether we could've achieved similar results with less hassle, who knows?
I am done. The end.
https://www.fodors.com/community/europe/pyrennial-a-spanish-pyrenees-tr-1727869/

20 bucks to remove a wire? Sheesh. Maybe I should start a side hustle.

If you need a wire removed from a treasured photo, ping me. I do that kind of clean-up (on my own shots) every day.

Disclaimer: I worked at Adobe for over 20 years, developing apps and helping customers figure out how to use Photoshop, Lightroom and lots more. These days I still use Photoshop and Lightroom, often for many hours, almost every day.

Been shooting since the days of film, traveling overseas with up to 100 rolls of 35 mm print film. I once almost got "arrested" (or maybe worse), checking in for my flight from Rangoon to Bangkok with a sack of 35 mm film cans. The machine-gun toting kids in the airport insisted it had to be run through a high-powered xray machine repeatedly, which I refused. Lets just say we had a long, sometimes tense discussion, I didn't get shot or arrested, and eventually they let me go after opening and visually inspecting every single film canister (thankfully, they were satisfied that it was film - without exposing it - and they didn't insist on viewing the film itself)...they finally let me go after I paid a "fine" for which no receipt was given...

It's probably good they didn't see some of my shots. Burma: The People's Desire.

I use Adobe Lightroom and Photoshop. Both very expensive if you have to pay for them, and Adobe have a terrible subscription model for their software.

Adobe puts Photoshop Elements on sale several times a year - for around $70 - a purchase, not a subscription - for desktop installation. It does much of what full-blown PS will do, so fine for most photo editing and enhancements. It does NOT output to CMYK, which is mainly an issue if you produce work for commercial printing. And it seems like the Corel photo editing package is ALWAYS on sale.

David from Seattle,
thanks for the offer. We'll see how the photos come out from the upcoming spring trip. Again, this has been an enjoyable thread. Thanks to all!