A new contender for best climbing camera?

I agree with those who commented that this camera (LX100) is not "adventure proof". I definitely will admit that I am not super careful with my electronics and I'm sure this camera would do well for hikes and such, just not climbing where it gets banged around a bit.

I bought one of these last spring and it proved to be fairly fragile -- it does not tolerate climbing adventure bumps and dings at all. Autofocus no longer works, and the back screen doesn't work after less than a year. I sent it in to be repaired but being banged up, they won't repair it under warranty (which actually makes sense - totally on me).

This was a bit of a bummer to me since I have a first generation Lumix GF1 (the first predecessor to the LX100) and it's basically bombproof and still works perfectly, although a bit slower than the LX100. I think the GF1 takes better photos than the LX100 in auto mode as well, and has been banged up for nearly a decade and going strong.

I use a Canon G15. It has many of the features of my DSLR and is small enough to bring it climbing. The best camera is the one who have with you.

I was thinking of the LX100, but that is because I want a small camera I can put in a housing and use for diving, that will also trigger external strobes. I have an LX3, which has to be at least 7 year old now. I use it as my travel camera, and have climbed with it many, may times. I use a runner to keep it attached to my harness and it is small enough to fit in my pocket and easy to use with one hand.

Panasonic makes great small cameras. For years, the LX3 was basically the same camera as the entry level Leica, at about 1/2 to 2/3 the price. The Leica added a few things, but the lens and sensor were the same.

I wouldn't lug my nikon FF gear up a climb unless I was getting paid to do so.

For personal climbing, As far as convenience and quality goes, I think the 1" P&S gang is where it's at: Sony RX100, Canon G7x mark ii, Lumix. I like the Canon the best. I used to use canon powershot Aseries; these newer p&s are worlds better, mainly because they shoot RAW, better glass, and are a lot faster (no shutter lag, etc). You can totally get some really nice photos with these in the right conditions.

However, I tried out a bunch of different small cameras recently, and came away with an OM-D Em5 mark ii. Only had it for a couple weeks but enjoying it so far. Y'all people who are looking to go beyond snapshots to share with friends should check out the Micro 4/3 world. With an Em5ii and the right lens (like the tiny Olympus 9-18mm or Lumix 12-32) you have a very capable, versatile camera that's still small enough to clip to your harness (in a Lowepro Dashpoint 30). If you look around on the web there are a number of pros using this camera. Great to have the option of LCD or EVF, and you can flip the LCD around to protect it while it dangles. Metal body, weather sealing with certain lenses.

One caveat to that: the tiny M43 zoom lenses are definitely slower than the lens on high p&s (4-5.6 vs 1.8-2.8), but it kind of evens out with the larger sensor on M43.

Certainly depends on what you're planning on doing with your climbing photos. I mean the iphone works pretty dang good to sharing on FB and what not.

Sony RX100 V - just picked one up for my recent ski trip to Japan. Photos and video are amazing...

Japow

Bill Kirby wrote:My IPhone is always in my pocket. That works best for catching the shots I want whether a great landscape or evidence of a personal victory. I either 1, never pack the camera. 2, don't wanna stop to take the shot. I feel like there's no time. Or 3, forget the camera.

Seriously, Iphone is the best.

Chris treggE wrote:I bought one of these last spring and it proved to be fairly fragile -- it does not tolerate climbing adventure bumps and dings at all. Autofocus no longer works, and the back screen doesn't work after less than a year. I sent it in to be repaired but being banged up, they won't repair it under warranty (which actually makes sense - totally on me).

I had the same experience with the LX100. Focus no longer works after 6 months and they will not repair under warranty because of the dings in the camera body (although this focus problem is a major known issue even when the camera is not treated roughly). I also felt the image quality was quite bad in certain key situations (mostly bright light like you usually find outdoors) and I was hugely disappointed in the camera to begin with. I've been a dedicated Lumix fan for years (LX2, LX3 & LX5) but this experience was enough to destroy my loyalty to the brand. The LX100 is an epic fail and should be avoided.

Sarah Meiser wrote: I had the same experience with the LX100. Focus no longer works after 6 months and they will not repair under warranty because of the dings in the camera body (although this focus problem is a major known issue even when the camera is not treated roughly). I also felt the image quality was quite bad in certain key situations (mostly bright light like you usually find outdoors) and I was hugely disappointed in the camera to begin with. I've been a dedicated Lumix fan for years (LX2, LX3 & LX5) but this experience was enough to destroy my loyalty to the brand. The LX100 is an epic fail and should be avoided.

I'm glad it wasn't just me, the durability issue and the poor image quality compared to other competitors. Total waste of $700 or whatever it was and I will never buy a Lumix again. I'm just using my first generation GF1 for now, until stops working. Not even worth the quoted $300 for repairs to get it back from the warranty repair shop, as far as I am concerned. Not to mention I had to call them 3 times to find out if they had received it and then twice to find out what they had discovered and a quote for repairs. Horrible customer service.

My 2 cents on this topic.

I'm into climbing photography. I'm not a pro or even close but have had a couple shots published.

I'm willing to push it terms of risking the camera. I've destroyed a couple camera's as well - banging around and/or chalk dust. I occasionally take out my Canon 6D (DSLR - full frame sensor) but keep it on the ground. For most climbing days and multipitch climbs I like to take a small camera.

Even with a small camera, image quality is most important to me so the features I look for are fast lens, as big a sensor as possible, and decent high ISO performance. Good burst speed is important too (to get the action shots just right). Zoom is nice to have but the further the reach the slower the lens even at wide open.

I've tried the "tough cameras" like Panasonic, Olympus, and Pentax. Often climbing photo ops happen in shade or cloudy conditions and these tough cameras have too slow lens, too small sensors, and slow operational speed. Their higher than base iso is very noisy and the Olympus (fastest lens of the bunch) has unacceptable in camera sharpening artifacts (at least in the generation I tried). I've haven't tried the Canon or Nikon solutions but they seems similar.

I currently am using a very beat up Canon S110 Powershot. Slightly bigger sensor, brighter lens, decent performance. I knew I would beat it up and bought it re-furbished from the Canon web site for around $300. I'm on my 3rd year with it.

When my S110 is fully destroyed, my next climbing camera will likely be one of the 1" sensor offerings in a small size. Sony RX 100 series, Canon G7X/9X or Panonsonic LX10. In order to keep the cost down, I will go with an older generation of one of these cameras. Like this:
shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/…

Sorry to hear about the LX100, it's a great sounding camera on paper. I have a LX7 I use for ski photography and have had great luck and good shots with it.

I have the Canon S110. It was great for the first several months and then the lens fell apart. The Lumix Leica lenses were fantastic for P&S with a decent ISO range, but all of the ones I've owned had excessive dust and durability issues. Tough cameras are only decent in perfect lighting.

In general, optical zoom isn't worth the decreased durability of a retractable lens to me. A higher MP range and cropping are more worthwhile. The best combo of high MP, shutter speed, battery and convenience is my Droid and I've been using it for the past couple years. The ISO range and sensitivity aren't great, which is a big drawback.

John Fielder was at a groundwater group dinner thing last week and I asked him about P&S options. He mentioned his Iphone.

I bought an Rx100 ii last year after a lot of searching. I've since taken it with me on multiple climbing trips, out to the crag, and all over the world. It's held up great so far.

I had a couple of priorities:

1) <$300 so that I'm not heartbroken if/(when) it breaks.
2) Mirrorless - obviously the best option for quality/size.
3) Decent lens capable of shooting in low light.

Zoom wasn't a huge priority for me - the quality of a mirrorless allows me plenty of resolution to crop with, and most of my favorite shots tend to be up close + wide angle anyways.

I'm very happy with my purchase. If I did it again, I might actually go for an Rx100 mark 1 just because you can get them for so ridiculously cheap and it would make me less worried about lugging it up into a chimney (which I've been reluctant to do with my Rx100 ii so far, even though its handled abuse like a champ).

For multi-pitch climbs I use my iPhone. For everything else (skiing, hiking, camping, sport crags) I have a Sony NEX and a couple of lenses for it. I bought a new older version NEX for $300 - I don't need wireless.

I just got back from 6 days climbing ice in New England and brought 5 cameras with me. My main landscape camera, a Sony a7ii, my backup landscape and backpacking camera, a Sony a6000, my old point and shoot, a Canon s100, a GoPro and my phone.

The a7ii, I brought with a few times in the pack, but never used it except from the base which is not terribly exciting.

The GoPro was mostly useless since I don't care about video much and head mounted video of a climb is painfully boring unless you fall or something.

My phone took a couple shots here and there for sending to friends while at belays, etc.

The a6000 and Canon were the workhorses. While climbing as a party of 3 I could easily just be photo guy and make the other 2 belay. I mostly just brought the s100 because it easily fits in a pocket. Even when climbing just with a partner it was easy to take out the s100 and snap a few shots when belaying from above and when my partner stopped to let me snap some of him on lead. (Yeah, I know, we're gonna die) I even brought my big zoom lens with my a6000 a couple times and when at a belay I'd just strap it over my shoulder to dangle which made it very easy to grab and get a shot or 2.

Now all that said, we were climbing ice/mixed with packs so it was easy to bring the bigger camera. On rock I'd either bring the stock pancake lens which almost fits in a pocket and is very light for what it is, just the s100 or if I wanted to get a more dedicated on the wall camera I'd go buy some version of the Sony RX100 like others have.

Regardless of camera, if whatever camera you use has tie in points for a strap of any kind, I highly recommend the Peak Designs leash strap. Makes it almost impossible to drop much past hip level and it doesn't really interfere in any way.

Are we going to get to see any of your NE photos, Ryan?

M Sprague wrote:Are we going to get to see any of your NE photos, Ryan?

Here are some of them. mountainproject.com/v/11247…

Very nice album. Some great shots in there!

Lots of good information here, tough choice between the G9x vs rx100

How about the new Sony RX0

^ Respectfully: if you're going to do that much color + saturation stuff in post, does it matter how good the camera is? I don't think I'm saying that that style is inherently bad, but rather that if you're going to push it that far in post and manipulate the image to that degree, you might be able to get something similar with a lesser kit?