Disneyland : Take Canon DSLR or Sony RX-100?

GeoKras1989 wrote in post #17123744
Two reasons:
My wife does not share my interest in photography, though she does like the results.
If I have to chose wife or camera, the camera will lose each and every time. Period.

My wife also does not get too excited about photography...but she knows I am so she follows along, sort of like I'm not that excited about live theatre yet I do attend with her.

If I had my way (like any God would), I would bring all my DSLR lens and tripod. There are many photo ops there. However, the real question is, can you and your family tolerate it and still truly enjoy their visit.

tkbslc wrote in post #17123792
rx100 = cellphone?

But same logic. Why do photography if family fun the only thing.

bobbyz wrote in post #17124543
But same logic. Why do photography if family fun the only thing.

No that's not the same logic. That's not logic at all.

I'd take the 6D, 24-105, 50 f/1.8 and the flash.

Carrying a full frame rig does not mean the family gets ignored. It just means they get photographed. And the 6D is super (so I hear) in low light.

BIAS: I love the images I got from the RX-100 but I found it to be no fun to shoot. Waaaayy too small. Crazy menu interface. Rented it. Would never buy it. Take it as a backup if you like or for those nights when you think the full frame will be too much to lug around.

NManuel01 wrote in post #17123192
I'm an annual pass holder and take my 2 year old daughter about once a week. About 95% of the time I have my 6D, 24-70, and 430exii, and don't find it more difficult much more difficult than bringing the EOS M. Is usually go in the morning from 10-2 so the heat is on but with my black rapid(recently sold) it's not bad at all. The crowds are dwindling now that summer is over, so it's more enjoyable. My daughter loves the characters so I am always taking pictures.

As for the water rides, the only one to truly be concerned with is grizzly river run. On Splash mountain I put it in a plastic store bag and hold it between my legs, that ride isn't bad at all, but any water near my cam always concerns me lol.

well you're kid is young, and once they grow out of the stroller age, it gets much more difficult carrying gear. 6D + nifty fifty would work for me, or even smaller would be great. Nowadays I'm experimenting with a really smaller mirrorless kit, and it works good. If activity is expected to be really heavy, it would be 1 lens (disneyland). Lots of shows like sea world, I'de use two lenses.

Some sort of belt holster would be best, I tend to avoid straps if possible. Weight starts to kick in a few hours in, and disney is a longish trip.

Leaning towards taking the SL1 with just the 18-55. I always forget just how light this thing is until I actually take it out and put it around my neck.

We did Sea World and the San Diego Zoo last year and I had my Black Rapids clone and myT3i and my 70-200 F4 the whole time. The strap kept the weight off my neck and I was able to get it out whenever I needed too.
I am extremely happy I brought my DSLR instead of something smaller and less feature packed. It was definitely worth the effort of carrying it.

I've been to Disneyland multiple times and I'm just going to come out and say it. You aren't going to get anything from Disneyland besides run of the mill snapshots regardless of camera. So what's the point? Best case they are going on facebook or in a small photo book and nobody will care what camera you used. Every Disney photo gallery I've seen is basically the same.

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=769091

tkbslc wrote in post #17124947
I've been to Disneyland multiple times and I'm just going to come out and say it. You aren't going to get anything from Disneyland besides run of the mill snapshots regardless of camera. So what's the point? Best case they are going on facebook or in a small photo book and nobody will care what camera you used. Every Disney photo gallery I've seen is basically the same.

lol, exactly how I feel about disneyland.

I took only my EOS M the first time I went, but next time I will bring a DSLR (if only for the viewfinder).

Check out these awesome photos posted BT Scatterbrained in another thread:

https://photography-on-the.net …hp?p=17120123&p​ostcount=4

Edit: I also ran out of battery power and had problems focusing in low light rooms there.

frugivore wrote in post #17125126
I took only my EOS M the first time I went, but next time I will bring a DSLR (if only for the viewfinder).

Check out these awesome photos posted BT Scatterbrained in another thread:

https://photography-on-the.net …hp?p=17120123&p​ostcount=4

Edit: I also ran out of battery power and had problems focusing in low light rooms there.

I guess if my girls had a princess makeover session, and were that young, bringing a DSLR would be cake. Just lug it with the stroller. But for non stroller crowd, and the non princess crowd, you're not going to be walking away with those types of shots.

FarmerTed1971 wrote in post #17123795

Charlie wrote in post #17125130
I guess if my girls had a princess makeover session, and were that young, bringing a DSLR would be cake. Just lug it with the stroller. But for non stroller crowd, and the non princess crowd, you're not going to be walking away with those types of shots.

Yea, I took my sony rx100 and took pictures of my two sons drinking beer at epcot

The Dark Knight wrote in post #17124935
Leaning towards taking the SL1 with just the 18-55. I always forget just how light this thing is until I actually take it out and put it around my neck.

Heya,

If I was going to just use natural light, I'd take the lightest, smallest, and relatively wide angle setup I could. If I wanted to have flash as an option, I wouldn't want anything less than a pretty powerful E-TTL capable flash for bouncing to make it a very nice ambient mix of light for exposures in areas where natural light isn't enough.

SL1, 18-55, and an E-TTL flash would be great, and if it took a dive, you wouldn't have a heart attack over it.

I've done theme parks with an APS-C and 18-55 and it really was a simple, easy going experience. I also did the 18-55 and 55-250 experience in some zoo/parks. Ultimately I found I more often wanted ultrawide for context. But when I look at those images, I don't see anything special, so it seems like taking an SLR with a big ultrawide lens with tons of depth of field, really doesn't produce something that a smaller simpler device can do.

Now, I like to just use an EOS-M with 22mm pancake. Enough to blur a busy background if I want. Wide enough to allow me to keep close to the kids and still get them well composed. Small enough that it's not a bother to have with me. And it takes E-TTL flash, so I'd keep my 565EXII in a bag, so if I was in an area that really needed some E-TTL bounce, I'd have it as an option (it looks ridiculous, but it works!). And it's so easy to use if you set it up for touch-screen photo taking, that someone taking a picture for you of you and your family can do it without any special instruction (touch the back of the screen, it will track faces automatically, and expose; you take photos with this thing on accident it's so stupid easy), and you don't worry if you hand someone a $250 camera, when their iPhone cost more.

Very best,