What Camera Should I Buy?

"What camera should I buy?"

This question is asked at some point in practically every photography-related forum. Usually the question is answered by a whole string of people whose responses take the form of:

"I use [insert camera model X] and LOVE it! You should get the same thing! You won't be disappointed!"

Unfortunately the plain fact of the matter is that you might very well be disappointed because their needs may not match your own, regardless of whether you're doing photography on the ground or from the air. There are no simple answers to this question. Ever.

With KAP, there are a number of considerations you might want to look at, depending on what you plan to do with your rig. A generously wide field of view is a common concern, as is the ability to trigger the shutter from an IR or electronic remote. Image quality and noise characteristics are another set of concerns that often go hand-in-hand. And of course there's the ever-present quest for more pixels without having to lose in any of these other areas.

But for KAP one of the overwhelming considerations is weight. This is not to say that light is always better than heavy, but no other characteristic of a camera will affect the rest of a person's KAP equipment more.

By way of example, there are two very successful KAP photographers who operate at two very different ends of this scale. One uses an ultra lightweight automatic rig. There is no radio transmitter, no receiver, only the camera, a servo for pan rotation, and a controller that will rotate the rig and take pictures. The rig is mostly flown from lightweight, high angle kites that let the rig be operated with a nearly slack line between the rig and the KAPer. This setup has produced numerous outstanding photos.

The other uses comparatively heavy medium format film gear. Because of the additional weight in the camera, it needs a substantially heavier rig to support it. The heavier rig and camera combination must then be hung from a kite capable of developing a great deal of pull. Larger kites cost more, so in addition to the more expensive camera hardware, the kite is also more expensive. Since this represents a large investment in airborne hardware, the safety factor in the line is higher, making for heavier line. In the case of this KAPer the line is also doubled so that in the event of a line failure there is a second line to take up the load. All of this adds to the cost. This setup has also produced numerous outstanding photos.

So which one is "right"?

And when Rabbit said, "Honey or condensed milk with your bread?" [Pooh] was so excited that he said, "Both," and then, so as not to seem greedy, he added, "but don't bother about the bread, please."
-- A.A. Milne, "Winne-The-Pooh"

There is no one right answer. Each is "right" for the photographer in question. Which more or less leaves someone interested in getting into KAP with no more information than they started with, which isn't entirely a fair thing to do.

Rather than leave things there, I'll share with you my own route into KAP. As for which camera I started with, I started with a camera I had on hand. In my own matrix of features versus trade-offs, it had the perfect combination: I already had it.

On the plus side, it wasn't that heavy. On the minus side, it had some oddball characteristics that didn't make it ideal for KAP. One of these was that it liked to turn itself off to save power, and there was no practical way to get rid of this problem. So I opted for an impractical way, and simply never stopped taking pictures the entire time the camera was in the air. I still lost a lot of shots because of this when the camera turned off mid-flight, but for the most part it worked.

My second KAP camera weighed twice as much, and increased my rig weight from 600g to 800g in one fell swoop. This impacted my ability to fly it. For starters, all of my kites needed more wind in order to lift the rig. But the wind range of the individual kites didn't change, so in essence this compressed their available wind range. For some kites, like my 6' rokkaku, it was hard to tell the difference. For others, like my Fled, it means I can't use that kite at all for this rig.

There are certainly lighter cameras available, but for what I wanted it was the right camera for the job. But the trade-off is that I have fewer opportunities to fly it. This can be addressed in several ways. One is to trade it in for a lighter camera. Another is to keep the heavier camera, but build a lighter rig. This is something I've done with this camera, and it wound up saving the day on a once-of-a-lifetime KAPing trip. Yet another way to address this is to get a new set of kites that will fly the heavier camera rig, and regain my wind range that way.

So even for a single KAPer, there may still not be a "right" way to go. It's a tough question that only you can answer for yourself. What camera is right for you? Only you can know.

Nonetheless, there are some things to look for in a KAP camera, though you won't necessarily get one camera that fits all of these:

• Weight - I've already made the point that weight affects all other aspects of KAP. Unless you're ready to invest in larger kites, heavier line, etc. you might want to start light.
• Field of View - Most of the time people look for wide angle cameras for use on kites. It's difficult to aim a camera with a narrow field of view, and tighter fields of view accentuate motion blur from rig swing. Wider, in this case, really is better most of the time.
• Manual Settings - In addition to letting you choose your shutter speed and aperture, most cameras with manual settings also don't get to insistent about turning themselves off or putting themselves into some sort of power saving mode. It's worth checking both of these things.
  
• Remote Triggering - Unless the camera has some provision for remote shutter release, the only way to get it to take a picture is to push the shutter button. This is not a show stopper, and all of my rigs but one use a servo as a "finger" to hit the button. But the ability to use an infrared or electronic release means one fewer piece of equipment to have to loft, and one more part of your rig that can't fall out of alignment.
  
• Battery Life - Cameras with longer battery life are friendlier for KAP. If the camera burns a set of batteries in an hour, the only way to keep flying is to keep a lot of batteries on hand. Cameras that let you shut off the LCD, put the camera in a power saving mode that it can wake up from, or are otherwise stingy with batteries are a plus.

You've probably noticed I didn't discuss the one thing that most camera reviews go ga-ga over: how many pixels the camera supports. Depending on what you want to do with your images, this may not be a big deal. For posting on the web, cameras with more than 2MP detectors may not buy you much. But if you're planning to make big poster sized prints, higher resolution cameras are called for. If you're planning to make wall murals, digital cameras may not be the route to go. (Now you understand why that one KAPer uses medium format film gear!) This is a question only you can answer, and has very little to do with a camera's aptitude for doing KAP.

As for particular brands, you're in luck. I've used cameras and lenses that were made anywhere from the early 1900's all the way up to cameras that came off the line less than a year ago. There's a world of difference. In order for a camera maker to stay competitive, they really do have to turn out a top-notch product. Chances are, if you're familiar with the manufacturer's name, you can't go too far wrong. Every camera manufacturer does occasionally turn out a lemon, so it's worth checking the digital camera review sites. But as for which brand is the best? See the quote from Winne the Pooh up above. But don't bother about the bread.

-- Tom