[automorphism]

I actually have a really old Panasonic FH25 bridge fixed compact camera that I take with me when I can't take a ILC. It is supersmall and fits in a pocket. I suppose people these days can take phones but in my opinion phones run out of batteries faster than a dedicated camera. Also I don't really like phones lol. But yeah, for long hikes I just forget my ILC.

[normhead]

My wife and I probably do an average of 5 mies a day, almost every day... 17,000 Fitbit steps just today.

It really depends... some days I'm energetic and use the k-3 with the DA 18-135 and DA 55-300. Other days I'm less energetic and just take one or the other. When I take the DA 55-300 PLM, I also take the 21 ltd.

More and more I'm taking the Lumix ZS100.

Just a few recent images....

It is superlative for low light images that don't stretch your dynamic range. This image taken at ƒ2.8, yet everything from 8 feet to infinity in focus.


For a one inch sensor the Dynamic range is a bit disappointing. In images like this with black and white dogs you have choice to make. You can have blasted highlights of black shadows.

ZS100, it's hard to get both the blacks and the whites. The DR is so narrow it's hard if not impossible to get both.

Note the lack of detail in the black face.


The top of Tripper's head is blasted and has no fur detail.


With the K-3 you can have it all.


With the K-3, no problem.


On dull days, these cameras are fantastic

Colour contrast is excellent.




ƒ3.2 yet ƒ22 type DoF, making hand held possible for everything in foucs scenics. Even in poor light.


I go out each day knowing that whatever camera I take it will have some advantages and some disadvantages but for days when I just want acmarea that I can slip in my pocket, the ZS100 is my solution.

I do plan to purchase a WG-6 for an even smaller camera that will fit in shirt pocket or a pants pocket. My Option W-90 has finally cashed in it's chips. It's not water proof, so put in in a ziplock sandwich baggie.

But I should also add, if I'm expecting a chance at spectacular, I take my K-1. But for everyday walks where I want something in my pocket, not hanging around my neck or in a camera bag I take the ZS100. The diffraction limit is much higher than a 1:2.3 sensor like the WG, or Q, it's just disappointing that the DR is about the same. But the detail from the 20 MP sensor is to die for in comparison.

However even at ƒ3.5, diffraction can be in a issue.


Anyway, hope that helps. As much as I like the convenience of 1:2.3 the IQ is too often disappointing.
Nikon AW 130 1:1.23 image Same size señor as WG cameras and the Q.
Dullness made bright... but serious DR and diffraction issues. But still nice image for the memories,


The famous tripper head top is blasted, the pack back has no detail. You're over the top and under the bottom in the same images. And you can see some diffraction effects.

That said, there are many days when the weight and the things the ZS100 does well, are the winning combo, for that day.

I'm 72 now, and every year, there are more and more walks where the ZS100 is the best option. My days of carrying heavy gear long distances are over. still, if I have a chance at spectacular... I'm taking the K-1. It's all about what will make you happy.

[dms]

Light/ultralight backpacking involves a lot of new gear, or being able to do w/o. The former, if ultralight is very expensive--as in order of magnitude $1000 for pack, sleeping system, and tent. The latter means you are quite experienced and know what you can do w/o.

There is a cost benefit aspect to this. You can see where you can cut weight and do so within a budget. That means listing what you have, the weights, and what it can be replaced with--but what you replace it with may not work/be satisfactory. Or you need to take the new stuff on a shakedown outing, or rely on a friend's knowledge/experience.

I think you need to assess where your knowledge base is strong, and explore those item(s) first.