[S Clark]

I've got a need for a camera and very little knowledge.  My wife and I are headed to Africa to attempt to do an extended climb of Kilimanjaro over 9 days.  I need a camera to carry for 9 days and up to 19 000 ft (if I get that far), so it needs to be light.  Most photos will probably be long panoramas... but, after the climb, we will spend a few days with a guide in several Tanzanian wildlife parks, and would need some telephoto ability.  I'm certainly not looking for the latest/greatest gear, but something available used that fits the needs.
Recommendations? 

[Early B.]

What's your budget? Because you're asking for a lot if you want high quality images. At the high end, you're talking about a DSLR and three lenses for $3 grand and up. In the middle, you're talking about a mirrorless camera and a telephoto lens for about $1,500 used:

https://www.pcmag.com/roundup/251078/the-best-mirrorless-cameras


On the low end, well.....don't bother. For the vacation of a lifetime and the phenomenal images you're trying to capture, go hard or just use your cell phone. Whatever you decide to do, post the pics here.

[Doublej]

I disagree. There are many choices between a cell phone and a $3000 camera that will give you great picture quality and flexibility.

This site will keep you busy for a while.

https://www.dpreview.com/

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/buying-guide-best-cameras-for-travel

I like the flexibility of a SuperZoom but that this class might be too big and/or heavy for your desires.

[Will2]

I have one of these and have been very satisfied

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/buying-guide-best-pocketable-enthusiast-cameras/2

[S Clark]

Well, I'm not going to spend $3K on a camera that I haven't the experience to know how to use.  Think I'll borrow a good camera/lenses for safari- I've got a couple shutterbugs among my friends- and then find a lightweight option for the mountain. 
That Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 V is nice, but clearly a late generation type... used they are nearly as expensive as new.  What is a generation back? Surely you don't have to look far to have a better option than my Samsung 7 phone.

[bellavita]

Been happy with this https://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2404742,00.asp for years.Hiking in Italy,Scotland and local stuff results are very good, for me anyway.

Cheers

[Folsom]

Sony makes really good quality images in their mirrorless. And these days they're cheap. They simply have very nicely resolved photo results.

You can't do better than the RX100 for a pocket camera. Can't. I'd go film before I'd bother with something lesser in the pocket category. (You can score old film pocket P&S cameras for not too much).

If you can deal with the size, a Nikon D3400 is an extremely commendable little camera. Make sure it comes with the AFP lens.

Don't be afraid of camera settings. I'll make sure you understand enough before you go out into the wild. It is all pretty simple, you won't have any real trouble with the basic settings and when & why to choose between shutter speed and aperture, or backlight issues.

[Will2]

That Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 V is nice, but clearly a late generation type... used they are nearly as expensive as new.  What is a generation back?

This model goes back a number of versions - the prior one was the RX100 IV and before that RX100 III etc. 

[Early B.]

The OP wants panoramas, so he'll need a wide angle lens (unless he plans to learn to stitch images together using software) and a telephoto lens for wildlife park shots. Plus, he'll need a walk around lens (usually comes with the camera). The Nikon 3400 is fine for a low budget camera, but he'll need to invest in two more lenses, each of which will cost as much as the camera and takes up space. 

Here's the Nikon cheap telephoto lens:  https://www.amazon.com/Nikon-55-300mm-4-5-5-6G-Certified-Refurbished/dp/B00R1MXPFW/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1519013941&sr=8-4&keywords=nikon+300mm&dpID=51Hbrc2GTPL&preST=_SY300_QL70_&dpSrc=srch

Here's the Nikon cheap wide angle lens:  https://www.amazon.com/Nikon-AF-P-NIKKOR-10-20mm-4-5-5-6G/dp/B072639587/ref=sr_1_3?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1519014028&sr=1-3&keywords=nikon+14mm&dpID=41vguPg3e1L&preST=_SX300_QL70_&dpSrc=srch

If you're willing to put up with bulkiness, jump on this refurbished bundle deal and buy the 10-20mm lens:  https://www.amazon.com/Nikon-24-2MP-Camera-70-300m-Lenses/dp/B01MYEYBAP/ref=sr_1_5?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1519014077&sr=1-5&keywords=nikon+3400&dpID=5137y8vsbAL&preST=_SY300_QL70_&dpSrc=srch

And you'll need some accessories like a camera bag, a few memory cards, extra batteries, a speedlite, a comfortable shoulder strap, imaging software, etc. It adds up fast. 

Whatever you decide, the most important thing is to practice, practice, practice before the trip!

[Folsom]

B.,

MAYBE... when people say they want this and that, they aren't always referring to what you and I, as camera nerds, may be.

For example the equivalent of a 28-35mm lens may be plenty wide enough for what is in their mind.

If you want true panoramas from a DSLR you have to go very wide, like 16mm equivalent, and use software conversion later. That or use a medium format film camera or larger, built for landscapes... None of that is on his mind I'm sure. 

But you sure are right about getting some practice. Scott can probably learn the basics and figure it out by taking a few shots, to get some pretty decent results. Without a lot of experience you would always have to go back a second time to get all the shots just right... even good photographers don't get all the shots.

(When I say equivalent that means on a full frame censor camera, which is woefully beyond the price range being considered, incase that is confusing to someone who isn't a camera nerd)

[S Clark]

It adds up fast. 

Whatever you decide, the most important thing is to practice, practice, practice before the trip!

The adding up fast is something that is happening with all aspects of this trip.  We are going in August.  Gym, trainers, gear, guide package, airfair... hell, even underwear are freaking expensive! So, no $$$ photo gear purchased.
It seems two cameras is what I've decided upon.  I've got a Nikon and lenses borrowed for riding around looking at game.  I'm looking at both the  Sony 100 III and the Oympus Tough to take up the mountain.  The Sony might be the best option if used is available. Tough's are available cheap, and lightweight... $100 and 7 oz.

But the practice, practice advice is well taken.  I can photograph deer in my backyard most days, and I get to Big Bend National Park regularly for landscape stuff.   

[skunark]

FujiFilm X100F - APS-C - 35mm equiv - 469 grams - wifi control  ($1.2k)
Sigma dp0 - APS-C - 21mm equiv - 499 grams - no wifi control ($1k)
Sigma dp1 - APS-C - 28mm equiv - 425 grams - no wifi control ($1k)
Sigma dp2 - APS-C - 30mm equiv - 395 grams - no wifi control ($1k)
Sigma dp3 - APS-C - 35mm equiv - 465 grams - no wifi control ($1k)
Sony RX1RII - FullFrame -35mm - 507 grams - wifi control ($3k)

Panasonic GH5 - m43 - below - 24-120 equip - 950 grams - wifi control
Panasonic Leica DG Vario-Elmarit 12-60mm f/2.8-4 ASPH. POWER O.I.S. Lens - (consider GH4 as well) ($3k)

You will need additional batteries, but a large SD card should be enough to cover 9 days unless you want video.

Some options, i'm not sure how much you are tracking weight (you probably should be), this list might be a good starting point.    The GH5 might be a reach for it's weight and complexity, but it's a great video and still camera with a zoom lens it will be very capable.   The Sigma DP0, is worth a look to since it's 21mm (35mm equiv) and is a great wide-angle solution.  For low-light options the Sony is your best followed by the Fujifilm with their 35mm/F2 lenses, both will be great for video too (in the same order).    Otherwise, maybe a gopro for video and smartphone option. 

RX100 is a 1" sensor, so not a bad solution, but probably just go for smartphone/gopro combo or look at the Fuji X100F.    The Fuji X100F is a great all rounder and probably could find the older models on sale or used,  which are just as good. You can also get a wide-angle attachment that works with the existing lens, so there's more flexibility if you are concerned using a premium point-and-shoot.

[S Clark]

If you want true panoramas from a DSLR you have to go very wide, like 16mm equivalent, and use software conversion later. That or use a medium format film camera or larger, built for landscapes... None of that is on his mind I'm sure. 

Very perceptive, Jeremy.
Yep, when I said panorama, I'm thinking some nice photos from the summit, some glacier shots, and looking down at cloud banks,  or of my wife or me smiling with a cool background just before throwing up from altitude sickness (actually not funny, and potentially dangerous)
Ha! I can just see myself explaining to my wife at 18000 ft, why I can't make the summit because I'm trying to lug some kind of camera obscura up Kilimanjaro!  I'll be doing great if I can simply haul my own carcass up in such thin air with 66 years of wear.   
By the way, will digital point and shoots even work if temps are around zero? 

And @Skunark... not really looking for video.  I'll check out the Fuji. And yes, we are rigorously tracking weight.  Every ounce is important.

[Early B.]

B.,

MAYBE... when people say they want this and that, they aren't always referring to what you and I, as camera nerds, may be.

Oh, OK. I suppose I shouldn't recommend that the OP purchase a carbon fiber tripod and arca-type ballhead for the landscape shots.

[S Clark]

Oh, OK. I suppose I shouldn't recommend that the OP purchase a carbon fiber tripod and arca-type ballhead for the landscape shots.

Actually, I am thinking about carbon fiber hiking poles... and if three of them could be hobbled together into a tripod, I'd be very interested. 
I can't take pictures from the summit if I don't get there. 

[Russell Dawkins]

The Ricoh GR might suit. It comes with a 28 mm equiv lens and there is a 21mm available, both very sharp corner to corner. It is the smallest APS-C size sensor camera in existence and is truly pocketable. I love mine, as do most owners. Not cheap, but no one complains about the investment who owns one.

[Wind Chaser]

I'm not complaining but I gave up on the GR. The color output wasn't to my liking and like so many units before mine, dust found its way on the sensor. If it were not for those two issues I would have kept it because in every other aspect it's a bloody fantastic camera.

Last fall I picked up an X-100 and even though it is renown for its colors and doesn't suffer from the dust on the sensor issue, I just don't feel the way about it as I did with the GR. Go figure.

[Russell Dawkins]

There's a certain magic to the combination of virtues possessed by the GR, including the feel in the hand. As for colour, I always use RAW and tweak just a little, but I gather the GR is no match for the jpeg rendering of the Fujis, for example.
Mine has dust on its sensor, too, but I will gladly disassemble it and clean it when I next have a spare couple of hours.

If they had high ISO capability I would have chosen one of the Sigmas in spite of their less pocketable size, just for the fabulous image quality and colour potential. I nearly did, anyway, but the practical aspects of the GR could not be ignored (smaller, better low light performance and more features like interval shooting and snap focus).

I now have a shutter count of 12,400 and the little thing still behaves like new.

I have never liked a camera as much as this one. Most of the competition feel a little like cheap toys by comparison.

[mav52]

A little GoPro might work, plus if you break it they replace it and its been to Kilimanjaro many times https://www.climbkilimanjaroguide.com/gopro-kilimanjaro/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-0QIOshjKw

I know its not high end but its pretty bullet proof.

[drewm]

The other thing we're leaving out is camera battery. On a 9 day trip, a mirrorless and its 300-400 shot battery will be useless. A DSLR can easily get 1200-2000 shots out of a single battery.

I'd stick to a DSLR like a D3400 (14oz) or D5600 (16.4oz) with 18-55 AF-P VR (7.1oz) and 70-300 AF-P VR (14.7oz). The VR is important, it's worth selling a non-VR 70-300 from the kit set and buying a VR version from ebay. Mirrorless camera systems do not save weight, and only a teeny bit of body thickness. For example, the Sony A6500 weighs 15.98oz, Fuji xt1 15.4oz. Lenses will all be about the same weight for the same sensor size. The previous generation D3300 and D5500 also use the exact same image sensor and are also fine. The AF-P lenses are way sharper wide open than previous versions and are highly recommended, from someone who's owned 3 generations of 18-55mm.

Get a 10000mah (6.4oz) or bigger USB battery:
https://www.amazon.com/Anker-PowerCore-Ultra-Compact-High-speed-Technology/dp/B0194WDVHI/ref=pd_lpo_vtph_107_bs_t_1

And a few extra camera batteries and ultra light USB charger:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/EN-EL14-EN-EL14a-Battery-Charger-for-Nikon-D5500-D5300-D5200-D3300-D3200-D3100/252902790578

I'm with Folsom, an ultrawide lens is totally overkill for their needs.

If you really need pocketable, you should go with the bigger sensor ones like the RX100, Canon G7X, or Canon G9X lines, but you'd lose out on the ability to zoom far. You'll also be giving up some image quality moving to a tiny lens like that. Like my friend with a RX100 IV discovered when he compared his photos to my D5500 on a same day shoot.

I own an X100S, they also suffer from above mirrorless battery life issues for a long trip, you'd need a wider lens, and you still won't be able to zoom far.

Also, don't bring a tripod, they aren't worth the 48+ oz, and you can shoot in near darkness with a crazy low shutter speeds with VR lenses. If you really need to be in the shot, bring an Ultrapod II (4 oz) and set it up on a rock:
https://www.amazon.com/Pedco-UltraPod-Lightweight-Camera-Tripod/dp/B000ANCPNM