Camera advice

Most camera purchasing decisions starts with budget. I'm currently using the Sony RX100 II and it's really great for tramping. I chose it for three reasons; size, sensor size and 3.6x Zeiss zoom (28–100mm). There are better cameras with four thirds sensors (waynowski can talk about his awesome camera) but for compactness the Sony is a winner. And it's great in low light (min aperture f/1.8). The weak points are: not environmentally sealed, the buttons are small and the zoom is not as versatile as some compacts but great for landscapes and macro. Sony has just released the MK IV but the zoom is 24–70mm. It's one of few makes which you can still get all four models, a friend was able to buy the MK I just two weeks ago but I would say not for much longer. Definitely check out reviews at http://www.dpreview.com There is so much choice on the market and recommendations from other forum members should help you get closer to making a decision. Good luck.

Could consider the Olympus Stylus 1, has a zoom which goes from 28-300mm but it has a nice wide F2.8 aperture which would allow it to capture more light in low light conditions. It also has a larger sensor then the Hx90v which again would allow for better quality low light image. The Sony does have twice the amount of Zoom, but in most conditions it is difficult to take advantage of such long zoom lengths without a tri-pod or extremely fast shutter speeds to eliminate camera shake.

if you want cameras that are good in low light you want at least a one inch sensor, or bigger.. bigger the better but getting good zoom means bigger lenses on those cameras so you have to go and look at how big those cameras are and whether you want to lug them around i use an olympus. the four thirds sensors are fantastic, smallish size for the quality, their lenses are faultless. but the bigger the zoom the more you loose in low light so its a trade off, you want a low f stop value for good low light performance and then you have to understand how the zoom changes with bigger sensor size, i only use a moderate zoom but get great low light performance www.dxomark.com gives a reasonable idea of how various cameras and lenses stack up for light performance depends how fussy you want to be, just about all the recognisable camera brands are making some good quality gear. although canon and nikon arent that good for anything other than large bulky slr cameras.

Im probably coming from a different side of the argument here. I sacrificed some image quality and lowlight performance for a camera that is small, lightweight and will not die (unless I do something horrifically stupid). Im using a panasonic lumix ft5 toughcam (waterproof to somethingorother m, dropresistant to 6.6ft, crushresistant to 100kgf, dustproof and cold resistant). Id recommend the olympus tg series though. Better photos and lowlight, similar ruggedness, but worse video. I will testify that it is pretty tough. Mine was dragged through mud, water etc on its first outing (It spent a weekend 4x4ing with me among other things) and got me photos that I could not have got with a regular camera. Survived perfectly intact, and could just be washed off. It gives me the peace of mind while tramping to use it near water etc, and not have to worry about waterproofing it in my pack, as well as letting me use it in situations I know it will get wet. Just another angle to look at things from as im not sure exactly what you are wanting.

I loved my old Panasonic Lumix, it wasn't a toughcam or advertised as being waterproof but I accidentally put it through the wash with a load of laundry and it survived without any damage. Used it for years till it got stolen in Singapore along with a whole lot of photos of our 2 months in Africa :-(

I'm not the best one to ask - as I lug a Canon 30D SLR everywhere. Great image quality if you can bear the weight of body and lenses...and tripod....and filters....!!! I do, at times, look on with a touch of envy at those carrying nice lightweight cameras...but not having tried any I can't offer any advice on their suitability. General advice: ask around, read reliable reviews, and buy the most suitable in your budget range. Bear consideration to battery life/and type too, for those longer trips. Never an easy decision!

It does seem to come down to image quality vs cost vs weight vs other features and I think we all fall on different points of the scale.

In order to simplify the choice I'd break the scale Size12 mentions into three rough zones: 1. Point and shoots. Great if low cost and weight , convenience and ease of use are important to you. In this category I'd probably pick a smart-phone camera because it combines multiple functions into one device. And there are some very nice cameras on smartphones these days. However be prepared for digital only zoom (always looses IQ) and less than stellar contrast and low light performance. It won't be easy taking good shots inside the forest, around the camp - but on the other hand these cameras will challenge you to learn how to use changing light conditions to your advantage. 2. The tough cams like Panasonic and Olympus make. These are very convenient cameras and extend the range of conditions you'll take photos in. They can be just clipped to your pack strap and be instantly available. The camera you have in your hand is always way better than the one still in your pack. Nice and light, better zooms, better low light performance - and importantly - built to take tramping conditions. I usually pick my Olympus TG-1 on most trips. 3. I think the future of enthusiast photography is Micro 4/3. I hardly need to say much about the capabilities of these cameras because if bringing home great images is important to you - then you already know about what they can do for you. I just brought an OM-D M5II a few months back. Fabulous - and I'm still learning to drive it. But at this level I've traded off some weight (nowhere near as bad as the full DLSR's though), cost and convenience. In order to justify carrying them there will be an extra investment in time and effort on the track. I'm not going to carry the OM-D on all my trips. However - and this to my mind is the kicker. In the next year or so I'll buy a couple of nice primes, probably a 25mm and a 75mm for the OM-D and then I'll get another body like one of the PEN series that's much lighter. Stick one of the primes on it ,and that will make one very excellent tramping camera. Or I may even look at buying an Olympus AIR - a sensor only body that uses m43 lenses and uses your smartphone as the user interface. Early days for this idea - but it's worth considering. Zooms are overrated. I started before they were commonly available. Most of the best shots I took were with an OM-1 and a 135mm lens. Other people will have their take on this - and that's why photography has proven such an enduring passion for so long. Everyone interprets their needs and the shot in front of them in their own particular way.

@Gbellamy so any further ideas on whether you will go with your original choice or another one?