Why an Olympus XA2?
When planning for a camping, hiking, canoeing, or other trip, it's hard to figure out which camera is best. You really have to follow Phillip Greenspun's advice and decide if you are going for the photography for just want to take pictures on the way. Unless you're a photographer, you probably just want snapshots to document your trip. If you're like me, you want snapshots that look good but don't require much effort or expense.
Snapshots should not be restricted to poor-quality images produced by plastic lenses in a cheap drugstore P&S camera, but they also should not require you to purchase a multi-hundred dollar Contax G series or a mini Leica for over a grand! It's hard to find a good balance between affordability and image quality in the larger cameras (unless you own a 1970s compact rangefinder), and it's even harder to find a good and affordable compact camera that produces reasonable images. The Canon Elph is very small and has decent optics, but it uses APS, which I abhor. Yes, I have an APS module for my film scanner, but I always thought that the idea was to use as large a frame as possible. If I wanted small frames, I'd buy a 110. I don't even like 35mm that much.
Then comes the idiot factor. Rangefinders are simple and fun to use, but many people just can't figure them out. I can almost guarantee that anyone you ask to take your photo will have no clue how to use a rangefinder. Most can't work an SLR. Sometimes you just need a P&S.
Many photographers love the Yashica T4, and while I have not tried it, I must agree that the images it produces are quite sharp and very nice. Zeiss is famous for their lens quality, and the T4 certainly benefits from it. However, a T4 is still not really as compact as you might want on a hiking trip, and it's also rather expensive these days. Too many pro photographers want them, creating a good demand.
I had heard that the Olympus XA was a great choice for my needs, being a very compact camera that is well built, well designed, and has an excellent lens. Its clamshell closes to protect the lens and viewfinder, the metal body can take quite a few knocks, and it has my favorite feature, aperture priority. The XA is also a bit pricy these days due to demand, but not too bad considering its quality and features. However, it's still a rangefinder and a rather tricky one at that. It's definitely not a camera I'd ask a random tourist to use, even though I'd probably enjoy using it.
I had heard that the XA2's lens was possibly better than the XA, and it uses its own zone-focusing type of system where you just set a slide for close, normal, and far. Nothing else to set. While that may be a limitation for true photography, it's fine for snapshots. After playing with an XA2 at the local elitist photographer shop, I picked one up for $40, including a detachable flash.
I ran 24 frames of Tri-X Pan through it, and I'm thrilled with the quality of both the camera and the images it produces! The camera fits in a jeans front pocket, has a very idiot-friendly design, and is surprisingly lightweight. The photos from it were sharp, clear, and absolutely acceptable for a camera with its purpose: high quality snapshots at a reasonable price.
This camera will absolutely be my camera of choice for all future camping and backpacking trips. I'll probably bring along at least one other, but the XA2 will be in my pocket on every hike.
So, out of 216 exposures, about 4 or 5 are worth showing anyone. That's painful.
The XA2 is smaller and lighter than the digital camera by far, and I would much rather use film. I also have an Agfa Isolette for true photography in a compact package, so between the two, I'm set. Snapshots without concern, and if a truly great photo opportunity arises, I'll just pull out the Isolette and shoot a few frames of 120 film.