2

I’m a road cyclist and I’m looking at purchasing a DSLR to go with me when I’m cycling just to take photos of what I see, however I am worried that the vibration of a Bike could damage the DSLR.

The camera will be in a big bag which is directly attached to my frame so will be very little suspension to the camera being a road bike. Will it likely damage the camera on are there any mitigations I can do for it

The road surface will be tarmac while there are some bad roads I’ll be on. I never had numb hands from cycling from vibration

Osian
  • 23
  • 4
  • Maybe you can use some tough camera, they are usually quite durable (Olympus Tough TG serie for example) – Romeo Ninov Sep 25 '21 at 18:49
  • The tough cameras generally have rather wide angle lenses, which may not be OP wants. – Ross Millikan Sep 25 '21 at 20:17
  • @RossMillikan, Olympus Tough TG-5 I own have 25mm - 100mm which is fine for me – Romeo Ninov Sep 26 '21 at 04:29
  • @RomeoNinov: that is a better range than I am used to seeing, but the tough ones I know are for water sports and usually do not zoom or focus. It sounds like a good choice for many uses. – Ross Millikan Sep 26 '21 at 04:31
  • 2
    Does this answer your question? Is it safe to bring my camera with me when cycling? – Saaru Lindestøkke Sep 26 '21 at 20:49
  • @SaaruLindestøkke the proposed dupe is about mountain biking with the camera in a backpack. This one is about road cycling with the camera in a pack strapped or mounted to the frame. Seems to me like there might be some differences in answers, maybe? – scottbb Sep 27 '21 at 20:23
  • @scottbb, well yes, these are different biking styles and the accepted answer at the proposed dupe deals mainly with mountainbike aspects. However, the other answers cover a broader range of activities (skiing, tour bike) and also mentions vibrations. The answers also show an overlap with what is suggested here: putting the camera in a backpack; use padding; use a point & shoot. – Saaru Lindestøkke Sep 28 '21 at 05:41
  • I keep meaning to convert a spare Peli case into a pannier - with a lot of padding. I'd be more concerned about peak forces from impacts than about vibrations. Paved roads can of course be rather rough, but riding in a backpack can be pretty hard on your body – Chris H Sep 29 '21 at 09:26

3 Answers3

4

Just putting it in a bag will mitigate the high frequency vibration considerably. Having some foam padding around the camera, as in a usual camera bag, is even better. The big problem will then be sharp impact, either in a fall or when the bag swings against something. If you avoid those you should be OK.

You might look into the mirrorless bodies. They provide most of the same function as a DSLR in a smaller package. The lenses can also be smaller as they are mounted closer to the sensor. You can use the extra space for padding.

Ross Millikan
  • 1,924
  • 1
  • 11
  • 11
  • It will be in the bag but the bag will be attached to the frame which while isn’t going to be high frequency as a motorbike, there’s a lot less suspension compared to a motorbike – Osian Sep 25 '21 at 22:07
  • I have carried a camera (a Nikon P900 megazoom, but that should be about as fragile as a DSLR) in a backpack on a road bike with no problems. I was on a hard packed dirt road, but I didn't do it much. – Ross Millikan Sep 25 '21 at 22:37
  • That’s brilliant! I’m not much for backpacks myself and rather the frame, but do want to get into photography on the bike – Osian Sep 25 '21 at 23:40
  • Do not put any hard objects in a backpack, they can break your spine if you fall on them. – xenoid Sep 26 '21 at 07:12
  • 1
    The lenses can also be smaller as they are mounted closer to the sensor. This isn't really true. Or at least, requires a caveat. Yes, the lenses are mounted closer to the sensor. But for equivalently-spec'd lenses, on equal-size sensor cameras, there is essentially no size savings for mirrorless vs. DSLR camera+lens combination. In fact, again, for equal-spec'd lenses, mirrorless lenses are often larger than their DSLR equivalents. The lenses still have to pack the same stuff, same glass, same motors, but also have to make up the missing flange focus distance that the body no longer has. – scottbb Sep 26 '21 at 17:11
  • @scottbb: the ability to put glass closer to the sensor can reduce the total volume, particularly for short focal lengths. I have gone from a Canon 7D DSLR to M6 mirrorless. The 15-45 kit zoom for the M6 is a nice little thing, – Ross Millikan Sep 26 '21 at 19:16
  • It’s a canon canon eos 2000d - there isn’t anything particular sensitive with this camera? – Osian Sep 27 '21 at 22:01
  • @Osian: I am not familiar with that one, but would be surprised if there is. – Ross Millikan Sep 27 '21 at 23:48
  • @RossMillikan (sorry, didn't see your reply until now) You're right, DSLR APS-C -> mirrorless APS-C can save quite a bit of space, because DSLR APS-C was always quite wasteful of space. There's not nearly so much to be gained from DSLR FF (Canon EF, Nikon FX) to mirrorless FF. Especially if the bag contains more than a couple lenses, because mirrorless FF lenses tend to be slightly longer than DSLR FF equivalently-spec'd counterparts (to make up the flange distance). – scottbb Sep 29 '21 at 16:08
4

I would not worry at all. I've had my DSLR camera with me on all my longer bicycle tours (10,000+ kms) and never had any problems. I had a Nikon D70 for about 12 years. Now I have used a Nikon Df for the last 5 years. I would not expect other cameras to be generally easier to break.

For easy access, I usually have the camera in my handlebar hardcase bag and even though I usually have other stuff in the bag as well, I don't think I have ever used something to on purpose pad or polster the camera. I am not really doing any off-road cycling, but have cycled my fair share on gravel roads and cobblestone. I have no count of how often my bicycle has fallen over, loaded bicycles are often quite unstable when only using a kickstand, and even if the camera has experienced a bit of beating, it has never been a problem.

The only thing I usually try to avoid, not only when bicycling, but whenever I carry the camera around, is to have a long and/or heavy lens attached. Most commonly, I am only using Nikon's small and light 35mm f2 lens.

jarnbjo
  • 3,272
  • 14
  • 17
  • A canon eos 2000d wouldn’t be too vibration right? – Osian Sep 27 '21 at 22:02
  • If I take the long lens on the bike, I take it off the body like you, but have to use a backpack (40D, so I've been doing it for years with the same camera, off and on). With the 18-80 lens I put the holster case in the handlebar bag (LowePro Toploader) or across my body if I want to stop and shoot without fiddling. Do be sure to securely shut the handlebar bag though, to avoid the camera being ejected onto something hard if the bike does go over – Chris H Sep 29 '21 at 09:24
1

Because we do not know your style and preferences of cycling and the surface you cycle (asphalt, macadam, offroad, mounting cycling) we have no idea about the amplitude and acceleration of these vibrations. If you cycle with a lot of vibrations will be wise to get tough camera (I prefer Olympus Tough TG serie). They can survive also rain, mud, drop, to say extreme situations.

If you prefer calm cycling on flat surface you can choose some mirrorless camera or even DSLR but getting some precautions to minimize the vibrations, hits, etc.

Romeo Ninov
  • 12,030
  • 4
  • 31
  • 49
  • I’ve just edited the post to reflect this question, but it will be asphalt on road and I haven’t had numb hands yet. – Osian Sep 26 '21 at 09:57
  • @Osian, thank you for update. But my practice show things happen even in format/organized trips in a city. If you do not expect extraordinary quality (almost) any camera is for you. – Romeo Ninov Sep 26 '21 at 11:45