Flying into Calgary, renting car and spending 10 days in Canada. Planning to shoot from Banff to Jasper area with a VRBO house in each area for 5 days. Need advice on where to go for great shooting and lodging that is fairly inexpensive. Not against paying for a guide or workshop for a couple of days. Mostly interested in wildlife and landscape. Names of any guide books that might be helpful would be great as well. Going second week in June. Wondering if Harvey Heights might be a good base camp for the Banff area? Any recommendations greatly appreciated!

It's kind of up to you. I shoot both Sony and Canon. I know what to expect from every Canon digital camera, both the resulting JPEGs and RAW. Somewhat the same experience and expectations from my Sony cameras. On one hand, a camera is a camera and a digital image is just that, a digital image. But, the two camera types and their files have subtle differences as your approach how to edit each type. Your experience to-date with Canon might make that a more logical choice, maybe not.... The availability may prove to be the driver, over price, brand and performance.

It would be good if we each listed our assumptions about the characteristics of the two cameras—their lenses and their sensors—which we are comparing. I think there are only two scenarios we need to consider. The sketches defining each one, the characteristics of the equipment, and the outcome of the photos are described below.

As to the two sensors, they are fictional with the smaller one having 1/2 the width and 1/2 the length of the larger one. Thus, the area of the smaller one is 1/2 W x 1/2 L=1/4 A(larger). And I am assuming the quality of each body, including its sensor, is the same between the two cameras, and this holds true for their lenses, too. Also, it is assumed that each sensor has the same number of pixels. On the diagrams, the sensors are represented by a dotted orange line.

CASE A: Both cameras use the same lens. Since the smaller sensor covers only 1/4 of the area with the same number of pixels, the smaller image is sharper with more details, but it shows only 1/4 of the scene.

Since the same number of pixels are sampling the smaller scene, each pixel receives 11/4 of the light shining on each pixel in the larger sensor. Thus is this scenario, the smaller sensor is not as good in low light.

CASE B. The camera with the smaller sensor also has a lens with 1/2 the focal length of the lens used by the camera with the larger sensor. With the shorter focal length, both sensors frame in the same scene and thus with these assumptions neither sensor is better. In this scenario, the smaller sensor can work with a smaller body. Both sensors work the same in low light.

I hope this discussion is clear. --Richard

I have bought many sensor sizes on my way to APS-C which gives me a high quality 13 x 19" prints on select pictures. The camera, lens, and subject all add up to whether the picture will look good when printed for wall viewing.
I still have a Canon pocket design camera with 1/32 sensor. I used it for many years because it could be squeezed into a pocket, it was quiet, and it had real camera controls. Then I bought a similar Canon camera with a 1" sensor and stopped using the smaller one.
I have never seen an image from the 1/32 sensor that I would consider printing above 8x10 and expect the image quality to look good without being disguised by special effects, etc. I do not think the 1" images would hold up at 12x18" on a normal photo subject either.
BUT I have never used either camera on a Tripod - and that is a Gold standard for Quality.
Boris

To be frank, none of these would be my solutions of choices and here are the reasons why:
1-the point and shoot is more than 10 years old and may fail or at least be more restricted in tis possibilities (regarding dynamic range for instance which can be an issue in Portugal–white walls, sea, and sun, I have been to the places you are mentioning)
2-the Canon means bulky (and "visible") equipment that you may have to carry all the time. There are easier solutions but that would entail an investment.
Bottom line, without investing, I would go for the 70D and the 24-105 that will cover 98% or your needs.