Backpacking/Hiking with MF gear.

StoneNYC · Oct 11, 2013

Shawn Dougherty said:
...I only use wooden tripods...

Hard wood or soft wood? :munch:

Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

Shawn Dougherty · Oct 11, 2013

maple?

Pioneer · Oct 11, 2013

one tiny little opening and...WHAMM!!

Totally gone to the dogs.

cjbecker · Oct 11, 2013

I have found that when I hike, I don't normally take that many pictures. By if I carry a small light camera like a rolliecord I will take a few. But I've finally come to realize, I don't need to take a camera with me hiking, or doing most things in life.

Alan Gales · Oct 12, 2013

The Fujifilm GF670 is the perfect camera for backpacking/hiking!

I wish I had one. Anyone want to donate to the poor Alan fund?

Alan Gales · Oct 12, 2013

StoneNYC said:
Hard wood or soft wood? :munch:

Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

His girlfriend carries the hard wood (Ries hard rock maple).

He's got an exceptional girlfriend!

Pioneer · Oct 12, 2013

Alan Gales said:
The Fujifilm GF670 is the perfect camera for backpacking/hiking!

+1 It is a great camera. Both on the trail and at home.

Poisson Du Jour · Oct 13, 2013

SMBooths' reply is the best I can see here. Quite apart from having joined him on walks, and noted his abbreviated kit (as he described it works brilliantly) the best way is to minimise your MF equipment. Yes, you can always go back.

My proven approach now is to take a digital compact; go out there, come back, examine the images and then return with the MF kit that I know, from experience, will do the job required typically P67 and one lens, nothing else: I'll know from the reccé pics which lens will work. You also cannot guarantee that you will come back with anything that has been the experience of millions of photographers taking every element under the sun out there and coming back with ... nothing! If I'm out walking with my Sekonic and Pentax 67, the kit consists of a 90mm/2.8 and 45mm/f4 (or 55/f4) (POL filters for each) and tripod [8.2kg with tripod total) 99% of approachable, researched subjects will be effectively covered by this combination, which is both light for me to carry and way less bulky compared to taking the P67, 45, 55, 90 and 165 lenses; that full kit is reserved for car-based photography short walks in a known area where this is scope to experiment beyond the "reccé-and-return" approach mentioned earlier.

StoneNYC · Oct 13, 2013

Poisson Du Jour said:
SMBooths' reply is the best I can see here. Quite apart from having joined him on walks, and noted his abbreviated kit (as he described it works brilliantly) the best way is to minimise your MF equipment. Yes, you can always go back.

My proven approach now is to take a digital compact; go out there, come back, examine the images and then return with the MF kit that I know, from experience, will do the job required typically P67 and one lens, nothing else: I'll know from the reccé pics which lens will work. You also cannot guarantee that you will come back with anything that has been the experience of millions of photographers taking every element under the sun out there and coming back with ... nothing! If I'm out walking with my Sekonic and Pentax 67, the kit consists of a 90mm/2.8 and 45mm/f4 (or 55/f4) (POL filters for each) and tripod [8.2kg with tripod total) 99% of approachable, researched subjects will be effectively covered by this combination, which is both light for me to carry and way less bulky compared to taking the P67, 45, 55, 90 and 165 lenses; that full kit is reserved for car-based photography short walks in a known area where this is scope to experiment beyond the "reccé-and-return" approach mentioned earlier.

Depends on how far you're going... You wouldn't take just a digital compact ONLY on an 8 day trip just as a test run to "figure out" what to bring next time...

Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

Pioneer · Oct 13, 2013

StoneNYC said:
Depends on how far you're going... You wouldn't take just a digital compact ONLY on an 8 day trip just as a test run to "figure out" what to bring next time...

Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

+1 on this one. There are places I have gone where I have not yet had an opportunity to return. Examples include high in the Andes in Peru and Chile. I have never been disappointed with the 6x6 images I captured with my Super Speedex or Super Isolette. I am afraid I would have been sorely disappointed if I had only brought a point & shoot, digital or otherwise.

Even on my local hikes, though I have brought back some very nice images with my 35mm cameras, I have never been terribly successful in recreating those images on a return trip. Things change, lighting is often different, even a change in emulsion can affect the outcome. For myself I have learned that a good folding camera is no harder to pack than a good 35mm, and most times easier. In addition, knowing that I only have one lens to work with makes me consider my compositions a bit more carefully.

Poisson Du Jour · Oct 13, 2013

StoneNYC said:
Depends on how far you're going... You wouldn't take just a digital compact ONLY on an 8 day trip just as a test run to "figure out" what to bring next time...

Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes I would take a digi on an 8+ day trip. KISS.

Where is the pure logic of packing heaps of glass and metal on the expectation of finding nirvana?

You certainly wouldn't take a massive kit e.g. 40kg of stuff on top of sleeping/accommodation provisions: what would you be looking at in terms of weight: 80-90-100kg?? I don't know of anybody devoted to photography that would carry anything more than two cameras (one SLR and a compact, of whatever genre). There must be commonsense espoused for people who have not done it before. There is also the natural limits of what individuals can carry in unfamiliar terrain, or through terrain that was entirely unexpected and caused them difficulty (I have seen this!). This is no place for bravado and "carry all you want and forget about trouble".

The best photographers here in Australia: Peter Dombrovskis, Ted Mead, Rob Blakers, Peter Dobré, Nick Rain..., made their fortunes with photography of the wild, unblemished landscape backpacking into the wilderness with gear weighing around 12kg with a small, lightweight tripod — no fancy $2,000 wooden artisan tripods carted about the bush. All used 4x5 Linhofs, 4 holders (8 images, with each and every one a gem) and 2 lenses, filtered. What can be said of their beautiful works created with minimal equipment? Their entire packs weighed nothing over 35kg for 7-8 day wilderness walks, and it created no problems for them.

Bill Burk · Oct 13, 2013

Poisson Du Jour, it's great you and SMBooth are able to join for walks.

I agree with SMBooth, that throwing a small case on top of a normal pack (under the flap) is a great approach. I did that for years with 35mm gear. It's easily accessible at stops. Most of the time the camera would be around my neck anyway.

I'm not good at location scouting though. I'm moved by the moment and the experience, and I don't feel the same when I revisit a location. So the shot I got the first time is very often the ONLY shot I will have.

For me, it MUST be good enough the first time. I believe that's what StoneNYC is saying... not pack a ton... pack what you need to take the kind of quality of pictures that you want, in case you never get back or in case an amazing scene unfolds never to be repeated again.

The amazing thing I've found is that the total weight of my camera gear hasn't changed with changes in format. With 35mm I'll bring more lenses. With MF and LF, since I use spring cameras, I shoot with whatever unfolds.

Location scouting and planning are valid strategies and I believe that you can get great results working that way. It takes a special talent. I'm glad you have it, even if I can't see doing it that way myself.

Poisson Du Jour · Oct 13, 2013

Bill Burk said:
Poisson Du Jour, it's great you and SMBooth are able to join for walks.

I agree with SMBooth, that throwing a small case on top of a normal pack (under the flap) is a great approach. I did that for years with 35mm gear. It's easily accessible at stops. Most of the time the camera would be around my neck anyway.

I'm not good at location scouting though. I'm moved by the moment and the experience, and I don't feel the same when I revisit a location. So the shot I got the first time is very often the ONLY shot I will have.

For me, it MUST be good enough the first time. I believe that's what StoneNYC is saying... not pack a ton... pack what you need to take the kind of quality of pictures that you want, in case you never get back or in case an amazing scene unfolds never to be repeated again.

The amazing thing I've found is that the total weight of my camera gear hasn't changed with changes in format. With 35mm I'll bring more lenses. With MF and LF, since I use spring cameras, I shoot with whatever unfolds.

Location scouting and planning are valid strategies and I believe that you can get great results working that way. It takes a special talent. I'm glad you have it, even if I can't see doing it that way myself.

Bill,
But it cannot always be guaranteed that it will be good enough the first time that's how so many, many bushwalker-photographers have come back strained and disappointed. I agree with you though that the emotive resonance may not be as strong or profound on the second visit, but if you've found something to call your own, it can be as emotive as you want to make it. That's certainly the case with what I found. Of course if I was to join the Bill Schwabb tour of Iceland (I hope to one year), I would take a digi and the MF gear, as it is vehicle-based photography. I think though my kit is getting so big I'd have to revert to standard day-walk packing of P67, 45mm and 90mm, filters and nothing else. I like the idea of 120 folders (SMBooth has a Ziess IKONTA I think) as a stand-in for the commanding whack-and-bang of a P67.

Researching a place well before visiting pays dividends. In July SMBooth led a group of three of us a second time into difficult, mostly untracked, steep, scrubby and sometimes dangerous rainforest terrain (GPS-guided).On that walk we all had digis (SMBooth and I do work film); I could have opted to take my XA in with no more of a sweat. Post-walk, the images and walk/route, sundry details were worked over and we agreed next time we'd take the MF or LF film gear in, knowing what is there, how to get there, the atmosphere/lighting and what would work best in terms of film, format and lens, but it would have to be a light kit; it was quite a challenging, strenuous walk and definitely not place for carting a tonne of gear. A month earlier, we researched our subject matter (same area) but were unsuccessful in locating it; thank God we did not carry in a huge kit around as that walk too, was quite strenuous and challenging in the southern winter cold, but it put us on course to the right route on the second attempt. Now we've got things "reasonably" sorted (the trouble is the tricky route), we know what we can take next time in the film kit area. I love this approach: "you can always go back.". Gold.

StoneNYC · Oct 13, 2013

Bill Burk said:
Poisson Du Jour, it's great you and SMBooth are able to join for walks.

I agree with SMBooth, that throwing a small case on top of a normal pack (under the flap) is a great approach. I did that for years with 35mm gear. It's easily accessible at stops. Most of the time the camera would be around my neck anyway.

I'm not good at location scouting though. I'm moved by the moment and the experience, and I don't feel the same when I revisit a location. So the shot I got the first time is very often the ONLY shot I will have.

For me, it MUST be good enough the first time. I believe that's what StoneNYC is saying... not pack a ton... pack what you need to take the kind of quality of pictures that you want, in case you never get back or in case an amazing scene unfolds never to be repeated again.

The amazing thing I've found is that the total weight of my camera gear hasn't changed with changes in format. With 35mm I'll bring more lenses. With MF and LF, since I use spring cameras, I shoot with whatever unfolds.

Location scouting and planning are valid strategies and I believe that you can get great results working that way. It takes a special talent. I'm glad you have it, even if I can't see doing it that way myself.

+1

Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

Bill Burk · Oct 13, 2013

Poisson Du Jour said:
But it cannot always be guaranteed that it will be good enough the first time...

Researching a place well before visiting pays dividends....

I love this approach: "you can always go back.". Gold.

On the first point, it's always been my attitude that the first try is the best no matter whether it is great or not. My 11 year old son is trying to sell me on this same exact idea now. But I'm trying to tell him to re-do his paper that's supposed to be a page and a half. Do I know where he gets it from or what???

I'll agree with doing proper research, this is an important step.

And on the third point... While I don't work that way right now, I would be wise to listen to you because I believe in optimism -- I should make plans to go back.

StoneNYC · Oct 14, 2013

Bill Burk said:
On the first point, it's always been my attitude that the first try is the best no matter whether it is great or not. My 11 year old son is trying to sell me on this same exact idea now. But I'm trying to tell him to re-do his paper that's supposed to be a page and a half. Do I know where he gets it from or what???

I'll agree with doing proper research, this is an important step.

And on the third point... While I don't work that way right now, I would be wise to listen to you because I believe in optimism -- I should make plans to go back.

I think all of that really depends on so many factors, for one thing as an example as I said about my going to the Grand Canyon The first time I went I took only 35mm film, all Kodachrome, and I really was, well I wasn't an amateur, but I certainly wasn't as good as I am now. It certainly shows in comparison to the second time I went which I got so many beautiful photographs it's just amazing, The first time I encountered terrible weather storms that made a lot of the images sort of dismal, but skill is also affected, in addition to all of that there are places that I just couldn't make it to the first time or I went to the wrong place thinking that was better and it turns out as the second trip that some of the other spots I missed were better, but I just had no perspective on it because I never been there before. On my third trip I realize one of most important things to you is to not go to the base of the canyon which is what I normally did the Colorado's beautiful and all, but much more beautiful from above than below...

And on top of everything I only caught a tiny glimpse at the end of the day of one of the most beautiful spots in the main area of the Grand Canyon Trail and I plan time to go back and spend most of my time out in this area because it was just spectacular, and I bet the third time out my photographs will be even better!

Again I'm dictating with Siri on my iPhone, so if there are any weird sentences that's probably why, I didn't proofread this.

Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

ntenny · Oct 14, 2013

Bill Burk said:
I'm not good at location scouting though. I'm moved by the moment and the experience, and I don't feel the same when I revisit a location. So the shot I got the first time is very often the ONLY shot I will have.

This is me too. I also have, very strongly, the feeling that you can't bathe in the same river twice; I might revisit and revisit and revisit a place, but it'll never be the same as it was the previous time. And I often notice things with the naive eyes of a first-time visitor that I might tune out on a second trip.

The exceptions are places in which I spend enough time to develop a feeling of intimacy with them. There's a ghost town out near the Arizona border that I expect to be photographing off and on for the rest of my days, circumstances permitting; it's different every time, of course, but I've gotten to where I feel I know the place well enough to appreciate those differences in a rich permanent context.

So I tend to think in terms of "decide what you need, then carry it", rather than "decide what to carry, then work with it". But I have the luxury of having some favorite cameras that are pretty carryable, as well as the stubbornness to overload myself occasionally and live with it. (My back doesn't take that as well as it used to, though. Aging sucks.)

-NT

Soeren · Oct 15, 2013

Poisson Du Jour said:
Yes I would take a digi on an 8+ day trip. KISS.

Where is the pure logic of packing heaps of glass and metal on the expectation of finding nirvana?

You certainly wouldn't take a massive kit e.g. 40kg of stuff on top of sleeping/accommodation provisions: what would you be looking at in terms of weight: 80-90-100kg??
<SNIP

My Tilopa (pic posted earlier in this thread puts 10kg on the scale with 10 4X5 holders, Chamonix 45 F1, 65mm f/8, 75mm f/5.6, 150mm f/5.6, 270mm f/5.6, minolta spotmeter, Lee bigstopper, some tools and extras. I don't expect camping gear to put another 70kg on top of that and if I had to I'd probably leave the 65 and 270 at home, maybe I'd bring some more film but all in all I'd say 20-25 kg at most fully packed. ok my old manfrotto 055+ head will add around 2kg to that. I could easily pack heavier bringing 35mm gear but it is possible to KISS without having to stick with a DP&S.
best regards

StoneNYC · Oct 15, 2013

Soeren said:
My Tilopa (pic posted earlier in this thread puts 10kg on the scale with 10 4X5 holders, Chamonix 45 F1, 65mm f/8, 75mm f/5.6, 150mm f/5.6, 270mm f/5.6, minolta spotmeter, Lee bigstopper, some tools and extras. I don't expect camping gear to put another 70kg on top of that and if I had to I'd probably leave the 65 and 270 at home, maybe I'd bring some more film but all in all I'd say 20-25 kg at most fully packed. ok my old manfrotto 055+ head will add around 2kg to that. I could easily pack heavier bringing 35mm gear but it is possible to KISS without having to stick with a DP&S.
best regards

Don't forget to add the weight of your pack to the equation

Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

Soeren · Oct 15, 2013

StoneNYC said:
Don't forget to add the weight of your pack to the equation

Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

You mean I should empty my pack and weigh it again without the gear in it??
The 10 kg was the brutto weight.
Best regards

gone · Oct 15, 2013

A TLR and a lot of 120 film will not be heavy or bulky. I tend to leave heavy cameras at home, so something like this gives one no excuse not to get up early and stay out late to get the good light.

W/ the extra weight you'll leave at home you can bring a bottle of red wine, some good sandwiches, and a chocolate.

PKM-25 · Oct 15, 2013

The most important part of getting great images in the backcountry are location and the time you need to put into it, the 2nd, 3rd, etc. important parts are food, water, clothing....camera gear is dead last. I see a lot....and man I mean a LOT of horribly boring landscape imagery out there from people who pack a Lowe Pro Super-something with nothing but camera gear, go out for half a day and come back with the same cliche's as everyone else.

I bring only what I need in terms of camera gear, a body, 2-3 lenses, a few film backs or Kinematic 10-shot 4x5 film holders and I protect it ALL in clothing, not one trick pony, utterly useless lenses cases and camera pouches. If you sprain your ankle and have to overnight, will that lens pouch fit over your head as a beanie....?...no, of course not.

For day jaunts, I still put a priority on food, water and clothing, camera gear is secondary. Putting the time in at a unique location is far more important than hauling your entire gear case up a trail, trust me on this...I make a living at it and I am headed out the door right now to do that very thing..

StoneNYC · Oct 15, 2013

PKM-25 said:
The most important part of getting great images in the backcountry are location and the time you need to put into it, the 2nd, 3rd, etc. important parts are food, water, clothing....camera gear is dead last. I see a lot....and man I mean a LOT of horribly boring landscape imagery out there from people who pack a Lowe Pro Super-something with nothing but camera gear, go out for half a day and come back with the same cliche's as everyone else.

I bring only what I need in terms of camera gear, a body, 2-3 lenses, a few film backs or Kinematic 10-shot 4x5 film holders and I protect it ALL in clothing, not one trick pony, utterly useless lenses cases and camera pouches. If you sprain your ankle and have to overnight, will that lens pouch fit over your head as a beanie....?...no, of course not.

For day jaunts, I still put a priority on food, water and clothing, camera gear is secondary. Putting the time in at a unique location is far more important than hauling your entire gear case up a trail, trust me on this...I make a living at it and I am headed out the door right now to do that very thing..

Agreed, in addition, if you die out there because you brought too much camera gear and not enough food/water/protective clothing... Who the heck will see your images...

Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

Pioneer · Oct 15, 2013

PKM-25 said:
The most important part of getting great images in the backcountry are location and the time you need to put into it, the 2nd, 3rd, etc. important parts are food, water, clothing....camera gear is dead last. I see a lot....and man I mean a LOT of horribly boring landscape imagery out there from people who pack a Lowe Pro Super-something with nothing but camera gear, go out for half a day and come back with the same cliche's as everyone else.

I bring only what I need in terms of camera gear, a body, 2-3 lenses, a few film backs or Kinematic 10-shot 4x5 film holders and I protect it ALL in clothing, not one trick pony, utterly useless lenses cases and camera pouches. If you sprain your ankle and have to overnight, will that lens pouch fit over your head as a beanie....?...no, of course not.

For day jaunts, I still put a priority on food, water and clothing, camera gear is secondary. Putting the time in at a unique location is far more important than hauling your entire gear case up a trail, trust me on this...I make a living at it and I am headed out the door right now to do that very thing..

A BIG +1 to this.

I have been out on search & rescue many times looking for people who were "only going out for a couple of hours." When things go wrong the camera is the last thing you need.

StoneNYC · Oct 15, 2013

Pioneer said:
A BIG +1 to this.

I have been out on search & rescue many times looking for people who were "only going out for a couple of hours." When things go wrong the camera is the last thing you need.

Except when you want to make a fire with the sun at high noon... Cause that's exactly the time you need it most.... Haha

Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

Backpacking/Hiking with MF gear.

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency