dharma bummer Posted May 27, 2004 Share Posted May 27, 2004 Hi, I was just wondering if it would be worth it to carry about my Sinar F-1 camera along with my Gitzo G1226 tripod and Bogen compact ball head for a 3-5 day backpacking trip. I would probably only bring about 3-5 film holders because as it is I don't like to stop for photos too much and would rather make the few I take perfect. I know this is alot of weight to carry around on my back consitently but I usually travel fairly light (especially in the summer) and only pack about 25 lbs., which is already much lighter than my normal school backpack. My other options would be to bring my Bronica Etrs-i with my 50mm and 75mm lenses, or my OM-2n with my 24mm and 50mm lenses, and most likely the same tripod. However, because of the density of the woods I would shy away from the 35mm. I will probably be printing the photos no larger than 16x20 (if I get any I like) and am not sure that the film size would make a difference or whether I would need the view camera's tilts and shifts, but there are some nice waterways and the view camera's small apertures would allow my to get nice long exposures. What are your opinions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_hamley Posted May 27, 2004 Share Posted May 27, 2004 Yes. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob_crosley Posted May 27, 2004 Share Posted May 27, 2004 My personal opinion would be no, it's not worth it. Particularly if you are moving every day. I've taken large format gear to the back country, but it was generally in for a hard day and set up base, and then go out from there every day, carrying only lunch and the camera gear. Unless you're 25 and strong like bear! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jnorman2 Posted May 27, 2004 Share Posted May 27, 2004 i'm going to have to agree with steve on this one. the view camera basically has two strong appeals - the ability to force very deliberate composition combined with total control over the image in terms of perspective and focal plane and the ability to capture the maximum amount of detail for very sharp reproductions. some people are attracted to LF because they enjoy the deliberate nature of every aspect of the work, from setting up the wonderful piece of equipment and taking their time to consider each aspect of the image to the hand development and printing of the negatives in the comfort of their darkroom (is there anything that can compare to the joyous aroma of developer?). other folks use LF because it an absolute necessity to obtain the images they need, such as architectural photographers (like me). if i didnt love fooling around with lovingly made LF gear, and didnt need to provide archival quality LF negatives to clients, i would not even think about hauling around all that gear just for a 16x20 landscape shot - any decent MF camera can do that extremely well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
george_stewart1 Posted May 27, 2004 Share Posted May 27, 2004 I'd say, "yes" if your camera were a light-weight folding camera with some small lenses. A monorail (probably with big lenses) will weigh a ton. I'd recommend the MF equipment. Of course you could just give LF a try and either be successful, in your trip and images, your learning (not to do that again) or both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gary_woodard Posted May 28, 2004 Share Posted May 28, 2004 Ansel Adams moved to medium format at the end of his career for its compactness and weight as well as its image quality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sam_portera Posted May 28, 2004 Share Posted May 28, 2004 Yes. Lighten your load as much as possible. My last few outings I hesitated on bringing the 4x5 but I did. Reasoning that if it was worth photographing it was also worth capturing on 4x5. My 35mm or 6x6 neatives look great none the less but the 4x5's always win. I'm more selective and deliberate with 4x5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
per_volquartz1 Posted May 28, 2004 Share Posted May 28, 2004 YES! Bring the biggest camera you can carry with max two lenses plus a few holders and a changing bag. You will curse the weight of the camera 100 times during the trip but when you return to the darkroom you will be glad you brought your 4X5. We complain too much about an extra pound or two. Think of Timothy O'Sullivan, Brady, Atget, Nadar etc.... with their large heavy cameras. Be very deliberate when you shoot. Make every shot count! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_dendrinos1 Posted May 28, 2004 Share Posted May 28, 2004 I know how much of a pain it is, but when I go out like this, I end up carrying about 75 pounds. Needless to say I don�t do it very often, but it�s always worth it. You mention you don�t like to stop for photos too much, and that�s good. Just stop for the ones that are worth the effort, and take the gear. You mention the school backpack. You must be a strong young person, go for it. I am a not so strong, older fart, and I would go for it. Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nikos peri Posted May 28, 2004 Share Posted May 28, 2004 Every time I've had to make this decision so far, I took the MF. I regret it, so let me live vicariously and take the Sinar! Besides, it's really not all that heavy... just a problem of packing it into a small space. If you do it, I'll do it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edward_kimball Posted May 28, 2004 Share Posted May 28, 2004 The only way I would take a LF outfit on a hiking trip is if it were a field camera with one lens that folds in (in my case it would be a 150mm), two film holders, a box of film, an empty film box and a changing bag - and of course a tripod. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aoresteen Posted May 28, 2004 Share Posted May 28, 2004 Dan, I would take the Sinar with 210mm and 125mm lenses, and 6 SFH. The only reason to the OM2 is if you shoot Kodachrome. My main camera is a 6x6 SLR and there are many times that I wish I had more control. I just bought a Cambo 23SF (should arrive today!) and that would be the one I would take. Yes it's a pain to haul the LF stuff arround. But when it's done you will have those great 4x5 negs for years to come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leica ron Posted May 28, 2004 Share Posted May 28, 2004 Dan, If it were me, definitley not. For a week long trip, the Sinar would be too heavy for the number of shots you'd be able to make. A medium-format camera will give you a big neg and the best value for the weight. Then again, the Zuiko glass you have is excellent. So taking the OM-2 shouldn't be considered a comprimise. I shoot with a Linhof TK45S, Mamiya 7ii and a Leica M6. I've used all of these cameras to produce images which I've been really happy with. If this was a day trip, I'd say take the Sinar ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg_miller8 Posted May 28, 2004 Share Posted May 28, 2004 Everytime I get up hours before sunrise to take a shot or am hiking out in the dark after a late day shot I tell myself that I will feel the pain just this one day but I will have the image forever. Years from now I will have long forgotten any agony that happened on this one day. So I go for the "pain for one day, pleasure for ever" philosophy and have never regretted. Take the LF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew_oneill Posted May 28, 2004 Share Posted May 28, 2004 Whenever I go hiking with the camera for a few days, my fishing buddies always come with me. They have so much room in their backpacks....Their homes are full of my prints as payback! I'm going on a big hike this summer in Cathedral Provincial Park in southern BC. Guess who wants to come along! Lots of fish there I hear. Funny, my friends never come with me if there is no water around..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dharma bummer Posted May 28, 2004 Author Share Posted May 28, 2004 Hah, lots of varying opinions here. I think what I might do is load up my pack with all my gear and the Sinar and take a day hike up a fairly rough part of the trail and see how I do. Part of what is appealing to me about taking the large format is the amount of time it will take to set up when I want to take a picture, nomatter what gear I pack I know it is going to be hard to get to and I will be forced to take off my pack to set up, if I am using my medium format or my Olympus it will take more time for me to get all the gear out than to actually take the picture! For whatever reason, this makes me feel less justified in making the exposures, especially when I am travelling with a friend and we will have to build up the momentum again for a 3 min stop. However, if I am using the large format, I can feel comfortable taking my time with the image and instead of having my photography be a bump in the trail, make it feel more like part of the experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
w_t1 Posted June 1, 2004 Share Posted June 1, 2004 ..seriously, I've seen them on the Pacific Crest Trail here in Washington State Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harry_zet Posted June 2, 2004 Share Posted June 2, 2004 @greg: i fully agree with your opinion. i missed quite a few great landscape shots, because i was to lazy to carry a big camera with me, when i was hiking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_senesac Posted June 6, 2004 Share Posted June 6, 2004 View camera if one is going to be taking pictures which might be printed really large. I'd use MF 6x7 to maybe 24x30. At 16x20 good 35mm gear and processing could work and be more flexible though MF would look noticeably better. With some images subjects as sunsets or wildflower closeups etc, smaller prints usually work better thus LF is overkill. LF landscapes work well when scenery contains lots of fine detail like naked winter tree branches, finely patterned rock, or broad scenics with complexity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now