Backpacking with LF gear

[oistrakh]

<p>Hi all,</p>

<p>I am looking to take my first overnight backpacking trip with my 4x5 camera, and wanted to get suggestions on how people pack their gear for these kinds of trips. How do people fit both camera gear and camping equipment into one pack? I'm less interested in camera/lens choices and more interested in the actual logistics of packing everything in a way that is light, stable, but still easily accessible for taking shots while hiking.</p>

<p>Some specific questions:</p>

<ol>

<li>Do you typically buy a pack designed for backpacking, and then fit your camera gear into that bag? If so, how do you ensure easy access to your camera if you want to take a picture while hiking?</li>

<li>Or do you buy a large pack designed for holding camera gear, and then re-arrange the interior to make space for the camping gear? If so, do you typically end up strapping your tent/sleeping bag to the outside of the bag, or do you normally manage to fit everything within the bag itself?</li>

<li>Now that readyload/quickloads no longer exist, do you bring a film-changing bag and change film out in the field? Any special considerations I should know about if I go this route? If I'm changing film at night in my tent, will I even need a film-changing bag since it will be almost completely pitch black at night?</li>

</ol>

<p>Any help and guidance with this and any other aspects of backpacking with LF gear would be tremendously appreciated! Thanks!</p>

<p>Chris</p>

[hopsage]

<p>Backpacking, I carry a 4"x5" wooden field camera, spot meter, changing bag, two lenses, four film holders, and two boxes of film (B&W neg. and Velvia). The camera with either lens is light enough that I can get away with using a very lightweight tripod and ball head. In addition, I also carry a 35mm camera, two zoom lenses, two fixed length lenses (20mm and 50 mm), and about 10 rolls of 35mm film. Except for the tripod (which rides on the outside of the backpack), all of this goes in a Canon Deluxe Photo Backpack 200EG.<br>

Fine points:</p>

<ul>

<li>The 50mm lens also doubles as a loupe for the big camera's ground glass, and the changing bag gets used a a focusing hood.</li>

<li>For quick access, the camera bag lives at the top of my backpack's main compartment. </li>

<li>Changing film in the field in a bag is no more difficult than doing so at home: just be careful about washing your hands (backpackers who wear contact lenses can attest that sufficiently clean hands are possible). </li>

<li>Unless you'll be camping in an unlit cave, it will never be dark enough to change film outside of the bag. If your eyes can adjust to the light, it's too bright for film.</li>

</ul>

<p>In general, volume is more of a problem for me than weight. Even with a 5600 ci pack, it can be a chore to fit all of this stuff. On long (> 1 week) solo trips, I've never found a way. Also, though I'm reasonably strong, the pack weight can get pretty serious with all this: it was probably around 75 pounds on a recent 5-day/4-night trip. The total weight of the camera gear is substantial component of that—around 25 pounds—but about half of this is the 35mm gear.</p>

<p> </p>

[peter_molettiere]

<p>I just returned from a three day 25 mile backpack though the northern part of Yosemite National Park, near Hetch Hetchy reservoir. I took a 5dMkii, four prime lenses, a set of filters, and a tripod + ball head. My total pack weight was somewhere south of 25lbs, including food (bear canister) and water.</p>

<p>The key, as I see it, in any kind of backpacking, is to get your base weight down as low as you can. Do a search for "ultralight backpacking" to see what you find. There are a lot of sites devoted to it. Start with your big three: shelter, sleep, and the pack itself. On a recent non-photographic trip I had my base weight down to about ten pounds, including sleeping bag and pad, bivy sack, water filter, stove+pot, etc. This will also help with your volume issue.</p>

<p>For summer trips, you can skip the tent, use a bivy (14 oz), get a 40* sleeping bag (1 lb) and a 3/4 length pad (13oz), and a golite backpack (~2 lbs), and you're at ~5 lbs.</p>

<p>As for packing camera gear, I have no suggestions for your specific equipment, but I'll tell you what I did for mine. I took the padded insert out of my camera bag, and simply used that in the top of my pack. Since you're using large format, you're going to have to stop and set up every time you want to take a photo, so convenience on the trail obviously won't be an issue for you. Just keep the gear on the top of the bag, and maybe look into a panel loader.</p>

<p> </p>

[sumo_kun]

<p>I use a backpack designed for mountaineering. Camera backpacks are useless because they aren't comfortable and most of the weight is in padding. Get a good backpack that fits you because if you don't you will suffer.<br>

I fit an ebony 4x5 and 3 lenses (75, 150, 210), 5 film holders, a changing tent, a 50 sheet box of film which holds both B+W and colour (sort it out at home before you leave), spot meter, Lee filter set with grad NDs, B+W filters and a 105mm PL, focus loupe and cleaning accessories. Two of the lenses are wrapped in clothes and the other is on the camera. The small accessories are stuffed in the top compartment and the change tent and film holders in the front compartment. Generally I put clothes at the bottom of the bag and camera stuff on top of that so I can get to it. Its not really optimal for weight distribution but its fine.<br>

I use a small tripod too. For LF, you don't need a huge tripod. Get a good head though. I use a Manfrotto 190Pro and a Linhof Profi II head with a Really Right Stuff clamp + plates.</p>

[peter_molettiere]

<p>Chuk's response reminded me: make sure you have everything you need to clean optics, and don't count on being able to keep any specific cleaning cloth clean! Things can get very dusty or wet out there! I'm not sure what the right solution is, but right now I'm leaning towards a ziplock of single use lens tissue and a small squeeze bottle of ethanol.</p>

[w_t1]

<p>I too agree on using a pack designed for backpacking. I'm old school and still love my kelty ext. frame pack, the top part is boxy and put my camera and lenses there. The only thing I disagree with is Peter's not taking a tent in the summer. I've tried that on a couple of summer trips here (washington cascades), and was fairly miserable at night, even though wasn't raining, wind blowing and branches cracking, sounded like Bigfoot approaching. I sleep a lot better in the 5lb tent, and a "secure" room for fiddling with camera gear. What I generally like to do is have a base camp, for instance alpine lake, and then take off with smaller daypack and tripod to shoot.</p>

<p>It is pretty amazing how light some of the folks are packing with now, especially if you read about some of these hikers that go on long trips like PCT and make their own gear. </p>

[oistrakh]

<p>It sounds like the consensus is to use a non-photo backpack, and either wrap the camera/lenses in padding/clothes or put them in a separate smaller photo bag within the backpack. So no one has managed to fit all their camping gear into a traditional photo backpack? I guess it's another trip to REI for me then ....</p>

<p>Thanks for all the suggestions guys, I really appreciate it.</p>

[peter_molettiere]

<p>I think John hit the nail on the head: photo backpacks aren't very good backpacks for backpacking. They're heavy due to all the padding, and the harness system is not geared to being carried for long periods of time. If it's got lots of plastic and padding, it's going to be heavy! I'd caution you, too, when looking for a backpack to make sure you don't get one that's too heavy. A lot of them are five to seven pounds, just for the empty bag! You can definitely get much lighter backpacks -- check out GoLite and Gossamer Gear online, and if you're headed to REI, look at their UL series backpacks. Your pack doesn't need to weigh more than three pounds. Wouldn't you rather carry an extra film holder or two than a heavier backpack?</p>

<p> </p>

[hopsage]

<p>I think my original post wasn't completely clear about my pack arrangement. My actual backpack is a 12-year-old Gregory, which itself weighs around 8 pounds. That's more than I'd like, but the pack is absolutely bombproof (unlike most UL models) and its suspension is more than adequate for the extra weight. The Canon camera backpack goes in the top of the main compartment of the Gregory. It makes stuff easy enough to access, and keeps all the photo gear nicely protected, but the whole setup is bleeding heavy. At some point, probably after I finally kill it, I will replace the Gregory with something lighter, if I can find one with the same strength and capacity (or better).</p>

[oistrakh]

<p>John, FYI the photo backpack that I was going to try and use for my backpacking trip is already 8lbs by itself, so I don't doubt that your pack is pretty heavy since you're putting an additional photo bag into your 8lbs bag! I'm pretty sure if you check out some of the newer bags you will be amazed at how light and strong backpacks and camping gear in general have become. The double-walled one-person tent I will be carrying with me weighs a total of 2lb 6oz, with fly.</p>

[peter_molettiere]

<p>@John: I think the "UL gear is delicate" meme is a bit overplayed. While I'm sure your 8 pound Gregory is bomb-proof, my wife and I have four ultralight packs between us, and all are proving very durable, as well as lightweight. We've done a lot of backpacking this way (well over 500 miles in the last few years), and have had no issues whatsoever with gear failure.</p>

<p>If you're a rock climber, and might be dragging your pack over granite slabs a lot, then the situation might be different, but if you're just hiking trails, then I think you'll find the GoLite packs are super durable. The new Dyneema ripstop nylon is the bomb.</p>

<p>I will say, though, that the bag-in-a-bag situation is kinda nice for when you get to camp, and want to carry your photo gear up a ridge, or across a meadow. My photo-bag-insert-only used in the backpack method meant that I was either carrying my lenses in the insert (or had my wife carry it), or I emptied my backpack out and used that. A lightweight shoulder bag would have been nice.</p>

[hopsage]

<p>@Peter - I don't really have an informed opinion of the UL backpacks, as I've not had the chance to use one. Honestly, my concern with them is not so much the strength of the fabric (some of that stuff is amazingly strong), but rather the ability of the suspension to stand up to weight. For example, I was part of a 12-day trip in the Brooks Range an couple years back: the food alone weighed over 50 pounds at the beginning of the trip (all total, I started out carrying 95, and needless to say, the large format equipment didn't come with me). </p>

<p>But the suspension strength is just a concern, not a claim. It seems like you've found yours to be satisfactory in this regard. If I get a chance to check out one of these packs, I'll do so.</p>

[peter_molettiere]

<p>@John: You've hit the nail on the head there -- there is definitely an upper limit to the amount of weight you can carry in an UL backpack. For me, it's about 35 pounds, and that's mostly food for a 10 day leg without resupply on a thru hike last year. Of course, we put significant work into minimizing the weight and bulk of our food to get there... ten days food in a bear canister is a feat.</p>

<p>I'm not sure I'd want to carry more than about 35 pounds for long, though. :)</p>

[ivan_j._eberle1]

<p>The backpack choice also depends on the terrain. Where there are no overhanging branches and no off-trail travel is expected, the lightweight backpacks might suffice. Where I do most of my photography, the dense chaparral (brush) would shred most packs within an hour or two-- at most.<br>

Many commercially available packs now have silly mesh pockets for where the tripod feet would reside. On my 20+ year old Gregory these were constructed of heavy ballistic cloth nylon as was the rest of the simple, single shell with divider design. Current Gregory packs are wimpy in comparision.<br>

Wish someone or another would get back to making quality packs again instead of off-shoring them for the masses (who may rarely if ever use them in extreme conditions). </p>

[jlkphoto]

<p>I'm surprised no one mentioned Photobackpacker. They cater to large format photographers.<br>

<a href="http://www.photobackpacker.com/home.asp">http://www.photobackpacker.com/home.asp</a><br>

They sell a modified Kelty backpack designed for photographers and have various cases for cameras, lenses, etc.<br>

The modified Kelty pack is designed for backpacking so it fits much better than any typical photo backpack. The cases and backer boards are incredibly light weight.<br>

I'm a happy customer.</p>

[w_t1]

<p>no one mentioned Photogbackpacker since those are not for backpacking, which the OP wants to do - carry LF camera equipment AND food shelter clothing water for staying overnight in wilderness. The pack I saw is a Kelty redwing with compartments added, my wife has a redwing, it wouldn't hold LF gear AND backpacking gear. Anyway, I still think the best way is to use a backpacking pack, and a guy can do a lot himself with 1/8" plywood and velcro and fabric in making his own compartments to modify his own pack for photo gear.<br>

regards<br>

Tom</p>