<p>If you follow your plan to hitch-hike through the Scottish islands, I would not take an RB. It is not just the weight, it is how it handles. The camera pretty much has to be carried in a back-pack because of its weight and size, and that means every time you want to take a shot with it you will have to remove the pack, unload the camera, and most of the time, mount it on a tripod, etc. Then go through all of the composition, shutter cocking, film advancing, focusing steps and with some frequency changing backs or films. Yes, that will be a contemplative way to shoot, but it rains very often in the Hebrides, the West Highlands and in Shetland, and often on short time cycles. In some places cars do not go by very often, so you may well be committed to longer than desirable walks. All of these environmental factors make field photography in general more challenging there than in other environments, and there is an advantage to be able to pull out a camera and put it away fairly quickly.<br>
<br />I think the advice about taking a TLR like a Rolleiflex, a Rolleicord, or a Minolta Autocord is worth a close look, because they are all quite light and small compared with an RB. For purposes of taking landscapes, where parallax shifts in close-ups do not matter, you can put a mask on the focusing screen to mark 645 size. A long time ago when I was making 4X4 superslides with a Rolleicord, I had the amazingly dim original ground glass screen replaced by Bill Maxwell and he scribed 4X4 cropping lines on the new screen, and it worked great. I suspect the Hasselblad option would also work well, but you will be into more money for that compared with a basic TLR.</p>