Cameras Used in Mountain Photography

[sapblatt]

Greetings All -

Just wondering what types of cameras the VFTT photographers out there are using? I want to stop using disposables cameras this year on my trips but I want to be sure I have enough of a camera to take decent pictures. Are people using SLR Digiitals? Pont and shoots? If point and shoot what woud you consider the minimum zoom strength to take decent photos out there?

Keep all of the grat photos all...HikerBobs pics make me real glad my computer monitor at work does not face anyone but me...I spend way too much time looking at great pictures and daydreaming of the mountains!

 

[TMax]

My photos are extremely important to me. As a result, I tolerate the weight and carry a Minolta SLR film camera. The only time it ever failed me was on an ice-climbing trip where the temperature never got above 0. It takes great photos and gives me the versatility of changing my settings with ease to adapt to the ever-changing mountain conditions. Besides, I'm terribly gratified by the whole process of dropping off film, waiting for it to be developed, picking it up and going through the photos in the parking lot. What can I say?

 

[bobandgeri]

I use a Nikon D100 Digital SLR with a 24 - 120 zoom. It has handeled the snow and temps to -14 with no problems.

 

[forestgnome]

Photography is a major part of my hiking. I like to capture the magic of the forest, be it a panorama from a peak or a critter or a babbling, mossy brook,etc...
Since you don't mind the extra weight, get an slr. You don't have to spend too much on the body. Try to put more money into lenses instead. More expensive bodies are full of tricks designed to make it "easy". But like using a calculator to add and multiply, it just makes you intellectually lazy. I wouldn't pay more than $200.00 for a body, because all you need is a manual setting and some basic knowledge.
The lens should be quality, it is the heart. The body just holds a piece of film in place, but the lens transports the image from the world to the film.
I use a Canon Rebel body($180). The lowest in the line of Rebels has tricks I'd never use. But I use a Sigma ATX 28-70mm ($400?) and a Canon 70-300mm zoom with Image Stabilizer($425).
You need a zoom for wildlife almost every time. For nice views from the top you would usually want a small lens, from perhaps 28mm to 50mm or 70mm, depending on you personal taste in composition. If you want a nice blue sky, a circular polarizer filter is a must.
A few more tips...slow film(100), small aperature (f/16ish), tripod. You can get a light tripod for $20.00. Another 2 lbs. in my pack is immeasuably worth it for the quality of results.
Digital vs. film? I went digital last summer and I love it. I got the digital Canon Rebel because it takes the lenses that I already invested in. You can see a few examples of pictures I've taken with this stuff at www.mountwashington.org, in the Photo Journal. There is a view from Mt Chocorua under February, taken with the Sigma lens. There is a nice shot of a black bear under October, taken with the Canon Image Stabilizer lens.
Don't buy a kit! You'll probably get a cheap lens that you'll end up replacing.
Ask alot of different people before you buy anything!

 

[bobmak]

It all depends on where I am going and what types of photos I want...

For a 35 mm point & shoot I use an Olympus Stylus Epic (no zoom) that takes great 35 mm shots. It's weather proof and pretty compact, has a great lens (f2.8), seems to be fairly rugged (it has been dropped several times and still works great). This is the one that I use most when I want to travel light and shoot film

For a digital I am behind the times. I am using a Nikon Coolpix 2100, bought it when it first came out, it works great but it is only 2 megapixel. I use this mostly for pix that I want to share with friends online, versus photos that i want to develop. The lens is not as sharp as the Olympus.

For kayaking I use a Pentax zoom 90 WR. It's splashproof (has been covered in salt water many times with no damage) and has a 35-90mm zoom rated at f3.5-7; not too bad for what it is. This is a very rugged p&s!

I also have 2 SLR's, a Pentax K1000 and a Nikon N80. The K1000 has seen a lot of action and has held up nicely. I recieved it as a gift when I graduated high school 30 years ago and the only work that has been done on it has been several cleanings. It's completely manual; it uses on small battery for the light meter only. It has shown no ill effects despite all the abuse it has seen. The N80 is a great camera, but is microprossessor controlled. I have taken it with me a couple of times on trips, but have treated it very gently. I think getting it wet or dropping it would mean a disaster.

For my upcoming trip to Arizona I am thinking of bringing the Pentax K1000 and the Olympus. That will give me a good combo of a 35 mm SLR with lenses, etc. and lightweight autofocus small camera.

 

[HikerBob]

I started out using a Nikon Coolpix 5700 but was dissapointed with the low light performance and the power zoom really drained battery life, especially in winter.

I now use a Nikon D70. I bought the kit but soon replaced the kit lens with a Nikon 24-120 with image stabilization (Nikon calls it VR - vibration reduction)
The VR helps in low light situations (as does the focus assist lamp) and for sharper zoom shots. With a manual zoom, optical viewfinder and bigger battery I have yet to suffer cold battery problems.

With the 24-120 lens the D70 weighs in at 3 lbs! I'm slow anyway and take a lot of pictures so the weight isn't really an issue.

While the D70 does offer a lot of versatility, for general picture taking I see a lot of excellent images from people using compact digital cameras.

As far as digital vs roll photography? That is a debate that can get heated. For me digital photography is the way to go for the hiking environment. With my camera I have the capacity to take almost 150 images (with a 512MB card) and switch ISO anywhere from 200 to 1600 without opening up the box. I would not want to change film at -15* in a blizzard!

Bob

 

[percious]

I too have a Minolta SLR. I got it used for $50. I wanted a camera that I didn't care if it was broken or lost. It takes some nice pictures. I understand what you mean about wanting to move over from disposables. Hard to beat a good SLR if you don't mind learning about real film.

-percious

 

[David Metsky]

My hiking pictures are taken with my Olympus C-720 or my new Canon SD300, both digital. I have a Canon SLR but I rarely if ever carry it while hiking, the digitals both do a fantastic job. I will eventually get a Canon dSLR so I can continue to use my Canon lenses, but for now the smaller digitals do all that I need and more.

-dave-

 

[Aviarome]

Along the same lines, what kind of tripods does everyone use, and what do you recommend? I'm in the market for a new tripod and am trying to look for one with the right combination of weight and versatility, primarily for SLRs. Thanks!

 

[DougPaul]

Along the same lines, what kind of tripods does everyone use, and what do you recommend? I'm in the market for a new tripod and am trying to look for one with the right combination of weight and versatility, primarily for SLRs. Thanks!

I personally don't carry a tripod hiking. I can stabilize my SLR fairly well by hand alone. My digital point and shoot, however, is much harder to hold...

Tripods tend to be fairly heavy and bulky. Some lighter weight approaches are:
* a monopod: won't hold the camera up, but will stabilize it.
* ice axe clamp--attaches to the head of an ice axe (there may be similar clamps that attach to the top of a ski/trekking pole make a monopod).
* mini-tripods--6 in to 1 ft high tripod

However, if you are really serious about your photography, there is no substitute for a good tripod...

Doug

 

[Tim Seaver]

What's in the Bag?

Here is what I generally bring for all purpose mountain photography ( unlike working out of my car, where the sky is the limit!):

Canon EOS-1n or A5 body with Really Right Stuff quick release plate
Tamron 20-40 F2.8 SP IF wide angle
Canon 70-210 F4 "L" telephoto with tripod collar w/RRS QR plate
1.4x teleconverter
50mm extension tube ( extends close focusing for use with 70-210)

Gitzo Carbon Fiber "Mountaineer" tripod
ACRA-tech quick release ball head
Lowe Photo Trekker pack ( holds tripod on middle of back)
Fuji Velvia 100 slide film
2 stop graduated neutral density filter, 4x4 filter holder and lens adapter rings
Polarizers

I still have room in the pack for a 70 or 100 oz. hydration bladder in the pack body and some food, and my outerwear fits in the external zippered compartment.

If I am going light, I generally bring one body and a Canon 28-135 IS lens, and leave the tripod behind - good for bright days where I don't need slower shutter speeds or in the winter when an axe-pod will suffice in a pinch.

I haven't gone digital yet, but the news that digital has now surpassed film in color accuracy and is closing in on film's resolution is bringing that day sooner.
Now if they could just sell those Canon D1s for a bit less than $8000....

If you are going to bother buying/bringing a tripod ( and you should if you are serious about photography), you might as well get a high quality model...anything less will be so frustrating/slow to use that you will end up finding an excuse to leave it behind, and then you have lost the ability to use slow shutter speeds - which is exactly what you need when the light is low and lovely. Get a tripod that is tall enough so that you don't have to bend over to peer through the viewfinder - the more comfortable you are, the better your compositions will be...and your back will appreciate it as well.

 

[arghman]

just bought my Panasonic FZ20 in December & am very happy with it (was out yesterday taking pictures of various trees), mostly due to the zoom range (12:1 + image stabilization, and they've done a nice job IMHO). Pluses: zoom range, manual focus (no longer a prisoner of autofocus!!!), hot shoe, adapters available for adding filters/closeup lenses/teleconverters. White balance is very good -- I was taking some test pix indoors while sun disappeared behind clouds & light source shifted from sunlight to indoor fluorescent, my exposure times lengthened by a factor of 30 but you can barely tell from the pictures. Minuses: WYSINQWYG (what you see is not quite what you get -- electronic viewfinder doesn't show enough detail to focus sometimes), image quality not as good as digital SLR due to smaller CCD. I wasn't willing to carry around a digital SLR -- too nervous to risk losing that much $$$ if something happened to my camera.

Tripods: tough call. Am looking at several now, Manfrotto 3001 Pro is a nice one... I'm leaning towards the Slik Sprint Pro, not as nice as the Manfrotto but it weighs less & has some of the good features (low minimum height).

If you do use a hiking stick for a monopod (i've had one for a few years, it's proved helpful but not superlative), consider buying a swivel head -- it gives you more degrees of freedom to aim the camera than just sticking it on top of the monopod. (e.g. Manfrotto 3229 which also has a quick-release.) *Don't* rely on sticking it into the ground to take a self-portrait; my Kodak & monopod fell down last year, camera is still OK but it scared the @#%@ out of me.

 

[afka_bob]

...For a 35 mm point & shoot I use an Olympus Stylus Epic (no zoom) that takes great 35 mm shots. It's weather proof and pretty compact, has a great lens (f2.8), seems to be fairly rugged (it has been dropped several times and still works great). This is the one that I use most when I want to travel light and shoot film....

Lots of great digital cameras out there, and getting better all the time, but I second bobmak's comments for the Stylus Epic: tiny, light, weather-proof, rugged, reliable, and cheap. Great backup for anybody, and most folks might find it entirely adequate to carry alone. 35mm isn't dead by a long shot.

 

[Greg]

I prefer my Minolta SLR, but because of the weight with the zoom lens, I usually settle for the Nikon Coolpics 4300 digital. It's a 4 megapixel and up to 12X zoom. The ONLY things that I like better about the digital is the low weight and small size, and the ability to see a picture before I end the trip, making sure I get the pic that I want. Quality is good, but I just feel that I get better pics with the SLR.

 

[tycho_32]

I carry the Rebel SLR and I love it though I am saving for a Digital Rebel for the reasons already listed above--it uses my lenses.

 

[Papa Bear]

...
and a Canon 70-300mm zoom with Image Stabilizer($425).
...

...
and a Canon 28-135 IS lens, and leave the tripod behind
...

A couple of you photographers refer to an Image Stabilizer. What is that and how does it work? I would think you would need something massive (inirtia) with a system to isolate the lens from the environment. Wouldn't that have to be pretty heavy to work?

 

[DougPaul]

I prefer my Minolta SLR,
...
The ONLY things that I like better about the digital is the low weight and small size, and the ability to see a picture before I end the trip, making sure I get the pic that I want. Quality is good, but I just feel that I get better pics with the SLR.

Same here.

I get better quality pictures with my SLR (film, all manual, internal meter, wider and longer fixed FL lenses, good quality optics, biger, heavier) than I do with my compact digital (digital images, too much poor decision-prone automation, zoom lens, narrower range of medium quality optics, smaller, lighter). Also, easier to hold and operate the SLR.

The primary advantages of the digital are weight, size, and convienent image format. I have been carrying it of late...

SLR: Minolta SRT-101, lenses: 28mm-270mm
Digital: Canon A75, lens: 35-105mm (equiv) zoom

Doug

 

[forestgnome]

image stabilizer

Papa Bear,
It's crazy but it works. As you may know, the longer the lens, the harder it is to handhold. I shot a bear, handheld, at 300mm with the Canon 70-300 IS. When I got home and brought it up on the screen I almost wept.
I don't deeply understand the technology of the gyro, but it works.
Check out the photo at www.monutwashington.org. Go to Photo Gallery, then to Photo Journal, then go to October 2004.
300mm and no tripod!

 

[ExploreTheEast]

For the past month now, I've been trying to justify the leap from consumer-level digital to digital SLR. For almost two years, I've been shooting with either a Canon G3 or Pro1. Both of these cameras have given me enough resolution and manual settings to make it feel like I have the perfect ratio of control to convenience.

Today I finally made my decision, NOT to go with a digital SLR. It came down to the same thing that it always has-- If it's too big/heavy, I won't bring it with me. I've had the Pro1 for a year now, but the G3 gets more action, because it's less than 2/3 the weight of the Pro1. The photos I take are just right by my standards. I feel like I can probably do better, but that's not going to happen without learning more about composition and technique. A Rebel 350 will not make me Art Wolfe.

When it comes to digital vs film vs digital SLR, one question that really helps in making the decision: Are you a hiker that likes to take photos, or are you a photographer that likes to go hiking? Lately, I feel like I've been blurring the line, but even at this point, I'm probably going to pick up a Canon G6 this weekend. I don't want to deal with film/development, and I don't want the weight of 2 different lenses and a stable tripod. At $480, the G6 is less than half the price of the SLR I was going to buy. It's also higher resolution and better image detail/quality than both of my current cameras, not to mention smaller and lighter as well. Can't go wrong with that!

 

[sapblatt]

Thank you for all of the input

Hi Everyone -

Well, I sure got a lot of great info and opinions. I agree with all of the weight concerns, as I do tend to carry too much. Financially right now, I am unlikely to spend a lot on anything, and because my wife is usually home with our son and our Canon PowerShot I am going to go back to my old ways and dust of my Minolta SRT and start shooting film again. It is a great camera, I am a little rusty off of "AUTO" but it will all come back to me. I have a lense that will cover most of my needs ( a 35-135mm zoom f 3.5).

I would have to say I am a hiker that likes to take photographs...not vice-versa.

As time goes buy I may buy a second digital camera to take on my trips...I do prefer the format and ease of use, but the Minolta will be great for now!

Thanks again... I learn so much at VFTT.