PDA

View Full Version : Camera weight vs. Tripod/Accessories weight...Light field Camera enthusiasts help?



audioexcels
19-Jun-2007, 20:47
I'm curious about a few things dealing with camera weight and size (i.e. format choice) and the associated equipment involved.

For example, lets say we have a nice field cam that is an 8X10, weighs say, about 5lbs like the Philips Explorer. Then we have some very light lenses from the 4/4 series by Fujinon (A/C), and Nikkor (M/A?). The weight of the actual equipment comes in at say 8-10lbs for the cam and three lenses on boards.

But then there is the tripod...the 8X10 holders...the 8X10 film (it may not seem like a lot, but compare the weight of 1 4X5 piece and 4/4X5 pieces...adds up if you have 4 sheets of 8X10 with you).

What do people shooting with larger or even smaller LF formats do about eliminating weight?

I.E. Use a light tripod? How light is considered a light tripod that will do a proper job of keeping things stable out in the field?

Holders?...how heavy are those 8X10 holders?!?!?!???...How does one eliminate this variable...any lightweight type holders to compensate?


I'm most concerned with the Tripod and Holders...Given one uses all lightweight lenses/camera, how can one do their best to eliminate the rest of the weight?

What this brings me to and the reason why I ask this question is because just as people will pay the premium to have light lenses, they will pay the premium for the lightweight field cam, especially the very well built ones that are very sturdy in spite their weight...in other words, if the equipment (tripod/holders/etc.) is weighing in at like 10-15lbs or more?, what difference does 5 more lbs of a camera or lenses make to such an outfit? I know packing with 5lbs or even 10lbs more is a noticeable difference, but certainly not one for a person that is in fine physical condition cannot live with knowing they saved $2000 buying "regularly large" sized Rodenstock/Schneider lenses by comparison to the small Fujinons/Nikkors.

A bit of a congested post as usual, but hopefully I have placed words carefully enough for people that know enough about field/packing/travel with LF will be able to help with.

Thanks all!!!

Adam Kavalunas
19-Jun-2007, 21:02
I cant attest to the 8x10 format, but my 4x5 set up is about as light as possible. My camera is just over 3 lbs(not quite as light as a toho tho), most of my lenses are super light(rod. 135N, fuji 240A, ect..), I use quickloads so I only need 1 holder, my tripod is a new feisol that weighs only 1.2Kg. Maybe this helps...

Adam

audioexcels
19-Jun-2007, 21:06
I cant attest to the 8x10 format, but my 4x5 set up is about as light as possible. My camera is just over 3 lbs(not quite as light as a toho tho), most of my lenses are super light(rod. 135N, fuji 240A, ect..), I use quickloads so I only need 1 holder, my tripod is a new feisol that weighs only 1.2Kg. Maybe this helps...

Adam

If you were shooting with an 8lb camera (including back and regular holder), would this Feisol do the trick? Sounds like you have an excellent kit. It is helpful what you said because in spite I'm looking more into answers with relation to larger format, at least about 8X10 or even Whole Plate (I didn't mention it because I didn't know if many would be able to tell of their experience as it's probably 10 to every 1 shooting 8X10 over WP).

Adam Kavalunas
19-Jun-2007, 21:21
I have a friend that shoots an 8x10 tachi and uses a velbon CF pod that is smaller than my feisol. It should be no problem if there is little wind. Feisol also makes a couple other pods that are a little more robust than mine and only add about another pound or two. I'd seriouly check them out. Their tripods are super light and VERY reasonably priced. One nice bonus i discoverd is that even though i didnt order a center column with mine, it still came with a hook underneath the flat plate for hanging my bag on to add stability. I also plan on adding an acratech ultimate ball head which weighs in at just under a lb and can firmly hold up to 25 lbs.

Adam

Ron Marshall
19-Jun-2007, 21:30
Limiting the weight of your kit is really only necessary if you intend to hike with your camera. If you will only use it within a couple of hundred yards of your car and you are in good shape then anything will suffice.

I started with a 7 lb Sinar, and a cheap, lousy pack. After doing a couple of longer hikes I decided to spring for a Toho and a good pack. Now I find it much more pleasant shoot at a distance from the car.

Eric James
19-Jun-2007, 22:13
As far as the tripod goes, much depends on the conditions (e.g. wind and substrate), focal length and shutter speed, and technique. Shutter speeds are usually so long that one must rely on good technique. Center the focused camera over your support, choose solid substrate for your support (or stay perfectly still during the exposure if your tripod is on spongy ground; splay out the tripod legs when appropriate), wait for lulls in the wind or block the wind (I just started used a blue tarp held over head - works great!), and stabilize the tripod with weight (e.g. with your extra gear hanging from a center column hook); you can also push your film.

I currently have two tripods for my 4X5 - a heavy and a light. If I'm shooting from the car or going on an easy hike, I take the heavy; if I'm going the distance with a bunch of altitude gain, I pack the light.

If memory serves me, QTL used a Gitzo 1228 to support a 5X7 and a 500mm lens to photograph many of our US National Parks. IMO that pushes the limits of good technique and spills over into the realm of great technique - I can't help your here!

Nick_3536
20-Jun-2007, 03:38
[QUOTE=audioexcels;250768] I know packing with 5lbs or even 10lbs more is a noticeable difference, but certainly not one for a person that is in fine physical condition cannot live with knowing they saved $2000 buying "regularly large" sized Rodenstock/Schneider lenses by comparison to the small Fujinons/Nikkors.
QUOTE]


I think that starts with the wrong basic info.

New the Fuji C are on the low end of the price scale. When Nikon still made it's lenses the lighter weight lenses cost less to. The bigger lenses are in #3 shutters and that alone increases the price.

I guess the 110XL and the 150XL are two lenses that are more expensive and a bit smaller then the other options.

But for the most part light weight lenses can be picked up for less if you're only looking at 8x10. Those slower lighter lenses with maybe a touch less coverage aren't that big a drawback outdoors.

To the question of why? I've said it before. No matter your condition you'll have a personal limit. You can choose to divide that weight any way you want. But in the end you've still got a limit. Water is heavy. Food. Plus anything else you might want to haul with you.

Walter Calahan
20-Jun-2007, 04:08
My view if you are concerned about weight, don't shoot above 5x7 format. I have a light weight 8x10 camera, but when you add everything together the system is heavy.

I don't skimp on a tripod. It is so important to have a stable platform under your camera.

So what do I do, I use a jogging baby stroller to, a three bicycle wheel style stroller, to roll my gear instead of carrying it. The type I bought used on eBay has shock absorbers to cushion the ride. If it's good enough for baby, it's good enough for my gear.

When backpacking, my backpack has the camping & food gear, and the camera gear rolls.

David A. Goldfarb
20-Jun-2007, 05:14
I agree that if you want to really have a super-light kit, the solution is to shoot a smaller format.

I use an 8x10" Gowland, though, so I'm familiar with the situation.

Filmholders--you could use wooden holders to save a little weight, and if you could find enough Mido holders for sale anywhere, you could carry more film in less space and with less weight, but in general, there isn't much savings to be had here. I usually carry 3-5 holders for an outing. Usually these are day hikes or half-day trips. I haven't tried an overnight backpacking trip with the 8x10", but if I did, I'd probably carry 3 holders and a changing tent.

Tripod--If you're not using very long lenses (say 450mm max), you can use a lighter tripod with a lighter camera. My general inclination is to use the big tripod when weight isn't at an absolute premium, but when I want to stay light with my 8x10" Gowland, I'll use my Tiltall, which is 6 lbs. with head. You could shave a pound or two off that by using a carbon fiber tripod.

Lensboards--If you're using small lenses, put them on small lensboards and use an adapter board. My small lenses generally go on Technika-style boards, and I use a Technika-Sinar adapter board.

eric black
20-Jun-2007, 05:31
An area to consider for saving weight is in the pack itself- most of the weight that comes with new packs is the heavy and excessive padding that they tend to put into them- My Lowepro pack weighs in at over 6 lbs so I use it only when I am hiking a good distance from the car- anything less than 2-3 miles and I use a Domke F-6 pack (with the miscellaneous straps and the bottom reinforcement removed). It goes over one shoulder with a windbreaker/raincoat to provide any padding needed. I am still waiting for somebody to sell a stripped down backpack made specifically for 4x5 or 8x10. I may try an f64 pack one of the days when I have more money.

David A. Goldfarb
20-Jun-2007, 05:38
My 8x10" Gowland fits in an ordinary knapsack designed for laptop computers. I keep the camera and darkcloth in the large padded compartment, holders in the next narrower compartment, and lenses and accessories in the other smaller compartments. The tripod goes on a strap over my shoulder.

Turner Reich
20-Jun-2007, 08:23
Where are the Feisol tripods available from and what is the price range? Thanks

turtle
20-Jun-2007, 08:35
One should arguable not look at weight savings as $x per gram or ounce, but in what it allows you to do. In many respects a lot of light lenses sacrifice aperture rather than cost more, cameras sacrificing stability or draw rather than cost.

I agree that packs can be quite heavy. I have a super light well harnessed conventional backpack that is used when light weight is really essential and I have lots of gear to carry. It is very comfortable but is not suited to shots here and there but fine for unload, stay, shoot, load and move on. Polyester lee filters are light but dont save a hole lot in the grand scheme of things.

Rakesh Malik
20-Jun-2007, 08:58
Where are the Feisol tripods available from and what is the price range? Thanks

http://www.feisol.com

audioexcels
20-Jun-2007, 17:00
[QUOTE=turtle;250841]One should arguable not look at weight savings as $x per gram or ounce, but in what it allows you to do. In many respects a lot of light lenses sacrifice aperture rather than cost more, cameras sacrificing stability or draw rather than cost.
QUOTE]

You make a very fine point. F5.6 vs. F9/F10/F12.5/etc. is quite a difference.

David A. Goldfarb
20-Jun-2007, 17:29
While bright lenses are a nice convenience, for outdoor landscape work where one would usually want a lightweight camera, they are not all that necessary unless you like to shoot with very short DOF (which you might, in which case, you put up with the heavier lenses). Normal shooting apertures for 8x10" in that situation are usually in the f:32-64 range, and one can learn to compose and focus at f:9 or f:12.5.

Dave_B
20-Jun-2007, 19:01
It is possible to get an "all in" 4x5 lightweight rig for backpacking that weighs in around 15 pounds. 12 for the camera gear and another 3 or so for a good pack that will not kill your back. The lightest way to shoot 4x5 is a Fuji holder and quickloads. Only in the limit of a very large number of shots do film holders, sheet film and a changing bag make sense from a weight point of view. Quickloads also are much better in terms of film cleanliness. Most places you would backpack are not dust and dirt free and the pre-packaged quickloads where you never handle the film directly are much better. A decent tripod for a light 4x5 camera can weigh ~2lbs. It is right at the limits but it works. Using an 8x10 for backpacking seems to require some kind of a pack animal or a much better back than I was given. I find 4x5 a good compromise for backpacking. Large enough for first rate images but small enough that I can carry it with all my other camping gear. All in, I can hit the trail with all camping and camera gear at under thirty pounds. At 55, I can carry this much weight for a long time. If my pack starts getting much more than that, I don't go as far or fast.
Cheers,
Dave B.