Page 2 of 45 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 447

Thread: Ultralight Hikers

  1. #11

    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    California
    Posts
    3,908

    Re: Ultralight Hikers

    I solved the tripod problem with a Kodak folding tripod made in the 1930-1950 era. There are several sizes. Although they are very light and look flimsy they are very solid when set up and there is no wrry about virbration. When younger I carried a 4x5 Ikeda, 3 lenses, 2 grafmatics, the tripod plus filters and meter on cross country skis. All of this went into a very lightweight daypack.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Sep 1998
    Location
    Oregon now (formerly Austria)
    Posts
    3,397

    Re: Ultralight Hikers

    I make a big distinction between hiking and backpacking.

    For the former, which I view a one-day affair, if not shorter, I need take no food. I usually get by with a liter of water or less (when my beautiful assistant and hiking partner carries the water bottles ).

    I've worked hard putting together a lightweight hiking kit. It includes a Wista DX, four or five compact lenses, filters, Pentax spotmeter and filmholders. I usually carry a 90mm Super Angulon f/8, a 135mm Nikkor W, an Ektar 203mm f/7.7, and a 300mm Nikkor M. All of these except the 90mm take 52mm filters. I carry 67mm filters for the 90mm. However, when I want to go lighter, I'll take a 100mm Wide Field Ektar that is adapted to take the 52mm filters.

    My camera, filters and lenses go in a lumbar pack. It has a shoulder strap as well as a hip belt, allowing it to be used like an over-the-shoulder camera bag (it never has to touch the ground). One of the lenses folds up in the camera (a real space saver). Loupe, lens shade, meter, viewing filter, lipstick brush and other accessories go in a fly-fishing vest. Six filmholders go in a separate pouch that I sling over my shoulder. A lightweight tripod goes in my hand, or strapped on under the pack when I need both hands to scramble. Darkcloth is rolled and strapped on to the pack as well.

    I could easily make this lighter by cutting down on the number of lenses, etc., but this whole kit weighs in a just over 20 pounds and is really fine for day hikes.

    Backpacking is not a lightweight trip for me usually. I carry tent, sleeping bag, ThermaRest pad and often a fly rod. My camera gear for multi-day (3-7 days) backpack trips usually ends up being the 100mm Ektar, 135mm Nikkor, and 203 Ektar and maybe, if I'm feeling ambitious, a Fujinon A 240mm. I take Mido holders when backpacking; one clamshell and 10 holders or so. They are a pain to load and have light leak problems, but are a lot less weight than 10 filmholders. I could always take four to six filmholders and an empty box and reload, but then I'd need that changing tent...

    My camera kit fits in my lumbar pack, which is then affixed to my backpack. Tripod gets strapped on too. I take one filter wallet with six 52mm filters and my spotmeter; no other accessories.

    Best,

    Doremus

  3. #13
    Drew Wiley
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    SF Bay area, CA
    Posts
    18,338

    Re: Ultralight Hikers

    I've been backpacking with LF gear for decades. Gave up on "ultralight" style way back in my teens, when that mean shivering all nite at high altitude without even
    a sleeping bag. Henceforward I have become my own pack animal, though probably not as intelligent as an ordinary mule. I'll skip over the medium format topic, because if you are thoughtful, you'll discover that certain 4x5 cameras and superb little lenses actually weigh less than MF gear (the exception would be rangefinders like the Mamiya 7). Where the weight comes in is the filmholders. Quickloads are almost a thing of the past now, so you'll have to get accustomed to either a changing tent on longer trips or rollfilm backs. There are plenty of past threads on these options. I normally use lightwt Ursack bear bags, but did have to carry oneof those obnoxious bear barrels last year, just to keep anal rangers out of my food. Generally I avoid such places and prefer quieter backcounty. When I was a youngster I carried a Sinar system, but then treated myself to a little folding Ebony when I turned 50. I still prefer the Sinar or even an 8x10 for dayhikes,
    but both of these are rather bulky and don't allow much food room in the pack - speaking of which, it's far more important to have a comfortable pack than an
    extremely light one. And you don't need any silly camera pack - a goosedown jacket doubles as wonderful camera cushioning as well as film insulation. ... And I'm
    getting a little tired of seeing some of these ultralight types getting hauled out in body bags when something like a surprise snowstorm hits, or they twist an ankle
    and can't keep up body temp. .. might add some more comments later, if I have time.

  4. #14
    ROL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,370

    Re: Ultralight Hikers

    Quote Originally Posted by papercrate View Post
    Speaking of which, any hikers have home-made tents or changing bags?
    I use(d) my full length zippered sleeping bag to change at night. It's all still too f54*$@g heavy for me any more!

  5. #15
    Vaughn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Humboldt County, CA
    Posts
    9,211

    Re: Ultralight Hikers

    Gowland PocketView (an early one marketed by Calumet...limited movements, non-rotating back). One lens. The Caltar II-N 150/5.6 in a Copal 0 together with the camera weighs 2.5 pounds. Bellows at 12.5 inches, plenty with the 150mm. It is a rail camera and one can disconnect the two rail sections (with a standard on each rail section), and loosen the swing on each standard and fold the camera up flat for compact storage. Set-up and take-down got to be fast and second-natured. But there is a lot to be said about a light wood folding camera -- in its own protective box, quicker set-up...especially if the lens can stay on the camera when folded. The Nagaoka is about the lightest of this type -- 2.5 pounds through short bellows and limited movements, but great for backpacking. The PocketView has only back swings and tilts, but all 3 movements on the front.

    My tripod was 7 pounds -- these were the days before carbon fiber...a Gitzo 300 Studex and a Gitzo Ballhead #2. Five holders, changing bag, darkcloth, first a Luna Pro, then a Pentax Digital Spot, an emergency kit (small screw driver, tape, needle and thread, extra allen wrench for the camera), and a day pack that all the camera gear could fit into (minus the tripod). Never weighed it -- probably 20 to 25 pounds. Solo trips into the Grand Canyon for 11 days at a time (in my younger years) and local mountains for a week or so. Last backpack with the 4x5 was locally up Redwood Creek last year...need to get back there soon! I wimped out on my last couple of backpack trips and just took the Rolleiflex (but it is a fun camera to use).

    On backpacks I am now saving a little weight and leaving the day pack behind; and going with an over-the-shoulder bag (for the holders, meter, etc) and the camera on the tripod as I wander around (darkcloth all around the camera, stuff sack over it and the camera).
    "Landscapes exist in the material world yet soar in the realms of the spirit..." Tsung Ping, 5th Century China

  6. #16
    Drew Wiley
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    SF Bay area, CA
    Posts
    18,338

    Re: Ultralight Hikers

    There is a least one person on this forum who changes film inside a black plastic garbage bag at night. Doing so in a sleeping bag per se would seem to be a guarantee of insanity once it comes to spotting. I once watched the poor stiff hired to retouch AA's prints from his early days using a slpg bag. I just seem to run into too much unpredictable weather to dispense with a real Harrison changing tent. I use plastic liners even inside it to keep film dust free. But I still have some Quickloads left, and the Mido holder system too. But a few recent long trips I've resorted to 6x9 roll film holders - I like the proportion, but focus is a lot more finicky with the smaller film area. I don't skimp on sleeping bags. I've spent more than my fair share of "bivouacs" out in the open as a kid. But you won't get much mileage in the next day if you're exhausted from an uncomfortable nite. I have a superb Feathered Friends Goretex bag for summer and early Fall use, which can be supplemented with longjohns; but I need a new winter bag for colder conditions. Tents are another topic. I have an ultralight for summer use up to timberline, but
    wouldn't want to use it in an extreme storm up higher - have a real Bibler for that kind of thing.

  7. #17
    Vaughn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Humboldt County, CA
    Posts
    9,211

    Re: Ultralight Hikers

    Quote Originally Posted by ROL View Post
    I use(d) my full length zippered sleeping bag to change at night. It's all still too f54*$@g heavy for me any more!
    Did that once about 35 years ago in the Trinity Alps. Never again if it can be avoided! What ugly-looking skies! A changing bag for 4x5 is pretty light, and worth its weight. A changing tent is pretty sweet. I wonder if a couple of short sections of old fishing pole bowed corner-to-corner, taped in the middle where they crossed would make a changing bag into a tent?
    "Landscapes exist in the material world yet soar in the realms of the spirit..." Tsung Ping, 5th Century China

  8. #18
    Drew Wiley
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    SF Bay area, CA
    Posts
    18,338

    Re: Ultralight Hikers

    The Harrison tents have crossing little poles just like a real tent. I own two sizes: the "Pup" tent for 4x5, and a big one for 8x10 use. They're the best. I like the idea of simply saving up some rinsed-out heavy black plastic bags like darkroom paper comes in, and doing this at nite. It's just that at nite it tends to get pretty cold, and having your arms inside goosedown or whatever sleeves is just asking for trouble. My tent change-out kit includes some alcohol wipes for finger oil (with nothing added!) and some little nitrile finger cots, along with a sponge. I want my arms bare and clean in there. Usually in the evening I'm either stumbling back from somewhere or trying to clean and arrange my dinner gear by headlamp. Enough to do before scrambling into the sack to get warm. I'm sure gonna miss Quickloads and Readyloads. For just a nite or two out I just use ordinary holders. I'm not a machine-gunner.

  9. #19
    Drew Wiley
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    SF Bay area, CA
    Posts
    18,338

    Re: Ultralight Hikers

    ... so tripods. I'm a bit skeptical of 2-ply carbon fiber under rough conditions. I have an original 3-ply Gitzo Reporter which has held up superbly. But I had a pal slip
    on a rock with a 2-ply version a couple summers ago, and then spend the next week with two limber pine branches duct-taped on, to replace the broken carbon
    fiber ones. Saving that extra half pound just isn't worth it. You can save more than that just by leaving your tripod head home and learning how to go headless. I've been doing that a long time, and it soon becomes instinctive. No problem at all. By the same token, an overly light or cheap view camera is going to prove worthless if it vibrates at long extensions or won't hold settings well. What's the point of carrying LF at all if you come back, after so much effort, with unprintable results? Save weight somewhere else. As I get older I've been forced to discover new tricks myself, though it often costs. I discovered a down sweater at half the wt of my old down jacket. Expensive yes, and needs to be fluffed or lofted more frequently, but a pound here and there starts adding up. Bubble packing weighs next to nothing, and will protect lenses just as well as heavy sponge rubber, maybe better. But I won't compromise on actual packs per se. Nothing worse
    than uncomfortable packs or uncomfortable boots. ... and yeah, I never wear anything but real leather boots. Those glorified tennis shoes that people wear nowadays are something I won't allow anyone who hikes with me to use... too much risk of requiring rescue even in a light snowfall.

  10. #20

    Re: Ultralight Hikers

    Great stuff everybody! Really enjoying the different takes on the weight saving issues. Thanks for compiling these responses to various issues (packs/gear, film changing, tripods) to this thread Drew, really interesting.

    Do those who use the MIDO holders think its worth the small savings in weight? For 4x5 at least? I reckon if I can achieve a dust-minimal changing solution down I'd be happy carry 4 or 5 standard film holders and a film box. I'd be interested in shooting with a 6x9 roll back occasionally too but those things definitely aren't the lightest things to begin with.

Similar Threads

  1. Landscape hikers – “10 essentials” or not?
    By Heroique in forum Style & Technique
    Replies: 254
    Last Post: 29-Aug-2014, 18:42
  2. LF hikers ― is “Map & Compass” a dying art?
    By Heroique in forum Style & Technique
    Replies: 195
    Last Post: 7-Mar-2014, 10:39
  3. Zone VI Ultralight - why not?
    By Ross Martin in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 12-Jun-2001, 17:09
  4. Zone VI Ultralight
    By nick rowan in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 27-Jan-2001, 20:36
  5. Zone VI Ultralight
    By Gary K. Heppell in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 24-Sep-1999, 15:10

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •