For simplicity's sake, let's say you've just parked the car, it's a nice morning, and you're about to head into diverse terrain for a half day or full day of shooting – you'll be carrying a typical (not overly ambitious) load of LF gear.
Are you a running shoes person, or a hiking boots person? (If neither, please tell us more about your choice.)
I've heard convincing arguments either way. What's more, the length of the hike doesn't seem to settle the matter. That is, the longer the hike, the reasons for electing running shoes, good and bad, grow just as quickly as they do for hiking boots.
What's the smart landscaper supposed to do? What are the chief variables to consider?
(Additional remarks about socks are naturally welcome!)
-----
For the record, I'm a hiking boots person 95% of the time, no matter how far from the car. Once in a city park, just a few steps from my car, and on a day when I was wearing running shoes, a large German Shepherd approached and began leaping up on me. No owner in sight. He turned out to be friendly, not hostile, but how was I to know in those first few moments? In retrospect, hiking boots would have been better than running shoes to gently keep him at a safer distance for those first few critical moments. "Hiking boots next time, and maybe every time," I remember thinking...
Bookmarks