An exercise: The ultimate lite weight LF outfit

[Brian C. Miller]

Creating a lightweight outfit can be quite interesting. I knew a fellow who hiked the Pacific Crest Trail twice back-to-back. I supplied a Yashica T4 and lots of Kodak 400UC for the trip. Shaving weight off of gear can be quite interesting. I also supplied him with a small Bogen head, which was fitted to the top of one of his hiking sticks with a double-screw from a hardware store.

What needs to be done is figure out how much the complete kit can weigh. I bet that the complete kit will weigh 20 pounds pack weight, including film. Maybe he would be better off with a light MF camera like the Mamiya 67.

One thing that I have not seen is a camera made from balsa wood. That wood is both light weight and quite strong. Isn't there a view camera made from carbon fiber or some molded plastic? I remember reading a review, but that was a few years back.

I would see what a Polaroid, Readyload, or Quickload holders weigh, and compare that to the weight of a changing bag. Your friend will also have to remember that dust may be a significant factor on the trip, and that can really mess things up. If he can get any kind of a resupply along the way, then he can pick up/drop off film as he goes.

[John Kasaian]

Why not handhold and loose the tripod entirely?

[Eric Leppanen]

I used to do fairly long distance (10+ miles round trip) day hikes with the following setup:

- Toho FC-45 Mini camera (see www.toho-machine.co.jp/FC-45Mini.htm)

- SS80XL, APO Sironar-S 150, Fuji-A 240 lenses

- Fuji Quickload film holder and loupe

All these items would fit into a Lowepro Photo Runner belt pack. The 4x5 Quickload film box would reside in my lightweight backpack, along with food and emergency gear. I used my black windbreaker as a dark cloth. and carried a Gitzo 1228 tripod with Linhof Profi-II ballhead by hand. Of course my lenses were not the lightest available: additional thoughts on lightweight lenses can be found at www.hevanet.com/cperez/kit.html and www.thalmann.com/largeformat/lightwei.htm.

The FC Mini weighs only 880 grams (a smidge less than 2 pounds) but lacks movements (although front rise is possible if you purchase the eccentric lens panel). It also lacks a rotating back. It is arguably an LF version of the Mamiya 7 (minus rangefinder), and is exceptionally rigid. Since no front tilt is supported, near-to-far compositions are only possible with wide to normal lenses due to the limited depth-of-field. I personally found the lack of movements too limiting and eventually sold it, but if you are looking for a rigid, ultra-compact, ultra-light camera then it is hard to beat. In the U.S. it is sold by Badger Graphic.

[Ole Tjugen]

Another vote for old plate cameras. Two of mine are on www.bruraholo.no/Cameras/Voigt/Voigtlander.html - Voigtländer Bergheil 9x12cm on the left, VAG 6.5x9cm on the right. Both have front rise/fall and shift. The Bergheil has interchangable lenses too - to reduce weight even more use a 135mm Skopar instead of the 150 Heliar shown in the pictures.
For the 6.5x9cm VAG I also have double filmholders, reducing carrying weight even more. With a 1930's collapsible tripod (thin and flimsy, but doesn't need much stability to hold the VAG) the total weight with 6 sheets of film is about 800g (0.8kg, less than 2 lb).

[Will Strain]

Mike - at some point the usability comes back in. If you have to unpack everything in order to reload film every 4 shots that can cost you quite a bit more in time and hassle (particularly in adverse conditons) than the extra weight might (don't forget a second box for spent shots - and if the darkcloth/bag doesn't work for film changing, then your equation gets shot to hell).

So I would second the quickload/readyload vote. But then again, I tend to shoot more film per scene than most.

[Michael Gordon]

Y'know, this sounds a like a really nice engineering exercise, but I think it would be a sure way to suck the pleasure and zen out of using a view camera.

[Bill_1856]

Rolleiflex 2.8 and 220 roll film.

[Steve Hamley]

At some point you've gone beyond the point of real sensibility and this looks like a good example. Rather than severely limiting functionality of the view camera, I'd take a Mamiya 7II and 3 lenses; 43mm, 65mm, and 150mm. if you wanted to get even lighter, substitute the 80mm for the 150mm. The Mamiya's lenses have better resolution than most view camera lenses and with a good scan can come very close if not equal the quality from 4x5. What you would be giving up is movemennts of course, but with shorter lenses that becomes less of an issue. I'd prefer a high quality multi-lens MF set than a severely limited LF camera - and in fact the Mamiya 6 and 7II are probably the ultimate travel cameras.

Steve

[David A. Goldfarb]

My lighweight kit--

Gowland 4x5" Front-Moves Pocket View with folding viewing hood

90/6.8 Angulon

135/5.6 Caltar II-N (I used to use a 135 Symmar convertible which is even lighter, but the Caltar II-N is a better lens)

Linhof 42mm filter and shade kit

Gossen Digisix meter

Linhof Report tripod (1950s vintage--the little one with the snap legs that folds flat) with small Linhof Ballhead 01 (current)

2 Kinematic filmholders (10 sheets each)

[David A. Goldfarb]

P.S.--Toyo 3.6x loupe.