An exercise: The ultimate lite weight LF outfit

[Donald Hutton]

I agree with Steve - a Mamiya 7 outfit is amazingly light, functional and capable. Also, you can get away without the tripod under most circumstances (I handhold the 80mm and shorter down to 1/8s). I have plenty of 16x20 prints shot on Tmax 100 which no-one has yet guessed correctly are shot on 6X7 rollfilm; not on 4X5. The oufit is that compact that I almost always carry it together with my 4X5 outfit....

[Donald Brewster]

I with Steve and Don in admitting that I've gone the Mamiya 7 route on my travel kit. Kerry Thalmann probably thinks about (and implements) this issue more than anyone. For some of his ideas see the following web links.

http://www.thalmann.com/largeformat/lightwei.htm

http://www.thalmann.com/largeformat/toho.htm

[Doug Herta]

My lightweight outfit

-Bender 4X5
-G-Claron 150mm
-tripod
-Quickloads

The bags of dirt theory is interesting. Either you will be bringing a shovel (!) or using your hands and introducing dirt onto/into your camera/optics.

[Kerry L. Thalmann]

Mike,

You left out a lot of details about your friend's goals and intentions. Does he shoot color or black and white? What focal lengths does he prefer? Is this ultimate ultralight kit going to be used for spped packing on long day hikes and/or climbs? Or, is it for through-hiking the Pacific Crest Trail? Or, something in beween? How many days will his trips last without access to the front country? How many sheets of film does he anticpate needing on the average trip?

With an ultralight 4x5 kit, the film and holders end up being a significant portion of the weight and bulk. If he's just going out for a day or two, I think he's nuts to carry just two holders (4 sheets) and reload in the field. Conventional 4x5 sheet film holders weigh six ounce each - so, that's twelve ounces for two holders. A Kodak Single Sheet Readyload Holder weighs 10.6 oz.. A Fuji Quickload Holder weighs 12.1 oz. So, the weight of two holders is pretty much the same as a packet type holder. The difference then comes down to the weight/bulk of the packets vs. the weight/bulk of loose sheets and a changing bag - and this trade-off depends on how many sheets of film he needs per trip. 24 Readyload or Quickload packets fit in a 1 gallon ZipLoc bag and weigh about 18 oz. How much does the equivalent number of loose sheets weigh? Don't forget the weight of an extra film box for exposed sheets and the weight/bulk of the changing bag. Even if your friend comes up with a changing bag that serves double duty as a dark cloth or a camera bag, there will be a weight adder to make it simultaneously light tight and accessible.

Personally, I find reloading in the field tedious and prone to dust. When I do carry film holders, I carry at least five holders (10 or 12 is better) to minimize the number of times I have to reload. Ultimately, I found I enjoy myself a lot more when I use packet films and can spend my time and energy enjoying photography and not constantly unloading and reloading film holders. If the weight and bulk of film packets is really too much for your friend's application, he may want to consider roll film. I don't have the weight handy, but I think a Horeman 6x12 roll film holder weighs around 20 oz. 120 roll film weighs about 3/4 oz. per roll and gives six 6x12 images per roll - much lighter and less bulky than sheet film or packets and6x12 is still a pretty decent size original (if the 2:1 aspect ratio suits your friend's style).

As far as lenses go, if your friend selects carefully, it's possible to get some VERY compact, lightweight lenses that cover 4x5. My little 90mm Congo weighs 145g in it's Copal No. 0 Shutter. My 150mm f9 Germinar-W weighs 132g in a Compur No. 0 shutter. If you're friend wants to get REALLY fanatical about lens weight, he could save a few ounces on the shutters. For example, the last style all-black Compur 0 shutters weigh about 30g less than a Copal No. 0. By going with Compurs over Copals, you'd save over an ounce per lens. Likewise, if your friend has any lenses in No. 1 shutters, Copal Press No 1 shutters weigh about 45g each less than standard Copal No. 1 shutters. To get a really lightweight two or three lens set, your friend could consider sharing one shutter for multiple lenses. Something like a single Compur 0 shutter with aperture scales for two (90mm Congo and 150mm Germinar-W) or three (90mm Congo, 135mm APO-Sironar-N and 200mm Nikkor M) focal would be the about the lightest lens kit I can imagine for 4x5. The folks at SK Grimes could ebgreave a nice set of aperture scales (similar to the old triple convertibles or current Nikkor T-ED teles) Screwing the lens elements in and out of the shutter would be a bit tedious and you'd run the risk of dropping something or getting the threads crossed. Still, I'd find this a lot less tedious than reloading holders every four shots.

Kerry

[Kerry L. Thalmann]

Oh yeah, forget about bags of dirt. A mesh bag suspended from the center of the tripod can be filled with rocks or water bottles to add ballast to an ultralight tripod. What I've found works even better is a section of cord (Kelty TripTease LightLine is lightweight and plenty strong enough) tied to an eye bolt and pulled taught under my boot. This can provide a LOT more ballast than a few ZipLocs full of dirt. In fact, be careful not to pull up too hard on the cord or you might damage your tripod. The idea is to provide enough tension to firmly ground the tripod, not pull so hard that things start breaking. The cord weighs next to nothing and I always have up to 225 lbs. of ballast with me everywhere I go.

Kerry

[Brian Ellis]

Mike - The communication problem was mine not yours. In my haste to leap in with what I thought was a very clever comment I didn't read your question closely enough. You said "plastic bags to fill with dirt" which should have given me a pretty good clue that he didn't plan to fill them with dirt before he started out.

[Mike H.]

Oh, Wow! I had to sleep overnight, but today there are some really GREAT responses. And now I have to head out to LF class at school, but THANKS everyone. Those are some super neat ideas. The guy who I asked the question for travels, hikes, teaches and does just about everything, but it really WAS pretty much an exercise on his part just to see how light he could make his outfit. Now I want to try some of these ideas myself. And I bet I could put a couple more pounds of ballast on that last "string and nut" idea from Kerry than he does ... :-) Keep the ideas up, if anyone else is still following this thread. It's more fun than reading Calamity Jane posts. Not really, CJ. :-)

[Paul Fitzgerald]

Hi there,

Did anyone mention Mido holders? Very light wieght and small for the number of sheets carried.

Why not a mono-pod or a step-on teather?

I am converting a Graphic 2X3 to 4X5 and will let you know what it weighs.

Have fun with it.

[Craig Wactor]

Schnieder angulons are lightweight. I also have a Rodenstock Ysarex 127mm from an old polaroid 110 that is light as a feather f/4.7 and covers 4x5 with lots of movement (doesn't look like yours has movements though).

[Ron Stoecklein]

AS others here I am also extremely interested in the lightest functional 4x5 system for backpacking.

As such depending on the distance traveled the first key is to get the packed weight(before adding camera) down as low as functionally possible. There are some extreme ultralighters that are into sub 5 lb. systems.

My last 4 day trip to 14,000' was with a 14lb total packed weight--inclusive of food and bear cannister, tent, bag(it was 20 deg. at night), pack, stove, and jacket and clothes. (does not include water)

It to0k me a few months to dial in that weight with ultralight gear.

Now I figure with that system I could easily add on up to 8lbs. of 4x5 gear and still be fairly comfortable--

Now the trick is to attain that -- I opted to go with the Toyo 45cf--not the lightest--but I'm hoping
light enough while still having swings tilts etc. Lens I'm not sure yet which one is the lightest--and I would most likley go with just one 90mm--tripod--thinking about a Gitzo 1001-2lbs.
Then there is the film--I would take the fuji quickload--and 24 quickloads about 30 oz. and then there is the light meter--maybe 8 oz.(guessing on that-as I haven't weighed it yet)--assuming the lens weighs 6-8 oz. my system is at around 8.25lbs.(3.74kg)

For a total packed weight of 22.25 lbs for 4 days travel.

If I was doing a day hike my packed weight would be about 12.5 pounds with hydration sleeve, snacks, jacket, pack, and 1 liter of water and above mentioned equipment. ( I might opt to carry an extra lens and a heavier tripod for a day hike as well as a ready load with film--which might add another 3-5 lbs.)

I would agree with previous posts that readyloads or quickloads are vital as is a tripod--will the gitzo 1001 handle the weight?--their specs say it will--if there is wind it will say something different--(if the wind is blowing at 30 mph+ gusts--nothing works--unless it is cemented to a rock)--

Realistically I would only use this system if were going into an area(most of my hiking is in the sierras) where I set up a base camp--and did day hikes from the base.

I think using a 4x5 or larger for long distance stuff(15 mile days for more than 4 days) would not be worth the effort--nor would it be worthwhile to carry MF gear...unless one is horsepacking, using a mule or llama---then you could carry whatever you wanted!!

Any thoughts on the lightest lenses in the 90mm range would be greatly appreciated as well as any thoughts on a lightweight tripod in the 2lb. or less range.