Yosemite hike update

[ROL]

As a pro who has over 100 summits and thousands of miles in the wilderness to his credit, I will never-ever understand what convinces amateurs to carry so much gear. I shot an entire article for Outside Magazine with a single D700 and 28mm F/2, 500 C/M with a 100mm 3.5, 50mm F/4 and two backs...28 miles in one day with nearly 9,000 feet of vertical gained at an average elevation of 11,000 feet...

I think my entire pack hit 18 pounds when the 90OZ Camelbak was full. It also included clothing, food, spare food, headlamp, water filter, GPS, tripod, bivy sack, etc.

My standard 3 lens, 6 holder 4x5 kit tips the scales at 8 pounds...with the CF tripod, filters, step up rings, Harrison Pup tent, etc.

...and I'll never understand why anyone needs that many photographic systems to do one thing, shoot for Outside. Seems like a lot of braggadocio...

My horrible truth is that I have been unable to get my bare bones 5X7 kit (camera, 2 or 3 lenses w/ mounted step up rings, 2 or 3 filters, spot meter, 5 loaded film holders, CF tripod, windbreaker dark cloth, headlamp, map, lunch) under 25 lbs. God (or whomever) forbid I should add more weight and fill the water bladder, and not drink from pure streams. No bivvy, no GPS, no iAnything. That's my base (with pack), gaining and losing as little elevation as necessary – and dat's dat.

[Kodachrome25]

I haven't had an eighteen pound pack since I was eighteen! For the last thirty years it has
seldom been below eighty. Now I'm dreaming of 60 as ultralight. You start life in diapers and go out in diapers, start photography with 35mm and apparently go out that way too.
I'd like to see anyone travel for ten days carrying the necessary things for survival plus
a 4x5 system for less than fifty or sixty lbs, and that's with all the newer technology like
carbon fiber, 800-fill down, tiny lenses, Quickload (well, there goes that one)...

My average is 35-45 for trips like that, camera gear always weighs about 6-12 pounds, tripod included, 4x5 as well. John Fielder used to bring a Linhof, 7 lenses, 30 holders, 3 people and a pair of llamas, I can't work like that where I want to go, I do 3rd to 4th class climbs with my gear just to get new POV's.

The last time I saw 80 pounds was in Tasmania on a 140 mile trek in some extremely remote wilderness, there is not a lot of scrambling you can do with that kind of weight. I was using a Bora 95 L pack, the thing weighed 7.4 pounds empty. Now none of my packs weigh over 4.5 pounds, sleeping bags at 3 pounds or less, favorite one, Marmot Helium at less than two pounds and compresses into the size of a grapefruit.

You do this long enough for a living and you figure it out quick or you get kicked off of expeditions or at least not invited back.

[Drew Wiley]

Well, I've certainly done my share of class 3 scrambling with an 85-pounder. I liked the
Sinar back in those days for the long lens compatibility (I still have a 28-inch bellows on it). Now my strategy is to carry the 8x10 on dayhikes, so that the little Ebony 4x5 will seem real light on those longer backpacks! But at this point in life, each added year seems
to make the pack a pound or two heavier! Maybe I should seal the belows more than light
tight and fill it with helium!

[ROL]

...You start life in diapers and go out in diapers, start photography with 35mm and apparently go out that way too...

More like digital P&S. And diapers – come to think of it, I did carry a few baby wipes with me. On my last 4 day excursion (earlier this thread), I started out with 27 lbs., including a bear cannister (drat!) and quart of water, ending up with less than 23. No tripod. My knees thanked me, and the goal was not fine art photographic prints. Rather, this was the goal:

[Kodachrome25]

...and I'll never understand why anyone needs that many photographic systems to do one thing, shoot for Outside. Seems like a lot of braggadocio...

Things are not what they may seem. The black and white in the Blad was for that now cliche include the frame look for the portraits and the D700 was for everything else, including night shots, we were out there 15 hours..

[ROL]

The black and white in the Blad was for that now cliche include the frame look for the portraits...

I think even I can make that happen in PS.

[Vaughn]

I never actually weighed my pack when I would go 11 days down in the Grand Canyon with the 4x5. I was afraid to! Ninety pounds give or take -- depended a lot on how much water I had to carry (dry camps required more water to be carried). Solo, so there is no splitting up any shared gear. Most of my meals required some soaking (no stove, no fires = no hot food). And I try to eat well, so too much weight in food (no freeze-dried food). My 4x5 camera with the one lens weighed 2.5 pounds, but I managed to carry another 20 pounds of camera gear somehow. After 11 days and hiking out of the Canyon, it seemed my pack still weighed 40 to 45 pounds! I do not think any of my gear was "light-weight"!

This was pre-carbon fiber, my pod (Gitzo 300 and a Gitzo Ballhead #2) was around 7 or 8 pounds. Usually 5 to 6 holders, meter, changing bag, a couple film boxes, mini-repair kit, darkcloth, small notebook, day pack for the camera gear.

Depending on where I was going, I might be able to substitute a shoulder bag for the daypack and carry the camera on the pod. But the Canyon pretty much dictated a pack to keep my hands free, and if I could afford it, take a few pounds off the tripod/head combo by going CF. If I can cut my food weight by half, take twice that weight off my middle, perhaps I can even figure a way to get the 5x7 into the wierderness before I hit 60.

These last few years I have just been taking the Rolleiflex and a very small Gitzo pod and cheap ballhead. It has been a lot of fun. But then I started with a Rollei, so I'll probably go out with one!

[ROL]

Ninety pounds give or take -- depended a lot on how much water I had to carry (dry camps required more water to be carried)... Most of my meals required some soaking (no stove, no fires = no hot food).

I guess one might say you were "soaker" then, for carrying water for that?!?

[Vaughn]

I guess one might say you were "soaker" then, for carrying water for that?!?

I also had sprouts growing as I hiked. Nothing like a handful of sprouts as a snack in thirsty weather! A typical dinner was sprouts, tabbouleh (which needed to be soaked several hours), hummus and cheese in a piece of pita bread, breakfast was granola and lunch some sort of food bar, jerky (home made), and cheese. Snacks: gorp, dried fruit, nuts, dates (nice to suck on the pit while hiking) and a little chocolate for desserts. I think I would start off with 3 pounds of chedder cheese. The jerky would be thin slices of flank steak soaked in soy sauce, then cooked at the lowest oven temp for a couple hours. I would also soak some dried fruit over-night to have with breakfast (dried fruit without any sulfur used, much tastier).

I did not mind carrying soaking food -- when having a dry camp, the more water, the better! Those couple of cups of water the tabbouleh mix was soaking in was nice to have! And when well soaked, it has a nice wet, minty flavor to it. When I can have fires, it is nice to have a little more variety, though!

[Drew Wiley]

My style as a kid was not to carry food at all, except a little emergency jerky. I'd count on
fish and foraging. Sometimes didn't even take a sleeping bag, just an oversize poncho which served as both raingear and emergency tent. I figured if the Indians did it, I could
too - but those nites at 12000 ft could get pretty bitter. The fact was, I was poor and
couldn't have even afforded decent gear. But I did have a little early Pentax. Large format
changed all that. But now I'm looking to not only things like carbon fiber to lighten my load,
but to all those special lightweight innovations like freeze-dried water that they sell at the camping stores nowadays. Eventually they'll have some special sauce that you pour on
your cell phone and it temporarily swells up to become an 8x10, complete with a digital
darkcloth.