LF or not? Trip advice needed...

[htswv]

Hello everybody...

I'm finally taking my dream vacation to Yosemite/Eastern Sierras in early August. I'm really excited but am having trouble deciding which camera(s) to take with me on the trip. For the longest time my goal has been set on taking the 5x7 Canham with the 150, 240 and 450 lenses and the Ries J100 tripod.

But I've also thought about taking my Mamiya Rb67 ProS with a 50, 127 and 180 lens setup and Bogen 3021 tripod.

A friend of mine who is also a large format photographer suggested that I forego the Mamiya and take only the large format. He says that I will encounter perspective issues with the Mamiya that can only be solved with the large format and feels that I will regret not having the 5x7 if I only take the Mamiya.

I thought about taking both but wonder how I'll cart all this stuff. I also worry about being too bogged down and unfocused by trying to shoot two different formats.
My goal was to shoot 5x7 negs for contact printing (and possible enlarging) in silver and also 5x7 negs for platinum/palladium printing. The Mamiya could serve as a "backup" for silver enlarging.

Do you think this is too much to try and juggle in a 14 day trip? Which camera(s) would you take and why?

[Capocheny]

It's a "dream vacation" and, as such, I'd say (if you can manage it) take both kits with you. You have 14 days of fun ahead of you.

First day or two after you get there... take the RB out for a walk and do some shooting with it. Then, the following day, take the 5x7 out and replicate those shots that require LF.

We were just down in Cannon Beach, Oregon a week and a half ago. Although I managed to take a few 4x5 shots... it was just too windy. So, I was glad I had the use of a friends' Rollei TLR to shoot alongside the LF.

Just my 2 cents worth. :)

Have a fun trip.

Cheers

PS: Be sure to read John Kassian's (and others) comments on Yosemite in the following thread:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=49551

[Andrew O'Neill]

Take the 5x7. Keep things simple.

[Ron Marshall]

Take both with you, but only take one kit with you at a time. (if you will have access to secure storage).

[Bruce Watson]

It all depends on what you want, and what works for you. No one here can make that decision for you.

I can tell you what works for me, and that's sticking with a single format. I carry that farther than most in that I only have the one camera. I did this because I found that switching formats for me is like switching back and forth between the sports car and my wife's truck. Different vehicles with different strengths and weaknesses, but it takes some "drive time" to get back in the grove with either one. So it is with formats for me. And with photography, I don't want to have to waste a day or two getting back into the grove when I switch formats.

So if it were me, I'd pick one format and stick with it. But clearly you aren't me, therefore YMMV.

[Matus Kalisky]

I would share my experience. I was for 3 weeks on New Zealand and had to decide whether to take 4x5 or SOME MF stuff as I was limited on the luggage amount/weight. I should also mention that this trip was not a dedicated photography trip. It was more of delayed honeymoon and I am just lucky that my wife does photograph too, but we wanted to see many places so some compromise needed to be found between photography and traveling/hiking.

I went with a full (although lightweight) 4x5 equipment, Rolleiflex T and small 35mm p&s. Often there was not enough time to use the 4x5 or the weather conditions (wind, rain) would make it very hard to photograph with 4x5. The Rolleiflex was faster and more fool-proof (focusing) and much easier to use under less-than-optimal conditions. Once I was back I had 30 (only!) 4x5 slides and 7 120 films exposed.

This experience let me to conclusion that should I go for a similar trip in the future, a 6x7 SLR plus a 35mm or 645 rangefinder may be more suitable option to bring more good shots home.

Now back you your trip: It depends on your style and subject how much you need the adjustments the LF camera offers you. But with 6x7 you will probably be faster and in the end you may end up with somewhat smaller, but more numerous negatives.

If you are not limited on the gear amount/weight that take both and switch on a trip basis and after few days you will get the feeing which to take to which trip/place.

Caveat: I have up to now exposed cca 200 4x5 sheets but also 50 120 films - so I have still to learn to become faster and more effective with the 4x5. The above mentioned trip of mine was first-of-the-kind experience for me.

[Bob McCarthy]

To a large degree, how your traveling and how much surplus space you have, influences the answer to the question you pose.

Big film usually wins over small film in my case. Though my choices are 4x5 and 35mm film.

bob

[mikebarger]

Space, when we travel in our Jeep wrangler I take one system. If we vacation with the truck, I take two systems.

Now, I don't try to drag both around when actually shooting. But, it has been nice to have a choice of system based on where we are and what we want to shoot.

Mike

[Gem Singer]

No need to take both outfits. An RB67 is quite heavy to carry and hand hold. Traveling with two tripods could prove to be a PITI.

You mention wanting to do contact printing and platinum/palladium printing. That makes 5X7 your first choice.

I use a similar 5X7 kit and realize what it takes to transport it over long distances. Opportunities for nice LF shots at a place like Yosemite are rare unless you hike away from the beaten path.

Take the 5X7 outfit in some sort of roller bag for B&W and a small digicam for color snapshots.

[Athiril]

Take both with you, but only take one kit with you at a time. (if you will have access to secure storage).

This.

I love my my RB67 Pro-S and really need to get more lenses for it.

I'd take some Pro 160S or Reala 100 for the RB67, and/or some Astia 100F if you can get it, lovely stuff :)


"No need to take both outfits. An RB67 is quite heavy to carry and hand hold. Traveling with two tripods could prove to be a PITI."

An RB67 is not heavy unless you're taking a bunch of other stuff with you as well.

[Gem Singer]

The OP mentions that his RB67 outfit consists of the camera and three lenses, as well as a Bogen 3021 tripod.

His RB67 outfit is probably lighter weight than his Canham 5X7 outfit.

However, making platinum/palladium contact prints with 6X7 color roll film would not be practical.

[Steve M Hostetter]

no offense but I think the RB makes a nice doorstop especially when moving the LF equipment from hotel room to vehicle...

The 5x7"Canham and 3 lenses sounds like the dream system to record the dream..
I started using a D200 to meter with and to get an idea from the image on the LCD what I'm looking at.. The wedding cam will just be dead weight

[Richard Littlewood]

Theres a nice wide angle with the RB stuff, also the other RB lenses are both very sharp. I'd go though with both outfits because of that.

[Preston]

Dream vacation. Fourteen days in Yosemite and the Sierra... Take the 5x7, by all means. I also suggest that you take a small camera; 35mm film or digital.

You will probably want to get off the roads and do some hiking in the higher country; something I strongly encourage, if you are physically capable of doing so. A small camera will be godsend if you don't want to carry the LF at high altitude. Also, weather in the Sierra could be an issue in August; thunderstorms can develop very rapidly, and it will be very hot in the direct sun. If you are carrying a heavy camera in the high country and need to beat a hasty retreat, you might compromise your comfort and safety if you are heavily laden with gear.

-Preston

[aduncanson]

I am finding this thread irresistible,probably because I love to contemplate this kind of question.

I assume that you posted here because you wanted to be told to take the LF equipment. In that I will happily accommodate you immediately. Of course, you should take the Canham, and maybe you should add a 110mm Super Symmar XL to the kit as well. (Then it would pretty nearly match my fantasy 5x7 outfit.)

As for the RB, I love the idea of this camera, (but don't own one) and cannot think of a good reason to take it on such a trip over any the following cameras:

1) A Rolleiflex TLR to use hand held because you just can't expose negs fast enough with a view camera.

2) One or more Fuji or Mamiya MF rangefinders/lenses, because they give beautiful color or B&W negs, and on a monopod with slow film they provide astonishing capability along with fast handling.

3) A 6x6 to 6x9 rollfilm folder, because you are afraid that you might find yourself somewhere without a camera with B&W film.

4) One or more 35mm cameras from a compact rangefinder through a sophisticated SLR and three or four lenses because you need to take a bunch of color images or

5) Any digicam meeting your standards because sometimes you just need to know that you got the shot.

and finally, my personal favorite, All of the Above.


You asked for opinions; I figure mine is worth what it cost.

Have a great trip!

[Steve M Hostetter]

PS... I hope your ready for the experiance of your life :D have a safe one

[Tim k]

LOL, this is funny. I'm trying to decide on 3 or 4 cameras. I've figured out how to get 2 slrs and my 4x5 in a backpack. Then I think, "gosh it would fun to have my Yashica Mat". So, if your undecided, I'm seriously screwed up.

Take it all. Have fun. Shoot the heck out of everything. Don't forget the Advil.

[Frank Petronio]

5x7 and a mini something, the RB is almost as heavy as the large format.

[Jim Fitzgerald]

I say 5x7 all the way! You will be glad you did. As one who goes to Yosemite often, just not in August, you should take the 5x7 and some other digital thing for the record shots. Of course I should talk, when I go i take the 8x10, 11x14 and the 8x20! I love to have choices!
have a great time.

Jim

[Vaughn]

Now a different country heard from...

Take the 5x7...definitely. Then get a 4x5 back for it and a 120 film holder(s) for color or quicker B&W. You'll have your choice of 6x6, 6x7, 6x9 and/or even 6x12! Roll film with creative tilts and swings!

I am trying not to make your life difficult, just different! LOL!

Vaughn

[Bill_1856]

Take a P&S, and buy some AA books and/or postcards.

[Kirk Fry]

Are you traveling with someone else? Large format is not usually a family occupation. I kind of solved the set up time with a crown graphic set up for infinity. No focusing required (Well you can use the scale doohicky). Pictures in under 2 minutes, especially if you don't have to meter. Hand held 4X5 opens up all sorts of possibilities. Panoramas can be done by stitching. I always seem to do better with less stuff to worry about. Yosemite is hard to photograph because that other guy got there first. Have fun. (A 450 mm on a long bellows 4X5 could be real fun on the trail from the valley to glacier point.)

KFry

[eddie]

hey,

i travel extensively in foreign countries and domestically with my camera gear. i lived in thailand for years. i always had my RB and my 35mm. i brought a 50,90, and 250. i found i rarely used the 50 YMMV but when i needed it it was great.

domestically when air travel is a factor i pack differently. a few trips to the utah area lately has seen me bring my 8x10 and 4x5 chamonix as well as my 35mm rig and my rb. i used them all. i was gone for 2-3 weeks. i used them all. 35mm the least.


on a driving trip back east i bring it all.

my last two trips to europe has seen my 4x5 and my 35mm. i just needed to be mobile while in country and had no car. this set up was great. light and fast. i have a 90mm f8 and a triple convertible 150 (230/330) that i use. it is very very small and i find i do not convert it much and if i do only to 220. the tripod was the most cumbersome part of it all. i would have loved to bring the RD but with lenses film etc i just could not. it worked great!

back to you. are you driving to Ca or flying? if driving take it all. IMO if you had to leave something behind ii would leave the 450 and the 180. IMO the 127 and 180 are pretty close in FL. or maybe leave the 127 and take the 180 and 50mm combo. i find i use my 90mm on the RB 80% of the time. you could probably get buy with just the 127 if need be. most of yosemite stuff is far off...

the same idea applies to the 450 on the LF kit. not sure how big the LF lenses are but i would take a wider one if possible. i love my 90 f8 on 4x5. it would work on 5x7 but may not give you what you need. a 111mm or a 120 maybe a good choice.....but if you do not have one take the 150....especially if it is small.

bottom line take them both. maybe just leave 2-3 of the lenses home if you need tro save weight. if not bring them all. as i saw for car camping/traveling if you are taking the car bring it all! no need to duffer! OTOH if you must carry it all on your back the opposite applies....or make someone else carry it.

keep us posted on what you do and how it goes. post some pics too.

eddie

[Jim Rhoades]

Took one of those dream trips out west a few years ago. It was so windy I only shot 6 negs of 8x10 in three weeks. Everything else was slides with a F5. I was really sorry I did not bring my TLR Rollie because I don't like color and B&W in 35mm is not so hot either.

The next trip I'll have the 8x10 with half the film and only for Pt/Pd. A 4x5 Linhof for silver. Any metal folder is better in the wind than wood. And oh yeah, the TLR. No color, no 35.

[Drew Wiley]

I'd keep it simple. You want to enjoy your trip and be able to concentrate on your
compositions, and not worry about babysitting a lot of superfluous gear. I spend a
lot of time in the Sierras and would absolutely opt for the Canham setup. MF is handy in very windy conditions or somtimes during winter storms, but in Aug you
primarily get big slow-moving thunderheads in the afternoon behind the peaks. Just
realize that Hwy 395 itself as well as Yosemite Valley are going to be hot and hazy,
if not downright smoggy. You will want to allow time to take the various side roads
up to higher altititude where the air is cleaner. The best way to ruin a trip I can think
of is to try to pack in too many "must sees". Better to spend quality time with fewer
locations, and allow yourself time to dayhike.

[George Stewart]

I often have the same dilemma - what camera(s) to take?

If figure that as I get older, my ability to haul equipment will diminish. Also, since I live in what I believe to be an area devoid of artistic landscapes, I must bring the biggest (read highest quality equipment) that I can carry. My typical trip out west, via aircraft, consists of an 8x10 camera, two lenses and 200 sheets of B&W, holders, etc. I also bring a DSLR and three lenses, not only for backup but for color work, as well.

Additionally, the DSLR can make mincemeat of some landscape work; for example, HDR-panoramas that exceed the quality of 6x17 are easy and shot in less than a minute.

The most difficult part of these trips is the air travel with valuable equipment. I generally, have the biggest carry on backpack I can bring, plus a photo-vest with other expensive stuff (lenses) in the pockets. I also carry a plastic bag for the film, that counts as the "smaller personal item." I haven't had a problem, and all the stress melts away when I finally reach the seat in the airplane. Make sure you are early for the flight so that you can get on with your stuff.

[anchored]

You haven't mentioned whether you're driving or flying... if driving take it all! Shoot the 5x7 loaded with transparency or B&W films during periods of ideal light. Use the RB67 loaded with negative film during periods of less-than-ideal light. Using medium format film in a large format camera, at least in my opinion, defeats one of the values of the RB... and that is, rate of capturing images. Not sure about others, but when shooting my large format camera (Linhof) I rarely shoot more than 12 images during a day. When shooting a medium format camera (RB67) I'll expend perhaps 6-8 rolls a day.

In addition... take a DSLR or even a pointy-shooty digicam for scouting trips and when light conditions are poor enough that you aren't sure the resultant images will be "keepers."

This is exactly as I did on a trip to Death Valley last year and returned with a very high return. In all honesty, the bulk of the keepers were captured by the RB67.

However, if you do have to restrict equipment... I'd definitely carry the Canham (and a DSLR).

Glenn

[htswv]

Thanks for all of the advice folks...it is greatly appreciated.

To answer some questions:

I'll be flying out to Reno and renting a car for the entire duration of the trip. I'll be travelling alone....so no human pack mule will be available..lol. I know I can't physically pack two camera systems of that size on my back at the same time at that altitude...so a choice will have to be made as to what camera to take on any given hike/trip. I really like the RB67 kit I have but as some have mentioned it weighs about the same as the 5x7 Canham outfit. I also have a 35mm Nikon FM that I can take but do not have a digital outfit...I just can't make the break to digital.

I plan on spending most of the time in the Eastern Sierras (Lee Vining/Virginia Lakes area) and doing dayhikes and side trips from there (Bodie, Bristlecone Pine Forest, Tuolumne Meadows area, Mono Lake, possibly Lone Pine). I'm not even sure about venturing into Yosemite Valley. I may spend a few days at Lake Tahoe just to chill out and relax at the end of the trip.

[Ben Syverson]

Take the Canham and Nikon FM (with one lens)... The choice is easy.

The RB67 is a studio camera IMO, which is why they also made the 7 series.

Imagine you brought both the RB and the 57, and you're about to head out for a hike. Why would you ever pack the RB over the Canham? You're there, you've gone to all the trouble, why wouldn't you take the extra minute of setup time to shoot LF?

Just a thought...

[Donald Miller]

From my personal experience and predisposition I have found that when I was tempted to bring along the camera store (I have done that occasionally) I made shi**y photographs. The reason I believe that is true, for me, is that working with one format and a very limited selection of lenses forces me to see consistant with the camera rather than trying to make a camera do the seeing for me.

My advice, again based upon my experience, take the largest camera and the fewest lenses.

[Terence McDonagh]

As others have said, the 5x7 and a TLR would be my choice. But since you already have the RB, I'd take it.

For windy/rainy days, it's always nice to have the more rigid option of the MF.

And the FM is light enough to stash regardless of what else you're carrying. If you have an 85mm or so lens, I'd go with that. A wide angle can be nice, but out there, it will never be wide enough. The place is just amazing.

[Michael_4514]

Another vote for keeping it simple. Take the 5x7 by all means, but take just one lens. Making decisions is stressful, and not having to decide which lens to use for a particular shot will lighten your load in more than just the physical sense.

For the second camera, I would take a medium format folder, like an Iskra or an old Zeiss. Light, simple, and you'll get great pictures.

Take less equipment and I think you'll take more pictures, and better ones.

[rdenney]

The notion of taking only one or two lenses seems to me to say more about the photographer than the guy asking for the advice. For me, I frame images in my mind, looking for relationships that work for me. Then, I choose the lens that accomplishes that framing. I've badly chosen the edges of images for so many years that I'm now using a viewing card (real or imaginary) to make sure that I consider the boundaries of the image. When I've made that choice, however, I need the lens that matches it.

Having only one lens forces me to frame everything the same. Perhaps I'm better with only one or two lenses at not needing the viewing card, but usually it means some images go unphotographed and others require excessive cropping.

That said, in any spectacular place, there are a million good pictures to be made on any given trip. We can only explore a handful of those no matter what camera we take. So we are unlikely to have nothing to point the camera to no matter what lens we have with us. I have been disappointed, though, when I brought only wides and needed something longer or vice versa.

Rick "suggesting Adams's advice to bring the biggest camera that can be carried" Denney

[Turner Reich]

Spend the first few days and the last few days without the camera and just enjoy the best place on the planet. Take the largest format that you can, you will see why when you get there.

[jp]

My last trip I took my 4x5 graflex with one lens and lots of film, and my digital D300 with 4 lenses ranging from 12-24 to 300 2.8. I also had a monopod. I carried all the gear at times, but never more than a mile from my rental car.

There's a worthwhile quantity of subjects that lend themselves well to a single lens and LF B&W film. There are plenty of other subject where you need the reach or speed of the 35mm system and I want it in color. This was for a weekend of car racing.

If it were a slower paced weekend, and you have a preference against digital, then perhaps a medium format system would be a nice complement. As far as lens choices go, large format lenses don't seem to be much bigger than medium format lenses, so that could certainly add to the cloudiness of a decision.

[Bob McCarthy]

Flying is such a pain with cameras today as there are restrictions on bulk "and" weight now.

If it was me. a view camera with a modest wide and normal (90 & 135 or150). Leave the "big" plasmats at home. You can get modest long by some cropping. If you shoot long, a Nikon 200M will be light and packable.

Quickloads make the film less bulky. Technika boards and an adapter for the Canham help too.

Carry the 35mm being sure to include something slightly long 105/2.5. I carry a 35/2.0 in the Nikon as the normal when traveling. And it approximates the 135 on the view camera so I can use it for scouting.

KISS principle applies when flying.

bob

[Bob McCarthy]

Correction:

Gemsinger just informed me that the smaller canham cameras do not use the sinar style board but a smaller one that precludes using the small technika board.

bob

[evan clarke]

You will compose the photograph to accomodate the camera you have with you, Keep it simple so you can photograph in automatic mode without having to analyze the camera..you can spend all your intellectual effort on the subject. I just spent 2 weeks in North Dakota with my 4x5 (I have dozens of cameras, all LF or MF) and could have done the whole thing with my 210 lens (115 photographs/230 sheets)..Evan Clarke

[Pete Roody]

Good advice already given: Take the 5x7 and a small camera (35mm or digital).

I like to keep things simple when traveling so I usually take the largest format I have (8x10) and a small camera. I do this even when I drive. Too many choices are distracting.

I flew to Utah/Idaho last fall with my 8x10. I had a backpack that fit in the bin above the seat. In it I had my 8x10 Arca (disassembled) with my lenses. I also had carry-on shoulder bag for film. I like to keep film separate from the camera when flying because the film usually goes quickly through the x-ray machine and the camera is usually stopped until they figure out what they are looking at. I left from nyc and the x-ray technician let everything go through. Coming back from slc, they hand inspected the camera and every lens. No big deal. I like to keep the more valuable stuff with me when I fly. The tripod, film holders, changing bag, etc. went with my checked luggage.

Traveling with a 5x7 may seem daunting at first, bit I think you will find it not too difficult. What's the point of shooting LF if you don't take it to interesting places? Take a point and shoot for the family pics.

[Dave Aharonian]

Whatever you do, take the 5x7. When I first went to Yosemite a few years back its all I shot with and quite frankly, if I hadn't had a LF camera with me when I was there, I would have cried!!

[Scott Davis]

Correction:

Gemsinger just informed me that the smaller canham cameras do not use the sinar style board but a smaller one that precludes using the small technika board.

bob

A Technika front standard is available for the smaller Canhams. My Canham woodfield 5x7 has exactly that.

I took my Canham to Argentina, and was very glad to have it. I've taken a Shen-Hao 4x5 up to the exact area of the eastern Sierra that is targeted by the OP for this trip, and it was a dream. I'd take the Canham up there in a heartbeat, and leave the RB behind. Definitely bring the lens compliment you mentioned, and if you can possibly add in a 90-110 mm focal length lens as well, I'd do so. You can certainly fill the frame with grand vistas, but there are also a lot of shots that you'll want/need the long lens for as well.

I was there in October, right around the Columbus Day weekend, and perhaps I was extremely fortunate, but I had no problems from wind, at least nothing that interfered with the camera (I did have a shrub or two that didn't come out quite sharp enough because the shrub was blowing in the wind during the 1-second exposure).

Take the road up Lundy Canyon, to see the alpine meadow and the beaver-dam lake. You can catch it on the way to or from Bodie. Bear in mind that in August, Bodie will be blazingly hot. BRING YOUR OWN WATER!!!! Another side trip well worth the effort is the hike to Rainbow Falls in Devils Postpile. On the way back to 395 from Mammoth Lakes there are several volcano craters accessible by a short hike from the road that also have photographic potential. Truly spectacular was the drive up over the Sierra on 108, which takes you to the north of Yosemite. I was fortunate enough to crest the Sonora Pass (9980 feet of elevation) at sunset and turn around to look west to see the sun turning one side of the canyon gold, orange and red, while the other side was in deep shadow.

Bear in mind that unless you are used to activity at this elevation, your activity speed will be greatly reduced. It took me several hours to do the 3-mile round trip from the parking lot to Rainbow Falls.

[Preston]

""I plan on spending most of the time in the Eastern Sierras (Lee Vining/Virginia Lakes area) and doing dayhikes and side trips from there (Bodie, Bristlecone Pine Forest, Tuolumne Meadows area, Mono Lake, possibly Lone Pine). I'm not even sure about venturing into Yosemite Valley. I may spend a few days at Lake Tahoe just to chill out and relax at the end of the trip."

If you are planning to go to the bristlecone pine forests, I suggest that you stay a night in either Bishop or Big Pine. It will be a very, very long trip if you start from LeeVining. If you haven't been to Lone Pine before, I suggest that you put the Alabama Hills on your agenda. There's no place like it. It will be hot! So, shoot there early in the morning, head up to Whitney Portal (8,300 feet) for the day and then head back down and shoot in the evening.

I live near Sonora Pass and have spent a great deal of time there. I can attest to Scott's observation about it being spectacular. It will be well worth the effort if you can fit it into your trip. There is free undeveloped roadside camping between Leavitt Meadows (east side) and Kennedy Meadows (west side). Bring your own water, or use a filter. If you're considering Sonora Pass, PM me, and I'll give you more info.

It sounds like you have a great trip planned: I'm envious!

For Scott--The elevation of Sonora Pass is 9,640; still pretty high, that's for sure!

-Preston

[Drew Wiley]

I'd agree that Sonora Pass is a wonderful car camping area, with many photographic
opportunities of its own, but I'd never drink the water near any road, filtered or otherwise. I've seen diapers and just about every kind of unmentionable thrown into
the creeks around Sonora Pass, plus cattle are grazing nearby. Until recently this was
also where the Marines trained for mountain warfare. There is a big campground in the
White Mountains just below the first Bristlecone grove. Quiet and some photogenic
rock formations nearby, but no water whatsoever. I't still quite a drive up the dirt road
to the upper Bristlecone grove, which has the gnarled forms generally associated with
this species. It's about four hours from Sonora Pass to the bristlecones, but the trip
does give you an interesting panorama of the Sierras from the dramatically different
topography of the White Mtns. As I suggested before, you'll go nuts if you try to see
everything. I was raised in the Sierras, have done literally hundreds of trips in it, but
there are still significant areas I have never even visited. But another good area to
visit with a car is to drive up Bishop Creek Canyon above Bishop, where the road
trisects to three different high lakes. The view from Lake Sabrina is especially nice,
and if you are in reasonably good shape you can take about a two mile uphill day hike
from here up to Blue Lake for a taste of real high country. Just remember to always
have a raincoat and jacket or sweater, since the weather can indeed change quickly.

[Preston]

I agree with Drew regarding the water issue in the Sonora Pass area. I always bring my own water. I do know of a couple of natural water sources, but they are not convenient and I always filter and boil it. Military activity is pretty much confined to the east side near the Pickle Meadows Mountain Warfare Training Center. Grazing occurs near the Walker River and Sardine Meadow on the east side, and west of Kennedy Meadows. Most of my own activity in the area is on both sides of the pass above 8000 feet.

If memory serves, the campground in the bristlecones area Drew mentioned is called Grandview. It's pretty nice, but like he said, there is not water. If you go there, hike westerly a bit from the camp ground. You'll be greeted a view of the Sierra East wall that will knock your socks off.

I have done the hike from Lake Sabrina to Blue Lake and beyond, many times. It is an astonishingly beautiful area! From Blue lake you can either turn right and head up to Hungry Packer Lake under Picture Peak, or turn left and head up to Sunset Lake below Mount Thompson. Either way, you'll be deeply impressed.

-Preston

[William McEwen]

Hi, HTSWV:

You're thinking about the photography.

Have you thought about the chump who will be printing those negs in the darkroom after you return? :)

That printer will be you, I presume???

The trip will last two weeks. The negatives will last forever.

Personally, I'd like to spend the months + years after the trip printing nice big 5x7 negatives.

I would take the 5x7 and only two lenses.

William

[John Kasaian]

I've done several photo trips into the Sierras with just an 8x10. A wide angle and a long (or convertible) will cover all the bases and if one of your lenses is fast you can even try night shots.
The trouble I see with a "system" like the RB or Hassy in the mountains is that they can be very heavy and with all those system goodies to choose from it would slow me down too much. Working with one out of the trunk of a car is one thing, but for taking a camera in the "field"----well, that's where a field camera really shines!

[htswv]

Thanks for all of the great advice, folks. It looks like I'll be taking the 5x7 (a true companion) on this "pilgrimage." Will surely be a load to haul...but I think it will really be worth it in the end.

[Jim Ewins]

Computer Hard Drives aren't the only things that need back up. The trip is expensive in time, money & opportunity. Always have an extra camera. A digital would be nice as well.

[Bosaiya]

I recently took a TLR and 4x5 Speed Graphic along with a digital SLR on a trip to Florida. I had been doing a lot of hand-wringing over whether or not to bring the 4x5 but in the end decided it was worth the extra effort.

I was really glad photographically to have taken the 4x5 and really glad for other reasons it was a Speed Graphic. At one point during a torrential downpour as people were literally fleeing the beach (and me along with them) I slipped on a bunch of slime and landed on my back, smashing the camera into the sandy, rocky ground. Of course I panicked, the back had come ajar and there was sand and water all over the outside and inside of it. Back in the car I wiped as much of the wet sand off the outside and shook as much from out of the inside as I could, grabbed some film holders, and ran back out to get a few more shots. I managed to get a wonderful shot of other people fleeing the beach and didn't have to worry about the camera at all, it came out of it like a champ and kept on going.

[Peter De Smidt]

I recently spent a week photographing in SD. On one of my days in the badlands, winds were 30-40 mph. I'm very glad I had my medium format fuji rangefinders along, as it was just too windy for the 4x5. I don't mind switching formats, especially if I use the same film.

[jackies]

I spent a week in the Eastern Sierras last fall. I took my 4x5 + 3 lenses and a DSLR + 2 lenses - 24-105 and 100-400. I always take wide angle, normal and telephoto lenses to cover all possible opportunites. Glad I did.

It was so windy the whole time I was there no matter where I was (in the meadows/lake or on the top of the mountain) that I shot only @ 7 LF and all the rest DSLR. Summer winds may be different.

I fly regional jets most of the time and pack it all into the MP-3 backpack and load it into the overhead. The film and other digital stuff goes in a roll-on briefcase that fits under the seat.

Have fun. It sounds like a wonderful trip.
J

[tom north]

I am asking the same question. I will be going to Europe in early August and have decided to keep my 5 x 7 system at home and bring my 6 x 7 Mamiya and 6 x 12 Horseman instead. For years I carried a full backpack with 5 x 7 gear and would like to try something different. Most of what I shoot is architectural and will be blowing up negs to print platinum. I know people who bring multiple formats to very remote places and have no problem switching but I prefer one format and to travel light. Let us know how it went.

[Ivan J. Eberle]

Having just been through this last month, I'd back up my 4x5 Quickloads with a DSLR when flying. There's plenty enough to worry about getting to my destinations when the light is epic without worrying about my images being destroyed by a too-vigilant scanner look-see inside my bag on the TSA conveyor.

You might want to consider that when flying boxed film will pretty much have to be blasted by X-rays, as there are no Quickloads in 5x7. Maybe carry-on X-rays machines don't bother you but the result is cumulative and it bugs me enough to always request hand inspection. Checked bags get a MUCH bigger dose, incidentally.

You can always request it, but with boxed film I really couldn't argue to point for out of concern for having the lids come off to fog all my film accidentally. Lot harder to screw up Q/Ls.

120 film may get explosives swabbed, but at least it can put in a ziplock to be hand inspected. It will add 15 minutes to your clearing TSA so get there plenty early.

No doubt about it, film can be a hassle when flying nowadays. Post 9/11 security measures played a significant role in the stampede to digital among pros.

[rdenney]

Post 9/11 security measures played a significant role in the stampede to digital among pros.

It's one of the main reasons that I usually limit myself to digital when I have to travel by air. I had half a dozen rolls of 120 film damaged or ruined by fogging when coming back from Alaska two years ago, and I don't get there often enough to be prepared to suffer that kind of loss. All that film was run through the checkpoint in carry-on bags. Before 9/11, I almost always took along at least one medium-format camera even on business trips in case I had an opportunity to play.

Rick "waiting (but not with bated breath) for affordable digital backs for large format" Denney

[Ivan J. Eberle]

Rick, what ISO film was it that you had damaged? Did the TSA balk at a request for hand-inspection? One of the strategies I've gleaned off the web for insuring hand inspection with film include putting a junk roll of ISO 3200 in the ziplock bag. Or even a slower roll rated at a 2 stop push with a hand label... Haven't had resort to that one yet, myself, but it sure seems worth remembering.

In late June, because I'd scheduled a one-way trip on less than 24 hours notice, I got the full explosives-swipe treatment. Despite this, I did still manage to get my slow ISO professional film (with particular emphasis on "professional") hand-inspected rather than run through the scanner.

If I had to deal with this multiple times per week or month, I could see where the time and hassle might soon push me towards an all-digital workflow, just not a MF or LF digital workflow.

So long as the films I like to use are yet available for a reasonably-affordable premium in Q/L, and digital MF and LF backs remain so freakishly expensive, I can deal with the TSA a few times per year .

[rdenney]

Rick, what ISO film was it that you had damaged?

Both 100 and 1000 (the roll of the 1000 was in the bag in case we had a good night for Aurora) transparency films were damaged. I did not ask for hand-inspection, because I had not had problems with film running through the check-point X-ray before. I suspect that it was only one airport that had juiced up their machine too much.

I travel a lot but not for photography, and usually try to get through the checkpoint as predictably as possible. I know what it's like to be behind someone insisting on a hand inspection or causing some other slowdown, and I know how surly and arbitrary the security people have become now that they are government employees, especially at smaller airports (such as Anchorage). It's a lot easier to achieve that objective with digital equipment, but even then my camera bag usually attracts a (often surly) hand inspection at smaller airports.

Rick "who is nice to government employees (particularly the one I'm married to), but for whom the favor is not always returned" Denney

[sanchi heuser]

Take the Canham :)

[Ivan J. Eberle]

Rick,
My somewhat limited understanding in the TSA lines is that the standard pass through the scanner is relatively mild and largely not injurious (though gamma and Xray exposure is cumulative). But whenever they see anything that the first X-ray view can't penetrate or that looks suspicious, they bump it up and the dose gets much stronger for the deeper look (and which also explains why lead foil pouches are counterproductive these days).

[rdenney]

Rick,
My somewhat limited understanding in the TSA lines is that the standard pass through the scanner is relatively mild and largely not injurious (though gamma and Xray exposure is cumulative). But whenever they see anything that the first X-ray view can't penetrate or that looks suspicious, they bump it up and the dose gets much stronger for the deeper look (and which also explains why lead foil pouches are counterproductive these days).

I don't recall seeing them conduct a deep look, but it could also have been the briefcase of the guy in front of me in line. From my perspective, it becomes a risk that is difficult to control. If I was paid to control it, I would. But for fun, though, I alleviate the risk by just taking digital. If I want to do film on a fun photographic vacation, I'll find a way to drive or go by train.

Rick "for whom this was one of the main motivations for buying a motorhome" Denney

[htswv]

I've decided to take the 5x7 Canham setup. I'll be shipping my Ries tripod, changing bag, film and film holders ahead via Fedex/UPS and will do the same on the return trip...it will cost money, sure, but American Airlines wants a fortune to add an extra bag and there's no guarantee that it will arrive safely or even arrive at all! The UPS charges are very reasonable. I'll probably also tote along my 35mm just to be safe.

For those of you who shoot 5x7, do you think a 90mm Nikkor is going to be too wide for shooting landscapes out there?

[Giovanni Peretti]

Just been in Yosemite (4 days ago).
Wonderful, it deserves LF.
i took my 4x5 field camera as a hand luggage from Italy.
My advice: less lenses (a moderately wide angle lens could be your only lens), more film holders: you don`t want to carry heavy weights over there, neither using a changing bag in the middle of a forest...
Enjoy it!
giovanni

[rdenney]

For those of you who shoot 5x7, do you think a 90mm Nikkor is going to be too wide for shooting landscapes out there?

As much of an ultra-wide freak as I am, I wouldn't want to be limited to just an ultra-wide at Yosemite. When I was there last with large format (something like 17 years ago), I had a 121 and a 215 for 4x5--roughly equivalent to a 180 and a 300 on 5x7. I used both. There were certainly images I could have made with both shorter and longer lenses.

Yosemite is the sort of place where any lens you bring will be usable for amazing images. But if you want to take on the classic scenes, you might prefer something a bit less extreme than a 90 on 5x7.

Rick "noting that it's not easy to get up close to a lot of places, especially by car" Denney

[htswv]

Rick,

I have a 150mm that I'm also planning on taking...it may be just perfect but wanted to go ahead and buy something a little wider. 110mm comes up a lot in discussions but couldn't find one that I could afford.

Maybe I should have bought the 120mm instead...oh well, can always sell the 90.

[rdenney]

Rick,

I have a 150mm that I'm also planning on taking...it may be just perfect but wanted to go ahead and buy something a little wider. 110mm comes up a lot in discussions but couldn't find one that I could afford.

Maybe I should have bought the 120mm instead...oh well, can always sell the 90.

In a pinch, you can also crop a 4x5 out of the 5x7 frame, without losing much.

And old 121/8 Super Angulon wouldn't be that expensive, though, and even that would be a pretty short lens on 5x7.

But as long as you have a longer lens, you'll be fine. The 150 will keep you from being overly constrained by the 90. As I said, you can stand in most spots and in one direction or another find a use for just about any lens.

Rick "who has extreme wides--down to 65 for 4x5--but who takes longer lenses, too" Denney