Angus, based on specs, I'm pretty sure those hemispherical levelers could be adapted to my large Feisol CF tripod too, which is my lightweight tripod option for 8x10 and MF telephoto work, though I don't think I'd ever actually employ something like that with either. But it might work OK with certain 5X7's, and probably most field 4X5's. They're certainly one of the smartest tripod top innovations to come along in a long time.
I agree. For 8x10 I use that same leveling base but in the universal version with a arca clamp because I don’t have an RRS compatible tripod. I add a Feisol panning base PB-70 because I want to adjust that axis once leveled (or else the leveling would be lost in moving the tripod again when composing). That whole thing of level + panning is 620g and will handle 10 kg no problem. The only issue is that setup does not allow you to point the camera to the ground should you want to take a close up pic of that. That’s an annoying limitation for me but I accept it when I don’t want to carry the additional lb of another solution.Originally Posted by angusparker
For a 4x5 wood or light weight camera a ball head is fine and very practical, like the RRS 40mm or any of the many equivalent versions. I know a lot of people in this forum would just ban ball heads from existence but it’s perfectly fine in the field for a 4x5 if you don’t go into 400mm or higher. And if you do, a RRS 55mm ball head will make it work but it’s heavy.
Also this is an all in one combo:
http://www.sunwayfoto.com/e_goodsDetail.aspx?gId=1115
For completeness only, here’s also some cheaper alternatives to other well known head solutions:
https://www.leofoto.com/products.php?cateid=88
Just to stray back towards the original post. The Fuji 400T weighs 700grams..... the 450 C weight 270 grams. Neither will break your back. 700grams is a pound and a half (ish).... if you need/like the reach i'd be more than happy with the 400 T.
Also a real difference in bulk. That might not matter much for you folks who are just out for a day with a camera pack per se. But when a LF kit is just one added component to an already full pack necessary for a long trek, all those little distinctions start adding up real fast. And now, having entered my 70's, I'm sure glad I invested in some compact gear. Lugging an 80 or 90 lb pack for many days across the mountains like I once did is just a memory now.
Hehe I don’t disagree but a 1 lbs difference is important. Not in isolation, when you’re carrying 2 vs 3 lbs, but there is a breaking point for all of us where 1 more pound will start really hindering your carrying ability. For some that may be once we get into 20 lbs territory, others 40 lbs, etc, depending also on other factors (temperature, distance, difficulty, age, fitness level, etc). When you’re going on a difficult 20% incline trust me 1 pound makes a real difference on your legs and back.
It’s best to adapt the situation, carrying only what you need for the scope of what you’re trying to achieve. As a hiker with thousands of miles in my back (I’m sure I’m not the only one here) making wise decisions on what to bring and be willing to compromise is as important as the tools you have. When you give up on a hike because you’re exhausted you’ve given up on potential shots because you never got there. Or the same weight could have been use to bring more film holders instead.
Certainly that does not mean to never carry the 400T! :-)
Some good points made, Drew & Kiwi. I've dragged my 8x10 in the mountains. But i don't call that backpacking. I know where the photo is that i'm out to get. By the time you get a tophat to use the 450 on a 4x5 field camera ....you've lost some of your 430gram savings. The 400T doesn't weigh a 'megaton.' And it's not that big... (i had one)
It's worth considering interpretation of 'backpacking.' Are we talking about having your LF contained in a backpack? .....or are we walking about an up to 12-16 hr there and back daytrip? Or a 5-7 day trip in the Wind Rivers / Canadian Rockies/Sierras....? If the latter, I wouldn't consider taking a 400... it wouldn't cross my mind. I'd have my 4 3/4 Dagor and my 8 1/4 and a few holders or a Grafmatic. .....and i'd very easily be able to skim 500grams savings in all the personal gear.
I did a two-weeker at high altitude in the Wind River Range last summer with 4x5. In other words, if you don't want to starve or freeze to death or be dependent on berries and fishing, any kind of photographic system is merely an added luxury, and constitutes ADDITIONAL weight and bulk to your pack, and not what's truly essential. That's what I was referring to. But even on a day hike in the mtns, you still need reserve space in your pack for a warm coat and waterproof parka, and a few emergency supplies. I've been around body recoveries for those who thought otherwise. Not carrying plenty of water is equally risky in the desert. Some camera packs are just glorified book bags without sufficient space for real outdoor situations. Weather can change remarkably fast at high altitude. So all of the above should factor into gear selection. At this point in my life I now have the option of lighter versus heavier kits, depending. For example, in 4x5 format I prefer a Norma monorail, certain lenses, and a mid-weight Ries wooden tripod for routine use, whereas in long-haul backpacking, it's a little Ebony folder, very compact lenses, and a carbon fiber tripod.
Drew, I'm with you. I had no doubt that you knew what to take. I was wondering about the OP..... from Maryland & what exactly he meant, otherwise, we haven't been too helpful.
I prefer my Ries too, but it just goes on day trips.
People experiment with LF and take a trip or two to the mtns, and often end up with a lifelong addiction to both, so I never like to underestimate the law of anti-gravity. I was just the opposite, and grew up in the mtns but now live near the shore. But here in CA they're just a few hours apart, at least to the nearest high road pass. Beyond that, well, I'd have to live another eight lifetimes to see all of the high Sierra. I couldn't even start my planned backpack trip last week due to all the smoke, and had to default to car camping in the adjacent White Mtns, which are also over 14000 ft, but in this case had clear air and wonderful clouds; so I got quite a few good negs anyway.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks