It's a pity that there weren't enough investors to get my helium-filled bellows patent into mass production. The bigger the camera is, the lighter it is.
It's a pity that there weren't enough investors to get my helium-filled bellows patent into mass production. The bigger the camera is, the lighter it is.
Being box-kites is bad enough!
The weight of one's backpacking gear is often expressed as a percentage of one's body weight. My 8x10 set-up is about 25% of my body-weight on the move (60 lbs/225 lbs). My 4x5 set up is (assuming 15 lbs) is about 7%. My Rolleicord goes almost unnoticed!
"Landscapes exist in the material world yet soar in the realms of the spirit..." Tsung Ping, 5th Century China
Rebels
Tin Can
In the 1980s I hiked up many a gorge here in New England with an 11x14 Improved Empire State, Dagor lens, exposure meter, and two wooden holders in a very light (and flimsy) backpack. I swear that it all weighed less than just my 4x5 Sinar X camera alone. Tripod was a wooden Miller. Always carried a plastic grocery bag that I would fill with rocks and hang from the top of the tripod. The 11x14 Improved Empire State was super light for its format.
The lightest packs per se aren't likely to be the most comfortable to carry. I stick with true external frame ones. And as percent of body weight? I might need to factor in some post-Einsteinian physics, ever since it was discovered that the tug of gravity increases over time, and that it's not time-space that gets warped, but one's belt line. Anyway, I've known a number of people capable of carrying more than 100% of their body weight. But personally, much of my adult life I was carrying around 60%, often long distances in the high country. Not so much now that post-Einsteinian physics has kicked in. Maybe 30% tomorrow if I stick with the 8x10 agenda. I always put a lot more in a pack than just camera gear, attempting to stay in shape. Less % if I go MF instead. Depends on what the lighting is doing the next few days. A few days ago it was still too damn hot inland to carry much, so I did go with my little ultralight Ebony 4x5 folder, but not with its light companion CF tripod - I reserve that for real long-haul backpacking, and took my smaller wooden Ries instead.
Before I caught the LF disease, my pack for a week or so in the high country was a comfortable 65 pounds. It was not until I was 25 or so that I started to add another 25 pounds of 4x5 stuff to that. But since the late 90s I've been slowly paring down on the camping equipment and unneeded 'extras' until my last trips were all those freezed dried meals and instant oatmeal breakfasts, a 3lb tent, and a lot of rest stops. I occasionally take the 5x7 rather than the 4x5 if the trip is shorter in distance and fewer number of nights (can't take as many holders with 5x7).
I had an Eastman View 11x14 - very lightweight, but my example needed work to make it enjoyable to use, so I sold it to a friend who could take care of that, and I bought myself a Chamonix 11x14. I am re-organizing my studio (otherwise known as my house) and just went through all of my 11x14 negatives today (only about a hundred I've kept so far)....using three different 11x14 cameras. Besides the obvious beginner problems, camera issues are here and there visible.
The first, and lightest, 11x14 (never weighed it, about 6 pounds) was homemade (not me) that was a little awkward in that one re-constructed every time you set it up. Once up, not too bad...full movements in front, tilt in back...and once deconstructed, it tucked into a pack easily. I have a set of Yosemite 11x14 negatives from that camera that are graced with a shadow of one of my hairs -- all in the same place as the hair was stuck in the film back of the camera...makes it easy to date those negs! That camera, which I am standing next to, was still good enough to get the image of the redwoods...
"Landscapes exist in the material world yet soar in the realms of the spirit..." Tsung Ping, 5th Century China
Looks just like one of the Ries tripods I have, my smaller one.
Them were the days ... The old man of our hikes was 22 and had a watermelon, several cantaloupes, a slab of bacon, a ham, and a bunch of zucchini in his pack, plus a cast iron frying pan, axe, fishing gear, pathetic excuse of a tent and sleeping bag. I was 16 with a miserable homemade pack and darn near worthless sleeping bag. The rain poncho had to double as a cramped tent. We'd do 12 miles and three thousand feet of grade up to timberline in two hours flat. I didn't own any kind of camera until a year later. Made a first ascent the next morning - naive country kid dangerous and stupid style. Returned in my mid-40th with a Sinar and did it right - have a 30X40 Cibachrome on my wall from that trip. The third time involved 22 miles in one day, almost all off trail needing an ice axe. Just printed and mounted a black and white interneg of that old 4x5 chrome, along with another interneg from another area - both now missing their glaciers. Can only visit those glaciers in my prints now, crevasses n all. Glad I took em. Even if they were still there, I couldn't get to those places again at my age. Need to conserve my strength for fighting off the two little mountain lion wannabees sitting beside me.
Well it made me think, and thanks to your thread I now have a lighter bag and can do more miles to take an image.Originally Posted by Tin Can
Wonderful!
Tin Can
Polaroid model 250 with 4x5 back and 3D printed double sided film holder: 861g
Voyager heavy duty #10 tripod: 1010g
Since it's a point and shoot rangefinder, a ground glass is optional. Manual shutter speeds with a dongle.
A little vignetting, but the photos have lots of character! This entry will likely trigger LF elitists...
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks