My Dream Backpacker Camera

daveRen

I have an Olympus E-1 which I love for my landscape photos (its weather sealed too). But it is just too big and heavy for backpacking, sea kyaking and some day-trekking. I am looking at purchasing a good quality "compact" or "SLR-like" camera that would be rugged, relatively light but with substantial flexibility in exposure control. Has anyone else gone through this?

I had an Olympus E-10 which was OK to carry and worked great for this. I think it died from water intrusion though, so I am a bit concerned about spending the big bucks on a full-featured camera only to have it wrecked or fogged up after a couple of years from yukky BC weather. Any comments on surviving rain showers would be appreciated.

My Dream Backpacker Camera:
- Rugged "weather-resistant" body (but still fairly light and small)
- Able to attach and use a circular polarizer filter.
- Fast lens (min f11, max f2) ((too many only go to f8))
- Long Zoom NOT critical (even a 35 or 50mm prime is OK)
- Reasonably good high ISO and long exposure image quality.
- Shooting RAW, would be nice
- Used or New
- Around $500 (possibly more if I could get a very useful camera.)
- Optical View Finder - much preferred.


I am looking at:
Canon G6 or G9
Olympus CZ-7070
Sigma DP1
Leica & Panasonic compacts

Also, it may make sense to go to a smaller/lighter DSLR kit.

Any suggestions, recommendations, comments, or even horror stories would be appreciated.

tks, ............. Dave

Wingin'It

Pancake lens
There are new lens by Pentax and Olympus that are referred to as "pancake lens" because they are super thin and light. Pentax has a 40mm lens that is 0.59 inches thick and weighs 3.17 oz. These lens would make a very lightweight SLR setup for you. I've only started seeing these on the internet, so they could be hard to find.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0412/04121501pentax_pancakelens.asp

Grainbelt

"weather-sealed" DSLR (e.g. Oly E-1, Canon 40D)

The pentax k200 is a weather-sealed dslr, with IS and all the toys.

I have a Canon S5IS, and an adapter for filters, but I don't think it would like getting wet.

LKN Dave

Grainbelt wrote:

The pentax k200 is a weather-sealed dslr, with IS and all the toys.

I have a Canon S5IS, and an adapter for filters, but I don't think it would like getting wet.

The K10D is a weather sealed slr that is fairly cheap right now, add a DA* pancake and you have a nice combo.

daveRen

Stay with DSLR, eh
Thanks for the tips, the Pentax DSLR models look verrrrryyyy interesting.

You guys would stay with a DSLR, rather than use a really light (but hopefully useful) compact or "DSLR-like" camera?

grinnin and bearin, ........... Dave

LKN Dave

daveRen wrote:

Thanks for the tips, the Pentax DSLR models look verrrrryyyy interesting.

You guys would stay with a DSLR, rather than use a really light (but hopefully useful) compact or "DSLR-like" camera?

grinnin and bearin, ........... Dave

The canon 350, 400, 450 are nice and light and give you the ability to use high end lenses, but are not weather sealed.

keepright

"weather-sealed" DSLR (e.g. Oly E-1, Canon 40D)

I voted for the "weather sealed" option, but I'm not sure what the 40D's doing in that column.

I'd pack the E-1 and 14-54 (actually, 11-22 and 50f2, but those are just my favourites) and be done with it. The P&S option is good if you want the experience of taking photos without the hassle of printing the good ones, but again I'd go for something durable since the image quality's going to be poor middling anyway. The Olympus 1030SW is my current favourite, but if I could baby a camera I'd take the Panasonic FX35.

rokklym

Compact or "DSLR-like" (non-sealed) camera

I've read alot of threads like this and started a few too. What I often hear is that if its too much of a pain to carry and access the camera, the less likely you are going to bother to take a shot, that is where the compact cameras come in handy. I think that even if a DSLR is weather sealed, that isn't going to help much. Keeping the camera in a waterproof / dust proof bag it the key for me. I'm carrying an Olympus E-510 and a couple lenses in a Lowepro toploader that carries in the center of my chest with a harness or rigged off back pack / camelback straps.

Its nice to have a compact camera with for the size and the huge focal length. Most can take photos very close in quality to DSLR's but do you really want to take a chance and not have the best possible photo? I've always wanted the Pentax W series cameras since they are waterproof and don't have an external lens to get knocked around and I've always been amazed by the shots people end up with. For me though, my next camera will hopefully be a Canon G9 and carry it in a small pelican case.

DoctorIt

Compact or "DSLR-like" (non-sealed) camera

An issue we all have, right?


I've figured something out after a year chock full of traveling... you have to decide if you're going somewhere to "travel" or to "photograph". Earlier this year, I literally put away my 30D and didn't touch it for weeks because I had tried to lug it everywhere, and I stressed at all these new locations to get "that shot", which I never got anyway, and instead, missed the pleasure of just taking in new places and felt frustrated for no reason. Not anymore. The tripod and 30D only come out when I'm specifically going "shooting".


At this point I'm a firm believer that if you are visiting anywhere for just a short time, you'll never be there long enough to learn the light, the location, and really make it worthwhile to carry serious equipment.

I have a G9 now, love the simplicity. Being the dry months down here, however, I don't have any comments to make about how tough it is. Sorry. I also have a Pentax WP (the original) that I still hold on to. It takes nice photos (in good light, don't bother in bad light) as well, and it went around the US with me over the past few years, in a dirty wet motorcycle jacket pocket, never flinched.

Miguel Delinquento

Extra lens?

I use my K10D and the DA* 50-135mm weathersealed body and lens in Western Washington rains all the time. That lens and/or the DA*16-50 would be just right for the Olympics. Or you can get just the pancakes: 21mm, 40mm, 70mm. They are not weathersealed but are so small and light you could probably cover them fairly easily. All this glass has excellent optical quality.
You can find a K10D near new or used for under $600 as it has been replaced by the K20D. The K200D is a new model and very similar too.

M

gus

DoctorIt wrote:

I have a G9 now

That would be my choice hands down.

ulrikft

I use a canon 30d + battery grip + several lenses for backpacking. If you got a nice camera backpack/shoulderbag and use your hostel (as I do, right now, in Berlin by the way :P ) as a base camp for all your other stuff, it works great.

For me, the pain of having a lousy ergonomically camera, far outweighs the few extra grams

ulrikft

ulrikft wrote:

I use a canon 30d + battery grip + several lenses for backpacking. If you got a nice camera backpack/shoulderbag and use your hostel (as I do, right now, in Berlin by the way :P ) as a base camp for all your other stuff, it works great.

For me, the pain of having a lousy ergonomically camera, far outweighs the few extra grams

I now see that I should have read more carefully, you are going into the mountains only? That way i recommend a 20d with a sigma 20 1.8, a canon 50 1.4 and a canon 85 1.8. Three quite small and light primes, an ok camera to use.

DoctorIt

Compact or "DSLR-like" (non-sealed) camera

ulrikft wrote:

I now see that I should have read more carefully, you are going into the mountains only? That way i recommend a 20d with a sigma 20 1.8, a canon 50 1.4 and a canon 85 1.8. Three quite small and light primes, an ok camera to use.

I'd like to meet the serious backcountry hiker who would even consider carrying that much weight into the bush. This is where you really have to decide what you are, a photographer, or a trekker. Maybe I'm from that extreme side who has cut the handles off his spoons to save weight, but still, I would really have to be convinced to even bring the g9 on a thru-hike.

Miguel Delinquento

Extra lens?

Guilty as charged.
I used to shlep a Minolta SRT 202 and three heavy MD lenses, a lightweight tripod, and twelve rolls of 36 ex Ektachrome on ten-day excursions into the Olympic wilderness. Long before those clever Ops-Tech getups were developed, I used to sew together support straps and quick-release harnesses. And suffer in those goofy glorified Hefty bags.
Of course I was a lot younger and poorer then
My friends still lug their medium format setups into the backcountry for a few days at a time. I call them the Matthew Brady contingent, but then again, they're the ones publishing their shots in Outdoor Photographer

M

DoctorIt wrote:

I'd like to meet the serious backcountry hiker who would even consider carrying that much weight into the bush. This is where you really have to decide what you are, a photographer, or a trekker. Maybe I'm from that extreme side who has cut the handles off his spoons to save weight, but still, I would really have to be convinced to even bring the g9 on a thru-hike.

ulrikft

DoctorIt wrote:

I'd like to meet the serious backcountry hiker who would even consider carrying that much weight into the bush. This is where you really have to decide what you are, a photographer, or a trekker. Maybe I'm from that extreme side who has cut the handles off his spoons to save weight, but still, I would really have to be convinced to even bring the g9 on a thru-hike.

I was a ranger in the army, I carried 70-80kgs on my back for 2-3 weeks .. :P Carrying 5-10kg of photography equipment isn't that much of a deal to me, and i realize that this is different than most people, but I believe that most adult men can carry 25-40kg backpacks with some training. Than again, if you want the trip to be comfortable and as light as possible, that is another story.

DoctorIt

Compact or "DSLR-like" (non-sealed) camera

ulrikft wrote:

I was a ranger in the army, I carried 70-80kgs on my back for 2-3 weeks .. :P

Ouch, how's your back these days? Unless you weigh at least 160kg, thats not very healthy... talk tough all you want, simple physics always wins.

Than again, if you want the trip to be comfortable and as light as possible, that is another story.

I think thats the point here - we're not talking about pushing the limits of strength or exertion.

Pindy

All the reviews for the Sigma DP1 say the IQ is spectacular for the type of camera and it also has the worst user interface and dearth of features possible. Until Canon or some other manufacturer makes a larger sensor compact, the G9 or the Ricoh GX100 seem the best all-rounders.

I'm considering the G9 because I can use my 580EX II and ST-E2. The Sigma wins hands down for IQ, though.

daveRen

2:1 for the DSLR, eh?
Wow, Thanks to everyone for the great info. Its great to see the thread and the poll growing daily.
I have been busy checking the reviews on all the great gear recommendations.

One of the best questions raised:
".... are you going as a photographer or as a trekker?"
Considering the fact that my wife and fellow hikers don't necessarily want to wait while I get the shot just right - the quicky shot with a light camera is likely worth it. Buutttttt, I know the difference in the quality of shots that come home with me when I take the time and have right tools ...... and considering the trouble of getting me and all my stuff there - its worth the extra grams. I expect there will be some amazing opportunities for shots.

Oh man - its not black and white is it? Right now I am leaning toward just taking the "weather-sealed" Olympus E-1 and I have the 14-54 lens which I really like. I guess saving the extra few grams taking a prime lens may not be worth it. Though I could probably save a pound plus the bulk by going with something like a Oly 410 and a prime lens. I never have been a great one for changing lens - I only have one for the E-1.

Having said that, you owners of the "SLR-like" G9s, etc. - do you go off exploring with little concern about water or dust intrusion? ..... and do you feel you have enough camera control to pull off you best shot? I guess you just take the extra precautions..... and is the weather situation something that should determine which equipment you take? Its interesting how we used to take our film Pentaxs, Canons, Contaxs and Olympi everywhere without much thought of wrecking them. Also, nobody has really mentioned the rangefinder digitals like the Leica M8 or the Epson RD1 (interesting cameras, but not for this?)

We have definitely moved into light hiking and have all the other gear to go with that. For 6 days the wife and I are trying to get our packs down to less than 35 lbs (we are both turning 63 this summer.) The trip is ssssooooooo much more enjoyable without the heavy load.

Here is a link to photos from last summer's short backpack trip off out from Obstruction Point in Olympic National Park:
http://daveren.smugmug.com/gallery/4025435_iyi7G

tks eh, ....................... Dave

swintonphoto

non "weather-sealed" DSLR (e.g. Oly 510, Canon 20D)

GO with the E410 or E420. Meets almost all your criteria and works with your current system.

nightspidy

"weather-sealed" DSLR (e.g. Oly E-1, Canon 40D)

Wow

ulrikft wrote:

I was a ranger in the army, I carried 70-80kgs on my back for 2-3 weeks .. :P Carrying 5-10kg of photography equipment isn't that much of a deal to me, and i realize that this is different than most people, but I believe that most adult men can carry 25-40kg backpacks with some training. Than again, if you want the trip to be comfortable and as light as possible, that is another story.

Wow, that's hard-core!!! Mind you, my pack right now is so loaded, I swear it must weigh at least 20 pounds (), but I'd rather have all my gear with me. However, that's just me. Depends on what you want to be hauling around and what is more important to you. Nice to see that I'm not the only one who hauls around lots of stuff.

Robinivich

"weather-sealed" DSLR (e.g. Oly E-1, Canon 40D)

I've huffed around my fair share of 20-30kg packs, military and civilian (haven't made it to 80kg personally ), definitely not the kind of hiking I think we're talking about though. For serious long range trekking I'd look at something like my original setup, XT and 17-85, the IS compensates the lack of wide aperture and tripod to a degree, and the combo is a moderate size, plus the range covers most applications with better quality than most any P&S. I'm also considering my new 10-22 for the job as well, but I wouldn't take both.

I lust for the day when I can get a truly rain proof "small" body DSLR in canon mount (translation, 5d mark II with 24-105L I believe would be the perfect balance for myself)

Definitely you have to decide if the photography is going to be the overriding part of the trip or not, I find myself fortunate in that I have no difficulty in packing along a camera and not taking it out. If opportunity knocks, I'll pull it out and then pick up the pace a bit to keep up with the group. Typically though, I find that the regular 5 minute breathers that make long hikes bearable usually coincide with the best vistas, and give that chance to take off the pack, and enjoy your photography.

I wouldn't bring along a choice of lenses unless I were really making it a photographic expedition, swapping lenses is a pain in the butt on a hike, and you'll end up not using the other lenses, so why bring them along anyways? Find a prime you REALLY like, or a good zoom, and leave it at that.

The trick is to be minimal without being too minimal, don't chop off the handle on the toothbrush, but don't bring a squeeze more toothpaste than you need either.

lendur2

Extra lens?

daveRen wrote:

Thanks for the tips, the Pentax DSLR models look verrrrryyyy interesting.

You guys would stay with a DSLR, rather than use a really light (but hopefully useful) compact or "DSLR-like" camera?

grinnin and bearin, ........... Dave

Remember you said weather sealed against "yukky BC weather". Olympic Peninsula is even worse. There are small cameras (not SLR) which are weather sealed. Can't recall which ones, but they should be easy to track down. I personally prefer the DSLR with interchangeable lenses, but the only sealed one is Pentax (or did Sony just come out with one?)

I think the issue is: do you want primarily to photograph or primarily to hike?

lendur2

Extra lens?

keepright wrote:

I voted for the "weather sealed" option, but I'm not sure what the 40D's doing in that column.

I'd pack the E-1 and 14-54 (actually, 11-22 and 50f2, but those are just my favourites) and be done with it. The P&S option is good if you want the experience of taking photos without the hassle of printing the good ones, but again I'd go for something durable since the image quality's going to be poor middling anyway. The Olympus 1030SW is my current favourite, but if I could baby a camera I'd take the Panasonic FX35.

I mentioned to someone on another forum that I had read the 40D is sealed, and turned out he either had one or he looked over someone else's and he replied that it's sealed only on the battery and memory-card doors.

lendur2

Extra lens?

Miguel Delinquento wrote:

The K200D is a new model and very similar too.

M

And also waterproofed, according to Pentax.

lendur2

Extra lens?

Weather-sealed camera/lenses

lendur2 wrote:

Remember you said weather sealed against "yukky BC weather". Olympic Peninsula is even worse. There are small cameras (not SLR) which are weather sealed. Can't recall which ones, but they should be easy to track down. I personally prefer the DSLR with interchangeable lenses, but the only entry-level (small & light) sealed one is Pentax (or did Sony just come out with one?).

I think the issue is: do you want primarily to photograph or primarily to hike?

Nikolai

Compact or "DSLR-like" (non-sealed) camera

DoctorIt wrote:

An issue we all have, right?
...
At this point I'm a firm believer that if you are visiting anywhere for just a short time, you'll never be there long enough to learn the light, the location, and really make it worthwhile to carry serious equipment.

I have a G9 now, love the simplicity. ...

I second Erik on this.
If one travels with *any* other primary purpose but the photography itself, dslr is an overkill. You'll end up with a bunch of snapshots anyway, or won't even bother to take them due to the hassle of setting the shot up.
G9 or similar high-quality compact P&S should be the tool du jour for such trips. All you need is RAW..:-)

Robinivich

"weather-sealed" DSLR (e.g. Oly E-1, Canon 40D)

lendur2 wrote:

I mentioned to someone on another forum that I had read the 40D is sealed, and turned out he either had one or he looked over someone else's and he replied that it's sealed only on the battery and memory-card doors.

As a brand new owner of a 40d, the sealing isn't anything to write home about, I doubt I'd rely on it even keeping the battery/cf compartments dry. All it amounts to is a little fringing of foam around the edges (most edges but not all) of each compartment. It doesn't even enclose the port for the AC adapter to go into the battery compartment (a little spring loaded piece of hard plastic)

As far as sealed SLRs go, I think the 1d series and nikons pro series are best sealed, then pentax/olympus/d200/d300 (?)

The key is, that while your camera may be sealed, are all your favourite lenses sealed? As far as I know no third party lens is sealed (which rules out a lot of good ones), no EF-S lens is sealed, with canon as an example, only the higher end Ls are sealed,and sometimes not even. As I understand it, even fewer nikkors are sealed, don't know as much about pentax/olympus, but their selection is smaller just in general.

"partial weather sealing" is easily the dumbest marketing trick I've ever encountered, who would go around wearing a "partially" bulletproof vest? Or hop in a "mostly watertight" submarine? Canon's marketers made me very angry on this one, though obviously not that angry

Photoskipper

"weather-sealed" DSLR (e.g. Oly E-1, Canon 40D)

ulrikft wrote:

I was a ranger in the army, I carried 70-80kgs on my back for 2-3 weeks .. :P Carrying 5-10kg of photography equipment isn't that much of a deal to me, and i realize that this is different than most people, but I believe that most adult men can carry 25-40kg backpacks with some training. Than again, if you want the trip to be comfortable and as light as possible, that is another story.

My personal record was only 40kg on my back for 2 weeks during training days when I was only 60Kg that time. It was hard but yet do-able. Did the 26 days hiking in Nepal without porter, that was those days.

Currently my Lowepro AW backpack always loaded with the 5d and 300d bodies, 3-4 lens, including the 70-200 F2.8 IS and 2 flashs and accessories. Added with either the laptop or the Slik AMT 340 tripod, it weights about 15 kg easily. It is mainly for travelling on plane or just a 5 - 20 Km hiking to the target photo spot.

Unless that is the 100% photo trip, otherwise I don't feel putting all the gears on yourback for the trekking. It does not mean I cannot carry, it is not worth to risk the expensive toys. Image how much it cost inside the backpack, ? 5-7K. The nature and weather are not necessary follow our will. Moist and dust are the enemy of the photo equipment.

If for serious trekking, I would rather bring a G9 or get my old 300d with the Sigma 18-200 and put them in a water proof bag.

Trekking and Photography does not mix well. The more gears I bring, the longer time I need to set it up then less time to walk and enjoy the scenary. If I want to walk far and fast, I don't have time to take the photo.

gus

Photoskipper wrote:

My personal record was only 40kg on my back for 2 weeks during training days when I was only 60Kg that time.

Im a big guy (still run daily) & did my share of military loads as a weapons rate & ships diver... no way on gods green earth could i carry 80kg in a backpack for a length of time.

NikonsandVstroms

I took the Nikon D50 is my camera out for my trip around Oaxaca and had no issues with its durability, or the fact that it's not weather sealed like the d-200. Other than that exact trip, that poor camera has seen tons of use and abuse (and other than the shutter burning out. It's been perfect) I can't attest to the Olympus reliability.
If you're spending $500 you can get a d40 kit which is going to be your best bet. If you want long exposure, a good optical viewfinder, raw, and most importantly high ISO