Carrying a DSLR on a Thru-Hike

[Shrkbit143]

I'm thinking of taking my DSLR camera on my thru-hike but the weight is the issue. I have a point-an-shoot but I want some great photos from this trip. Has anyone taken their DSLR and what is your thoughts on it? Thanks.

[Ender]

I wouldn't, for many reasons. First, a camera doesn't take good photos, it just makes it easier to do so by adding manual controls... but it does that at the cost of greatly increased weight. Similar function at much less weight can be gained by using an advanced P&S like the Canon G11, or even lighter the Canon S95 or S100. Or something along the lines of the Fuji X100.

Sure, they aren't as versatile as a DSLR, but you're going to spend most of your time hiking, not shooting.

Some people have carried DSLR's, and have taken good photos. But frankly, the photos you are taking are more for memories than anything else, you don't need to be taking gallery quality photos of your trip.

Just my $0.02... YMMV.

[Shutterbug]

I'm thinking of taking my DSLR camera on my thru-hike but the weight is the issue. I have a point-an-shoot but I want some great photos from this trip. Has anyone taken their DSLR and what is your thoughts on it? Thanks.

People who aren't photographers don't understand those of us who carry heavy cameras on hikes. It is a personal thing. If you are not comfortable without your camera, take it. It will get beat up, but isn't that expected?

Give some thought to how you will transfer your pictures off the camera. Some DSLRs are up to 20 megabytes per photo. You won't be able to transfer those on a library computer. You will probably need to mail memory cards to someone who removes the pictures and sends it back farther up the trail.

Keeping a charged battery will also be a challenge. Most DSLR's won't use AAs.

I can't count the number of times I have wished I had my DSLR on a hike. I have missed some great shots when I left it at home. I agree that the reason is only to preserve personal memories, but that is important. I relive my adventures over and over.

[swammie]

Last long hike I was on I carried my DSLR. I took some magnificent photographs, unfortunately, none from the trail. All my shots were from camp and when I bothered to bring it out at rest stops. It became a chunk of metal to lug along and I regret those times I didn't take the time to bring it out. Nowadays I bring a high quality point-and-shoot carried in a small bag suspended from my sternum strap. The quality of my shots has been maintained while the variety is greatly increased.

Remember, it's not the camera, it's the photograph you see in your mind and your ability to manipulate your camera (and in post-development) to present that vision.

[Ender]

To chime back in and give myself a frame of reference, I am a strong hobby photographer. And sure, there are times having an SLR would have made taking shots in the woods a lot easier. I would still never bring any of my DSLR's, or their many lenses, on the trail. Too much weight, and all you're really getting is added convenience for taking photos. Equally good photos can be taken with a good P&S or EVIL camera, for much less weight, but more inconvenience.

Shutterbug's thoughts on file sizes and batteries are very good, and worth considering. Memory is getting much cheaper, so carrying a bunch of memory cards isn't going to be too expensive. And charging in towns isn't a problem, just carry an extra battery to get you from town to town. Or carry a Nikon D40... the batteries on those things lasts forever. Seriously. I can easily get 2000 shots or more off a single charge while shooting RAW. And it's super light too. Not sure about the newer Nikon lower-end cameras batteries, though. I know the D300 batteries and D7000 batteries don't last as long as the D40's.

[Ender]

Remember, it's not the camera, it's the photograph you see in your mind and your ability to manipulate your camera (and in post-development) to present that vision.

Exactly what I was trying to say earlier, but stated much more succinctly than I ever could have put it.

[Lyle]

I used to carry a film SLR whenever I was backpacking. Then in the quest to lighten my pack weight (also the camera got stolen) I switched to digital P&S cameras. The compactness and the weight were nice, but the photos were not nor was the photo process. I will sometimes take an hour or two break, either during the day, or at the end, to do some photography. For the past year or two, I've been carrying a small dSLR (currently a D5100) again. The time I devote to photography is much more fun again. Since I will probably never hike 98% of the trail again, I want to have the opportunity to get some nice photos on this pass.

Can nice photos be taken with a P&S, sure, if the photographer is skilled enough. Does the smaller sensor size make a difference, even for them? Yep. Particularly in low-light, like around the shelters in the evening. Or for close-up photography.

Today's dSLRs and the modern plastic lenses offer amazing photo quality at much lighter weights than the older, more bombproof, but much heavier lenses of the film era.

My feeling is that:

1) I enjoy photography for photography sake.
2) I will probably never return to many of these areas.
3) I have spent much time and money to significantly lighten my pack and the other items I carry.

So, I've now gone back to SLR photography as my luxury.

A decent dSLR and one or two light weight lenses is not much more weight than the MP3 players, phones, GPS, Kindles, books, booze, heavier than necessary stoves, two wall tents, or some combination of these that other folks choose to carry. It is all a personal choice of what is right for you. For me, a good camera is right.

[swammie]

I used to carry a film SLR whenever I was backpacking. Then in the quest to lighten my pack weight (also the camera got stolen) I switched to digital P&S cameras. The compactness and the weight were nice, but the photos were not nor was the photo process. I will sometimes take an hour or two break, either during the day, or at the end, to do some photography. For the past year or two, I've been carrying a small dSLR (currently a D5100) again. The time I devote to photography is much more fun again. Since I will probably never hike 98% of the trail again, I want to have the opportunity to get some nice photos on this pass.

Can nice photos be taken with a P&S, sure, if the photographer is skilled enough. Does the smaller sensor size make a difference, even for them? Yep. Particularly in low-light, like around the shelters in the evening. Or for close-up photography.

Today's dSLRs and the modern plastic lenses offer amazing photo quality at much lighter weights than the older, more bombproof, but much heavier lenses of the film era.

My feeling is that:

1) I enjoy photography for photography sake.
2) I will probably never return to many of these areas.
3) I have spent much time and money to significantly lighten my pack and the other items I carry.

So, I've now gone back to SLR photography as my luxury.

A decent dSLR and one or two light weight lenses is not much more weight than the MP3 players, phones, GPS, Kindles, books, booze, heavier than necessary stoves, two wall tents, or some combination of these that other folks choose to carry. It is all a personal choice of what is right for you. For me, a good camera is right.

and that is why I take my DSLR with me sometimes. Can't beat it when trying for professional results. Some of Nikon's lightest, cheapest lenses are its best, so the add'l weight is relative. Just need to talk my hiking partner into carrying the whisky.

[swammie]

Exactly what I was trying to say earlier, but stated much more succinctly than I ever could have put it.

thanks, did I say that? Suppose I have a quote for my profile now.

[Miner]

First of all, a DSLR with its large sensor in comparison to a P&S or cell phone camera will take much better photos in low light situations which are often the better photos. The others are fine for most people in bright light situations. So if you get up late and stop early at a shelter, you might not care about light performance. For those of us who like to hike at dawn and sunset might want the larger camera. Get a Camera case that you can either hang from your shoulder straps or attach to your hip belt so that it will remain easily accessible so that you can take quick photos through out the day. Most people I've heard that complained that they never used their DSLR seemed to keep their cameras in their pack which means they never used it. Choose just 1 or (if you must) 2 lenses to bring for it that will cover most of the shots you want. I prefer to cover wide angle rather then high zoom for backpacking.

Back in the 90's I carried a film Canon Rebel SLR for years, just hung off my neck by the strap. I still have that camera and it still works. Sure it picked up a few scratches here and there, but no reason why it won't remain usable for years after a thru-hike if you just treat it like most UL backpacking gear and don't throw it around. Back when I thru-hiked the PCT in 2009, I carried a heavy camcorder that I stored in a case mounted to my shoulder strap. I could have it out and recording just as fast as most people with their P&S cameras. I bounced a small netbook with an external USB harddrive to copy HD footage off every 1.5 to 2 weeks. I carried a spare large capacity battery and kept the charger in my bounce box. I hiked with a guy who carried a Canon DSLR in a hipbelt case and his photos are much better then anyone elses I saw after our hike. I have a copy of his and several other people who hiked together so I could comapare ones taken at the same time and place. There was a clear difference that could be seen; particularly in early morning and evening shots.

For the AT this year, I'm taking a Canon Rebel T3i SLR in a hipbelt attached case by lowepro which I expect to use to get excellent photos and HD video. I'm going to bounce the same netbook again to copy photos and video footage though I may carry the charger with me this time since opportunities to charge are more numerous then they were on the PCT.

[bigcranky]

Are you a very good photographer? That is, will you be able to extract the added value of using a DSLR over using a point and shoot? I'm not trying to be offensive, it's just that I see lots of poor quality photos taken with both kinds of camera. A great photographer can shoot great photos with an iPhone or a p+s camera, while an inexperienced photographer can shoot bad photos with a professional camera (just ask my students. Ugh.)

I have a lot of cameras, from tiny point and shoots to behemoth professional DSLR bodies with giant lenses. If I were serious about shooting good images on a long distance hike, I would take one of the small mirrorless cameras now on the market, with a single prime lens in the 35-50mm (equivalent) range, and maybe a short telephoto. I am getting some seriously great photos from my Panasonic micro 4/3 cameras with the 20/1.7 and 45/1.8 lenses, and the whole kit is smaller and weighs less than a Rebel with the kit zoom. The new Sony NEX system gets rave reviews, too, and the Olympus m4/3 cameras seem very nice.

I'd have a harder time justifying a large traditional DSLR with a large zoom. The weight does make a difference. However, to see an amazing set of photos taken with a large DSLR on a thru hike, click here. (Note that these are in reverse order; he did a nobo thru but the top photos are from Maine.) This photog, a professional in the "real world," carried a Canon 5D Mark II and the 35mm f/1.4 prime lens. Note that he did not start the trail with this combo, electing to get his trail legs first. Great photos.

Good luck and shoot lots of good photos.

[swammie]

However, to see an amazing set of photos taken with a large DSLR on a thru hike, click here. (Note that these are in reverse order; he did a nobo thru but the top photos are from Maine.) This photog, a professional in the "real world," carried a Canon 5D Mark II and the 35mm f/1.4 prime lens. Note that he did not start the trail with this combo, electing to get his trail legs first. Great photos.

Good luck and shoot lots of good photos.

Now those can justify the effort! I'm stuck in a similar mode with my Nikon gear. DOF with that lens and tack-sharp focus make the story easy to tell. Or I just whip out my iPhone to capture a moment that otherwise would have been impossible to get...being in the thick of things and not able to deal with a bulky DSLR dangling from my neck.

[BlizzardChord]

DSLR saves my life. I bring it on every single hike (but have not been on a long overnight type of hike.) I am an active photographer and Graphic Designer, so the fact that I bring my camera is kind of what pays my bills. Personally, any photos I take can be sold, I just need the right opportunity. My thoughts though? Take it, but put it on a neck strap. It might be heavier than a regular point and shoot, but it's still not a lot of weight. Keep it on the neck strap and out of the way of everything else.

[Samson]

I have been thinking about getting a nikon 1because of the size and weight. I have only taken my DSLR's on day hikes and they feel like I am carrying an extra 100 pounds at the end of the day.

[Lyle]

I have been thinking about getting a nikon 1because of the size and weight. I have only taken my DSLR's on day hikes and they feel like I am carrying an extra 100 pounds at the end of the day.

Try a LowePro triangular wedge pack. Use some light beiners to attach to your shoulder straps (I add a short loop of nylon cord to lower the camera and make it more convenient). Top opens out, away from your body, so the camera is readily accessible, protected, and since it is hanging from the shoulder straps, much more comfortable than around your neck. Some minor inconvenience occasionally when you have to push it aside to see precise foot placement, but this is just a minor annoyance.

[Lyle]

You do need to lighten all your other gear in order to feel comfortable with the extra weight, at least I did.

[Samson]

also the thought of dropping a $3k camera makes my face twitch a little lol

[Lyle]

also the thought of dropping a $3k camera makes my face twitch a little lol

I don't carry my "good" camera. There are entry level dSLRs for a lot less than $3000. Mine was well under $800 and it's brand new. You can get a somewhat older model that will still shoot the pants off of a P&S for $200-$300 quite easily.

[Samson]

I have a few dslr's at the ready. I would feel the same whether I dropped my d60 or my d800.

[Sassafras Lass]

Oh boy oh boy oh boy. This is my DREAM. But nope, P&S for our SOBO thru next month. I've only got my one system, which I use professionally occasionally, and I'm not going to spend AT dollars on insurance for it.

Check out Ben Benvie for absolutely breathtaking photos of his hike. He hiked NOBO, so I've embedded the last page for you to work your way from. Makes me drool!