Camera

[Matt Pincham]

Hello All,

Was just wondering what your views are on cameras. Do you or did you take one on your thru-hike? (or day/section hikes).

I'm thinking of getting a relatively small one and mailing the films home but I'm not sure if I can be bothered with the weight and hassle.
I'm sure it will be great to look back in years to come, but at the same time, surely it would just be even better to hike again

I've been browsing a lot of the member galleries etc and some of the photos taken are fantastic. What types of cameras did any of you guys use?

Thanks for your time
Matt

[bearbag hanger]

Hello All,

Was just wondering what your views are on cameras. Do you or did you take one on your thru-hike? (or day/section hikes).

I'm thinking of getting a relatively small one and mailing the films home but I'm not sure if I can be bothered with the weight and hassle.
I'm sure it will be great to look back in years to come, but at the same time, surely it would just be even better to hike again

I've been browsing a lot of the member galleries etc and some of the photos taken are fantastic. What types of cameras did any of you guys use?

Thanks for your time
Matt

I use a Canon S100 digital camera. Had it for about four years now and am very happy with it. It only weights about 8 oz, which is close to the smaller, cheap nonreusable film cameras. It's not waterproof which means I can't use it when it's raining. But there are digital camera's out there now that are fairly rain proof.

I would hightly recommend going digital. Film is, in the end, very expensive. I generally get maybe one good shot out of ten attempts. With digital, you just delete the bad ones and reuse the "digitial film". But, if you go digital, you have a lot of decisions to make, with film not so many. What pixel size do you want (more is better), what type digital film do you want (recommend CompactFlash, stay away from Memory Stick), and so on. Printing digital pictures is easy, showing them at a slide show is a bit more difficult, but if you have the money, not that hard.

This is only a recomendation. I promise not to get mad or upset with anyone who doesn't like my ideas. Please don't yell at me!

[c.coyle]

Was just wondering what your views are on cameras. Do you or did you take one on your thru-hike? (or day/section hikes)

I've been browsing a lot of the member galleries etc and some of the photos taken are fantastic. What types of cameras did any of you guys use?

I'm an old 35 mm SLR and Kodachrome snob from the 70's, but I've completely changed my outlook on hiking photography since I bought a Kodak DX4330 digital. Most hiking shots are grab shots, so you can usually get away with a point & shoot, built-in flash, and a built-in zoom lense. Much lighter than an SLR. Giving up aperture, shutter, and focus control isn't a problem on 99% of hiking shots I take.

Advantages of digital: No film to buy, develop, load and unload (a pain in the cold or rain). See your pictures immediately and trash the bad ones. Only print what you want printed. Easy to e-mail and upload. 64 or 128 meg flash cards are cheap and hold lots of photos. Don't have to carry filters and polarizers, the software does it for you. Photo quality, at 3.2 mega pixels resolution, yields grain free (pixel free?) wallpaper shots on my 17" monitor. Cheaper in the long run to own and operate.

Disadvantages: Crammed with electronics, so moisture is a constant worry. Battery life in some is short, although the DX4330 lithium battery lasts a long time if you turn the camera off between shots.

[hungryhowie]

Hello All,

Was just wondering what your views are on cameras. Do you or did you take one on your thru-hike? (or day/section hikes).

Absolutely! I used disposable cameras the entire time and the one thing that I regret about my thruhike is not using a better camera to help capture better photos.

Today, I'd recommend going digital. You can get small, fairly light cameras that are quite suitable for backpacking. Canon makes the digital Elph series (the s400 is the most recent version - 4mp, ~8oz, ~$450, and really really small), Sony's V1 (5mp, ~10oz, ~$600) is still pretty small but adds a ton of creative control. If you want the ultimate in image quality, control, and flexibility, you'll have to invest "heavily" (both ways) in a DSLR and lenses - I'm saving up for Canon's new Digital Rebel (6.3mp CMOS, 19oz, ~$900) and a couple of lenses (17-40/4L, 50/1.4, 70-200/4L - a total of about 3 pounds and $1500) This should finally satisfy my photography needs in the backcountry. I'm having (once again) to slash my packweight and add a sturdier pack to make up for the 5 pound difference.

If you want to stay with film (absolutely nothing wrong with this), I've been using the Olympus Stylus Epic for a couple of years as my hiking camera and have been quite happy. It has a fairly fast and capable lens (28/2.8) and I've captured some excellent landscapes with it. The gold standard for film point and shoots has always been the Yashica T4 - absolutely hands down, the best point and shoot camera EVER. If you go film and don't mind splurging just a bit (~400), you won't be disappointed with this little gem. Of course, you can still go 35mm SLR for less weight and cost than going DSLR, Canon's Elan series or film Rebel series would be a good option here.

For more info than you ever cared to find out, www.dpreview.com is the place to go for anything digital camera.

-Howie

[Kerosene]

All of the pictures I've taken from the past four years (and posted) were with a disposable Kodak camera (3.5 ounces, plus an ounce if you add a flash which is really only useful if you're taking pictures of the shelter). To save scanning time I order the prints on CD. Here's a recent example, slightly re-touched by the photo improvement software: <click here>

My biggest gripe is that a third of my pictures aren't keepers, and another third would be better if I took them again. I'd love to go digital but I'm waiting for the weight to drop a few ounces (inclusive of a 3X optical zoom), the battery life to improve, and I'm wrestling with how to keep water out.

[chief]

I use a canon elph 2. Exactly the size of a pack of short smokes. Like a lot of people, I'm thinking of switching to digital. A friend of mine got a 3 meg digital for xmas that's even smaller than my elph. Sorry, I don't have the details.

What I found after my hike in 2000, I didn't get nearly enough pics of people I met. I got lots of view shots and they are no different than anyone else's view shots. Next time i hike the AT (or any other long hike), I will save my photography for people I meet along the trail.

[Kerosene]

I have the same problem that Chief does: I take too many pictures of scenery and not enough of people. I was a little better this last trip, but I still didn't take pictures of two companions who I stayed with.

[Jaybird]

Matt:

good question!

there are as many answers as there are thru-hikers on any given April day on the trail....hehehehehehe

i guess, just like your backpack, its a personal preference...

i've used Kodak single-use cameras in the past...developed the film when i got back from my section-hikes....& the photos were always a great reminder of what a GREAT time i had on the trail.....

BUT, this time, i plan on taking my Argus digital 5 mega-pixel camera with me. (section hike April/May 2004) it only weights 8 oz....& on avg.quality setting...i can get approx 700 shots.


there are digital cams now that weigh as low as 3.9 oz. & are credit card thin that fit in your shirt pocket.

good luck....look foward to seeing your photos in the MEMBER GALLERIES!

see U up da trail!

[weary]

I've gotten a lot of pleasure out of showing my 35 mm slides from my 1993 walk to various groups, and I periodically show slides on behalf of our town land trust, so I continue to stick with film.

A digital projector still costs in the $2,000 range, negating any financial benefit from going digital. For comparable quality, digital cameras, though dropping in price fast, are still significantly more expensive also.

I worry also about recharging batteries on a long distance hike. That's relatively easy along parts of the trail, but towns remain relatively scarce in Maine.

Anyway, my current camera is a 35 mm Olympus Point and Shoot, 35-140 zoom.

Weary

[Kyle & Lisa]

Matt--

Since you are mainly concerned about the hassle and weight I gather you would just like something that takes decent pictures, but not necessarily professional ones. You could go with the disposable, which is cheap, little hassle, and not much weight.

My suggestion is the digital Oregon Scientific Thincam DS6628. It is only 1.3 Mega Pixel, so it's not a professional camera (but then again, there's only professional photographers, not cameras). It weighs 40grams! It is 86x54x8mm (about the size of a credit card and as thick as three cards stacked together). It holds 91 640x480 shots or 21 1280x1024 shots with its 16MB memory. Has Macro mode, Memory card slot . . .check it out at www.oregonscientific.com. Not the highest quality, but man is it convenient. You can get for about $100 now. Last years version is even cheaper.

Kyle

[weary]

PC magazine on line has what I found to be an interesting analysis of digital cameras. It can be found at:

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,1418655,00.asp

[Alligator]

Hi folks. Santa was good to me this year and brought me a digital camera, the Pentax Optio S. Well, sort of, he didn't drop it off on Christmas Eve, but sent it ground. It should be at my door today or tomorrow. It can actually fit behind a credit card or in an altoids tin, has 3.2 MP and a 3X optical zoom. Found it for $300.00 (Special deal from, please don't get irate, the store with the yellow smiley dude) and it comes with a 256 card and mini tripod. I did get the tripod already, it is lighter than the miniature one I have now. I tried the camera out in the store, it is wicked small and weighs around 4 oz. It does have a proprietary battery, so for a thru-hiker, a spare battery would be necessary, plus the recharger would need to be put in a bounce box. Two memory cards might be needed also. Maybe some of this years thrus could comment on any challenges of digital cameras they had. I also know that there are several other cameras of comparable size and quality around this price, plus better quality cameras for slightly more.

I previously carried a manual SLR 35 mm and beginners favorite Pentax K1000. It takes really good pictures but is, shall we say, f&%#ing heavy. I have a compact soft case to carry it on my chest. It does not have a timer. As others have noted, I have lots of great pictures of scenery but not many of me, or me and my hiking buddy. It's nice to have a camera with a self-timer, which is pretty standard on most non-disposable cameras. I stopped bringing it because of the weight, although I did carry it for years and considered it a luxury item.

[Peaks]

Just to summarize,

Like all gear, there is no conscentous on which camera or type of camera is best. You see all types out there, including disposables, point and shoot, full size SLR with all the extras, and digital.

The first thing you need to figure out is what type of pictures do you want to take. If all you want is snapshots, then a disposable will work just fine.

Cameras like the Olympus Stylus Zoom are compact and take good qualtity pictures. Because I use slides, that's what I carried. I got the water resistant model. One disadvantage now is that slide film is not readily available. It's hard to find along the trail, so I included film in my mail drops.

Digital cameras are getting better and cheaper. Historically, the problem has been low battery life. However, that has improved dramatically the last couple of years. Certainly if I were to replace my camera today, I would need to consider going digital.

[cabalot]

i used to carry a disposable, now i have an olympus 400 digital. 4 mega pixel. weatherproof, 6.8 oz.
it only comes with a 16mb card so i ordered a 256mb and a spare battery.
great camera, even comes with a remote to take pics of yourself when soloing.

[Matt Pincham]

Thanks for all the replies guys.

One concern I have is the cost of mailing films or disposables home. Airmailing all the way to the UK isn't cheap so I'm not sure which option will be best for me. I also, do not intend to use maildrops as co-ordinating them from the UK will also be hassle for my parents.

Kyle, you got it right about not wanting professional photos. My girlfriend took photography so she may want a decent camera but for myself, I'm just looking to get photos for the memories.

I think the cheapest option will probably be to buy a 'normal' camera and mail the films home individually. I love this whole digital idea but it's a bit pricey, maybe in a few years time.

PS Nice shot Kerosene...with a disposable too

Right I'm off to make my first ever Pepsi Can Stove. Wish me Luck
Matt

[MadAussieInLondon]

matt, just get a large enough memory card (a 256 of 512mb card last you all the way!). thats what I plan on doing. 2x256 or 1x512mb card in my digital camera... that is HEAPS of photos.

i usually take my photos as 1280x960. i may downsize that a bit to save more, thats 480 on a 256mb card, or 960 on a 512mb card. saying 6 months, thats 5 per day, every day for 180 days.

in a higher res i get 320 on a 256mb, 640 on a 512mb=>3 per day for 180days. really, thats overkill resolution.

downgrading to 640x480, thats 16mb for 155, 1840 for 256, 3680 for 512mb... anything under 128mb is probably too small i think.

640x480 give fine 6x4 prints
1280x960 gives me awesome 7x5 and 8x6 prints...

[Patco]

I have a compact soft case to carry it on my chest.

I really need a quick access, water proof pouch to carry my camera in. I've seen some on the hip belt and some in 'fanny pack' carriers. What's the best and where can I find such a thing? Wildlife moves fast and if you're not quick enough it'll be gone before you're erady to snap the shot.

[Happy]

I bought my 3oz. fanny pack at the thrift store for $2. Quick access to camera, snacks and other items...or just buy a pouch from REI, etc. and sew it to your hipbelt.

[Uncle Wayne]

Matt,

Almost all of my photos in the Whiteblaze gallery were taken with an Olympus Stylus 300 Digital camera. It is weather resistant. Last summer during an 18 day trip I took 1400+ pictures using the lowest resolution with only 3 batteries. The proprietary battery is the weakest link in this camera but it is rechargeable. So getting through Maine or anywhere else where you couldn't recharge wouldn't be a problem with a little planning. We emailed 150 of the digital photos to Wal-Mart for 4 x 6 prints and the quality was excellent.

And you don't need a $2000 digital slide projector to share your photos either. I found a shareware version of a slide show that allows me to burn my photos to a CDR or CDRW and show my photos using almost any dvd player over almost any TV.

One things for sure with a digital camera you'll take more photos. You can double check to make sure you got the shot you wanted before you leave the spot, you don't have to pay for the bad shots and in our online world, digital makes it so much easier to share your photos. You can even doctor them with the right software.

Remember your thru hike will possibly be a once in a lifetime opportunity. Do you want to risk the shot of a lifetime and not know until weeks or months later whether you captured it on film? For almost all of my 14 years with the Boy Scouts I used an Olympus Stylus 35mm film camera. But there were several rolls that came back from the developer with bad prints. Some were due to error on my part, some on poor development process and once I lost two complete rolls due to grit being in the gasket around the camera where I loaded the film. The grit let in just enough light to ruin my photos. So there are no guarantees with film cameras either.

IMO, except for the initial investment, there are not as many advantages to film over digital anymore. Good luck with your camera decision Matt and on your thru hike. Whatever you choose, practice with it at home before you take it on the trail. Maybe we'll meet on the trail somewhere this year.

[Reverie]

Matt
I carry at least one camera when I hike. It really depends upon the length of the hike more than anything. Like a lot of people here I am a convert to digital photography. My camera of choice is a Canon G2. It is ruggad and depednable but it weighs a bit more than a more recent design. If I were to select a digital camera for the trail today I would look for these specifications:

1. At least 4 Megapixels. 5 is better. 6 is fabulous.
2. Compact Flash storage (easy to use, rugged, available) at least 256 MB.
Two Lithium-Ion Batteries. Keep one charged and have someone sending you a charged battery. Alternately, put the charger in your bounce box and hope you can always find a place to plug it in. Wish they made a solar charger...
3. Water proof or at least resistant.
4. A timer (you want to be in a picture once in a while and it always seems like nobody is around to take the picture).
5. Damn good optics. Don't go for a brand-x because their lenses just don't do a good job.

Get your camera and practice, practice, practice. I shoot everyone and everything. I use Photoshop to work with my photos but typically only use it to resize and/or reduce my image quality to email the photo.

Get the National Geographic field photography guide and read it. It really helps.

Reverie