[DWS1]

I'm curious what everyone is carrying for a camera when out hiking. I'm 65+ years old and have been taking a K70 w/16-85mm and love the flexibility and images I get with it. It works good for a relative short hike of up to about 4-5 miles, but much longer than that the weight becomes a big problem for me, even when using a chest harness. I recently took it on a 3 day 2 night backpacking trip of about 18 miles with a lot of up and down hiking, and said never again is that camera coming along. That 3+ lbs. doesn't sound like much weight but it is when added to the weight of backpacking gear. I'm looking for a different solution, and have even considered going back to my 15 year old 7.1mp Kodak ZD710 bridge camera. It only weighs about 12 oz. The problem is I really love my Pentax. What good quality lightweight cameras are others here taking in long or difficult hiking situations?

[UncleVanya]

My favorite lightweight camera is the PANASONIC LX-7, but the sensor is small. The LX100 mk ii or a Sony RX100 (several models)

The LX-7 has an add on evf that I like when the camera doesn't need to be pocketed. I've been using my LX-7 all month. Most shots are b&w as I like to do a month of b&w in Monovember/Movember.

Daily in November 2020 | Flickr

[aaacb]

I don't backpack, but I do day hikes and longer bicycle tours with a tent and camping gear. I used to use a k3ii and primarily the 16-85, so quite similar to your setup. Then I added a GR III for trips that didn't allow for the dslr weight. It's not weather sealed and hardly usable with winter gloves, but it's great otherwise and ibis allows lowering the iso a bit or smoothing waterfalls. I'm now also using a micro four thirds camera (lumix g95 and kit lens) as an option between the dslr and the GR; while half the weight of a k1ii and kit lens (my current Pentax), it's still noticeable in weight and bulk, unlike the GR.

[clackers]

If image quality doesn't matter and weight matters because it's a multi-day thing or I'm on a bike or whatever, I use a Canon G7x, DWS. 1" sensor, tiny, 28-105mm equivalent zoom.

But when the pictures are important to me, I'm not just documenting, I'll take my K-S2 with the Limiteds, or the Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 and DA 55-300.

When photography's actually the main point of the hike, I'll put in the K-1, DFA 28-105 and Sigma 12-24mm.

Wildlife means that either the FA*300 or the Sigma 150-500 have to be included, I'm not trying to walk more than 5km from my car with that configuration, because I'll also have a monopod and a flash.

[robgski]

I use a Ricoh Wg-20 as my all weather pocket camera. It replaced The Panasonic Lumix Point and shoot that was my go-to until it just stopped working. I would get another, but I am going to out that replacement cost towards a GRIII.

[pichaser]

A Olympus tg 1 has been a companion when convenience and durability are desired . Landscapes and macros are it's best uses but I hate not having OVF .

[Gorgarath]

If only they made the Q WR.

[heinamj]

I don't hike long enough for a K70 or K3 with an 18-135 to be a problem...

[ChristianRock]

If I am going to carry a camera all day long, I used to carry it with the DA 35 2.4 a lot. The lens is featherweight and while not as flexible as a zoom, at least I had something.
I haven't been hiking much, so I usually carry a bag with a few lenses these days...
But in your situation, I would consider that carrying a DA 21 and DA 70 along with the K-70 might cut down on the weight quite a bit (both lenses together weigh half what the 16-85mm lens weights).
If that is still to heavy there's always the Ricoh GR III...

[PJ1]

I like the Q7 with both the 02 and 06 zooms. Or - for reach and if I don't want to be changing lenses- a Panasonic Lumix FZ200.

[luftfluss]

How about the Panasonic DC-LX100 II? Under one pound, m4/3 sensor, 24-75mm equivalent zoom.

Panasonic Lumix DC-LX100 II Overview: Digital Photography Review

[Michail_P]

I don't hike long enough for a K70 or K3 with an 18-135 to be a problem...

Me neither. I hike along my k-70 regularly. For me it’s the tripod that weighs. My hiking is almost always about photos, so I sometimes consider the possibility of my tele-zoom (also for the macro capabilities) but GRIII sounds like a good solution if you’re in the wide range.

[dms]

My typical setup is:
canoe and expect rain/water in canoe--Nikonos III (underwater film camera)** + 35mm lens = 1.7 lb
canoe or backpack and not super light--lately a KS2 + 17-28mm FE + small tripod (ultrapod II) + spare battery = about 2.5 lb
super light--pentax Q + 03 +04 (FE and 35mm eq) + spare battery = 1lb
___
** no light meter but I don't need it for color negative film

[Astro-Baby]

I hike a lot and take either a tiny Panasonic happy snappy TZ90 which gets good pics for me or a lighter weight film camera thats disposable in event of disaster.
Last year hiking the Nakasendo I used the Panasonic and a Konica SII rangefinder.

[Sam_I_am]

Interesting thread. I just ran into a gentleman who is selling all his film cameras and kit. He was/is a backpacker. He went digital and never looked back. I am purchasing his entire film setup including harness. It got me wondering about these exact questions. Just a couple months ago members of our family attempted the South Sister in Central Oregon. My wife is 48 and was carrying her K3ii with two lenses and day pack. They did not make it to the summit but overall the hike was 10 miles from the car park. Five up and five back. Car park was 5400 ft. They went up to about 8800 ft. We live at sea level. I just asked her if she noticed that her camera gear weighed her down. She never even thought about it. She said that the only thing that stopped them from reaching the summit (about a mile more) was their late start and thin air. I suspect the thin air was more of a challenge since we live at sea level. Since I am getting a film backpack kit, I am more interested in this. Now I just need to get rid of this covid bod.