[normhead]

I just got back from my latest canoe trip. Two 30k plus days, over 7.5 km of carrying my gear (and my boat and my tent food and clothing.)
K-1 and DA 28-105, DA 55-300, Sigma 24mm macro, that's it.

DA 28-105


DA 55-300


Sigma 24mm macro


My wife carried the 100 macro... which I borrowed from time to time.

---

Last edited by normhead; 08-13-2020 at 07:30 AM.

[Wheatfield]

I have a live in Sherpa for carrying much of what I take on hikes. I leave the heavy lenses at the campsite, so rather than the D FA*50/1.4, I go with the A50/1.2 or A 50/1.4. instead of the D FA* 85/1.4 I take the 77LTD, that sort of thing.
It makes it easier on said Sherpa. I use a Feisol Traveler tripod, which seems rigid enough and is pretty light.

Here's a picture of the previous Sherpa loaded up and ready to go. The present Sherpa looks pretty much the same.

[normhead]

I have a live in Sherpa for carrying much of what I take on hikes. I leave the heavy lenses at the campsite, so rather than the D FA*50/1.4, I go with the A50/1.2 or A 50/1.4. instead of the D FA* 85/1.4 I take the 77LTD, that sort of thing.
It makes it easier on said Sherpa. I use a Feisol Traveler tripod, which seems rigid enough and is pretty light.

Here's a picture of the previous Sherpa loaded up and ready to go. The present Sherpa looks pretty much the same.

My dogs are in the water so much, I just don't want to deal with the stress.

[Wheatfield]

Extra gear is extra weight. For example weight of carried stuff I took for one 60km hike in harsh terrain was 35kg in the beginning of the hike including 10kg of photographic gear (Sony A7r, three lenses, batteries and a solid 5kg tripod & ballhead). Not very enjoyable. Huawei P20 Pro gives me the same pictures and total weight of photographic gear would be about 1.5kg including a mini travel tripod.

Hauling photographic junk into wilderness is doable, sure. Fun? No.

I do think that if one is doing long hikes it pays to have a kit dedicated to the activity. For me, a cell phone doesn't cut it, the image quality, while improving, is still not there. I was impressed with the camera in my P20 Pro. For a cell phone camera it is pretty good, but it is still a cell phone camera, which means it is only good when compared to other cell phone cameras.
Were I doing a lot of hikes, I would consider fleshing out my Fuji kit a bit more, adding an X-T4 body and a couple of their little zooms, or picking up one of the smaller Pentax APS-C bodies and a couple of lightweight zooms. Neither solution is all that heavy, and the image quality is quite a lot better than what a cell phone is capable of.
For me, though, the working dog solution is the best one. I've never been anywhere that he (now she) wasn't allowed to hike with me, though I know they exist. I recall Zion park in Utah doesn't allow dogs on the trails.
I wonder if I could get my animals certified as service dogs. That would be a good work around for that sort of rule.
Also, the sort of wildlife I prefer to not encounter in the woods (eg: bears and ax murderers) will tend to give dogs a fairly wide berth, so there is an added safety factor in having a well trained Rottweiler at one's side.

---

Last edited by Wheatfield; 08-18-2020 at 08:42 AM.

[texandrews]

Extra gear is extra weight. For example weight of carried stuff I took for one 60km hike in harsh terrain was 35kg in the beginning of the hike including 10kg of photographic gear (Sony A7r, three lenses, batteries and a solid 5kg tripod & ballhead). Not very enjoyable.

I would agree---but those are military standards, especially the harsh terrain part, for young men and some select young women, plus a few lifers at higher ranks (who have learned the mental aspect of endurance)

Huawei P20 Pro gives me the same pictures

As a former A7R owner, that's stretching my credulity a lot---and I also count myself amazed at how good my phone cameras perform. But, if you say so....

and total weight of photographic gear would be about 1.5kg including a mini travel tripod.

I would think there could have been a happy medium---I think I could do 5-6.5 kg with my K1mkII and my Feisol with an Acratech head, and then pick my lens/lenses very carefully.

Hauling photographic junk into wilderness is doable, sure. Fun? No.

Well, there's wilderness and then there's wilderness...I've done it and it was ok, but not bushwhacking with a lot of altitude gain/loss and/or at high altitude, or in high desert heat, or nasty humidity with even moderate heat. Canoeing it's very doable, and it's not so bad from a base camp (once you hump it into the base camp...). But the real answer is a pack animal, llama or burro.

[cooks333]

Hiking is my primary photographic activity and I've gotten very used to bringing my K1 II along. Used to have a K7 and then K3 w/ a set of Limiteds (21/35Macro/70), but now my most common kit that I'm carrying is K1 II + Irix 15mm + D-FA* 50mm and a couple of polarizers. On the rare occasion, I'll bring my DA*300mm along. I carry the K1 in my hand on the hike and recently got the Lowepro PhotoSport to carry the extra lens and hiking necessities. My K1 kit is definitely a bit clunkier than my old APS-C setups (those pancakes are a hiker's dream), but I don't find it prohibitively restrictive. The grip on all my Pentax bodies has been so comfortable that carrying them by hand has never posed any issues and always been most convenient for shooting. Been through plenty of rain/dust/snow and weatherproofing has always held up great. Only issue I've ever had was the on/off switch on my K3 getting a little sticky because of repeated exposure to ocean air on coastal trails or the beach (did a lot of coastal hiking in CA).

I'm pretty much exclusively a day hiker and go for 10-20 mile adventures. My wife and I just got back from a trip to the sky islands of southeastern AZ with our new dog and did some great 8-13 mile hikes in the Huachuca and Chiricahua mountains with 2,000-3,000 ft climbs up to the ridgeline on each hike (and then down of course ). Feeling crisp mountain air after a summer of 110+ degree temps was refreshing to say the least!

[FoxbatK]

Excellent points!

Any body of photography is going to be judged on the quality of the images taken rather than the quantity of images not taken. Thus, taking a small number of very very nice shots ultimately means more.

There is much to be said for picking a single lens and really learning to see the world through that one lens.

I'm sure that an entire great book of great landscape photographs could be made with just a 12mm lens. Likewise, a very different great book could be made with just a 450mm lens. Rather than picking the lens for subject, one can become skilled at picking the subject for the lens.


Perhaps one difference is in the personal goal of the photographer.

If the goal is to take "great landscape photographs" then a single focal length or modest set of lenses may be best because the photographer can pick and choose.

If the goal is to "photograph great landscapes" then a much broader set of lenses may be necessary because Mother Nature is calling the shots.

Thanks for the food for thought! It took more than a decade for me to really figure out what I like taking pictures of, and how, as opposed to try to mimic what's I imagine a postcard would look like, and I've really enjoyed what comes out a lot more as the evolution progresses. I think you've summarized it more succinctly.

[osbourne one-nil]

Some gorgeous photos posted and some wise words. I really like the thought of prime lenses and the "constraint" it applies to composition. I also try to take very few shots but shoot well...just for the reason that I like the process of doing it that way. Unfortunately I have developed male tennis elbow (this is like normal tennis elbow but x10 as bad because I'm a bloke) and for the last couple of weeks it's been almost unbearable to pick up a cup of tea. This makes a prime lens, and especially something like a limited lens, very desirable as the shorter the object I'm carrying the less pain it causes. Obviously, it's ok when it's on my back, but the camera isn't much use there.

I feel like one of those old men I used to tut at as a youth because I couldn't figure out how an elbow could ever hurt. I think this is karma!

Anyway, I quite liked this one I took the other day on a very wet walk.

[texandrews]

Some gorgeous photos posted and some wise words. I really like the thought of prime lenses and the "constraint" it applies to composition. I also try to take very few shots but shoot well...just for the reason that I like the process of doing it that way. Unfortunately I have developed male tennis elbow (this is like normal tennis elbow but x10 as bad because I'm a bloke) and for the last couple of weeks it's been almost unbearable to pick up a cup of tea. This makes a prime lens, and especially something like a limited lens, very desirable as the shorter the object I'm carrying the less pain it causes. Obviously, it's ok when it's on my back, but the camera isn't much use there.

I feel like one of those old men I used to tut at as a youth because I couldn't figure out how an elbow could ever hurt. I think this is karma!

Anyway, I quite liked this one I took the other day on a very wet walk.

1. That's a lovely image, well executed.
2. Definitely Karma, pal. Most def.

Part of my work is art handling for a contemporary art museum. Big work, heavy stuff, in big heavy crates. Don't get me started about Ai Wei Wei and the 37 tons of rebar we had to move. You read that right.

So, when I get a little comment or two from the millenials about getting a bit slower (I'm 64), I tell them to let me know how they're doing in 30 years. But, oh wait, I'll be dead..... Usually shuts 'em up.

[Wheatridger]

Hiking is more and more theoretical with me now, but I find a there are several older Pentax lenses that perform very well on the K-1 and don't weigh so much. First of all, though, forget about F2.8 zooms. They're the all-purpose Swiss Army Knives of photojournalists, not the sharp scalpels of landscape photogs. Consider the F series: the 35-70 is tiny, very lightweight and sharp at all apertures. The F80-200 is very slow, but quite usable with the K-1's ISO strength and stabilization. Together, they weigh about 500 grams, just over one pound. Because one is slow and the other is only a 2x zoom, it wasn't so hard to achieve good performance with these designs.

These days, since I have a 31 Limited, I'd probably use that instead and crop it as necessary. Add a 77 Limited, croppable to a 105mm, and you'd be set, with premium quality lens pair also weighing about 500 grams together. Also, the DFA 28-105 is a superb one-lens solution at 440 grams.

Any of these three options will give you a camera & lenses total weight of around three pounds, and that isn't bad.

Another suggestion, if it hasn't been mentioned: those blue neoprene OpTech straps really spread the weight on your shoulder and cushion the bumps!

[BirdDude007]

Another suggestion, if it hasn't been mentioned: those blue neoprene OpTech straps really spread the weight on your shoulder and cushion the bumps!

I too have one of those OpTech straps as well and have had it for six years now, the most comfortable strap I ever used and at only $30 (at the time I bought it) it is totally worth every penny, now I gotta go and buy like four more of them, they are that awesome...

[BertilArild]

Hello. I do not know if this is the right place for my notice,but anyhow.....I wrote some days ago about my front broken eye piece glass and my way of doing an easy,cheap and fast reparation.-The camera had fallen down on the floor. -In my search for some protective means of keeping my K-1 fit I have found a photo bag to be placed inside a rucksack which seems flexible and very handy for trekking etc. The product is called "Fjällräven Photo Insert". Could be a tip for travelling,trekking and so on.
/Bertil

[dpartner]

I've hauled mine on a few Grand Canyon Rim-to-Rim hikes, talk about weight regret! But in the end it's been worth it for some of the pictures I've taken. I use my Sirui T-025X which would seem on the small side, but with the Irix Blackstone 15mm I haven't had any problems with movement (except when posted up on the bridge at Bright Angel Campground and someone walks across).

[BertilArild]

I've hauled mine on a few Grand Canyon Rim-to-Rim hikes, talk about weight regret! But in the end it's been worth it for some of the pictures I've taken. I use my Sirui T-025X which would seem on the small side, but with the Irix Blackstone 15mm I haven't had any problems with movement (except when posted up on the bridge at Bright Angel Campground and someone walks across).

Apropos weight. Maybe a televonverter occaisonally could be an option instead of an extra lens when trekking.
/Bertil

[3by2]

Just returned to this thread to see how you were getting on. Tennis elbow, yeah I've had that, my sympathies, it does eventually settle provided you don't do anything like cooking and housework and stick to light duties like drinking alchohol.....

I've been looking for a travel/hiking rucksack for nearly two years now without any success, so I'm still packing a motley collection of cases in different rucksacks. I have at least settled on Jack Wolfskin messenger bag for casual wear but not for hiking and I'm using a KP not a K1. Like I mentioned I do use a waistbelt and pouch and some of the Mindshift modular stuff looks quite interesting if you haven't seen it, there is a review of it on the forum. Lowepro also do a protactic range in a similar vein. There's a limit to waistbelt stuff I find, depending on your hip shape. Those of us with narrow hips will tend to find waistbelts around our ankles if you overload them.