Along the Uinta Highline Trail

A pretty typical scene along the Uinta Highline trail these last nine days. I just got back late this afternoon and have just started to go through my photos.

D2x
24-85mm @ 24
f/14 @ 1/30sec

Very good, Mark. Looks just like I remember it. I love all those beautiful meadows up there. Great show of clouds here and perfect composition. My only suggestion would be to boost the saturation a bit.

Thanks, Marc. I'd have to say that I've never seen more beautiful scenery anywhere else in my life! Every corner we turned, every pass we went over, it was just beautiful, beautiful and more beautiful!

The original on my computer looks way saturated, I think the web is killing it.

The Uintas are indeed spectacular! I'm so glad your trip sounds like it was a success. How did you hold up under that much pack for ten days anyhow? Are you using 'save for web'? I can believe the web posting has a lot to do with the lack of saturation.

Mark:
Great exposure for those of us that have not been to this area. It is now on the to-do list, which the folks at PNWNP keep making me add places to it.

Photo does look a bit flat on my monitor (calibrated it again today, just for you).

Glad you had a great time.....now back to those beans......

My pack started out at 57/58 pounds. Ten pounds of food and fifteen pounds of camera gear. It was heavy but every day got lighter and lighter. I'm planning on buying the D80 or a D200 for a backpacking and traveling camera along with the 18-200mm lens. I may even invest in a lighter ball head. I figure I'll cut five or six pounds off the camera gear weight that way. The other way I'll cut weight is to buy my food more with an eye to weight. I had some 9.8 ounce meals (dry) that felt like too much food when I ate them. I'll try to go more towards the 5 to 6 ounce meals next time. Those dehydrated meals taste pretty good these days!

Sure, I use the save to web, the photo looks great here on my monitor (calibrated and all that) so I'm not going to worry about it too much.

Beautiful view and comp. Gives me a sense of space and serenity. Sounds like a wonderful trip. Looking forward to more.
Harald

MARK: I've been shooting with the D200 now for some time. I like it alot. It will do just about everything that the D2x will. I have it progrmmed just like my X and H, so when I pick up a camera, I know how it will behave. It sure beats lugging the D2X up those hills. I'm heading to Colorado next weekend for some long day hikes around Mt Evans and Divide. I'll be using the D200, and only two lenses, 12-24 and then I will jump to the 70-200. I might sub the 12-24 for the 17-55, just have to see. For $1600.00, you can't go wrong with the D200. Note, if you toss in the extra battery holder / grip it will weigh MORE than a D2X.

Randy

Welcome back dude. The place does look amazing, even if it is just a piece of what you experienced. Not anywhere close to the google searches you showed me b4 you left. I'm glad you had a good time.

I love the scene, but it looks flat and understaturated here also. Hate to sound like a member of the choir, but I'll call it like I see it. It also doesn't look very sharp in all honesty. Not sure about your calibrated monitor if this looks good to you and bad to all of us.

John, it's dead sharp and the print (profiled printer) looks just like my (calibrated) monitor.

Mark,

Welcome Home! For what it is worth, a 58 pound pack for a nine day hike including camera equipment seems like a reasonable weight -- if you want a lighter pack in future you should consider taking decaffeinated coffee, isn't it lighter :-)?

Regards, Simon

Simon,
No it isn't. In fact, I should have taken more coffee. and more alcohol!

Mark,

You surprise me, in point of fact decaffeinated coffee would indeed be lighter, at least it would be for me! I wouldn't take decaffeinated -- why bother :-)! More beer/alcohol is always a plus. The trick on backpacking trips is to sneak in to other peoples pack accompanying you -- at least that is what I planned to do to you if you make it to the SW trip next spring :-)!

Regards, Simon

Simon, young man, a pound of decaf weighs the same as a pound of regular coffee.

One of the guys didn't have a water filter so I blackmailed him into carrying mine so he didn't have to drink unfiltered pond water.

Mark,

Probably I'm being way to esoteric -- Sigh, yes, I'm aware that a pound of decaf weighs the same as a pound of regular, and that a pound of feathers also weighs the same, as does a pound of camera equipment. The point is you wouldn't take decaffeinated and therefore your pack would be lighter :-)! I guess it isn't humorous if you have to explain it -- then again since PNWNP became a place of higher photographic learning possibly humor is no longer permitted :-)!

Regards, Simon

Oh, Simon, Simon, Simon!
I got your point, I laughed, humor understood!

But, by your same point, since I don't like i.e. camels (okay, it's not that I don't like them, I'm just using them for the sake of argument), I wouldn't take any, so therefore my pack would be lighter? I could think of just a few things I don't like and my pack would weigh nothing at all!

You guys are cracking me up. (even though Mark is sometoimes a little slow) As for the image, it does seem just a tad flat. I do think it's pretty spectacular as is with great dynamic range...BTW, As for bringinfg a lighter camera, I played around with a D200 for a while and it seemed like a toy compared to th D2x. I also think the extra mpxles make a difference.

Amazing sky and beautiful scene. For some reason I feel like there is a lack of depth, but I don't really have a suggestion. It isn't something that really keeps the image from working, it just seems like something could give it a little more pop, perhaps contrast or some selective dodging and burning some shadows and highlights.

I think Ellen played with your monitor settings while you were away . Simon, Mark should be back to himself in a few days...until then, we should write things in crayon for him
I've got it easy, I can spare about 10-15 pounds of weight around the mid section...that's almost as much as my tripod weighs. Seriously, I want to get more into backpacking...with or without camera. I used to do it alot more before I got married.

Boy Mark! Can you tell folks missed you while you were gone? (Maybe they're just cranky because they're out of coffee.)

That's some sky. I see what the others are talking about, but I'm not sure I'd go so far as to complain about it. You'd probably get some more zing if you punched up the reds a bit more, but it's easy to turn the saturation dial a bit too far.

Simon -- I'd be cautious about what I stuck in Mark's pack; you know he's willing to nearly walk off a cliff. I'd hate to have my extra batteries and my 200-400 in his pack when he finally goes a little too far. (Ya think he'd notice that extra weight?)

Randy -- I haven't looked much at the D200 but I'm curious how the viewfinder is. The main things I notice when I pick up Inge's old D70 is (a) how light it is and (b) how cramped the viewfinder seems.

Sean

SEAN - The D200 uses Nikon's High-eyepoint viewfinder. I find it just a good as the D2H/Xs that I have. When low to the ground, I perfer the D200 because of the 90 degree finder that snaps on - the same for the D2X screws on and is a pain. I'm a rip and run kind of guy these days when I am not shooting out of a vehicle. I always use my D2s on my 200-400 due to the additional motor power for the focus on these longer lenses. Anything less than the 200-400 should be driven just fine by the D200. The D200 is heavier than the D70 and feels solid AL frame vs plastic. When I first got it, I felt like the controls were too close together for my large hands, but I got used to it. The queen loves it, and it fits here very well. Nikon has a very serious rebate on the D2x, if yo can find them. This will put the price of a D2X at about $3800-ish for USA grade. That is double current cost of the D200. I will be buying another D200 in another month, if that is any indication of how much I like the camera. That said, each camera has it's own pluses and minuses. For me, the D200 makes a great third and forth body. My D70 will be given to my daughter this weekend. Drop me a line if you need more, or come to Seattle and shoot with me and you can use it. NOTE - I beat the crap out of my D70 in Baghdad, and it never stopped working - but it is time to give it to the daughter, so I can continue to satisfy my NAS (Nikon Acquisition Syndrome).

For the kind of shooting I'd do on a backpacking trip, and remembering the kind of weight I carried, I'm leaning towards the new D80. It has the same sensor as the D200, same ISO workings. That's all I care about. The D2x weighs. 2 lbs 6 oz vs. the D80 weighs 1 pound 5 ounces. Saving a pound is a big deal to me! (vs. only 9 ounces for the D200)