I know "heavy" is relative, but the thread about looking for a P&S camera made me realize that maybe not everybody carries heavy (relatively) cameras and big lenses and tripods on long (also relative) hikes. I had also noticed the thread about carts. So I'm wondering which of the photographers here do carry heavy stuff on long hikes using a cart or not and which don't, and if you don't do you feel like you're missing something?
I don't know if my stuff is heavy, or if I'm just out of shape! I shoot landscapes and I usually carry my tripod and camera (mounted on tripod); in my bag or backback I carry only minimal stuff, but it still seems outrageously heavy ( I carry 2 extra lenses (28-70 & 70-210), a few GND's and a Lens Pens, and of course an extra battery for the camera.) I shoot with pro lenses and that makes quite a difference in carry weight. I've never weighed it, but I know I get darn tired on carrying it any distance.
I fully acknowledge that I carry too much in the field. I've toted my 500mm up mountain trails or through rainforests before, often for miles at a time. I'm sure it's not good for my shoulders, but I'm also usually carrying at least one other body plus about 3-4 other lenses and accessories in my pouch system, so there's nowhere else to put the big gun.
A cart would never work for me, given the terrain. A sherpa however... (before you ask, my wife started taking pictures so she wouldn't have to carry my gear ).
I used to do Herculean feats back in the old film days, but with the advent of digital, I don't even carry a tripod. An NEX will produce better images than what you are using and with a small oss lens, you are good to go. Weight is not even an issue any more.
I've been told by some that my backpack with all my camera gear in it is fairly heavy (fully loaded). However, I usually don't take it all with me if I were to go on a long hike. I gage what I bring based on what I'm likely to find and what I want to photograph. Although, it has happened more often than I care to think about, not having the gear I wanted at the precise moment I needed it. At the very beginning, I tried to get by without a tripod to cut down on the amount of stuff I had to lug around, but now that I've got a tripod/ballhead combo that I LOVE, I don't like being without it.
If I'm going to attempt any "real" photography, I bring a tripod, my 5DII, 2-3 lenses, a polarizer, and a few other minor supplies that vary with the nature of the trip. It all adds up to about 10 pounds, so for multi-day backpacking trips I've cut weight in other places by purchasing a lighter pack, sleeping bag, tent, etc., and I don't bring anything I don't really need to get by (spare underwear?). For me at my current age (39) and physical condition (good enough) the weight isn't bad, but that's all relative and I may very well come to feel differently as the years continue to go by.
Posted by Lorna Taylor on March 9, 2012 at 9:45 PM
When I go out about once a week for the day usually anywhere from 9 to 14 hours my camera bag can weigh as much as 40 pounds with tri-pod and lunch,water and extra layers of clothing . I usually don't notice it much . If you have a good bag it should feel comfortable and unlike Phil who is still a pup my current age is a touch more and physical con. bordering good enough !!!
I usually carry my camera and lens on my Spyder holster (which I found out about on here). That takes that weight off my back which is great. Then I will stuff my tripod, any extra lenses I may want and a few accessories such as extra batteries in my back pack. I often hike 5 to 8 miles with this getup for landscape shots. Yesterday I took my 300mm f/2.8 with a TC and tripod about 3 miles to shoot a flock of migrating Sandhill Cranes. That was a much tougher hike because the 300 does not go on the holster and for me it is a pretty heavy lens.
Posted by Eva McDermott on March 9, 2012 at 10:43 PM
If I take both my Canon 5DM2 + 2 lenses and my Pentax 67II with 2 lenses + tripod + filters + extra batteries + film, my Lowe Pro backpack is close to 30 lbs. I've carried that for 2 to 3 miles but definitely have to have a plan B for my upcoming trip to Scotland. No way I can carry all. While I carried this on the lower levels of Mt Washington, NH, it was quite heavy. Not that I tire from it, but it does throw off my balance.
Photographing birds, I usually travel with a little over 40 pounds of gear. The walks in airports can be a lot of exercise.
In the field, I carry a camera, big lens and tripod on my shoulder. A hip belt or backpack (depending on volume required) carries bug dope, survival kit, batteries, maintenance kit, rain gear, extra fleece, food, water and, if I will be fording streams, water socks and sandals.
Posted by Kent Staubus on March 10, 2012 at 2:05 AM
For some night shots I need x5 big monolights with their stands, batteries, reflectors, etc. Combined with camera & tripod it's probably more weight than I can comfortably pick up. I load it all onto a toboggan and drag it through the snow. Now that my wonderful snow is melting, I'm screwed. For regular daytime trips, I've been cutting down as much as possible on the number of pieces I carry. For our upcomming trip back to Iceland and then on to Arctic Finland I'm taking a Nikon D5100 (with 18-55mm VR), D300, 17-55mm f2.8, 80-400mm VR, Tokina 11-16mm f2.8, SB-900, Travel Angle tripod. I don't intend to carry all that at once either, but will pick and choose two lenses and one camera, tripod. I only buy gear that has multiple uses (i.e. zooms) and have learned how to get the images I want using what I have. Instead of a macro lens, I bring a Canon 500d for the 80-400mm. Works great! We often hike most of the day, often over rough terrain where there isn't even a trail.
Due to back and knee problems I walk short distances only over even ground and use a Beach Roly cart. That way I can take everything I need for small bird or other wildlife photography including a stool.
I used to carry my lenses etc in a Tamrac Extreme back pack and walk (hike) several miles on photo shoots. The entire package - not including tripod - weighed 28 lbs. It got real heavy on the way back out. Now at 65 I no longer want to carry the weight for any distance so I purchased a Tamron 18-270 and it has become my everyday travel lens. If I'm going to a special location I take other lenses - but not to often. I use a Domke bag for my cards, batteries etc with a nominal weight.
We carry lots when we have to, but as little as possible as often as possible.
All the lighting cases and camera cases for our location shoots have wheels, but we still haven't replaced the duffel bags for everything else.
For nature shooting we are usually in country too rough for wheels, so it's backpacks. On our last bear adventure we had to weigh all the bags individually (and the photographers!) due to weight limits on the float planes. My Tamrac 787 pack weighed 72 pounds with the tripod strapped on. It harbored three bodies, a 500 f/4, a 300 f/2.8 and an assortment of smaller lenses and accessories. On arrival we had to make daily walks 1.8 miles each way from our camp on the lake to a set of falls and riffles where the bears congregated. Egad. I'm not getting any younger.
On our hikes to remote cliff dwellings in the Southwest I carry one body, two zooms, a strobe, a tripod and a gallon of water along with a lunch, for about 25 pounds. Much better!
Posted by Richard Ditch on March 10, 2012 at 11:34 AM
My basic bird kit is my 300/2.8 with a TC20E 2x and a D300; all this is mounted on a Gitzo 1325 with Really Right Stuff BH-55 and Sidekick. I carry this over my left shoulder. I always have my Swarovski 8x30 binoculars around my neck. I use a fanny pack for an extra battery for the D300 and extra compact Flash cards and one or two half liter water bottles. About 15-16 pounds, I think. I hike around mostly flat landscapes with this for a couple miles over 2-4 hours. I used to take an SB-800 flash with spare batteries in the fanny pack as well but didn't use it very often so now leave it behind to save on weight. At times in the past I'd add a second body with one short lens (50, 18-70, or 55-200) mostly to document dogs off leashes, people off trails, etc. but now just use the camera in a retired iPhone for such stuff.
If I'm not after birds then it is one camera, a Tokina 12-24, the 18-70, and a 70-300 in a small camera backpack with a light tripod and ancient Leitz ballhead. And maybe a 105/2.8 macro lens, or an ancient manual focus 200/4 macro lens instead of the 70-300.
My arthritis has gotten worse over the years so I don't cover ground as fast as I used to and I don't take as much junk as I used to do, but that translates to looking closer, taking my time with subjects, and using what I've got along instead of what I might have used.
I have an Tamrac Evolution 8 backpack that generally carries my Canon 7D with the 24-105mm lens and either the 100-400mm lens (if I anticipate wildlife) or the 10-20mm lens (if I'm going to waterfalls or alpine environments). I rarely carry both of those.
Add to that my tripod, extra battery, lens cloth, and a nd grad filter, sometimes a cpl as well. I swear the pack is always in the 20-30 range with all of that (my tripd hooks to the pack) and a down vest, rainjacket, food and water. I've never weighed it, but it's heavier than any dumb-bell I would curl.
I typically take this setup on hikes ranging from 3-7 miles. Any longer than that and I really commit to a focal length range and lighten things up. Knee problems, plantar fasciitis, and 48 year old spine just make it too iffy to go further than that with that kind of weight. Yeah, maybe I'll have regrets about the shot that got away, but I now know from experience that regret over injury that could have been avoided is a far deeper and more chronic regret
One thing I've begun doing when I return to a place I've shot before is look at the focal length of the compositions I most like from a previous effort. For example, I used to take my 10-20mm to Punchbowl Falls, but all of my favorite comps were in the 24-40mm range, so now I don't because it makes the falls too small. Of course, if the stream gets really dry some year, I'll have to rethink that.
Most of the time, I keep macro work at home and in gardens because I like to use my focusing rail as well, and it's just a different mindset for me.
"Yeah, maybe I'll have regrets about the shot that got away, but I now know from experience that regret over injury that could have been avoided is a far deeper and more chronic regret "
That sezz it all.
The hardest lesson for me has been adjusting expectations to fit within capabilities- always downward it seems as the decades and body abuses accumulate.
Really enjoying this thread. Thanks once again to Barbara for posing such great questions!
Marylynne and Hank-- RIGHT ON! Approaching age 60, The bod no longer wants to do what the brain still does want to do!
Having good footwear and a backpack that FITS have been important ingredients for enabling me to carry a heavy load for 2 to 6 miles in relative comfort and safety. I have a Think Tank Street Walker Pro backpack, which I, personally, have found to be the only pack that comfortably accommodates to a woman's smaller frame, and in my case, narrow shoulders. A Think Tank Holster carries camera and one lens on my belt and with a shoulder strap that distributes weight nicely. The pack carries all of the other main stuff that I would take if I needed to be prepared for various subjects: 300/2.8 & 2.0 TC, 70-200/2.8, 24-70/2.8, a set of 3 gnd's, circ. polarizer, extra batteries, cable release, extra cf cards, rain cover for pack, tripod strapped on. Whew! Usually 30-40 lbs, plus all the stuff in my pockets and on myself-- like fleece, rain gear, boots... Gee, I'm pooped! A lightweight but sturdy, folding hand truck- with larger wheels- really helps in airports and on even terrain. When I can, I lighten my load to carry gear appropriate for what I expect to shoot. But then I invariably still need water, some food and a jacket.
The age thing... Well... Old injuries ( and brand new ones ) flare up unexpectedly by doing just normal things, and the gear feels heavier sooner. I get grumpy about adjusting to it, but gotta look after self or not get to go out. That's about it.
Posted by Danny Laureys on March 11, 2012 at 3:17 AM
Well, I'm thinking of getting a donkey to carry all my stuff, I 'm getting to old for carrying all this stuff on my back. The brain wants to play but the body can't keep up sometimes.
I haven't weighed my pack--I don't want to know! I do know this, though: It gets heavier as I get older!
--P
Posted by Jim Sabiston on March 11, 2012 at 12:26 PM
Great thread! We can learn a lot from others experiences here.
I made gear selections right from the beginning with my backpacking in mind. The gear I carry is always directly related to the destination and conditions - kind of a mileage/terrain/subject/weight balancing act. My personal 'best' was a recent self-supported week long traverse of the Grand Canyon. Over seven days we covered 80 miles on foot combined with 16,000 feet of elevation change - we climbed down and then back up with a week of up and down in between! I've backpacked and climbed for many years and even at 55 this qualified as a serious workout. Camera gear had to be balanced against food and shelter for the week. I settled on my 5D with the 24-105mm lens with trimmed down filter selection, three backup batteries, a G9 with polarizer lens/adaptor and three backup batteries and small video camera with 4 backup batteries. The last bit was my full size Gitzo mountaineer tripod mounted to the outside of the pack. I specialize in minimalist backpacking, so the total pack weight going into the Canyon was about 40 pounds. I probably dropped 10 pounds in supplies over the course of the week and 8 pounds personally!
More typical is a day trip when I use a LowePro sling pack and add a full collection of filters and a 100-400 L series telephoto. Never weighed that setup, but after 6-8 hours, there is no secret that I've been lugging a chunk of weight around all day. More important that the specific weight is a proper fitting pack. When fitting a pack - bring your gear with you! This will give the only accurate fit and also ensure that your gear will fit.
The ongoing development of highly capable smaller cameras offers many advantages for convenience without sacrificing much in the way of quality as well.
"Well, I'm thinking of getting a donkey to carry all my stuff, I 'm getting to old for carrying all this stuff on my back. The brain wants to play but the body can't keep up sometimes. "
Many years ago I was shooting with a friend and career staff-photographer for NG, then in his early 60's. The bear shoot involved hiking a couple of miles each way over a couple of ridges, and each morning and evening he would effortlessly mount his big old yellow Kelty backpack for the trek. I had reason to move the pack at one point, and doublechecked to see if a strap had tangled a root. I could barely lift it, and I was buff.
I commented on the weight, and he said 30 years of shooting around the world had taught him one important lesson: "A photographer is 5% artist and 95% mule."
"...double-checked to see if a strap had tangled a root," when trying to move a NatGeo photog's backpack. And his reply. Great stuff. No wonder it takes me a week to recover from a workshop! Some days on one of those adventures, after traipsing hither and yon for 10 or 12hrs and shooting, I can't even speak, I'm so beat. And for goodness sake! don't ask me to make a decision of any kind.... One might wonder why this is so fun, but that would just waste much needed energy...
In my younger years it was three trips over a portage, the canoe, the living pack and the camera gear. About 70 lbs per load. Just carried a Speedotron 2400 pack down two flights of stairs and up another two. Exhausted.
When I go out now I plan as carefully as possible as to what may be needed to keep the weight down.
Posted by Bruce Painter on March 21, 2012 at 1:36 AM
I weighed my mountain smith camera pack at just over 22 lbs. Then add water, snacks, rain jacket if needed.etc. Then add my tripod. The lighter one is just over 6 lbs. This would be carried strapped to the backpack on hikes of anywhere from a few hundred yards to maybe 6 or 8 miles. On shorter hikes up to maybe 2 miles or less if I feel it's needed I may swap the lighter tripod for my heavy one ( at 11 lbs) and carry it over my shoulder.
I carry all my gear in an f-stop Tilopa BC backpack and a Lowepro Topload Zoom chest pack. With photography gear, water, snacks, tripod, a jacket, etc. factored in the total weight is between 25-30 lbs. An average hike is 4 miles with some extending to 10 or more. I carry the same kit on every hike. As I see it, it's a great way to train and burn some extra calories.
Posted by Bruce Painter on April 19, 2012 at 11:46 AM
Bret it sounds like your our packs weigh about the same. I like the looks of the f-stop packs but haven't got around to looking for a new pack yet.
I agree that carring the pack is good for burning a few calories. When my wife and I hike most of the time I'll put on the pack even if I don't think that I'll be taking any photos. You know "Just in case"
At almost 48 I need all the help I can get.
Discussion
26 repliesA cart would never work for me, given the terrain. A sherpa however... (before you ask, my wife started taking pictures so she wouldn't have to carry my gear
Max
In the field, I carry a camera, big lens and tripod on my shoulder. A hip belt or backpack (depending on volume required) carries bug dope, survival kit, batteries, maintenance kit, rain gear, extra fleece, food, water and, if I will be fording streams, water socks and sandals.
Kent in SD
All the lighting cases and camera cases for our location shoots have wheels, but we still haven't replaced the duffel bags for everything else.
For nature shooting we are usually in country too rough for wheels, so it's backpacks. On our last bear adventure we had to weigh all the bags individually (and the photographers!) due to weight limits on the float planes. My Tamrac 787 pack weighed 72 pounds with the tripod strapped on. It harbored three bodies, a 500 f/4, a 300 f/2.8 and an assortment of smaller lenses and accessories. On arrival we had to make daily walks 1.8 miles each way from our camp on the lake to a set of falls and riffles where the bears congregated. Egad. I'm not getting any younger.
On our hikes to remote cliff dwellings in the Southwest I carry one body, two zooms, a strobe, a tripod and a gallon of water along with a lunch, for about 25 pounds. Much better!
If I'm not after birds then it is one camera, a Tokina 12-24, the 18-70, and a 70-300 in a small camera backpack with a light tripod and ancient Leitz ballhead. And maybe a 105/2.8 macro lens, or an ancient manual focus 200/4 macro lens instead of the 70-300.
My arthritis has gotten worse over the years so I don't cover ground as fast as I used to and I don't take as much junk as I used to do, but that translates to looking closer, taking my time with subjects, and using what I've got along instead of what I might have used.
Add to that my tripod, extra battery, lens cloth, and a nd grad filter, sometimes a cpl as well. I swear the pack is always in the 20-30 range with all of that (my tripd hooks to the pack) and a down vest, rainjacket, food and water. I've never weighed it, but it's heavier than any dumb-bell I would curl.
I typically take this setup on hikes ranging from 3-7 miles. Any longer than that and I really commit to a focal length range and lighten things up. Knee problems, plantar fasciitis, and 48 year old spine just make it too iffy to go further than that with that kind of weight. Yeah, maybe I'll have regrets about the shot that got away, but I now know from experience that regret over injury that could have been avoided is a far deeper and more chronic regret
One thing I've begun doing when I return to a place I've shot before is look at the focal length of the compositions I most like from a previous effort. For example, I used to take my 10-20mm to Punchbowl Falls, but all of my favorite comps were in the 24-40mm range, so now I don't because it makes the falls too small. Of course, if the stream gets really dry some year, I'll have to rethink that.
Most of the time, I keep macro work at home and in gardens because I like to use my focusing rail as well, and it's just a different mindset for me.
That sezz it all.
The hardest lesson for me has been adjusting expectations to fit within capabilities- always downward it seems as the decades and body abuses accumulate.
Marylynne and Hank-- RIGHT ON! Approaching age 60, The bod no longer wants to do what the brain still does want to do!
Having good footwear and a backpack that FITS have been important ingredients for enabling me to carry a heavy load for 2 to 6 miles in relative comfort and safety. I have a Think Tank Street Walker Pro backpack, which I, personally, have found to be the only pack that comfortably accommodates to a woman's smaller frame, and in my case, narrow shoulders. A Think Tank Holster carries camera and one lens on my belt and with a shoulder strap that distributes weight nicely. The pack carries all of the other main stuff that I would take if I needed to be prepared for various subjects: 300/2.8 & 2.0 TC, 70-200/2.8, 24-70/2.8, a set of 3 gnd's, circ. polarizer, extra batteries, cable release, extra cf cards, rain cover for pack, tripod strapped on. Whew! Usually 30-40 lbs, plus all the stuff in my pockets and on myself-- like fleece, rain gear, boots... Gee, I'm pooped! A lightweight but sturdy, folding hand truck- with larger wheels- really helps in airports and on even terrain. When I can, I lighten my load to carry gear appropriate for what I expect to shoot. But then I invariably still need water, some food and a jacket.
The age thing... Well... Old injuries ( and brand new ones ) flare up unexpectedly by doing just normal things, and the gear feels heavier sooner. I get grumpy about adjusting to it, but gotta look after self or not get to go out. That's about it.
--P
I made gear selections right from the beginning with my backpacking in mind. The gear I carry is always directly related to the destination and conditions - kind of a mileage/terrain/subject/weight balancing act. My personal 'best' was a recent self-supported week long traverse of the Grand Canyon. Over seven days we covered 80 miles on foot combined with 16,000 feet of elevation change - we climbed down and then back up with a week of up and down in between! I've backpacked and climbed for many years and even at 55 this qualified as a serious workout. Camera gear had to be balanced against food and shelter for the week. I settled on my 5D with the 24-105mm lens with trimmed down filter selection, three backup batteries, a G9 with polarizer lens/adaptor and three backup batteries and small video camera with 4 backup batteries. The last bit was my full size Gitzo mountaineer tripod mounted to the outside of the pack. I specialize in minimalist backpacking, so the total pack weight going into the Canyon was about 40 pounds. I probably dropped 10 pounds in supplies over the course of the week and 8 pounds personally!
More typical is a day trip when I use a LowePro sling pack and add a full collection of filters and a 100-400 L series telephoto. Never weighed that setup, but after 6-8 hours, there is no secret that I've been lugging a chunk of weight around all day. More important that the specific weight is a proper fitting pack. When fitting a pack - bring your gear with you! This will give the only accurate fit and also ensure that your gear will fit.
The ongoing development of highly capable smaller cameras offers many advantages for convenience without sacrificing much in the way of quality as well.
Many years ago I was shooting with a friend and career staff-photographer for NG, then in his early 60's. The bear shoot involved hiking a couple of miles each way over a couple of ridges, and each morning and evening he would effortlessly mount his big old yellow Kelty backpack for the trek. I had reason to move the pack at one point, and doublechecked to see if a strap had tangled a root. I could barely lift it, and I was buff.
I commented on the weight, and he said 30 years of shooting around the world had taught him one important lesson: "A photographer is 5% artist and 95% mule."
"...double-checked to see if a strap had tangled a root," when trying to move a NatGeo photog's backpack. And his reply. Great stuff. No wonder it takes me a week to recover from a workshop! Some days on one of those adventures, after traipsing hither and yon for 10 or 12hrs and shooting, I can't even speak, I'm so beat. And for goodness sake! don't ask me to make a decision of any kind.... One might wonder why this is so fun, but that would just waste much needed energy...
In my younger years it was three trips over a portage, the canoe, the living pack and the camera gear. About 70 lbs per load. Just carried a Speedotron 2400 pack down two flights of stairs and up another two. Exhausted.
When I go out now I plan as carefully as possible as to what may be needed to keep the weight down.
Bruce
I agree that carring the pack is good for burning a few calories. When my wife and I hike most of the time I'll put on the pack even if I don't think that I'll be taking any photos. You know "Just in case"
At almost 48 I need all the help I can get.
Bruce