Click to view our Accessibility Statement or contact us with accessibility-related questions
Daisy_Cutter
1288
Oct 9, 2017
I've personally never understood how people go out into the field for more than a couple of days with a bunch of devices that need to be recharged constantly.
In my opinion (which is probably in the minority), backpacking is one area where film photography really shines. You're no longer constrained by battery life, and the thoughtful, deliberate attitude that film photography cultivates goes well with hiking. Film cameras also tend to be much lighter than their digital counterparts, which really helps on the trail.
A piece of kit that you might have to add to this setup is a tripod for dawn and dusk photography, but really light ones can be had these days. That, and a waterproof container for your film (which doesn't weigh much at all).
Finally, zoom lenses are nice but really add to the bulk and weight. More experienced photographers will eventually find a couple of focal lengths they like (28mm and 35mm are classics) and just bring out one or two prime lenses.
search
ArsenalOhio
41
Dec 12, 2017
Daisy_CutterIf one battery gets you 200-300 photos, then arent you already way ahead of the game? You'd have to bring a lot more film to get even close to that. I bring: Camera, 12-40 lens, one extra battery, tiny tripod for astrophotography.
Daisy_Cutter
1288
Dec 15, 2017
ArsenalOhioI was thinking along the lines of extended trips where your batteries eventually run down no matter how conservatively you shoot.
Also, it's nice to have the capacity for hundreds or thousands of frames, but I learned photography with film, and I remain convinced that if you really think through and plan your photos, you only need a roll of 36 frames for every day or two.
Of course, if you're going to do astrophotography as well then there's no getting away from bringing a digital camera.
Vizdrum
40
Mar 11, 2018
Daisy_CutterI really like the different viewpoints. In my opinion film is by far the heaviest, when using film I use a nikon f100, it does however use a lot of energy, I should use manual focus more, however I find that manual focus doesn't work as well when you wear glasses... Otherwise my go to is a very basic nikon DX (3200) with a 12-24mm f4 (wide zoom) and a 35mm f1.8 (prime) with total 3 batteries and and an extra 20,000 mamp batterie with an usb charger (if I feel pumped I grab a decet tripod too). I save the weight on my cooking set and sleeping system. One of those batteries easily lasts for 4 days, I might have used flash ten times over the last 2 years and don't really use the screen (saves a lot of energy). Taking pictures is one of my reasons to hike. I like to take the time to take a good picture and I don't use post processing, also I still print the pictures, all this greatly reduces the amount of pictures I take.
Daisy_Cutter
1288
Mar 12, 2018
VizdrumI'm glad that you've managed to make a digital system work for you.
Interestingly though, it sounds like your style of photography is quite suited for film, except for the manual focus aspect. Have you considered trying out a rangefinder like a Leica M6 or similar? That could be the most weight-efficient system for you.
I don't have perfect eyesight myself and find it much easier getting critical focus with a rangefinder than with an SLR. Alternatively, if you shoot at F8 and above, critical focus becomes not very important.
Vizdrum
40
Mar 12, 2018
Daisy_CutterIndeed. If one day I manage to make the budget I will probably add a Leica to my available choices!
PRODUCTS YOU MAY LIKE
Trending Posts in More Community Picks