p.2 #1 · Lightweight Backpacking Kit on a Modest Budget
If you like to keep the ISO down and shoot at low shutter speeds from a tripod, I would consider the rII over the original r. The shutter shock problem with the original r can be mitigated, but it will rear its ugly head under some conditions.
For a first lens, I'd consider the 28-60 C. It's not the best all-arounder, but for landscapes, it's excellent and easy to pack and carry.
May 18, 2021 at 10:59 PM
AmbientMike Offline • • • • • • [X]
p.2 #2 · Lightweight Backpacking Kit on a Modest Budget
twistytee wrote:
Hi - I primarily shoot DSLR on crop cameras for sports and birding. I am also an avid backcountry hiker/backpacker and would like to build a second lightweight mirrorless kit for landscape photos. I know many carry the RX100 series to keep things light and simple, but I still like to have interchangeable lenses so I can use the camera for travel/street use. Given this is a hobby and weight and limited budget are considerations for me, are the crop a6xxx series still the way to go or do some of the early gen FF cameras like the a7r or a7rii with a lightweight prime or zoom offer better value for IQ in the backcountry? Oftentimes I can’t justify carrying a tripod in addition to my camping gear so curious if the IBIS on the later gens is required for hand held shots or if an a6000 or A7r Mark I will work well with the right lens combo. Seems like the weight of the FF lenses might negate the benefits for me.
Any advice on Sony body/lens combo recommendations for my intended purpose is greatly appreciated. ...Show more →
Which dslr are you using? Canon has some very lightweight aps gear such as 55-250, 10-18, & SL series bodies. Nikon probably does too. Might make more sense.
p.2 #4 · Lightweight Backpacking Kit on a Modest Budget
How big do you print? Unless you want to make giant prints, an aps-c kit makes the most sense for backpacking. I haven’t been in a while but on my last trip I took an NEX-7 with sigma 19/2.8 and 30/2.8, plus an adapted minolta md 45/2. The beauty of that kit was that it was so light I could also get by with a light tripod, and having a tripod allowed me to get most of my favorite shots.
All that said, an A7R-series would have more resolution and a bigger lens selection. I personally don’t think it’s worth the weight on a backpacking trip.
p.2 #5 · Lightweight Backpacking Kit on a Modest Budget
I generally go on 8-day trips in mountainous terrain. I used to carry an A7R3 with 16-35GM 24-105 and CV15. Used the PD clip on my shoulder strap. Prior to that had a variety of APS-C and smaller sensor cameras.
Recently got the A7C. Really impressive low light performance and I can shoot as slow as 1/25 handheld. Shadow recover when shooting to correctly exposé the sky and ETTR is great. I have a gitzo CF tripod with Markin ball head that is less than 4 lbs but recently started to carry a Ulanzi MT11 with a neweer ballhead. Weighs less than 1 lb. I don’t need a tall tripod for my compositions. I rarely print large. We have really nice art on our walls instead
You need to figure out your preferred focal length. No sense in buying a zoom with a focal range you don’t need. Just like backpacking you need to figure out what is necessary and want is not.
p.2 #7 · Lightweight Backpacking Kit on a Modest Budget
A few years ago I was backpacking in Mexico only with the A6000 + Samyang 12mm, Sigma 19mm, Sigma 60mm.
Everything together fit in a small hip pack (pacsafe). I also had a gorilla pod with me.
I bought the equipment on black friday and sold it used immediately after the trip with minimal profit.
Photography wasn't the reason for the trip. But until now I enjoy the pictures. Even today, I would describe the quality as absolutely sufficient for that purpose. And it made traveling even more fun. If I had anything to criticize, it would be my compositions.
Today I would do a similar trip with the A7c, the Samyang 18, 45 and 75mm.
p.2 #10 · Lightweight Backpacking Kit on a Modest Budget
twistytee wrote:
Do you find you shoot the 10-18 wide open when you use it? I know that lens is highly thought of for the apsc cameras but it seems like the manual focus Samyang gets you similar IQ for less $ and less weight.
I hike similar routes. Do you find yourself wishing you carried the FF for wide angle shots? or is the weight difference/pack volume just not worth it?
The only time I wish I had the FF was for challenging light situations like other people mentioned, but I can usually get away with a bracketed shot in those instances with my small tripod. The 10-18mm I bought used so I didn't pay too much and it's nice to have the zoom range with it and 10mm is quiet a bit wider then 12mm. With some of the lightweight FF primes that are available now I would be pretty tempted by an a7c if I was starting over with a new kit.
p.2 #11 · Lightweight Backpacking Kit on a Modest Budget
I would second others suggestions of a used A7R2. For landscapes and non-action stuff you can't beat the value.
As for budget/lightweight lenses...I agree with others on the Sony 28-60. You could also go with the Rokinon 24 2.8 for something a little wider/faster for $200 new, or less used.
There's also the CV 21 3.5. Great size/IQ and reasonably priced.
If you want the wide range only and 2.8, the Tamron 17-28 2.8 makes sense if you can swing that along with the camera body.
Really I think you just need to prioritize what's most important for your immediate needs lens-wise to stay on budget, and then build out your kit from there as funds/requirements allow.
p.2 #12 · Lightweight Backpacking Kit on a Modest Budget
From a prioritization perspective, it’s weight/small form factor first, ability to shoot low light, and ability to shoot wide. If I could get an a7c and a lightweight wide prime I would, but it’s above the budget I set. I guess the a6xxx crop series is the better choice for my priorities, but the crop images don’t seem to have the same 3D “wow” factor to me as you can get from a FF and a lens like the loxia 21.
p.2 #13 · Lightweight Backpacking Kit on a Modest Budget
I have long wanting to make the upgrade to Full frame Sony but simply can´t afford the price step being a "recreational photographer" and (more important) increased weight for my hiking. Sony APS-C serves me very well and with that I can keep weight under control for my hiking.
I use a Sony A6500 + SEL18-135 and Samyang 12 F/2 for my hiking. Paired in a chest bag (FStop Navin) attached to the shoulder straps of my backpack I carry all in front of me and I can throw in 2 spare batteries and a small set of ND filters and CPL filter. The SEL 18-135 is a good allround light and compact lens, nice focal length range and the IQ is pretty solid.
My small F-Stop Navin frontpack with camera, 2 lenses, 2 spare batteries, filter set, L-bracket for camera, lens cloths, remote release and some other small stuff weights less than 1,9 kg.. and that is hard to beat wth any camera system with same focal length range.
I also carry a small Leofoto LS224C tripod with Sunwayfoto FB-28i ballhead, it weight around 940 grams total.
May 19, 2021 at 12:08 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #14 · Lightweight Backpacking Kit on a Modest Budget
Your budget is tight, but I would recommend A7r II and Voigtlander 21 f/3.5. Those two give you a great start. As a hiker on a tight budget if you could just add the Sony/Zeiss 35 f/2.8 and the Zeiss ZM 85 f/4 it would be a wonderful and small kit and wouldn't break the budget either.
Given your priorities, I'd look at the A7rII plus 28-60 for the lightest most capable full frame kit in your budget. You could add a second lightweight lens to shoot low light or wider or both (Samyang 18/2.8?):
With the A7rII you could also get 18MP shots on an APS-C lens like the 10-18mm (but personally, I would stick with the Samyang and just crop even though it's not quite as wide).
One other thought I had was to consider a Panasonic S5 (714g) with 20-60mm kit lens (350g). That gets you a wider all-in-one option for 1064g. But of course then you're buying into a different ecosystem and there are a lot of other considerations.
May 19, 2021 at 12:37 PM
AmbientMike Offline • • • • • • [X]
p.2 #16 · Lightweight Backpacking Kit on a Modest Budget
twistytee wrote:
Canon 7D. I also have a Rebel body. They’re too big/heavy for hiking with overnight gear, so hence the interest in a smaller mirrorless kit.
The A7C is small, but the Sony site says over a lb, so it looks heavier than the Rebel SL2 or even my T6. APS 10-18 & 18-55 very light, too. 28-60 Sony extremely light though. The ff RP should be lighter, as well, unless I'm missing something here.
The Sony site makes big claims about A7C being the smallest and lightest, but at one point adds the qualifier with in body stabilization. If it's 1lb 2oz, that's more than the bodies mentioned above.
p.2 #18 · Lightweight Backpacking Kit on a Modest Budget
Also a lightweight backpacker here, ~11lb pack weight, but I have recently started adding a bit more weight for photo gear.
I started with a Ricoh GRii which was amazing weightwise at ~250g but the fixed focal length was a bit limiting. Since then I've gone through two more iterations:
1. Sony a6500 + Samyang 12mm + Sony 16-55G. Ultimately, I gave up this setup despite the reasonable weight because of the limited focal lengths available at the time & higher noise levels in low light. I believe Tamron has released a few more affordable lenses for the Sony APSC line recently so you likely have a few more options.
2. My current setup is a Sony a7rii that many others have recommended + Tamron 17-28 + C/Y 35-70. Gives me most of the focal lengths I shoot at plus some "macro" ability as well. I also have an old Canon FD 70-150 I bring along in case I want a bit more range. I'm pretty happy with the new setup and it's quite affordable.
p.2 #19 · Lightweight Backpacking Kit on a Modest Budget
AmbientMike wrote:
The A7C is small, but the Sony site says over a lb, so it looks heavier than the Rebel SL2 or even my T6. APS 10-18 & 18-55 very light, too. 28-60 Sony extremely light though. The ff RP should be lighter, as well, unless I'm missing something here.
The Sony site makes big claims about A7C being the smallest and lightest, but at one point adds the qualifier with in body stabilization. If it's 1lb 2oz, that's more than the bodies mentioned above.
But isn't the A7c also much more of a camera than the ones you mention. Having ibis really extends your shooting time during the sweet light...something that might be worth an extra ounce.
p.2 #20 · Lightweight Backpacking Kit on a Modest Budget
twistytee wrote:
From a prioritization perspective, it’s weight/small form factor first, ability to shoot low light, and ability to shoot wide. If I could get an a7c and a lightweight wide prime I would, but it’s above the budget I set. I guess the a6xxx crop series is the better choice for my priorities, but the crop images don’t seem to have the same 3D “wow” factor to me as you can get from a FF and a lens like the loxia 21.
In that case I'd go used A7R2 and a CV 21 3.5. You get 42mp as opposed to 24 from the A7c, which will give you more cropping options in case the 21 is too wide at times, and you can grab one cheaper than an A7c.
