Dig. Camera for long BC ski trips

[Junker]

I'm trying to decide on a camera for extended BC skiing trips. I want digital, but powering the thing seems like the most significant problem.

My two options:

Canon G9

Pros
-Light weight
-Compact
-Good excuse to buy it

Cons
-Only takes special battery packs that I will not have a chance to charge along the way unless I mount a solar panel on my pack.
-Will have to buy lots of said batteries that will cost $$$
-Image quality is less than my DSLR


Canon 20D/grip

Pros
-Can use rechargeables or Li-ion AA in the grip. I will be able to pick new ones and throw old ones out every few days as we stop in towns to get food.
-Good image quality
-Have lots of CF memeory
-Have an assortment of lenses, but probably 17-55 or 20mm and 50mm, or
17-40mm.
Cons
-Weight
-Size

Am I forgeting anything?
Should I consider another option (not film).
Any experience with Li-ion in cold weather?

Looks like I will be gone for 2 weeks at a time.



Oh ya...I'm going to Yurp BITCHES

[Hugh Conway]

The trip sounds cool, but the question is like "Should I buy Dynafit Rando Rally skis or Dynastar Legend Pro XXLs?" Different style of shooting.

Without knowing where, or how, you are going in "Yurp" it'll be pointed out - the huts, often including the winter rooms, have power to charge batteries. Many digital cameras will take quite a few more AAs than LI-Ion batteries for the same number of photos and the AAs will way more, and aren't cheap to purchase in mountain towns. Rechargeable special batteries are cheap to buy (you can buy econo brands for the G9 <$10/each) at home. The other question is storage. No matter what camera you take if you are running through a bunch of batteries you are running through a bunch of storage.

[Junker]

The trip sounds cool, but the question is like "Should I buy Dynafit Rando Rally skis or Dynastar Legend Pro XXLs?" Different style of shooting.

Without knowing where, or how, you are going in "Yurp" it'll be pointed out - the huts, often including the winter rooms, have power to charge batteries. Many digital cameras will take quite a few more AAs than LI-Ion batteries for the same number of photos and the AAs will way more, and aren't cheap to purchase in mountain towns. Rechargeable special batteries are cheap to buy (you can buy econo brands for the G9 <$10/each) at home. The other question is storage. No matter what camera you take if you are running through a bunch of batteries you are running through a bunch of storage.

I agree it is different types of shooting. If weight/power were no big deal, I would opt for the DSLR. I don't think that we will be spending much time in the huts, so recharging is not really an option, but good to know about the availability of electricity. Li-ion disposables are pretty light, but they could be hard and expensive to come by as you point out. I'm going to bring copious amounts of memory... Thanks

[LeeLau]

Junker - i went to Fairy Meadows for 2 weeks and stayed in a hut without power to charge. It wasn't cold and I tried to keep the batteries warm. I brought in 3 batteries for a Rebel XT and used 2. One battery had a half charge left. Probably took approx 600 shots without flash in total. Anyway, just a data point for you

[Junker]

LeeLau, that helps. Unfortunately, there are so many damn variables to it, so it is hard to get an accurate idea. I'm thinking that the AA's will give me the most flexibility in my situation.

[Ripzalot]

i would rather have the canon g9 batteries over AAs. i'd guess that one canon g9 battery weighs about the same as 2 AAs, and lasts 4x as long.

and storage - 4GB sandisk ultra card for about $40. storage is not an issue.

.02

[summit]

Junker: I have a 17-35mm f/2.8 USM L or a 20mm f/2.8 USM to sell you if you go 20D

[MeatPuppet]

Am I forgeting anything?
Should I consider another option (not film).
Any experience with Li-ion in cold weather?

Looks like I will be gone for 2 weeks at a time.

Personally, I would go with the 20D/17-55 and leave the grip at home. I have been faced with similar situations several times in the past and I have always chosen to take my dslr and never regretted it. I bough it for a reason and leaving it at home kind of defeats the purpose.

I have had really good success with li-ion batteries in the cold. I pack most of my batteries in my pack and keep one in an inner pocket to keep it warm. When I am ready to shoot I put that battery in the camera, shoot, and then put it back in my pocket to keep it warm until I am ready to shoot again.

AFAIK the storage temperature of the batteries is irrelevant. It's just the temperature of the batteries as they are being discharged that is important.

The last tip I took was to Yellowstone in May, for 5 days. I took four batteries and ended up using the same one the entire time. I took 400+ pictures, equally split between jpeg and RAW, including one 20min exposure at 3am when the temp was in the upper teens.

Buy four or five extra Li-ion batteries, leave the grip at home. You won't notice the extra 1/2 kg, but you will be looking at the pictures for a lifetime.

My $.02

[Junker]

i would rather have the canon g9 batteries over AAs. i'd guess that one canon g9 battery weighs about the same as 2 AAs, and lasts 4x as long.

and storage - 4GB sandisk ultra card for about $40. storage is not an issue.

.02

AAs with the g9 is not really an option, so it is g9 with a bunch of rechargeables, or the 20D with rechargeables or AAs with the grip. But, I would much rather spend the money on rechargeables (either with the G9 or 20D) than on toss-aways.

Junker: I have a 17-35mm f/2.8 USM L or a 20mm f/2.8 USM to sell you if you go 20D

Thanks Summit, but I've got those FL covered.

Personally, I would go with the 20D/17-55 and leave the grip at home. I have been faced with similar situations several times in the past and I have always chosen to take my dslr and never regretted it. I bough it for a reason and leaving it at home kind of defeats the purpose.

I have had really good success with li-ion batteries in the cold. I pack most of my batteries in my pack and keep one in an inner pocket to keep it warm. When I am ready to shoot I put that battery in the camera, shoot, and then put it back in my pocket to keep it warm until I am ready to shoot again.

AFAIK the storage temperature of the batteries is irrelevant. It's just the temperature of the batteries as they are being discharged that is important.

The last tip I took was to Yellowstone in May, for 5 days. I took four batteries and ended up using the same one the entire time. I took 400+ pictures, equally split between jpeg and RAW, including one 20min exposure at 3am when the temp was in the upper teens.

Buy four or five extra Li-ion batteries, leave the grip at home. You won't notice the extra 1/2 kg, but you will be looking at the pictures for a lifetime.

My $.02

Ya, I'm def. leaning towards the 20D. I'll probably be stocking up on some rechargeables too. Fack weight...I'm to young to bitch.

Thanks all.

[shirk]

Are you shooting shots you intend to submit to mags or get published?

If so then go for the DSLR.

If not then go G7 / G9.

If you are a skilled photog I'd think you can cover almost every shot you can get with the 20D with the G9.

[Junker]

Are you shooting shots you intend to submit to mags or get published?

If so then go for the DSLR.

If not then go G7 / G9.

If you are a skilled photog I'd think you can cover almost every shot you can get with the 20D with the G9.

The pictures are just for personal stuff. I've still got a lot to learn, so it may be a good idea to stick to the 20D (I'm much more familiar with it).

[grizzle6]

Take the 20D if you're serious about getting good shots. The g9 would be great if you were shooting static stuff the whole time, but it's not even gonna come close to cutting it for action. Also--I would do your best to get a much longer lens. I'd say the greater majority of ski photogs (myself included) are shooting stuff at focal lengths in the 70-200mm range, hence the lens (or vice versa, I guess). I'd go a step further and say most of those shots are near 150-200mm than the wider end. If you can afford it, I'd seriously consider the 70-200 F4. Great backcountry lens.

[LeeLau]

I shoot a lot of landscapes while out touring. There were times when i had the cheapo 28 - 200 out and used it but mostly I shot landscapes or got shots where skiers were fairly close to me. Isn't that 70-200 fairly heavy/bulky? I'm not disagreeing with you adam - just maybe another point of view?

I use an A710 when i am on trips where weight is a big issue and i want to go light.

[Junker]

Take the 20D if you're serious about getting good shots. The g9 would be great if you were shooting static stuff the whole time, but it's not even gonna come close to cutting it for action. Also--I would do your best to get a much longer lens. I'd say the greater majority of ski photogs (myself included) are shooting stuff at focal lengths in the 70-200mm range, hence the lens (or vice versa, I guess). I'd go a step further and say most of those shots are near 150-200mm than the wider end. If you can afford it, I'd seriously consider the 70-200 F4. Great backcountry lens.

I just sold my 70-200mm F/4 after buying the 2.8, but i've been thinking that the F/4 IS may be a nice addition as the 2.8 is really too heavy for travel. The other option is to go with the 70-300 IS DO. It weighs about the same, but the image quality is not as good as the 70-200. I'm kinda thinking about an alternative to the 2.8 for a long lens for Europe in general. I'm not sure there will be many action pics on the ski trip. I think that there will be more landscape/timed exposure etc.
But yeah, Im going with the 20D.

The g6 took the same battery and memeory as the 20D/30D/40D, but now they changed that on the g9 which sucks for someone with half-dozen Bp-511 and lots of CF mem.

[Keegan]

I'd say the greater majority of ski photogs (myself included) are shooting stuff at focal lengths in the 70-200mm range, hence the lens (or vice versa, I guess).

Would you say they're using the IS version for the weathersealing, or just using the non-IS 2.8?

[grizzle6]

Would you say they're using the IS version for the weathersealing, or just using the non-IS 2.8?

If they're using the IS, it's not for the weather sealing. It's for the IS. Leelau--the 70-200 F4 is significantly lighter and less bulky than the 2.8. You should go pick one up--quite the difference for sure. I was gonna throw that 70-300 DO out there. That would be the optimal one lens wonder in addition to a wide angle, but from what I understand, you'll give up a little on the image quality side of things. Pros and cons I guess...

[El Chupacabra]

FWIW -- one thing I've done to extend battery life on trips (not skiing, but in places without the ability to recharge the proprietary Canon batteries) is to turn off the screen on the back of the camera except when selecting settings, and just use the viewfinder to take photos.

[Junker]

FWIW -- one thing I've done to extend battery life on trips (not skiing, but in places without the ability to recharge the proprietary Canon batteries) is to turn off the screen on the back of the camera except when selecting settings, and just use the viewfinder to take photos.

That's something that I will definitely do, and also, try to minimize the use of IS on the lens; both seem to suck down the juice.

[Keegan]

I fail to see how the IS is going to come in handy for their action shots. Only reason I'm personally saving up the extra bit is because I need the weathersealing for what conditions I shoot in.

[Hugh Conway]

If you don't bring a zoom lens with the SLR you'll kick yourself. Sure, for a day trip 17-50 is a fun exercise. or if the primary purpose isn't photography. If you are bringing an SLR for 2 weeks you are bringing it to take pictures, right? Action shots of skiing, or of your friends skinning, with the 17-50 are "wheres Waldo" time.

I fail to see how the IS is going to come in handy for their action shots. Only reason I'm personally saving up the extra bit is because I need the weathersealing for what conditions I shoot in.

So why'd you ask a ski photographer what ski photographers are using then?
They use it because "I only use IS lenses" sounds the shit on internet bulletainboards

[Keegan]

Because I wanted to know the answer.
Your second point doesn't contribute at all. If you want, I can clarify my statement so you understand it more clearly.
The IS is not going to help freeze the action; if they're ski photographers that means they're shooting action. I realize the IS is being used for IS... duh. Just wondering what else they'd shoot that would require the IS lens.

[Tippster]

For those who do not really understand what Image stabilization in a lens (or camera) is for:

Look through a 200mm lens (attached - duh) handheld and really pay attention. You'll be able to see your heartbeat in the slight shaking of the lens. Now do the same thing with the IS on. No heartbeat. The moving parts of the image still move, regardless.

IS lenses aren't for freezing any action - the shutter does that. IS lenses make handheld shots less blurry by compensating for the shaking of the camera/lens. No, you don't need IS at long focal lengths... if you use a Tripod (or 1/500 shutter or higher.)

[Keegan]

I think this has gotten blown out of proportion. Refer back to my original question. I already assumed they were using the IS, but merely wondering if they needed the weathersealing as well.
I'll consider my question answered now.
Thanks

[Junker]

OK. My decisions are getting easier... Canon does not recommend using lithiums in the grip. Here is a little info about it http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00IGj1

So it looks like it will be the 20D and lots of BP-511s from Sterlingtek.com Probably also bring the grip incase I have to shoot with ALKALINE AAs.