WTB: DSLR for ski touring (looking for suggestions/info)

[Max Archer]

That's basically what I use. I have a Thinktank d-20 holster but I use the cheap, simple, and light Lowepro topload zoom chest harness. The Lowepro harness is the lowest profile, simplest and cheapest harness I've found. I can even put on a regular backpack over it and it's fine (see pics below).

I put it on over my base layer and my jackets are all big enough to be zipped up over the holster (but just barely in a couple of cases.) My friends call me "The Seahorse" 'cause I look like I'm pregnant with this rig but it works great. The camera is always at hand and faceplants are a real rarity so the camera is as safe as it can possibly be.

That looks like a pretty good rig. I'll have to give it a shot when I try to get my stuff up the hill. Still nervous about skiing with a D3+lens hanging off of me, though.

I use a Think Tank modular belt rig when I'm working, I wonder if something similar could be rigged for skiing when you want to carry multiple lenses.

[Lonnie]

Good for you.

Apparently you missed the part of the original question where he asked about skiing with the camera, not walking to the park with your baby.

And apparently, you missed the point of what I'm trying to say. If it's small enough to fit in a coat pocket, then it's much less likely to inhibit you while skiing (I'm thinking balance and range of motion) when compared to a dslr. That, and given the fact that, it has the same sized sensor as a dslr, it has all of the features of a dslr (minus PDAF), shoots at a faster frame rate than the t2i (almost 2x), for the casual photographer/skier in my mind it trumps a full sized dslr. For most people they don't need to carry that bulk.

I've said it about 1,000x on here. If you haven't looked at what modern mirrorless cameras are capable of you really deserve it to yourself to find out.

[outabounds]

I can't believe anyone still engages Lonnie in that idiotic conversation. When I want to use a toy camera, I bring the Holga.

[Lonnie]

I can't believe anyone still engages Lonnie in that idiotic conversation. When I want to use a toy camera, I bring the Holga.

Yeah, this is a toy.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2011/8/24/sonynex7overview

One of the most kick ass cameras on the market today. I'm telling you, you guys need to check out what mirrorless cams can do. DSLR's are going the way of the dinosaur. When we get a solid system with phase detect AF on the sensor (the nikon1 series can do it now, but the rest of the specs and price are junk), it's going to be all she wrote for DSLR's.

[systemoverblow'd]

Are you actually saying that DSLRs are going away? You're an idiot. Maybe for fisher-price photographers like yourself but not for anyone serious.

Keep sucking that Sony cock you douchebag. Haven't you realized we all think you're a joke by now?

[Lonnie]

Are you actually saying that DSLRs are going away? You're an idiot. Maybe for fisher-price photographers like yourself but not for anyone serious.

Keep sucking that Sony cock you douchebag. Haven't you realized we all think you're a joke by now?

Yes, I actually think that cameras with flipping mirrors are going to go away in our life times. What we will have is cameras that resemble "dslrs" (same size and feel), but the flipping mirror and the prism will cease to exist. The reason is simple. engineering and economics. You guys realize how expensive the prism is to manufacture, right? You realize how much cost is involved with engineering the mirror and the mirrorbox? You also realize the serious limitations that using a phase detect autofocus system that must be interrupted when you move the mirror out of the way to take a picture? And none of this even mentions the advantages for video recording, which is the real driver behind this movement. As I said, when we get phase detect AF "on the sensor", then the whole camera game is going to change (the most likely solution will be PDAF module behind a semi transparent sensor.) What that looks like, I don't know, but I'm willing to bet that within 10 years, you will have to work hard to find a camera with a prism and flipping mirror.

So call me a douchebag whatever. If you guys really understood the engineering involved and the advantage of mirrorless cameras, then you'd realize what I'm talking about and why I'm saying what I'm saying. If not then I guess you either 1) haven't looked at the issues, or 2). You're naive, or 3) Your stupid, or 3) all of the above.

And FWIW, there are many mirrorless options out there, not just sony. I personally think that the NEX system has it right (due to the APS-C sized sensor), it just needs more "native" lenses (If you are willing to manual focus there are literally thousands of options). But there are plenty of m4/3 options out there that kick ass as well. If you'd look at the totalality of what I've posted in this thread, you'd realize that I'm not just advocating sony products, I'm advocating mirrorless products for someone like the OP who is crossing over for a P/S camera.

[JRainey]

With stuff like the nex7 coming out I think that dslrs are going to have a hard time justifying their weight and size for what they deliver.

The conversation is about camera's to take touring/skiing. Unless you are a professional photog who is more interested in capturing skiing vs actually skiing, mirrorless is a viable option.

I just don't see the point in hauling my dslr up any mountains unless it's just a day hike. A lot of the times I'm wishing I had it, but it's not worth restricting my mountain activities for. Enter mirrorless cams.

It's not just a size thing, it's a weight thing. I like the mountains for recreation first and photos second. For someone with my priorities a smaller, lighter camera is better. That's why I'm moving to mirrorless. P&S doesn't cut it for me either.

[systemoverblow'd]

Yes, I actually think that cameras with flipping mirrors are going to go away in our life times.

ohh so maybe 60 fucking years? Nice stretch dipshit.

Fact of the matter is who wants to not use a viewfinder? What professional wants an ultra light camera? Stick the fucking thing on a tripod on a windy day for a long exposure. The weight and ergonomics are the main problems with a dslr for video and the reason they aren't replacing the camcorder. Much like the mirrorless won't replace the dslr. Like I said, DSLRs aren't going anywhere anytime soon for people who make money of this. Of course we will see more mirrorless on the market but that doesn't mean the proven method is going away.

And I find it laughable that you think I know little about the engineering involved in camera manufacture or just think I am naive and stupid. So just post more pictures of your ugly ass naked wife or shitty little kid because we could all use more of that. Fuckhead.

[Tap]

Hey photogs, stop acting like assholes to each other.

This is a brotherhood of the lens. Be cool.

[Chainsaw_Willie]

^^ Here here. Nothing wrong with differences of opinion, but why make it personal?

[Altmanator]

Discouraging someone from posting naked pictures of their wife? What has TGR come to?

[systemoverblow'd]

Hey photogs, stop acting like assholes to each other.

This is a brotherhood of the lens. Be cool.

Hippy bullshit. Just because I share a hobby/pastime/career with someone doesn't mean I have to be nice to them. He said I was stupid and naive. Fuck him and fuck you if you don't like it.

^^ Here here. Nothing wrong with differences of opinion, but why make it personal?

See above.

[Chainsaw_Willie]

^^Jesus dude, relax. I'm not singling you out here. Too much caffeine?

[Tap]

200 post count MOTHERFUCKING JONG.

BEAT IT, KOOK!

[Tippster]

Maybe that "ugly ass naked wife" is his ex?

Lighten up, Francis. Plenty of other places on this board to be a cocksucker. Let's keep this forum civil, please.

[Lonnie]

Maybe that "ugly ass naked wife" is his ex?

Doubtful. Lol. But it does sound like systemoverblow'd needs to get blowed so he'll calm the F%$# down.

[AlpiNord]

......And FWIW, there are many mirrorless options out there, not just sony. I personally think that the NEX system has it right (due to the APS-C sized sensor), it just needs more "native" lenses (If you are willing to manual focus there are literally thousands of options)......

I probably haven't picked up my SLR in a decade and have a few lenses sitting around. Are any older lenses compatibly with the mirroless camera or DSLRs to help phase in the transition? Is an adapter required?

The lighter bodies and apparently fewer moving parts sounds appealing regarding the mirrorless. My favorite shots have been with a P&S simply because it was lighter and compact...and I'd always bring it and keep it handy. Because of this I could pull it out of a pouch and shoot on a seconds notice. Dealing with lots of camera gear and worry about protecting lenses has never been desirable, but after seeing shots I've taken next to a friend who lugs tons of gear, the interest is growing.....but then there's that large expense issue it'd take to step in the door.

[Lonnie]

I probably haven't picked up my SLR in a decade and have a few lenses sitting around. Are any older lenses compatibly with the mirroless camera or DSLRs to help phase in the transition? Is an adapter required?

Legacy lenses are usable (with manual focus) on both the m4/3 and the NEX system with adapters. The "catch" is the crop factor for these lenses. With the M4/3's options you multiply the focal length by 2x and with the nex it's 1.5x. So on an M4/3 camera a 50mm lens is equl to a 100mm lens and on the NEX it's a 75mm lens. Also the equivalent depth of field is also increased. So at f/2.8 the in focus on a m4/3 cam is larger than it is on a NEX (ie it makes it harder to have a very narrow DOF when using the m4/3 options). The adapters are usually just hollow metal tubes that line up the mounting bayonets for the two systems and align the focal planes. The plus side of using legacy lenses is that quite often they can be found for cheap on craigslist/ebay.

Here's a list of NEX adapters that I found using google (this is just what I know, I imagine the m4/3 list is very similar)...

-Sony Alpha / Minolta AF Mount to Nex (Sony LA-EA1 official adapter)
- Minolta MD (Aperture control possible directly on the lens dial)
- C.mount (cine lenses for 16mm cameras, this lenses in most cases don't cover the sensor)
-M39 Leica (screw Leica mount)
-Leica LM (Bayonet Leica Mount)
-Leica R LR
-M42 (screw mount)
-Canon EOS (No aperture control on this)
-Canon FD (Aperture control possible directly on the lens dial)
- Nikon F AI AIS (aperture control possible with some MF and AF oldest lenses)
-Penatx K
-Contax Yashica C/Y
-Olympus OM
-Contax G
-Contarex
-Nikon RF - Contax RF
-PL mount (35mm cine lenses)
-PV Mount (Panavision 35mm cine lenses)
-CCTV screw mount

This is in no way a comprehensive list. So as you can see, these bodies have the ability to bring new life to some great old lenses that have been forgotten by the AF/digital age. (Disclaimer: Now while this (mainly MF) may or may not be good for skiing and the OP, it does open up loads of creative opportunities for many other types of shooting.)

To give you guys an example of how small a mirrorless kit can be, I have a 5 lens kit (2 system lenses, a 28 mm prime, a 50mm prime and a 135mm prime) along with a Nex to Olympus OM adapter that fits in a 8"x7"x6" bag (take a piece of 8.5 x 11 paper and fold it in 1/2. That's basically the footprint of the case. Let's see you get a DSLR and 5 lenses in a bag that size). When I travel, there's still room in there for a portable HD, cables and the battery charger. I'm willing to bet that the whole lot weighs less than three lbs.

Again, I'm just highlighting the NEX because it's what I have. M4/3 can be just as small...

[outabounds]

There you have it. Mirrorless is the preferred choice of crazy Lonnie and people who aren't serious about photography.

If you can't carry a 1.4 lb camera body on your hike, you're a sissy, and you probably don't carry beer or other essentials. Sack up, Nancy.

[thin cover]

We walked to the park today with the baby. I put my nex with the 18-55 zoom in my coat pocket (and this was a regular waist coat, not a ski parka). By your def, it's a pocket camera. Any more questions?

I am with Lonnie on this, that for most casual users not looking for bulk the Sony is an amazing option and the pics are kick ass. I am waiting for the nex-7 24 mega pixels and 10 FPS. Shots look better than the majority of DSLR's I have seen. But its not cheap.

[Lonnie]

There you have it. Mirrorless is the preferred choice of crazy Lonnie and people who aren't serious about photography.

If you can't carry a 1.4 lb camera body on your hike, you're a sissy, and you probably don't carry beer or other essentials. Sack up, Nancy.

Lol. Touche'. So you're telling me to HTFU?

As you know, I have a FF body too, and I've lugged it up and down mtns, and miles into the back-county. As an day in and day out shooter, it's my go to. It's heavy, but I go to it when I want the look that FF gives me. But, I'm glad it's not my only option....

There are times when I just can't or don't want to hassle with lugging all of the weight. Long story short, there are times when the required IQ isn't worth the hassle of a full sized cam and full sized lenses. One prime example is flying. Hauling my FF kit around with me is a difficult proposition at best. Many international carriers have a 7 kilo (15 lbs) weight limit. My body alone is about 2lbs, and my go to lenses are about another 10lbs, so right there I'm up against the weight limit, without mentioning a laptop or all the other accessories that go along with it. There's no way I'm checking $k's worth of camera gear either. There are other examples, but this was one I've had recent experience with.

What I'm trying to say is I'm glad I'm invested in a mirrorless system for times when fast and light is the way to go. I'm also glad I have a full sized DSLR. In the case of the OP, I think that's exactly the situation they are in. They don't need "pro level" IQ. They want to step up from a P/S and would like a decent cam that takes good pics that doesn't take up a lot of room in parka pocket or a pack. Many folks stepping up from p/s cams think the next step is DSLR, and don't even know of the mirrorless class of cams. All I'm trying to do is to educate folks as to the pros/cons of that type of system. For me there are a lot of pros, and very few cons.

While I think my original statement about the camera world going mirrorless was misinterpreted, I'll stick by it. I do think that one day, and closer to the 10 year time I put out, that most all of the cameras we use will be "mirrorless". When I said that, I think many folks read it as the micro mirrorless bodies we are seeing on the market today. I think we'll have plenty of those types of cams, but I also think we'll have mirrorless cams that are the same size and have the same feel as our full sized DSLR's today.

There will be a point where auto-focus and electronic viewfinder technology will advance to the point that we will no longer "need" the mirrors or prisims in our cameras (and the expense that goes with them). When I say that, I mean that the view from the evf will be as good or better than an optical viewfinder and the AF will be just as fast if not faster than the AF modules we use now. At that point it will not be economical to build "DSLR's" the way we do now and manufactures will start making their full sized cameras mirrorless. All it takes in one manufacture to make the switch and the others will be forced to follow in order to hold step with features and price. However, the user experience while using future mirrorless cameras will not really be any different than using a DSLR today (with the exception of the cool stuff that technology will bring us (like electronic shutters with super fast shutter speeds or the ability to simultaneously being able to capture stills and video)). My prediction is that most of the cannibalization of the DSLR market by full sized mirrorless cams will be at the entry level to mid level cams. The reason is simple. Most entry/mid level users won't be able to tell the difference between evf and ofv's and the price difference will be significant in favor of mirrorless cams (for reasons stated above).

So while I think technology will change, I also think the full sized class of mirrorless bodies will be of similar size and functionality to today's dslrs. The reason is this, ergonomics. There are times when a bigger cam is just easier to handle. I get that. There is also wanting to maintain the ability to use existing DSLR lenses. Short of using adapters, the only way to make that feasibly work is with a full sized body. So I don't think that full sized bodies are going away, I just think that they will be mirrorless in their construction. This isn't to say that you won't be able to buy a traditional DSLR cam, but I think that they will be in the realm of pro level gear and will be very expensive, much like Medium format cameras are now.

Only time will tell....

[Fuzz]

One prime example is flying. Hauling my FF kit around with me is a difficult proposition at best. Many international carriers have a 7 kilo (15 lbs) weight limit. My body alone is about 2lbs, and my go to lenses are about another 10lbs, so right there I'm up against the weight limit, without mentioning a laptop or all the other accessories that go along with it. There's no way I'm checking $k's worth of camera gear either. There are other examples, but this was one I've had recent experience with.

Wait, what!? I understand that some/many people may not want to lug around a DSLR + lenses + accessories all the time, but I've never had a problem carrying all my camera gear around, domestic or international. So far this year I've flown to Europe 4 times (5 countries), within Europe 4 times, within North America 5 times. Spread across 6 airlines (3 US, 3 European).

And each time I've had the following in my carry-on with no problems...

- 16" laptop w/ extended (read: heavier) battery pack & power adapter
- Canon DSLR body (5D2, previously 40D)
- Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 II IS
- Canon 35L
- Canon 16-35
- 430EX flash
- Standard tripod (21" collapsed)
- Camera charger
- Internal power adapters
- Spare camera batteries
- All power cords and card readers
- External 500GB HDD
- Books and now Kindle

And ^ all fits in my backpack or shoulder bag, so I often still take my roll-aboard suitcase as my second/"real" carry-on (sometimes I check it if I'm not in a hurry or want to spread out (i.e. want the foot-space)).

[Lonnie]

Wait, what!? I understand that some/many people may not want to lug around a DSLR + lenses + accessories all the time, but I've never had a problem carrying all my camera gear around, domestic or international. So far this year I've flown to Europe 4 times (5 countries), within Europe 4 times, within North America 5 times. Spread across 6 airlines (3 US, 3 European).

You've gotten lucky then. When we flew to Oz last year Quantas was weighing carry on bags. This is mostly an international issue, not domestic. Flyer beware...

–North & South American Carriers–
AeroMexico – Size 22″x14″x9″ (45 linear inches) – Weight: 22lbs
Air Canada – Size: 21.5″x15.5″x9″ (46 linear inches) – Weight: 22lbs
AirTran – Size: 55-linear inches of any reasonable dimensions – Weight: none
Alaska – Size: 24″x17″x10″ (51 linear inches) – Weight: none
Allegiant Air – Size 22″x14″x9″ (45 linear inches) – Weight: none
American – Size: 22″x14″x9″ (45 linear inches) – Weight: 40lbs
Continental – Size: 22″x14″x9″ (45 linear inches) – Weight: 40lbs
Delta – Size: 22″x14″x9″ (45 linear inches) – Weight: 40lbs
Hawaiian – Size: 22″x14″x9″ (45 linear inches) – Weight: 25lbs
JetBlue – Size: 26″x18″x12″ (for Airbus) & 24″x16″x10″ (for Embraer)
LAN – Size: 22×14 x10 (46 linear inches) — Weight: 18lbs
Mexicana – Size: 20″ x15″x9″ (44 linear inches) – Weight: 51lbs
Porter – Size: 22″x16″x10″ (48 linear inches) – Weight: 20lbs
Southwest – 24″ x16″x10″ (50 linear inches) – Weight: none
TACA – Size: 22×14×9″ (45 linear inches) – Weight: 22lbs
TAM – Size: 21.65″x15.75″x7.85″ (45.25 linear inches) — Weight: 11lbs
United – Size 22″x14″x9″ (45 linear inches) – Weight: none
US Airways – Size 22″x14″x9″ (45 linear inches) – Weight: 40lbs
Virgin America – Size:24″x16″x10″ (50 linear inches) – Weight: 16lbs
WestJet – Size: 21.5″x15.5″x9″ (46 linear inches) – Weight: 22lbs

–European Carriers–
Aer Lingus – Size: 22″x18″x10″ (50 linear inches) – Weight: 13lbs
Air France – Size: 21.5×13.5″x10″ (46 linear inches) – Weight: 26lbs
Alitalia – Size: 18″x14″x10″ (42 linear inches) – Weight: 11lbs
British Midland/BMI – Size: 22″x18″x10″ (50 linear inches) – Weight: none
British Airways – Size: 22″x16″x8″ (46 linear inches) – Weight 26lbs
EasyJet – Size: 22″x16″x8″ (46 linear inches) – Weight: none
Finnair – Size: 22″x18″x10″ (50 linear inches) – Weight: 22lbs
Iberia – Size: 18″x14″x10″ (42 linear inches) – Weight: 22lbs
KLM – Size: 21.5×13.5″x10″ (46 linear inches) – Weight 26lbs
Lufthansa – Size: 22″x16″x8″ (46 linear inches) – Weight: 18lbs
OpenSkies – Size: 18″x12″x10″ (40 linear inches) – Weight: 51lbs
Ryanair – Size: 22″x14″x9″ (45 linear inches) – Weight: 22lbs
SAS – Size: 22″x18″x9″ (49 linear inches) – Weight: 17.5lbs
SWISS – Size: 22″x16″x8″ (46 linear inches) – Weight: 18lbs
Virgin Atlantic – Size: 22×14″x9″ (45 linear inches) – Weight: 13lbs

–Africa/Middle East/India–
Air India – Size: 22″x16″x8″ (46 linear inches) – Weight: 18lbs
El Al – Size: 22″x18″x10″ (50 linear inches) – Weight: 17lbs
Emirates – Size: 22″x15″x8″ (45 linear inches) – Weight: 15lbs
Etihad – Size: 22″x15″x8″ (45 linear inches) – Weight: 15lbs
Gulf Air- Size: 17″x15″12″ (44 linear inches) – Weight 19.75lbs
IndoGo – Size: 22″x15″x8″ (45 linear inches) – Weight: 18lbs
Jet Airways – Size: 22″x15″x8″ (45 linear inches) – Weight: 15lbs
Kenya Airways – Size: 20″ x15″x9″ (44 linear inches) – Weight: 22lbs
Kingfisher – Size: 22″x15″x8″ (45 linear inches) – Weight: 15lbs
Middle East Airlines/MEA – Size: 22″x18″x10″ (50 linear inches) – Weight: 17.5lbs
Qatar – Size: 19.68″x14.56″x9.84″ (44.08 linear inches) – Weight: 33lbs
Royal Jordanian – Size: 22″x14″x9″ (45 linear inches) – Weight: 15lbs
South African Airways – Size: 22″x15″x8″ (45 linear inches) – Weight: 18lbs
SpiceJet – Size: 22″x15″x8″ (45 linear inches) – Weight: 22lbs

–Asia/Pacific–
Air New Zealand – Size: 22″x15″x8″ (45 linear inches) – Weight: 15lbs
Air Tahiti Nui – Size: 22″x15″x8″ (45 linear inches) – Weight: 22lbs
All Nippon/ANA – Size: 22″x15″x8″ (45 linear inches) – Weight: 22lbs
Asiana – Size: 22″x15″x8″ (45 linear inches) – Weight: 22lbs
Cathay Pacific – Size: 22″x14″x9″ (45 linear inches) – Weight: 15lbs
China Airlines – Size: 22″x14″x9″ (45 linear inches) – Weight: 15lbs
Eva Air – Size: 22″x15″x8″ (45 linear inches) – Weight: 22lbs
Hainan Airlines – Size: 22″x15″x8″ (45 linear inches) – Weight: 22lbs
Japan Airlines/JAL – Size: 22″x16″x10″ (48 linear inches) – Weight 22lbs
JetStar – Size: 22″x14″x9″ (45 linear inches) – Weight: 22lbs
Korean Air – Size: 22″x14″x9″ (45 linear inches) – Weight: 25lbs
Malaysia Airlines – Size: 22″x15″x8″ (45 linear inches) – Weight: 11lbs
Philippine Airlines – Size: 22″x15″x8″ (45 linear inches) – Weight: 15lbs
Qantas – Size: 22″x14″x9″ (45 linear inches) – Weight: 15lbs
Singapore/SIA – Size: 22″x14″x9″ (45 linear inches) – Weight: 15lbs
Thai – Size: 22″x15″x8″ (45 linear inches) – Weight: 15lbs
V Australia – Size: 22″x14″x9″ (45 linear inches) – Weight: 15lbs
Virgin Blue – 19″x13″x9″ (41 linear inches) – Weight 15lbs

[Fuzz]

This is mostly an international issue, not domestic.

Again, I flew to Europe 4 times, flew within Europe another 4 times just in this calendar year. With 6 completely different carriers. I usually fly to Europe about 2-3 times a year, domestically about 6 times a year and to Asia about once every 2-3 years. This has been my pattern for the last ~10 years, flown about 20 of the carriers listed above (half domestic, half international). I've NEVER had any airline (domestic or international) weigh my carry-on bags. Size check, sure, but never weight.

Maybe you just look like a dirty hippie to them!

[Lonnie]

I dunno. You have way more international exp than me. All I can say is what I saw last time I flew. Maybe it's a Atlantic ocean vs Pacific ocean thing...