wetworx Posted August 16, 2011 Share #1 Posted August 16, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) what are your thoughts on whether an M would be a suitable choice of camera to go on harsh Alpine climbs? or should I just stick with the DSLR and leave the M for the cities. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 16, 2011 Posted August 16, 2011 Hi wetworx, Take a look here Taking an M on an Alpine Climb?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted August 16, 2011 Share #2 Posted August 16, 2011 Why not? Unless you fancy filling your backpack with gear. I would say it is the ideal camera for trekking -always has been. In the 1930ies Leica even offered a special lens for mounaineers - the Berg Elmar 6.3 -10.5 I would not even consider taking anything but a Leica M into the mountains. The only thing - in inclement weather take care of condensation. When in your tent do not enclose the camera a in a wet backpack, or something like that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sm23221 Posted August 16, 2011 Share #3 Posted August 16, 2011 +1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted August 16, 2011 Share #4 Posted August 16, 2011 what are your thoughts on whether an M would be a suitable choice of camera to go on harsh Alpine climbs? Are you talking ropes, pietons and carabiners? In that case there's something to be said for a small DSLR with a zoom lens. First there's the advantage of not having to change lenses while hanging on to a vertical rock face. And the advantage of AF and image stabilizer when shooting one-handed suspended from ropes, and breathing hard at altitude. Plus, there's the thing about bashing tens of thousands of dollars of camera equipment against rocks, or dropping it down the mountainside. Sure there's always insurance, but with Leica's production "schedule" how long until you can replace your lenses? There's also something to be said for one of the compact EVF cameras like the GF2 or Olympus. As a side note, the late Galen Rowell, probably the best example of a professional photographer/mountain-climber, used a Nikon SLR on climbs (he died before digital took full hold), although he certainly could have afforded Leicas, so there was definitely some good reason for his choice. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted August 16, 2011 Share #5 Posted August 16, 2011 I was a great fan of Mr. Rowell. A sad loss. As to the use of Leicas at altitude, I can but quote as follows: "Dr Borchers, Bremen, from his expedition in the mountains of Pamir, Central Asia - 4th August 1928 and 2nd January 1929. The apparatus has rendered excellent service. I have had it with me on expeditions to mountains 21,000 to 23,000 feet high, and even in the most intense cold the focal plane shutter was always in good condition. Working with the Leica is so convenient. One of our fellows of the expedition, Gorbunow,, one of the highest Russian officials, had a Leica with him, and was more than satisfied with it." Leica Camera Catalogue, 1931 Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sblitz Posted August 16, 2011 Share #6 Posted August 16, 2011 so perhaps the question is dslr vs film leica? given the potential conditions, an m3 with just a 50mm lens is best? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Geschlecht Posted August 16, 2011 Share #7 Posted August 16, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hello wetworx, I have been using an M3 w/ 35mm Summicron & MR meter to do just that for years. I have been happy as a clam. Accurate metering is especially important when you are up high. Don't forget your rigid lens hood primarily for protection but also for flare reduction. A small solid tripod w/ large ballhead & cable release is a very handy combination against your chest (+2 Stops) or against a rock (All the stops you need). A polarizing filter sometimes. If you photograph in B&W a K2, #8 or Leica #1 medium yellow filter. All the same like Woodchuck, marmot & groundhog. Additionally: Don't forget extra batteries & plastic bags. Better to double or triple bag in the rain/snow. When it is raining/snowing put those bags in your rucksack when you are not using the camera. When you do use the camera protect it it is not waterproof. The most important things, even more important than an M w/ a 35 & a meter is proper boots or shoes & a number of sets of appropriate sox & an anorak that folds up really small (some become belts) & opens up to become a thin wind stopping jacket which further unfolds to become a small personal tent. Pretty much waterproof. Nice to have when you are @ a weather change point in the mountains & the nice 25 C sunny afternoon turns to snow & 5 C in 20 minutes. You will like your boots & sox then also. Have Fun. Best Regards, Michael Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeinzX Posted August 16, 2011 Share #8 Posted August 16, 2011 I would take the Leica with me - but in addition a camera like the Panasonic FT 3. This one is not heavy, easy to handle wirh one hand and extremly tough. Furthermore it uses the same cards as the Leica, and the camera is not expensive. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Henry Posted August 16, 2011 Share #9 Posted August 16, 2011 I stayed two days at high altitude with the M9 and M8 (as back up) No problem for me The only caution is to keep spare batteries warm (i have 6 Leica batteries) in case the battery in the camera were to be out of service because of the cold (-10°C to 15°C at 2300 meters and at the Mont Blanc) It is mostly your fingers will be frozen There are gloves intended for the photo in the cold http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/landschaft-reise/181127-alpen.html Good climbing Best Henry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wetworx Posted August 17, 2011 Author Share #10 Posted August 17, 2011 Thanks everyone for the amazing responses. I'm still a bit on the fence, due to the value of the camera and that it isn't weatherproof. But no doubt amazing photos can be had. I'll have to weigh those demons and come up with what's right with me, but your stories/recommendation are all very reassuring. Thank you all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted August 17, 2011 Share #11 Posted August 17, 2011 Hello wetworx, I have been using an M3 w/ 35mm Summicron & MR meter to do just that for years. I have been happy as a clam. Accurate metering is especially important when you are up high. Don't forget your rigid lens hood primarily for protection but also for flare reduction. A small solid tripod w/ large ballhead & cable release is a very handy combination against your chest (+2 Stops) or against a rock (All the stops you need). A polarizing filter sometimes. If you photograph in B&W a K2, #8 or Leica #1 medium yellow filter. All the same like Woodchuck, marmot & groundhog. Additionally: Don't forget extra batteries & plastic bags. Better to double or triple bag in the rain/snow. When it is raining/snowing put those bags in your rucksack when you are not using the camera. When you do use the camera protect it it is not waterproof. The most important things, even more important than an M w/ a 35 & a meter is proper boots or shoes & a number of sets of appropriate sox & an anorak that folds up really small (some become belts) & opens up to become a thin wind stopping jacket which further unfolds to become a small personal tent. Pretty much waterproof. Nice to have when you are @ a weather change point in the mountains & the nice 25 C sunny afternoon turns to snow & 5 C in 20 minutes. You will like your boots & sox then also. Have Fun. Best Regards, Michael Michael, where can I get more information on this belt/windjacket/tent 'wunderapparatus'? Mark Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted August 17, 2011 Share #12 Posted August 17, 2011 Thanks everyone for the amazing responses. I'm still a bit on the fence, due to the value of the camera and that it isn't weatherproof. But no doubt amazing photos can be had. I'll have to weigh those demons and come up with what's right with me, but your stories/recommendation are all very reassuring. Thank you all. Wet, why invest in a Leica to get extraordinary photographs and then not take it where you will get extraordinary photographs? If you leave it behind you will look back at the photographs you took with the other camera and forever think: What if? Why didn't I? Insure it and take it (and perhaps a compact digital backup body to use with the remaining the remaining lenses if the M9 with lens does a swan dive off a cliff) Regards, Mark Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
!Nomad64 Posted August 17, 2011 Share #13 Posted August 17, 2011 what are your thoughts on whether an M would be a suitable choice of camera to go on harsh Alpine climbs? or should I just stick with the DSLR and leave the M for the cities. However said that the M is very a resilient and versatile camera that would make an excellent choice, my very personal fetish would be taking with me a Leica 0/Barnack Replica... As an alternative I'd also consider an LTM model, say a IIIf or a IIIg, more compact than the Ms. Being all mechanical cameras they'd be less prone to failures due to cold. Cheers, Bruno Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KM-25 Posted August 17, 2011 Share #14 Posted August 17, 2011 When I did a climb of the Kautz Route on Rainier with a crux of over 300 feet of steep ice, I took an M6 and 28 Summicron, while it was great for some things, it sucked for a lot of the shots I needed to get like the one hand lean-to-focus-zone method to get another climber when on the crux, AF or even an MF SLR would have been much, much better. So in contrast, I used a Nikon FM3A when completing the last 7 of my climbs of all 54 of Colorado's 14,000 foot peaks. I used an old 24mm 2.8 AIS, 50 1.8 and a 105 2.5, they got scratched, banged and kicked ever loving a$$ over the Leica gear, I could frame and hit focus much faster and it was not that much bigger than my M6/28 combo. I think Leica is OK, it certainly is fun having something that small on a recreational climb but a small AF SLR/ DSLR is much, much better on one where you have to produce top quality images and still stay safe. None of the top professional climbers I know use Leica or RF gear on climbs for the reason of it taking too much away from what is most important to accomplish the climb safely, the climb it self. Jimmy Chin uses a D700 and 18-35 for his editorial work and on his campaigns with North Face. A good friend of mine I did a New York Times piece on used a 5DII, 24-105 and 14mm on his return to Everest, he is famous for having been a hero in the book in to thin air. He said his Canon was flawless, used the 14 quite a bit on the crux and above the balcony. People on here, none of which climb professionally like I do, might say a Leica is a perfect for this. I don't agree, not even the film ones.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick_S Posted August 18, 2011 Share #15 Posted August 18, 2011 Here are a couple of examples of mountaineers who took their photographs using Leicas. Walter A. Poucher used Leica M cameras for his classic route books of Wales and the Lake District. An earlier thread is here: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/film-forum/61223-w-poucher-leica.html There are a number of notes on his Leicas in the biographical book: A Camera in the Hills: the Life and Work of W. A. Poucher by Roly Smith Roger Mear, Robert Swan and Gareth Woodtook took Leica M, as well as R, gear on their trans-antarctic sled haul described in their book In the Footsteps of Scott. The appendix of the book lists the photographic equipment which they took in detail. Nick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KM-25 Posted August 18, 2011 Share #16 Posted August 18, 2011 But unless one of those guys did a spicy route up Vinson Massif at the South Pole, these are not harsh Alpine Style climbs, I would take a Leica on any of these, especially terrain as low in elevation and as comparably tame as the Lake District. Unless the OP has embellished what he is actually doing, Alpine Style climbing is most demanding in it's approach in how one is actually climbing. And trekking even as high as 18,000 feet in Nepal is not climbing, it is trekking. But I digress, the OP now has enough information to make an informed decision.... Here are a couple of examples of mountaineers who took their photographs using Leicas. Walter A. Poucher used Leica M cameras for his classic route books of Wales and the Lake District. An earlier thread is here: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/film-forum/61223-w-poucher-leica.html There are a number of notes on his Leicas in the biographical book: A Camera in the Hills: the Life and Work of W. A. Poucher by Roly Smith Roger Mear, Robert Swan and Gareth Woodtook took Leica M, as well as R, gear on their trans-antarctic sled haul described in their book In the Footsteps of Scott. The appendix of the book lists the photographic equipment which they took in detail. Nick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick_S Posted August 18, 2011 Share #17 Posted August 18, 2011 My understanding is that the UK offered decent training ground for tougher climbs. Did not the earliest teams to ascend Mt. Everest such as Edmund Hillary in 1953 train on the faces of Yr Wyddfa, aka Mt. Snowdon? Nick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KM-25 Posted August 18, 2011 Share #18 Posted August 18, 2011 My understanding is that the UK offered decent training ground for tougher climbs. Did not the earliest teams to ascend Mt. Everest such as Edmund Hillary in 1953 train on the faces of Yr Wyddfa, aka Mt. Snowdon? Nick Hillary did most of his training at home in New Zealand on Mt. Cook, a 12,000 foot peak littered in crevasses. But, he did take a Leica filled with Kodachrome to the top of Everest. But we are talking in terms of what climbers use now, in 2011. Most use an SLR or small hybrid cameras with an effective zoom range to keep it simple so that they can get the shot and be done with it when on exposed climbs that are anything from 3rd class scrambling to vertical ice climbs at high altitudes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted August 18, 2011 Share #19 Posted August 18, 2011 My mate Pete, who is a qualified mountain guide, took a little Panasonic to the Himalayas. Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Blaster Posted August 18, 2011 Share #20 Posted August 18, 2011 I, too, am a climber (mostly ice climbing) but not a professional like KM-25. I take my Leica M7 with a chrome Summilux 50mmASPH and my greatest concern is the weight of it all, especially with the chrome 'Lux. Seems like a tank at times. My wife's plastic digital camera appeals as it weighs about as much as a feather but I'm sticking with my Leica. My use of Leica is not governed by logic or I would probably use my wife's digital but I just love using the blasted thing so there you have it! John S. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.