Re: [Leica] trip report--gear, film, filter and airport experiences--long

[Doug Herr <telyt560@cswebmail.com>]

David,

I enjoyed reading your post.  I've often fought the "not enough stuff"/"too much stuff" fight on my Sierra hikes and can empathize with your compromises.  Most frustrating have been those times like the Mt. Whitney climb with only 35-60-90 lenses when the Gray-crowned Rosy Finches had me wishing for my 400.

My experience in the Sierra (up to 14,000+ feet) with Leica-R lenses is that a UV filter is not nessesary to block the extra UV light, and that the "sunny 16" rule is good at altitudes much closer to sea level.  Altitude does funny things to light.

Doug Herr
Sacramento
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/telyt


On Thu, 13 July 2000, DavidS8451@aol.com wrote:

> 
> Hello all,
> I've just returned from a backpacking trip to the high Sierras and would like 
> to share some of what I learned in the process about gear, film choices, 
> airport X-rays and yes, filters.  
> 
> Firstly, what gear to take.  I took with me an M6 and 35 Summicron ASPH and 
> 21 ASPH, and an R 6.2 with 35-70 f4 zoom.  My rationale was that the R camera 
> and zoom would be convenient (if not lightweight), and I could use the 
> "macro" setting for shots of wildflowers (I hear you groaning Martin).  I 
> bought the 21 mm lens especially for this trip, which included a drive 
> through Death Valley.  I took the 35 Summicron too because, well, because I 
> just like it as my usual lens on the M6.  I also have a circular polarizer 
> for that lens, but more on that later.  I agonized over the issue of a 
> tripod, considered buying a Gitzo Mountaineer, but settled on bringing a 
> small Slik Compact XL.  
> 
> This turned out to be a lot of gear, and my backpack weighed a ton.  We hiked 
> up the Shepard's Pass trail to the Mt. Williamson basin and climbed 
> Williamson, Tyndall, and an unnamed peak above Shepard's Pass.  So I lugged 
> this stuff over ten miles of trail and up over 6000 feet in elevation gain to 
> our base camp.  Because I was with a friend who likes to be hiking, not 
> waiting around for me to finish taking pictures, I never used the tripod.  We 
> were always too busy.  Maybe if I'd spent hundreds of dollars on the Gitzo 
> Mountaineer, I would have used it!  On the summit days I took only one 
> camera/lens combination; on Tyndall I took the R6.2 and zoom, and on 
> Williamson the M6 and 35.  I'm still ambivalent.  But I can say one thing for 
> sure:  I find the M6 *easier* to reload, at 14,000 feet on exposed rock, than 
> the R 6.2 (or any SLR).  At that altitude, above 12,000 feet for a week, one 
> tends to make a lot of little mental mistakes.  When I had both cameras 
> around my neck, at one point, I got tangled up in the straps and dropped the 
> R 6.2.  Luckily it fell on gravel, not hard rock, and only went from mint- to 
> exc + as a collectible (I still have all the boxes and papers).  On the next 
> comparable trip I think I would just take the M6 and 21, 35 and maybe a 90 or 
> 135 for flowers.  I just like the handling of the M6.  Or perhaps, though I 
> don't own it, I would just take the R6.2 and the 60 mm Macro alone.  
> Doubtful.  But, as Ted always says, keep it simple stupid!
> 
> Which leads me to the issue of film.  Again, I couldn't decide between Fuji 
> E-6 films (Velvia and Provia F) and Kodachromes 25 and 64.  So I brought all 
> four types.  I figured that the different handling and processing of the Fuji 
> and the Kodak would back up each other.  I was hoping to do as Sal suggested 
> and FedEx my E-6 stuff back to Boston, and use mailers for the Kodachrome.  
> As it turned out, all the different film types gave me way too much to think 
> about at 12000 feet.  Next time I will just take one type of film, probably 
> just Provia F and avoid having to constantly check which film was in which 
> camera.  I used the "sunny f16 rule" a lot because of all the snow and UV at 
> that altitude, and using one film type and speed would have been much easier. 
>  Again, keep it simple.
> 
> Of course, I'm paranoid about going through X-ray scanners in airports.  I 
> found that both at JFK in New York and at the Las Vegas airport, it was no 
> problem to have my film hand inspected when I presented it to them in clear 
> Ziplock bags.  I didn't get to FedEx my film back, since we hiked up to the 
> last ray of daylight and didn't have time to find the office.  So I carried 
> my film onto the plane both ways.   It really helped to be organized at the 
> security checkpoint and I was profusely polite with the security people.
> 
> I've gotten my E-6 processing back and I'll stir the pot a bit on the filter 
> issue.  I think that this trip was an instance that justified filter use.  
> For one thing, I was often in windy, sandy conditions and I didn't want my 
> lenses sandblasted.  Also, at high altitude, the UV problem is very evident.  
> I used the Leica UV filter on the 21 M Asph and the 35 M Asph all the time.  
> I did not use a UV filter on the R 35-70 zoom, and I think I should have done 
> so to cut the UV to a greater extent.  I also should have used a warming 
> filter in all that blue light.  Since the R 35-70 f4 zoom's front element 
> rotates, it is not convenient to use circular polarizers with that lens.  
> Also it's a guessing game to use a polarizer on an M6, although I really like 
> the Heliopan polarizer with the numbers.  So I didn't use the polarizers 
> enough.  Most of the pictures that were successful were taken with the 
> polarizers, especially those at lower elevations.  The only problem at higher 
> elevations is that the sky goes quite black, but then again, that's the way 
> it looked to me through my sunglasses at the time.
> 
> A final note.  I learned, or relearned, that if you see a picture you should 
> just take it!  There were several times, in low light, when I didn't have my 
> tripod with me, miles from camp, and would have used it if I'd had it.  But I 
> just braced myself against a rock, waited till my heartbeat slowed a bit, and 
> squeezed off a couple of shots at 1/15 and 1/8 of a second.  In one case it 
> was the last shot on my last available roll of film.  That one, taken long 
> after sunset, was the best picture of the whole trip.  I'll see an 11 X 16 
> Ilfochrome of it next week.
> 
> Thanks to this group for being a great place to think through all these 
> issues.  The Leicas performed perfectly from 18 to 118 degrees F.  I 
> apologize for posting so infrequently and then pouring out such a lengthy 
> monologue.
> 
> Dave Schaller
> Newton, MA
> BTW Age 42.  First rangefinder used was a Voigtlander Vitessa of my Dad's 
> before I was 10.  First Leica right before I turned 40, to assuage my midlife 
> crisis.  I said, "Hey, it's cheaper than a Porsch."

___________________________________________________
The ALL NEW CS2000 from CompuServe
 Better!  Faster! More Powerful!
 250 FREE hours! Sign-on Now!
 http://www.compuserve.com/trycsrv/cs2000/webmail/