cheap & light SLR for backpacking

andreios

andreios

Well-known
Local time
1:09 AM
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
278
Hi guys,
just a quick question - I sold recently all of my OM gear, am doing mostly MF now with a LF image here and there, but I came to think that I need something for hiking / mountain walking - cheap and lightweight SLR, with a decent zoom lens - or at the most two primes. Where shall I look first? Some Nikon ideas? Or shall I look at M42 systems? Which ones?

THank you.
 
ok, i bring up the Canon A-1 again.

quite cheap and the fd lenses are cheap too. the body is made with a lot of plastic, so light. but still very reliable. small, very good viewfinder, different auto-modes or full manual, functions for exposure compensation, multi-exposures, etc.

if u want it light, i would look for a new fd-mount lens (in oppostion to the older breech-lock) then. optics is the same, but in the fdnew more plastic is involved, and therefor lighter.

if you don't need any auto-modes, you can also have a look for the quite similar, but full manual Canon AT-1
 
If you will go the Manual Focus route with your hiking SLR, I'd highly recommend a Nikon F3 (the non-HP pentaprism type), as these are some of the most durable cameras I have EVER seen. Been using a combination of two of these for 22 years without even one hiccup.

As for lenses, perhaps a Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 AI-S and Nikkor 85mm f/1.4 would suit your hiking needs, though there are plenty of excellent Nikon Zoom lenses as well.

On another note, the Pentax ME Super is impossibly small with a big, bright viewfinder. And there is never a shortage of all variety of Pentax K-mount and M42 mount (with adapter) lenses.
 
:D BACK TO THE FUTURE!

My manual Nikons feel utterly gargantuan after handling an OM.

OM-1, 28/3.5, and a 50/1.8 is all you (really, anybody) need.
 
Depends on what is cheap....speaking abut few tens of euros, I can recommend Ricoh XR-20sp with Tokina 25-50/4. Camera has light polycarbonate shell, nice VF and decent feature set suitable for such occasion, costs next to nothing. Zoom is barely larger than 50/1.4 lens. This lens were made in other mounts, too.
 
If you are considering auto focus, maybe a Nikon F80. Cheap, light and gives good results.
Or, as suggested above, another OM. The F80 is probably cheaper.
 
Still use my first camera from time to time. Minolta XD-7 + 50/1.7 cheap ansd sturdy enough for a back pack.
 
Last edited:
Well, I was thinking about the OM - while compact, it felt sometimes too small in my hands (I'm rather tall, well over 6ft). Once I had a nikon FE2 (I think) and it felt just right in my hands, to this day I don't know why I sold it. But the F80 sounds good as well. I just want something I can throw in the backpack or in the car and don't care much about.
So if we consider staying with nikon - what lens(es)? any reasonably priced decent wideangle/short tele?
 
I just used a Nikon F2, 50mm 1.4, and 24mm f/2 backpacking in Yosemite. It worked beautifully but is neither cheap nor light.
Like I said, OM.
 
Small light means OM or possibly a Pentax M series both systems are excellent there are probably more K mount lenses about though.
 
andreios said:
Well, I was thinking about the OM - while compact, it felt sometimes too small in my hands (I'm rather tall, well over 6ft). Once I had a nikon FE2 (I think) and it felt just right in my hands, to this day I don't know why I sold it. But the F80 sounds good as well. I just want something I can throw in the backpack or in the car and don't care much about.
So if we consider staying with nikon - what lens(es)? any reasonably priced decent wideangle/short tele?
Click to expand...

my budget choice:

wide - 24mm f2.8
short tele - 105mm f2.5
 
I have been everywhere, including underwater by accident, with my Nikon FE. I was worried that the electronics would fail but they never did. after 20 years of ownership I sent it in for CLA (when you could still do it) and the guy sent it back saying it did not need it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom