Camera for Climbing/ Ski/ Landscape Photography

Zach Eiten wrote:

Thanks for all the information and yes I misspoke and forgot the “r” in the A7riii. Good catch.  

Ya it’s tough decision haha

Yup, good problem to have. If you can afford it lensrentals.com is a good option to test them each out.

Not Not MP Admin wrote:

Can you elaborate? I’d like to hear your perspective but this seems way off to me. Saying there is not much difference between sensor size doesn’t seem very accurate in my eyes. One of, if not the the biggest, reason people prefer FF over M43 is due to sensor size. After all, the sensors of FF are literally twice as large. That’s why the M43 crop factor is 2x (i.e. a 24mm lens on FF is mostly equivalent to a 12mm lens on M43).

I agree with these statements and think a lot of M43 set ups are equivalent, if not better, than APS-C mirrorless set ups if shooting in daylight, but shooting climbing in shady and/or low light I don’t see much advantage. To me, aside from 5-axis stabilization (which is fuckin phenomenal. I remember taking a handheld shot with 3 second exposure on the original OM-D and having no noticeable blur) and weight are huge advantages over APS-C and FF. 

It should also be noted that, while the gap is closing, the biggest difference between the various systems (from a perf perspective) is lowlight/high iso and DR performance. As I mentioned above FF sensors essentially allow twice the amount of light into the sensor. If you are using this camera professionally this absolutely matters unless only shooting in a studio or in bright lights. There are certain climbing shots I’ve taken that just could not have been published if I took them on a M43 as opposed to FF mirrorless. We could go into how pixel size and pixel count attributes to different noise levels in images as well, but overall DR and lowlight scenarios are undeniably better than m43. 

Hey JT, 

If you read my comment, you’ll se that I said there’s not a real notable difference in the “size/weight” of the differing system camera bodies. To be honest the larger pro M43 bodies are actually larger than the most compact FF bodies. The real advantage of the M43 comes in when you look at the kit of body plus 2 or 3 pro lenses…

And as you mentioned IS, you know that it’s easier to stabilize a smaller sensor than a large one, and for this M43 is arguably leading the IBIS race. Even my 10yr old OMD has amazing IS.

Also, I never meant to argue that M43 produces a superior image in every situation. What I will claim is that any of the modern systems will produce an image that’s “good enough” in nearly any situation. We’d be fools to start thinking that a photograph needs to have the camera that performs at the top of the charts in all categories in order to have a sellable professional image. If you think you can’t take professional images with anything smaller than a FF sensor, then you’ve drank the marketing Kool-aid and you’re not going to look at the real-world examples all around you. And if you’re looking to print giant-format art prints, you probably want to skip FF and go to a larger sensor 100+MP camera anyways…

Josh Z wrote:

I love the image quality and noise performance I get from my FF setup, but will admit a M43 setup is really compelling for a lot of use cases.  If I had disposable income(that wasn't spent on climbing haha) I'd like to try a setup.

Gerald Adams wrote:

Other than a cell-phone ,which  mini camera for year around use? In the old days I used a Minox35.

Ricoh GRiii

Tiny camera with great picture quality.  

Hey Josh,

Without even going for used equipment, you can get a great taste of M43 with a LUMIX GX85  kit (with 2 zooms, the collapsing normal zoom and a nice tele zoom). They still show up for around $600. I got an open box (new) for $400.

Great rig, and with the 20mm pancake lens (40mm equivalent) it’s truly pocketable, one-handed fun. Shoots great video, sends photos directly to your phone, shoot all day on a battery, charges via a USB in your car or portable power pack.

Teton Tom wrote:

Hey JT, 

If you read my comment, you’ll se that I said there’s not a real notable difference in the “size/weight” of the differing system camera bodies. To be honest the larger pro M43 bodies are actually larger than the most compact FF bodies. The real advantage of the M43 comes in when you look at the kit of body plus 2 or 3 pro lenses…

I’m not arguing that one bit. My issue is that you said the sensor size is not that different. That couldn’t be further from the truth. 

And as you mentioned IS, you know that it’s easier to stabilize a smaller sensor than a large one, and for this M43 is arguably leading the IBIS race. Even my 10yr old OMD has amazing IS.

Yes, I agree. However that kind of IS is only applicable to still objects. Skiing, climbing, family shots cannot be taken with a 1 second exposure. As I mentioned, I was able to produce a relatively crisp photo on that presumably that same OMD model of with a 3 second handheld exposure. The 5-axis is/was revolutionary and is much easier to stabilize a sensor half the size (back to my original issue). Not arguing that brilliance of the IS, but imo it’s not applicable to action shots. Higher DR and more usable ISO (as a result of larger sensors) are the only option in certain situations

Also, I never meant to argue that M43 produces a superior image in every situation. What I will claim is that any of the modern systems will produce an image that’s “good enough” in nearly any situation.

As I stated, I agree with this if you’re only taking photos  in good to great lighting. Assuming we all kind of agree what “good enough” is. For example, a photo taken of a shaded/poorly lit subject at anything above iso 6400 or 128000 may not be “good enough” for many clients, but would be totally fine for social media or even some publications.

We’d be fools to start thinking that a photograph needs to have the camera that performs at the top of the charts in all categories in order to have a sellable professional image. If you think you can’t take professional images with anything smaller than a FF sensor, then you’ve drank the marketing Kool-aid and you’re not going to look at the real-world examples all around you.

Agree to an extent, like I also mentioned, there are certain images I’ve taken (all of moving objects) that would not be possible (read: I would not have been paid) if I were using a M43 camera compared to FF. These are obviously anomalies, but are worth mentioning. My point being in these situations is that shooting with a f1.8 on M43 and shooting with a f1.8 FF are vastly different in low light in regards to how fast/slow you can bump the shutter and ISO, thus allowing for faster or slower subjects. 

And if you’re looking to print giant-format art prints, you probably want to skip FF and go to a larger sensor 100+MP camera anyways…

Depends on many factors, I often make near 100 mp images with my 24 mp Sony. I could just as easily create a 100 mp image using a 3.2 mp camera if I wanted, but obviously that would not be practical at all. Megapixels are often misunderstood.

I understand the point though, yes medium format sensors could more easily be used for “art grade photos”. 

https://alpineexposures.com/phototips/tips-from-the-pros-which-camera-gear

This information (from one of the best living mountain photographers) is a bit dated, but still useful.  

He really likes the micro 4/3 systems.  

Kai Larson wrote:

https://alpineexposures.com/phototips/tips-from-the-pros-which-camera-gear

This information (from one of the best living mountain photographers) is a bit dated, but still useful.  

He really likes the micro 4/3 systems.  

He also said that at the time of publication that the “best camera by far” was a Sony A7Rii so let’s get both sides of the story lol 

I’d be interested to see how he likes the A7C or newer canon mirrorless as this was published way before they came out.

The actual point of the article was a good one though: use what works best for you. 

Go Back to Super Topo wrote:

Yup, good problem to have. If you can afford it lensrentals.com is a good option to test them each out.

I didn’t even think about this. Thanks for the idea. I may give that a shot.

Also, thanks everyone for all the good info. I really appreciate it

Zach Eiten wrote:

I didn’t even think about this. Thanks for the idea. I may give that a shot.

Also, thanks everyone for all the good info. I really appreciate it

It’s super nice when you’re going on trips sometimes and don’t have an ultra-wide, pro grade tele, etc.

Zach, everybody's got an opinion when it comes to photo gear and what the hell, I'll give you mine: the truth is it doesn't matter what you shoot it with, spend more of your money on experiences and putting yourself in positions with whatever camera you have to capture interesting things. Your subjects and the ability to tell a story with photographs, is what is going to make your work stand out. It's also what's going to get you work if you want to do it professionally. Shooting a ton, waking up to capture the good light, missing dinner for the waning hours of good light, convincing your ski/climbing/adventure partners to get up early so you can snap their efforts in that good light, putting time in with them so they trust you to photograph them, rigging, etc --- that's the actual stuff that will make a difference.

I work in video, my employer is a canon shop. We shoot on C300/500, and as a result when I snap photos at work it's with a 5d mark iv. None of that is adventure stuff. In my personal life, I shoot on a fuji xpro3 or on 35mm film. It's really not 'adventure' stuff either, it's more just documenting moments. I've taken photos I hate with all of the setups and photos I love with all of them.

Some additional things you should consider, that often are missing from forum discussions like these: lensing and menus. Honestly, look at a ton of photographs and if there's something you find you are drawn to, it's probably the lens more than the camera body itself. So learn what focal lengths and glass you like. I mentioned my employer is a canon shop. I love canon glass. It rocks, and in my opinion has a specific look that is distinct from Sony glass. I also think a full frame camera may not be a bad idea if you're trying to get into true landscape photography, where ultra wide angle lenses become much more desirable. Now, I'm not saying there aren't options on crop sensor cameras, but just do some research into lensing as much as you look at the bodies themselves. The investment of a lens system will take you a lot further than pixel peeping the newest body or whatever; with a good lens system, you'll outlive the investment of your camera body as a pro shooter. But as others have pointed out here, size might be a consideration--something for you to figure out.

The other thing I mentioned was menus. Every manufacturer has their own way of setting up their cams and for you to manipulate settings, and I think an underrated part of shooting professionally is your ability to be comfortable with time pressure and navigating a given camera quickly and without thinking--in part why I like the Fujifilm camera I shoot on in my non-work life is there's a physical knob for any setting I'd want to manipulate. I can change my ISO/shutter/f-stop manually and not have to deal with a screen or cumbersome menu--which is something I know is important for the documentary life photos I tend to snap.

It's not fulfilling to hear, but much like when people ask what they should buy as they are building their new trad rack or whatever -- the best advice I can give is shoot on as much stuff as you can and see what you like and/or are most comfortable and efficient with. The more you shoot with what you've got, the longer the list of "oh it'd be nice if I could do x, y, or z" Good luck, can't wait to see your snaps.

Yawn Bosco wrote:

...the truth is it doesn't matter what you shoot it with, spend more of your money on experiences and putting yourself in positions with whatever camera you have to capture interesting things...

So true! I can honestly say that many of the most impactful images I've seen in the last decade are coming from phone cameras, because that's the camera the photographer had with them at that golden moment.

I'm "old school" still lugging a full frame DLSR into the backcountry.  Cuz DSLRs are old school.  Anyway- Nikon D750 for a body and two Nikon primes- the 20mm 1.8 and the 50mm 1.8.  Would like to add another option, a little longer, still prime.  I don't mind the weight at all for the setup considering the quality of the images.  I do mind the space a little.  With the 50mm on it's pretty darn small, but I end up wanting the 20mm for 75% or more of the use and with the 20mm on it's a little bulky (taking up most of a "brain" storage).  Usually use a single point over the should style sling to carry.  UV filter for most use, occasionally a circular polarizer.  

As is always the case- the user and the light and perspective they use matter a lot more than the gear.  But it is really nice to be able to fall back on the RAW file coming from a full frame sensor and prime lens stopped down a few clicks.  It lets me be a lazy photographer while focusing on the climbing or just being present.  I have a problem with getting to wrapped into the camera that I lose the experience of just being there to enjoy the alpine.  This is a reason I prefer a prime lens.  Something about having to walk to zoom prevents the camera from getting too much mental space and preventing the flow state associated with moving in the alpine.

I really really can't get past the loss of sharp, bright optical view finders for a digital replacement.  Even the latest tech still doesn't come close to what you get with an optical pentaprism viewfinder.  For that reason I think I'll be lugging the DSLR for many more years.  I confess that my iphone xr does a damn good job and ends up being a great ultralight option that gets a larger share of the work each year it seems.

Full frame adventure camera you are getting Sony... I do not like Sony, they require firmware updates nonstop and have a menu that requires an advanced degree to sort through. Plus they cost too much and I am not a fan of their glass. I also do not believe the hype on full frame = Pro. Especially since I make a decent side income in video and photography with a Fuji XT2 crop sensor. 

Yawn Bosco wrote:

Zach, everybody's got an opinion when it comes to photo gear and what the hell, I'll give you mine: the truth is it doesn't matter what you shoot it with, spend more of your money on experiences and putting yourself in positions with whatever camera you have to capture interesting things. Your subjects and the ability to tell a story with photographs, is what is going to make your work stand out. It's also what's going to get you work if you want to do it professionally. Shooting a ton, waking up to capture the good light, missing dinner for the waning hours of good light, convincing your ski/climbing/adventure partners to get up early so you can snap their efforts in that good light, putting time in with them so they trust you to photograph them, rigging, etc --- that's the actual stuff that will make a difference.

I work in video, my employer is a canon shop. We shoot on C300/500, and as a result when I snap photos at work it's with a 5d mark iv. None of that is adventure stuff. In my personal life, I shoot on a fuji xpro3 or on 35mm film. It's really not 'adventure' stuff either, it's more just documenting moments. I've taken photos I hate with all of the setups and photos I love with all of them.

Some additional things you should consider, that often are missing from forum discussions like these: lensing and menus. Honestly, look at a ton of photographs and if there's something you find you are drawn to, it's probably the lens more than the camera body itself. So learn what focal lengths and glass you like. I mentioned my employer is a canon shop. I love canon glass. It rocks, and in my opinion has a specific look that is distinct from Sony glass. I also think a full frame camera may not be a bad idea if you're trying to get into true landscape photography, where ultra wide angle lenses become much more desirable. Now, I'm not saying there aren't options on crop sensor cameras, but just do some research into lensing as much as you look at the bodies themselves. The investment of a lens system will take you a lot further than pixel peeping the newest body or whatever; with a good lens system, you'll outlive the investment of your camera body as a pro shooter. But as others have pointed out here, size might be a consideration--something for you to figure out.

The other thing I mentioned was menus. Every manufacturer has their own way of setting up their cams and for you to manipulate settings, and I think an underrated part of shooting professionally is your ability to be comfortable with time pressure and navigating a given camera quickly and without thinking--in part why I like the Fujifilm camera I shoot on in my non-work life is there's a physical knob for any setting I'd want to manipulate. I can change my ISO/shutter/f-stop manually and not have to deal with a screen or cumbersome menu--which is something I know is important for the documentary life photos I tend to snap.

It's not fulfilling to hear, but much like when people ask what they should buy as they are building their new trad rack or whatever -- the best advice I can give is shoot on as much stuff as you can and see what you like and/or are most comfortable and efficient with. The more you shoot with what you've got, the longer the list of "oh it'd be nice if I could do x, y, or z" Good luck, can't wait to see your snaps.

This guy knows! Plus he shoots Fuji so I agree with whatever he says. I too agree glass is like 90% of what makes a system. Fuji 90mmF2 and 56F1.2 are some of the most beautiful specimens out there. I can almost recognize photos shot with those two lenses just bc of the sharpness and bokeh patterns. 

Canon has a lens that I cannot remember rn but it was used a ton in Natural Geographic and other magazines through the early 2000's the body used varied but that lens had a look that made it a legend.

Used 2climb wrote:

Canon has a lens that I cannot remember rn but it was used a ton in Natural Geographic and other magazines through the early 2000's the body used varied but that lens had a look that made it a legend.

Probably the 24mm f/1.4 since Nikon didn’t have an equivalent and Sony wasn’t in the game. 

Zach Eiten wrote:

Hey everyone!

I have found some older forums discussing cameras but I wanted to know what you guys are running with in 2022?

I have rocked a Sony a6000 for years but want to upgrade to a full frame camera as well as get more into professional photography.

Anyhow, I have been looking at the Sony full frame cameras (A7 series, A9, etc). Are any of you out there using these currently for ski mountaineering/ ice climbing/ rock climbing/ landscape photography and liking them? Which model?

Thanks everyone! 

 Not the worlds greatest action shot but Sony A7R is a workhorse, lightweight, and really my favorite to shoot with. I purchased a tamaron 28-200mm lens and it is a one stop shop. 

one camera system isn’t going to cover everything you want to cover so the best camera for the job is the one you’re willing to carry 

JD wrote:

one camera system isn’t going to cover everything you want to cover so the best camera for the job is the one you’re willing to carry 

I think one lens isn’t going to cover everything, but I think one system can cover just about everything. I think it all depends on what you want. If you know what you’re doing you can certainly do just about anything with any of the major players though (Fuji, Canon, Nikon, Sony). 

If you’re just into photo, stick with Sony and grab a used a7ii and spend your money on a workhorse G master.
You don’t need any crazier specs than that, it’ll hold up just fine for you to learn and eventually upgrade to a better body. 

In the field, it’s best to get a single all around lens. I typically bring a 24-105 for mountaineering or a 16-35 for tighter multipitches.

The crux is how you carry it. If it’s in your pack you won’t shoot, especially in winter, bring 2 batteries per day.

Peak design clips are great. Also, the metal frame is a pain on the hands even with gloves. Maybe get a rubber body cover.