DSLR vs Mirrorless for hiking

Igor

Igor

Messages
232
Name
Igor
Edit My Images
Yes
Im going for a hike in a couple of weeks to the lake district and camping out there somewhere for a couple of days.

I have a Canon 6D with a 24-105 L lens and also a Canon EOS M with a 18-55 and a 22mm f2

My dilemma is which camera do i take? weight is an issue but should i sacrifice image quality? Also i could take a mini tripod with eos m and would be a full size for the 6D

Im pretty sure the correct answer is take the EOS M. Still APS-C and full manual control. Just wanted to get some opinions

also if anyone could recommend particularly nice area to hike and photograph that would be awesome!
 
I'd take the lighter and smaller camera whenever possible, especially hiking. In fact, I'd probably just bring my X100, which is EOS M with 22 f2 in your case. Then work around the compromises.

There's a saying: Work to take the photo, not work to bring the gear. As we all know, it's not the camera gear that makes the photograph.
 
I bought a tripod of a size suitable for the lighter camera and lens combo. It came with a bag with a shoulder strap. It can hang on my back all day without me feeling that it's there.
 
Last edited:
Personal I would take the dslr, the 6d isn't the biggest of FF cameras although the 24-105 L is fairly heavy. the 24-70 F4 would have been a better lighter combination and is arguably a better lens. I always carry a tripod in my hands so I don't find it a problem with weight. But only you know what your comfortable to carry but if I was going out to the lakes to photograph I would want my best gear, but if it's just to do a bit of walking we'll probably the eos m.
 
Igor said:
Im going for a hike in a couple of weeks to the lake district and camping out there somewhere for a couple of days.

I have a Canon 6D with a 24-105 L lens and also a Canon EOS M with a 18-55 and a 22mm f2

My dilemma is which camera do i take? weight is an issue but should i sacrifice image quality? Also i could take a mini tripod with eos m and would be a full size for the 6D

Im pretty sure the correct answer is take the EOS M. Still APS-C and full manual control. Just wanted to get some opinions

also if anyone could recommend particularly nice area to hike and photograph that would be awesome!
Click to expand...

There's no one correct answer here - but you already know the answer for you! The only thing holding you back is the 'what if' anxiety of not having the 'best' kit available and the 'guilt' of leaving all that nice expensive and heavy kit back at home.

Take the 'M' & enjoy the freedom it gives you and the challenge of how to get the very best out of it. For sure you will encounter scenarios where the 6D would have been a better choice, but the way I look at it is perhaps the opportunity might not have presented itself if you had been weighed down by the bigger kit in the first place.
 
You choose which you are happy carrying. Are you hiking or looking to walk to a loaction to shoot when the light arrives?

I suggest you look at how you will carry it more than anything else if it is at the bottom of a big rucksack are you going to take it off and rumage for the camera. Especially if walking with non photographers who are going to complain about you stopping to shoot.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Cotton-Carrier-StrapShot-Carrying-CSP-3713/dp/B007XELMO4
 
i may just take the eos m with 18-55. i doubt ill need the faster lens of the 22mm for landscapes. i also have a 10 stopper for the 18-55 for some long exposures
 
alfbranch said:
Are you hiking or looking to walk to a loaction to shoot when the light arrives?
Click to expand...

hiking up and then setting up camp somewhere. maybe take a few shots on the way and on location
 
I do all my mountain hiking with camera kit. 5d MK3, 17-40, 50, 70-200, sometimes 14mm, tripod and filters.
It hurts the shoulders, but I like to have the kit with me in case. Sometimes the light can vary and change, and I would hate to be stuck with a wide angle. Plus the tele allows for really detailed panoramas, and Mountain scenery often looks better through the compression of a longer lens.
If you are planning on shooting at first light, or at the end of the day, I think a tripod is a valuable addition, as high ISO is not my favourite choice for landscape, and I'd rather have a bit of extra weight to allow me to shoot at ISO100
 
MattyW said:
I do all my mountain hiking with camera kit. 5d MK3, 17-40, 50, 70-200, sometimes 14mm, tripod and filters.
It hurts the shoulders, but I like to have the kit with me in case. Sometimes the light can vary and change, and I would hate to be stuck with a wide angle. Plus the tele allows for really detailed panoramas, and Mountain scenery often looks better through the compression of a longer lens.
If you are planning on shooting at first light, or at the end of the day, I think a tripod is a valuable addition, as high ISO is not my favourite choice for landscape, and I'd rather have a bit of extra weight to allow me to shoot at ISO100
Click to expand...

i do have a black rapid so maybe i could use that if i was to take the 6D
 
Igor said:
i do have a black rapid so maybe i could use that if i was to take the 6D
Click to expand...

Certainly worth some sort of stabilisation option if you are planning low light shots. Couple of weeks, you'll be approaching a full moon again, so the option to shoot some moonlit scenes on the tops would be worthwhile investigating. I know I would be!!
 
I've been using SLR's for years but recently bought a Panasonic GX7 for longer walks when I want to keep the weight down.

I found the battery life of the GX7 to be about 3 hours the first time I used it! I do wonder if that might have been a "first use" problem though as it seemed to last longer the second time.

Secondly I find using the Panasonic such a poor experience compared to a DSLR. On an admittedly hot sweaty walk with steamed up glasses etc, composition and more intricate settings was more or less guesswork. I'm sure it would have been more precise with a DSLR.

Having said that if you're carrying tent, sleeping bag and supplies you may have no alternative to taking the M.

If you're planning to use a 10 stop ND you'll have to take a tripod. Could you hang something heavy from the lighter tripod to keep it more steady?
 
Igor said:
i may just take the eos m with 18-55. i doubt ill need the faster lens of the 22mm for landscapes. i also have a 10 stopper for the 18-55 for some long exposures
Click to expand...

I was going to say that IMO it is worth thinking about which filters you have for each camera/lens.
 
Igor said:
hiking up and then setting up camp somewhere. maybe take a few shots on the way and on location
Click to expand...

Scounds like you need your best glass tripod and filters then.

For me that would be a CSC anyway as I no longer use a DSLR.
 
The main issue you will have if you are just taking the M is reflections on the LCD screen if it is bright and sunny. OK it will be Autumn and in the Lake District, so unlikely; but I would have a plan to workaround that issue even so.

Personally, I would want a backup camera with me (so I would recommend you take the 6D, lenses AND EOS M) but it depends on how secure your base camp is (so you can leave your 6D behind if you have a particularly taxing hike planned). You should be able to get by with just the EOS M and kit lens though..it all depends on if you are going for the experience or the pictures I suppose.

Igor said:
i may just take the eos m with 18-55. i doubt ill need the faster lens of the 22mm for landscapes. i also have a 10 stopper for the 18-55 for some long exposures
Click to expand...

If you are taking the M you might as well take the 22mm as it's tiny, and will be nice for night time starscapes. It's nice for portraits too, so you can take some shots around the campfire.

In fact... yeah leave the 6D at home and go for the lighter option :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top