Expedition camera(s)
Discussion
Thanks for your advice, Paul 
Now I'm really confused
- the MP looks glorious (and my sponsorship budget might just stretch to one). Am I right in thinking it doesn't have a timer? Can an external one be used? (quite important as I'm on my own!!)
I appreciate that for print quality, film is still the daddy - the downside is that film becomes very fragile at cold temperatures (-40).
Just to throw a spanner in the works, I've spotted the Ricoh GR1 after a bit of Googling. Oh bugger...
http://home.pacific.net.sg/~kennetht/GR1specs.html
I take it you're a photgrapher, Paul? What are you up to for the last week of February? (and do you fancy visiting Siberia?!)
Now I'm really confused
- the MP looks glorious (and my sponsorship budget might just stretch to one). Am I right in thinking it doesn't have a timer? Can an external one be used? (quite important as I'm on my own!!) I appreciate that for print quality, film is still the daddy - the downside is that film becomes very fragile at cold temperatures (-40).
Just to throw a spanner in the works, I've spotted the Ricoh GR1 after a bit of Googling. Oh bugger...
http://home.pacific.net.sg/~kennetht/GR1specs.html
I take it you're a photgrapher, Paul? What are you up to for the last week of February? (and do you fancy visiting Siberia?!)
polar_ben said:
What are you up to for the last week of February? (and do you fancy visiting Siberia?!)
To get Paul out of his cosy bed you have to put large amounts of money through his letterbox! Though you could put him on sentry duty outside to keep off polar bears 
I'd do it for food and lodging but not at -40C
How about an expedition to somewhere more temperate?
polar_ben said:
Now I'm really confused
It doesn't mention one in the specs but it looks like it has one on the front of the body. Need to check with a dealer. Couldn't you get Leica to sponsor you, perhaps they would lend you some kit?
polar_ben said:
I appreciate that for print quality, film is still the daddy - the downside is that film becomes very fragile at cold temperatures (-40).
I was only thinking of film because you could achieve high quality in a small package without having to rely on tons of batteries. I know film becomes brittle and can snap at cold temperatures if you wind on too quickly. I have no experience in shooting in extreme conditions apart from the theoretical stuff that I have read, like covering the camera body with tape so your eyeball doesn't stick to the it etc. I know in the past, photographers had their cameras 'winterised', the lubricants taken out, which used to slow the shutters down etc. I believe the silicon lubricants used these days are good for -60 though.
It seems like you have enjoyed reasonable success with digital in the past so maybe you should stick to this road. One great advantage is that you can see that you have the shot. It's a long way to go back for a re-shoot! A 5 megapixel camera is going to be a big improvement over the what you've had in the past and may well be good enough for print depending on reproduction size. Another possible factor is that the higher res cameras require bigger batteries/more power to move more data around.
Out of interest just checked the working specs of my 1ds. It says it will work from 0-45ºC. For a pro camera, not much good for the Arctic! The advantage of the smaller cameras is that you can, as I guess you have done, keep them close to your body and keep the temp up and just whip it out when needed. This may be trickier with the bulkier SLRs?
polar_ben said:
Just to throw a spanner in the works, I've spotted the Ricoh GR1 after a bit of Googling. Oh bugger...
Can't help here. Know nothing about it. Looks like it has a fixed wide angle lens but looks cheap compared to a Leica.
polar_ben said:
I take it you're a photgrapher, Paul?
polar_ben said:
What are you up to for the last week of February? (and do you fancy visiting Siberia?!)
I put it down to being born in winter, but I actually like ice, snow and freezing cold and there's not much on the telly that time of year, so yes, I could be up for that. I've started training already. Went for a spin in the Griff in my swim-wear with the lid down today. It was getting a little parky at about 85. Forgot to hang a thermometer off my ear to record the wind chill though.
One of my biggest clients is a publishing company. One of their titles is 'Global Adventure' mag (think they just call it Global now) perhaps I could do a feature on you to fund a trip?
Better still, if you could 'knock up' one of Atomic Kitten, we could do a feature on you for 'Hello' or 'OK'.
simpo two said:
Not strictly true Simpo. I will happily accept payment by BACs.
simpo two said:
I'd do it for food and lodging but not at -40C
How about an expedition to somewhere more temperate?
Clacton-on-Sea between May and September? You big girl.
(sorry mate, couldn't resist) >> Edited by Bacardi on Sunday 14th December 18:25
Bacardi said:
Went for a spin in the Griff in my swim-wear with the lid down today. It was getting a little parky at about 85. Forgot to hang a thermometer off my ear to record the wind chill though.
No barbed wire shirt then?
FYI I'd hoped for somewhere more exotic than Clacton. Maldives-on-Sea?
Bacardi said:
polar_ben said:
I appreciate that for print quality, film is still the daddy - the downside is that film becomes very fragile at cold temperatures (-40).
I was only thinking of film because you could achieve high quality in a small package without having to rely on tons of batteries. I know film becomes brittle and can snap at cold temperatures if you wind on too quickly. I have no experience in shooting in extreme conditions apart from the theoretical stuff that I have read, like covering the camera body with tape so your eyeball doesn't stick to the it etc. I know in the past, photographers had their cameras 'winterised', the lubricants taken out, which used to slow the shutters down etc. I believe the silicon lubricants used these days are good for -60 though.
The coldest I've ever been out shooting was about -30. This was with a Maxxum 8000i. I was out for probably two hours (maybe it just felt that long, it's been a while) so the film definitely had time to cool down. I had no problems. Consider that that was with a motor driven camera with a fairly fast film advance. The Leica or any other manual camera (I'd also suggest a Nikon FM2 or FM3) will allow you to wind on slowly to minimize any potential problems. More likely than the film breaking is that you will get static discharges inside the camera as the film is wound on, which will show up as bright streaks in your picture. I've never had that happen but it is a possibility.
polar_ben said:
I appreciate that for print quality, film is still the daddy - the downside is that film becomes very fragile at cold temperatures (-40).
They've taken film cameras to the top of Everest and I've not heard of problems caused by the film becoming fragile, in fact I'm pretty sure that they actually had the film developed from Mallory's camera which was found a few years ago after being left on the mountainside for many years.
When I say fragile, I mean it tends to become brittle in extreme cold. Of course, lots of expeditions have had great results with film, it's just that I'm pretty cack-handed at times 
There's a great article on the Kodak site here - www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/c9/c9.jhtml
There's a great article on the Kodak site here - www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/c9/c9.jhtml
Hi Ed, good to meet you yesterday.
Unless there was another camera I don't believe they have found the one that counts. i.e. The one which proves, or not, as the case may be, whether they made it to the top.
"And what of the camera that Mallory is reputed to have taken up with him? It was not with his body, but it is quite possible that he gave it to Irvine, who was much more practical than Mallory. Somewhere on the North Face of Everest still lies the body of Andrew Irvine, undisturbed since 1975, and possibly still holding the secret of their remarkable and heroic attempt on Everest in 1924."
From this web site:
www.bbc.co.uk/history/exploration/everest/features/everest2000/bbc.shtml
ehasler said:
in fact I'm pretty sure that they actually had the film developed from Mallory's camera which was found a few years ago after being left on the mountainside for many years.
Unless there was another camera I don't believe they have found the one that counts. i.e. The one which proves, or not, as the case may be, whether they made it to the top.
"And what of the camera that Mallory is reputed to have taken up with him? It was not with his body, but it is quite possible that he gave it to Irvine, who was much more practical than Mallory. Somewhere on the North Face of Everest still lies the body of Andrew Irvine, undisturbed since 1975, and possibly still holding the secret of their remarkable and heroic attempt on Everest in 1924."
From this web site:
www.bbc.co.uk/history/exploration/everest/features/everest2000/bbc.shtml
Bacardi said:
Unless there was another camera I don't believe they have found the one that counts. i.e. The one which proves, or not, as the case may be, whether they made it to the top.
Hi Paul, it was good to meet you too!
Yep - you're right, they still haven't found it, and after a bit of googling, I've found that there actually is an expedition planned next year to try and find the camera. I think I'd read about what might happen if they did find the camera, and assumed that they had.
I'd recommend my personal favourite - a 1980 vintage Canon F1N. Bomb proof build and reliability, hybrid electromechanical shutter so you can still use 1/60 and faster shutter speeds when the cold has killed your batteries, and if you're attacked by wild animals you can use it to beat them to death ;-)
Pete
Pete
simpo two said:
Undisturbed since 1975?? If it was disturbed in 1975 they'd know where it is surely...?
Wang, the Chinese guy who found the body in 75 maybe didn't know about the camera. He just reported an English body, dressed in pre war clothing. Wang was killed in an avalanche the following day. The story is in the above link.
Even if he knew of the existence of a camera, it may have fallen from Irvine's pocket? The strap may have snapped if it was round his neck? Maybe it was in his backpack that ended up somewhere else after the fall? You also have to appreciate that looking for something on the North face of Everest at 26,730' isn't quite as easy as looking for a golf ball, in the rough, on the 17th fairway.
I guess they need a spell of mild weather so they can locate the body and then scour the area with metal detectors.
>> Edited by Bacardi on Tuesday 16th December 14:54
pete said:
I'd recommend my personal favourite - a 1980 vintage Canon F1N. Bomb proof build and reliability, hybrid electromechanical shutter so you can still use 1/60 and faster shutter speeds when the cold has killed your batteries, and if you're attacked by wild animals you can use it to beat them to death ;-)
Pete
Yes, would have to agree, the F1 & N were lovely cameras, like brick built outside conveniences.
Having earlier suggested Leica film cameras might be a good choice, certainly for size and weight, I wondered if they were, in fact, any good in extreme cold. Did a bit of poking around and found this amusing quote on a Leica users forum:
".....having lunch with a friend (Dean Conger, National Geographic photographer) who had just returned from the Arctic circle. He said he carried a basket of Nikon gear that immediately froze up and became useless unless the temperature rose above zero. He carried one Leica M2 and a package of lenses.
He used the Leica at temperatures down to 50 below and a wind chill factor he could not measure and it never stopped working. The punch line though was that when we was trying to walk the frozen tundra he used the Leica body as a hammer to knock the ice off his boots that had frozen there between the heel and the sole."
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff