Am I crazy to take a Nikon D800 Backpacking

[BernardLanguillier]

No,  they can't because it's a defect inherent to D800.

Never heard of it, never experienced it. Besides, the way the RRS brackets spreads the physical stress over the full surface of the underbody of the D800, there is just no way a possible weakness of the tripod attachment part would have any impact.


Cheers,
Bernard

[kers]

D800's internal metal frame near the tripod mount can be easily broken and this is a well-known issue. If it ever happened to you on the hike, it would definitely ruin your photography. Perhaps you can carry some other camera instead.

They used to say that you could use a Nikon as a hammer without any problem...
I think it will still counts for the D4 bodies, but not for the d800's...
On the other hand; the d800 bodies have been working flawless for me from the beginning they were introduced.

on topic: yes i would carry a d800 body and some lenses if i think i would want to do some serious photography.
And also a tripod - for where i usually go - above 2000m- there are no trees.  For me 'the standpoint'  is one of the most important things in making a photograph.

[HSakols]

Yes, the limiting factor here is how much weight I can safely carry.  At least I do know what I'm getting myself into.  I've backpacked in the Sierra Nevada hundreds of times.  What is strange is when I traveled to Turkey this fall, I brought along just an Olympus EPL5 with no tripod and was satisfied.  However, I was traveling with a group of friends and the main purpose of the trip was not photography.  This is different because it is what I'm most interested in photographing and eventually printing.  I will carry a carbon fiber tripod and my d800 has a L bracket.  This is essential for mounting my 70-200 in a vertical position.  Once again I appreciate everyone chiming in and behaving themselves.  Over the weekend (well over the last two years) I rebuilt my website.  If you look at my Tuolumne Meadows Gallery you get a sense of what I like to do.

www.yosemitecollection.com

[smthopr]

If it were me, I thnk if take the d800 and just a 50mm lens (small). I'd crop cor short telephoto and shoot panoramas for wide angle an stitch in the computer.

Just one question: how will you charge the batteries?

[HSakols]

Thanks to a recommendation from these forums.  http://www.voltaicsystems.com/7-watt-kit

[JNHenry]

For what it's worth, I'm glad I took my D800e, RRS -24L tripod, three Zeiss lenses, and the RRS multi-row pano kit on my multiday hike of the Mildford Track in New Zealand a few years ago.  The Milford Track is regularly listed as one of the top 5 multi-day hikes in the world, and I was doing it just to take pictures.

Now, because I went on the trek with 4 days notice, I went with the fully supported option.  That meant I only had to carry a day pack holding a change of clothes, lunch, water, rain gear, and my photo gear---no tent, sleeping bag, or multiple days of food.

I'm glad I did it.  The memories are incredible; the photos are some of my best.  Could I have captured the same images with a "lesser" set up?  Sure.  But, I would know the difference when I looked at the prints---others probably wouldn't notice.  So, I have the memories and the images.

Take the camera.  Take a good lens or two, and a tripod.  And have a great trip.  I'm jealous you're getting to do it.

Jeff

[lowep]

this sounds like a golden excuse to sell both and buy something else

[SeanBK]

Sean, you may be a big guy. I am a small woman. If I use the "carry 1/4 of your body weight" limit often cited by backpackers as a good guideline to safe packing, that's 30 pounds. I have done 1/3 my body weight, 40#, but it wasn't pretty and I was s-l-o-w. Some, perhaps a big chunk, of that 30# may be in water, if you are traveling through areas where water is widely spaced. How much gear you can carry depends on your size and your terrain. Answer will be different in different situations.

Nancy, I'm 5' 6.5" @ 170lbs, so not in a great hiking shape by any stretch of imagination, just a strong desire for good photography & common sense that's it.
   I agree with Bernard @ RRS L-bracket quality it can take a abuse & have no effect on D800.

[dwswager]

Sean, you may be a big guy. I am a small woman. If I use the "carry 1/4 of your body weight" limit often cited by backpackers as a good guideline to safe packing, that's 30 pounds. I have done 1/3 my body weight, 40#, but it wasn't pretty and I was s-l-o-w. Some, perhaps a big chunk, of that 30# may be in water, if you are traveling through areas where water is widely spaced. How much gear you can carry depends on your size and your terrain. Answer will be different in different situations.

First, everyone has to consider their own situation and limitations.  Some people have lower thresholds for pain and discomfort.  Others very high.  As a point of comparison, "The average weight carried by a soldier on a dismounted operation is about 100 pounds, including a 30- to 40-pound rucksack..."

The original poster mentioned 2 options and so we should be concentrating on those 2 options for him; giving advice to the best of our knowledge to help him make his own choice.  Since we don't really know all the details it becomes hard to give concrete advice.  I'm the type that will lean toward better quality photography.  Others might want to 'enjoy' the trip more.  I can honestly say that I have never gotten back from a trip and said "I'm glad I didn't pack the good equipment!"  I'm more likely to skimp on everything else because from the time the trip is over until I die, the photos will be what I cherish.  I'll forget the pain, but remember the photos.

BTW, w/ respect to D800 frame cracks, I was under the impression that it was on the back plane and not the bottom.  I know the D810 was redesigned to have a thicker frame and not turn the tight corner where the crack occurs on the D800.  But I can't fathom how using a custom plate would not be better than screwing into the tripod socket.

[NancyP]

My L bracket (Kirk one-piece) saved my 6D's bacon about two weeks ago when I slipped and came down hard on my side, elbow, and left rear corner of the camera. There's a decent scratch in the L bracket (and on me), and a perfectly functioning 6D.

[DeanChriss]

Even if that were the case, Arca swiss compatible brackets such as the RRS L brackets remove any possibility of this happening and have been considered for years pretty much mandatory for field tripod work.
Cheers,
Bernard

That's true if the force imposed is toward the bracket. The fact there is a thick plate under the camera has no influence if the force is not directed toward that plate, such as when carrying a camera mounted on a tripod. Forces in other directions stress only the tripod attachment point of the camera.

[NancyP]

True enough. So I am happy the camera landed on its L bracket.

[Maverick02]

 I too have been photographing the Sierra Range for decades, when you say Northern Yosemite are we talking
 out of Twin Lakes area? If yes, then make sure you include the lakes east of Finger Peaks (Sawtooth Ridge),
 Slide Canyon has numerous places, Seavey Pass area has some pretty lakes hidden away from the trail that
 are worth visiting, Matterhorn Canyon from the Burro Pass area can be sublime with the right light as can be
 the Upper McCabe Lake area at sunset.
 
 Agree with the folks who say that you should carry the best equipment (including tripod) you can carry, period.
 For snapshots along the trail and during harsh light take a small point and shoot, when your doing your serious
 stuff I am assuming you will be taking the time to scout out locations each day so you can go back for the golden
 hours to capture those money makers with you D800.

[BernardLanguillier]

That's true if the force imposed is toward the bracket. The fact there is a thick plate under the camera has no influence if the force is not directed toward that plate, such as when carrying a camera mounted on a tripod. Forces in other directions stress only the tripod attachment point of the camera.

No, that is not the case. Torque will be carried mostly by the under body plate. I would argue that it is when a torque is applied that the reduction of stress on the tripod attachement point is the most valuable.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Stephen Starkman]

Nope. Have travelled with my D800e and recently D810 on such outings.

I have a small collection of excellent small(ish) light (kinda) lenses - 28 1.8G, 50 1.8G, 70-200 f/4 VR. And a great, less often utilized Zeiss 35 2.0 (manual focus). Perfect for me, great selection. Some days I leave a lens or two back in the car/hotel. Small bag. GREAT image quality. There are some fantastic mirrorless systems available now too... but I wouldn't spend the money to acquire one if I didn't have it already.

Having said all that, I shoot primarily landscape so the corner/edge performance is really really important for me. If I was shooting street, candids, or other then I wouldn't be so particular about corner quality.

Hope this helped a bit.
Stephen

https://www.flickr.com/photos/stephenstarkman

[Stephen Starkman]

I agree with Bernard's reply.

[DeanChriss]

Ok, I need someone to explain this to me. If a camera is attached to an Arca style aluminum plate by a single screw into the tripod socket of the camera, and the plate is clamped into a tripod head, how are the forces on the camera any different than if the camera was directly screwed to a tripod head using the same tripod socket? I can see how downward forces would be better distributed if the Arca plate covers more of the camera's bottom plate than a tripod head would. But if, for instance, you pull straight up on the camera, the plate supplies no additional support or force distribution at all no matter how big the plate is. If you push forward or backward on the top of the camera there's a little more support across the front edge or back edge of the camera's bottom plate, again, *if* the Arca plate covers a larger area of the camera's bottom plate than a tripod head alone would. But the forces acting on the camera's tripod socket are the same.  It would be different if the Arca plate were glued to the camera, but it's just attached at a single point, exactly like it would be if there were no plate and the camera was attached to the tripod head directly by its tripod socket. I'm willing to be wrong, but I just don't get it.

Didn't mean to hijack the thread. I'd vote to endure the pain of the heavier camera on the backpacking trip too.

[BernardLanguillier]

Ok, I need someone to explain this to me. If a camera is attached to an Arca style aluminum plate by a single screw into the tripod socket of the camera, and the plate is clamped into a tripod head, how are the forces on the camera any different than if the camera was directly screwed to a tripod head using the same tripod socket? I can see how downward forces would be better distributed if the Arca plate covers more of the camera's bottom plate than a tripod head would. But if, for instance, you pull straight up on the camera, the plate supplies no additional support or force distribution at all no matter how big the plate is. If you push forward or backward on the top of the camera there's a little more support across the front edge or back edge of the camera's bottom plate, again, *if* the Arca plate covers a larger area of the camera's bottom plate than a tripod head alone would. But the forces acting on the camera's tripod socket are the same.  It would be different if the Arca plate were glued to the camera, but it's just attached at a single point, exactly like it would be if there were no plate and the camera was attached to the tripod head directly by its tripod socket. I'm willing to be wrong, but I just don't get it.

You are obviously correct that there is no difference if the force applied is a straight pull, but most failures - I would imagine since I have never heard of one - do happen more when a strong torque is applied to the screw.

The RRS brackets have a lot of value here because they wrap around past the edge of the bottom plate and therefore are able to increase the size of the area resisting the torque. They are indeed de facto larger than most tripod support plates.

But this is again very theoretical since I have never heard of a particular failure in this area, nor have experience it and I am not particularly kind with my cameras and tend to use heavy lenses... and it is indeed not the point of this thread.

Cheers,
Bernard

[HSakols]

then make sure you include the lakes east of Finger Peaks (Sawtooth Ridge)

Oh yes we will be there!

[duane_bolland]

I’m sure I’m in the minority here, but I’ve not been overly impressed with Yosemite and the Sierras.  I’d chose Utah over Yosemite any day.  I do very much enjoy the bristlecone pines however. 

I did a week in the Sierras with a 5D2, 16-35, 100 macro, and tripod.  I survived.  The biggest challenge was getting all the food in the bear-proof container.  (Take Tuaca instead of beer.  It is lighter, tastier and doubles as dessert.)  I think you need to simplify your kit.  I recommend the D800, 16-35, and an 85mm or 100mm (macro not required).  The 50mm is too close to 35mm and therefore can be covered by cropping a 35mm shot.  And I think the 70-200 is overkill.  If you need something longer, just crop the 85/100 image a bit.  For me personally, I'm not into really wide angles, so a 24-105 would be all I would need.