High Altitude Mountaineering Photography

[fx101]

This year I plan on making a summit bid on Aconcagua (~7000m) on the border of Chile and Argentina (highest peak in North/South America) via the "Normal Route" and ideally a bid on Denali/Mt. Mckinley (~6200m) in Alaska via the highly technical "Cassin Ridge."

Now, I've asked questions on Supertopo, MountainProject, Summitpost, etc. about appropriate cameras and usage but keep in mind that primarily the responses I got were from climbers who view their cameras as nothing more than souvenir-taking curiosities. Or "aid" rock climbers that are accustomed to climbing giant rock-walls like El Capitan in Yosemite and have no concept of how terrible weight is in alpinism. Or true mountaineers that will respond with "a camera? Why don't you strip off the plastic casing and replace it with electrical tape to save 20g?"

Now, Aconcagua is not a very technical climb so I'm not hugely worried about bringing a camera up (except for maybe surviving the bad winds). Denali, however, is an entirely different beast. To give you an idea about what me (and this potential camera) are up against....


You'll notice around the cassin ridge area there is some highly technical ice/rock climbing involved. This means that if I'm going to be taking pictures on the way up, the camera needs to be easily accessible from my harness. I have a light climbing pack, but something tells me that if I'm flipping out from being forced to climb crumbly vertical ice that doesn't take ice-screws well, I'm sure as hell not going to reach into my pack to grab a camera. So I'm thinking I can clip it into one of the gear loops of my harness with what's called a "trad draw". Essentially, two carabiners connected with dyneema webbing. One carabiner clips into the camera, the other into the harness. This way, when collapsed, the camera is close to my waist (my center of gravity isn't affected by a swinging camera) and when I want to take a picture, I simply extend the webbing to be able to take a picture comfortably (and have the camera tethered so if it falls, it doesn't fall and tumble 20,000 feet to the bottom).



The technical aspects aside, i need a camera that weights next to nothing, is weatherproof enough to not die if it's -40 outside or handled with snowy gloves, and handles extremely variable light conditions well. Let me expand on that last point a bit. I don't know how many of you have been on a glacier... but let me tell you... it's like going to the beach. The amount of sunlight reflected back from those things is mindblowing. If you are exposed to glacial reflections for too long, you can actually suffer permanent eye damage and get horrible sunburn. This is why we use "glacier glasses" which cut 85% of visible light. Is the camera (presumably a P.O.S) going to be able to handle such insane lighting conditions well? If anybody has experience with this stuff I'd love some input.

Budget is under $1k ideally. But if there is something lighter and better, I'll go as high as necessary.

[Photo-John]

Hope you don't mind that I moved your post to our sports photography forum. I thought it was a better fit here.

I am not a climber but I do a lot of ski photography and I know a whole bunch of professional ski / ski mountaineer photographers. I think you're going to find we all recommend bigger, heavier, more expensive cameras than you'd like. The problem with going super light is the build quality and reliability. Over the years I've found that opting for bigger and heavier is usually the best compromise for serious outdoor photography. My quickie recommendation would be an APS-C sensor digital SLR like the Canon EOS 7D or the Nikon D7000 with an 18-200mm zoom lens and polarizing filter to help deal with glare. You should also look at the Olympus digital SLRs. they are very small and light and I've really enjoyed using them. The Olympus E-620, in particular, is very small and light. But the performance of the Canon and Nikon cameras I mentioned will be better. There's also the new Olympus E-5. It's about the same size as the Canon and Nikon and has a better build than the Olympus E-620.

Here are links to articles on all of those cameras:

Nikon D7000: http://reviews.photographyreview.com...preview-video/
Canon EOS 7D: http://reviews.photographyreview.com...eo-experience/
Olympus E-620: http://reviews.photographyreview.com...opening-video/
Olympus E-5: http://reviews.photographyreview.com...p-digital-slr/

If you're really going to be shooting at -40 you're going to be in trouble no matter what camera you have, though. you know, the colder it gets the worse battery performance is. That's why mountaineering photographers liked the old Nikon and Olympus cameras that were completely mechanical - no batteries to compromise camera performance.

Have you looked at the Olympus and Panasonic Micro Four Thirds cameras? I've shot some skiing with the Olympus E-PL1 and it's worked fine. It's much smaller than a digital SLR but it still has interchangable lenses and uses the same sensor as the Olympus digital SLRs. Like I said, I've used it for skiing but I'm not sure how well it would do at temperatures well below zero. Once nice thing about the Olympus Micro Four Thirds cameras is they're small enough that you can just zip them inside your parka so it's always there if you need it. I've done that touring, on the skin track. I always put the camera back in my pack for the descents, though. Here's my Olympus E-PL1 review: http://reviews.photographyreview.com...-e-pl1-review/

I'm not so sure about the build quality of the Olympus Micro Four Thirds cameras, either. The E-P1 and E-P2 are all metal and might be a better choice than the E-PL1 or the new E-PL2. They are heavier, though. However, they don't weigh nearly as much as a digital SLR and zoom lens.

[SmartWombat]

I like the idea of using a film camera instead of digital.
No battery problems, no charging issues at each camp.
But how do the mountaineers manage film changes?


I've been thinking about battery performance, John.
Does the battery have to be in the camera?

Just because that's where the manufacturer puts it doesn't mean it has to stay there.
For many cameras you can get a DC adapter, basically a dummy battery pack with wires to a AC-DC power supply.
Even if that was just wired up to a battery inside your jacket, you get the benefit of protection from the cold and thus better performance.
Would it be practical?

[fx101]

You bring up a good point with the batteries.... Problem with the external battery in the coat is that it poses a safety hazard. What if I fall and the rope gets caught on the cable? It'll rip my jacket in half and cause undue pain. Problem with a DSLR is, ignoring the weight, they are big (even the compact ones). Also, the compact ones aren't exactly "burly" and won't handle a blow to a rock well.

I've been eyeing the fully mechanical Leica's actually. The M4's can be had for around $900 in new-ish condition. The 28mm f/2.8 lens seems like a great fixed focal length for mountain photography (most shots will be close to the people doing the climbing anyways...) and it only weighs 180 grams (and is TINY). I'm thinking the old-style leather satchel cases would work. I can sling it across my shoulders, open the case to shoot, and close the case all with one hand. Anybody got more experience with these film mechanicals or have other recommendations?

As for film changes.... I was thinking perhaps using a clear plastic bag, and working inside the plastic bag to change the film. Any suggestions on changing film in adverse conditions? (I'm guessing dealing with film in rainstorms will be similar in nature).

[Photo-John]

Film and cold don't mix well, either. Static electricity is an issue because it's so dry and static can cause small bits of flash exposure on your film. Severe cold can also make film crack and chip. So nostalgia for the old days would be a little misguided

Nikon made a couple of all mechanical film cameras, I think. I believe they all had "M" in the their name. The one I'm thinking of is the FM2. One of the favorite film cameras for mountaineers back in the day was the Olympus OM, because of it's small size and low weight. It's not as small as a Leica but it's arguably more versatile and the OM lens line is very rich. There's also a later OM Ti, which is even lighter and jewelry beautiful to boot. I think the OM cameras also had full mechanical exposure settings but you would probably want to do more research on that.

As cool as a film camera seems, I think digital cameras offer a lot more benefits. The biggest one has got to be the stable and compact nature of memory cards. If you take a film camera, consider the care you'll have to take with the film and the weight and bulk as well. You have to figure that into the equation. And when you do, I think digital looks a lot better. From experience, I also know that digital SLRs are built a lot better than people think. I seriously abuse mine as do most working outdoor pros. The average photographer babies their camera and never even comes close to testing the limits. If it were me, I wouldn't think twice about taking a Nikno D7000 or Canon EOS 7D. I am also pretty sure that's what Galen Rowell would do if he were still around

[Danbaileyphoto]

I agree with John. I'd go digital, but maybe take a film backup like the FM2 in case somethig goes wrong. You can always leave it at basecamp.

The D7000 is light enough but it offers complete, professional quality imagery and technology. I think with something like that, your only concern is keeping the batteries warm, but it should be up to the job.

[Wanderlust]

I came across this post while trying to find an appropriate camera for 2 climbs I am doing early next year- and it looks like fx101 had the EXACT question and mountains in mind that I have, only he asked a year ago. I am wondering if fx101 has 1. completed both Aconcagua and Denali and 2. did you find a suitable camera to capture the experience!? I look forward to hearing from you! Ps- I couldn't post a private message as I haven't any post on this site yet. Can the moderator possibly forward this to him? Thanks guys!

[mattb]

It seems not all that much has changed in the year since this thread was posted.
Did we ever hear back from the OP on how things worked out?

I like a small-ish SLR like the Olympus E-620 or the camera I back into the BC, a Pentax K-x (now replaced by the K-r). They are a lot more substantial than a P&S but the photos are worth it to me. I like a small prime lens to keep it compact and just live with whatever FL I take with me (typically 40mm or 15mm on a APS-C sensor).

Newer options include weatherproof P&S cameras from Olympus, Pentax, Canon and others but I have only played with the Olympus. The IQ is so-so but the camera can take a lot of abuse including full submersion.

I have heard of people keeping a hand warmer strapped to the camera with a rubber band or in the case with it for battery preservation. Also keep in mind LCDs don't always work well in extreme cold so a cam with an optical viewfinder might be worth it.

Let us know how it goes and I'd love to see some photos!

[fx101]

I'd just like to update this thread since it's been a while...

Unfortunately due to some weather issues summiting Denali didn't pan out. I have a couple of nice basecamp shots but that's about it... it was a nightmare up there. I didn't end up attempting Aconcagua due to being too busy at the time, but I plan to attempt it soon. Shouldn't be too bad.

I can, however, offer advice from the guides and what worked for me.

Don't use film. The notion of changing film with high winds and flying snow without taking your gloves/mittens off is absurd.

Don't bring a magnesium/metal chassis camera. My D300 is WAY too heavy, for instance. The cheaper polycarbonate DSLR's are better bets. Most mountaineers use P&S cameras, but you can get away with a small and light DSLR (that has proper bracketing and Exp Comp. buttons). To be honest, weather sealing is irrelevant. If the weather's bad enough that you need the weather sealing then you shouldn't be taking pictures anyways. The D7000 is a winner.

Bring several batteries and only keep one exposed to the cold at a time. If you're about to summit put in a warm one and you'll be set (it takes around 30-45 min for the battery temp to really drop inside). Like someone mentioned, an external battery system isn't a bad idea. I'm currently working on a system that runs a wire from a battery pack inside my bag, through my jacket, to a retractable cable holder on my harness. When I'm about to shoot I take out the camera and plug in the port.

There's no point in bringing multiple lenses. A wide angle zoom (12-24 is a good choice) is all you need.

The most important thing to consider is how you carry the camera. I used my pack most of the time. Hence, i barely took pictures during the actual climb. There's no time to stop and sift through your pack. The best thing to do is (unlike what I've seen recommended elsewhere) use one of those cases that cover the camera+lens combo. If you use a small lens then it should fit. I would then use a quickdraw to attach this. Basically, you clip one of the carabiners to both the gear loop of your harness and the case, then clip the camera to the free carabiner. This way, the case will stay close to your body, but you can open it, use the camera, and the camera will still be tethered to you by the sling that connects the two quickdraw biners together.
Oh, and make sure that you use the rear loops or your ice axes/tools will slice into your camera.

Don't bother with flash. Headlamps do the job just fine. Not enough battery power available w/ the cold for flash to even be reasonable anyways.

Set your camera on aperture priority at f/8 with auto iso. It's bright as hell out there, so set the EV to -1. Set the display to histogram. If the exposure is off, just bracket and you'll usually nail it. In the future, I'll play around with HDR and see how well it works. You can operate everything with mittens this way.

FYI a remote wireless shutter trigger isn't a terrible idea. You can sneak a small unit into your mitten so all you need to do is set the lens to infinity (it's f/8 on a wide angle... how off could you possibly be??) and 'spray and pray'. It's all about putting the trigger in a good position so it doesn't become annoying as hell when you're nervously hanging off your two ice tools on a poorly protected traverse.

[Photo-John]

Thanks for following up. Sorry you didn't get to summit but that's the way the ball bounces with mountaineering, right?

I like your gear and setup recommendations. What about a compact system camera like the Olympus E-P3? That would probably be what I'd want to take - with a superzoom lens like the 14-150mm (28-300mm equivalent).

Please post a couple of photos - even if they aren't from the summit

[fx101]

The E-P3 might not be a bad idea, actually. Only thing is with a more compact system you have to make sure that there are buttons for the more commonly used functions. Using menus is simply not an option .

I'll post some of the better shots in the critique section. I'm doing some climbs in Wyoming soon and I might update this thread using shots taken with these techniques (as well as some photos of the setup).

[mattb]

Thanks for updating us! Looking forward to the pics!
I do a little ski mountaineering (usually just day trips) and have been using my Pentax K-x and just recently got a K-5 which I have only taken skiing a few times now. I'll typically put my 15 or 40 mm prime on it and it's not too big or heavy that way and I can keep it in my chest pocket.

I think the new Olympus OM-D or Pentax K-01 look they could be a nice mountaineering cameras too! The Pentax is quite a bit cheaper but the Oly is sealed and has an articulating screen.