Penny for your thoughts on this Travel/Hiking Camera System

Hi. I've been researching for quite a while now trying to find the
perfect balance between quality, size, weight, and price in selecting
a system that I can travel or hike with that still will produce top
quality. I was looking into the Canon L glass first. I love what
I've heard on the 17-40 f/4L lens and the 70-300 Diffractive Optic has
piqued my interest (though I have reservations about the $1300 price
and of reports of some very odd Bokeh). However, to complement the
70-300 I would need the 24-70 F.28L (my travel/hiking system would
consist of usually those two lenses unless specifically intending to
shoot landscape). Now I don't know if you've seen this lens, but it
is a beast. It's has a large diameter and is aproximately 5 inches
long, and it weighs in at slighty more than 2 lbs. It also costs a
mint. I've looked for other zooms in canon's lineup, and I just am
not impressed with the quality of any other alternatives in that focal
range.

So I looked outside of Canon. I checked Nikon, but they didn't
seem to fit the bill, so I looked into a Contax - Zeiss Lens system.
I was initially warry because I've heard how outrageosly expensive
Zeiss glass can be, and in many of their lenses that is indeed the
case. However, I've seen a Vario-Sonnar T* 24-85mm F3.5-4.5 available
for $920 used (E+ condition) and a Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 70-200mm
f3.5-4.5 available for $685 after rebate. The 24-85 is just 1.41 lbs
and 2.8 inches long and 3.4 inches in diameter. The 70-200 is just
1.38 lbs and 4.2 inches long and 3.1 inches in diameter. Both look
good on the MTF charts and users report the superb contrast and
sharpness typical of Zeiss glass. I've thought of paring these two
lenses with a Contax N1 that I've seen available used (E+ condition)
for $684, it also weighs in light for a pro body at only 1.75 lbs.

I still have an old rebel 2000 body that I was considering getting
the 17-40 F/4L lens for and using it primarily as a dedicated
landscape camera. So how does this sound? A Contax N1 Body with 2
Zeiss lenses covering a 24-200 focal range as a travel/hiking/all
around use camera with an Rebel 2000 (lets just say light box) with a
17-40 L glass ultra-wide for Landscape. All of this equipment should
come in at about $3000, under $2300 for the conax system.

Is my thinking here sound? I would welcome any other viewpoints
or suggestions in selecting a high quality system with a broad focal
range that is relatively compact and not obsurdly heavy that I could
travel and hike with.

That's some heavy glass for hiking. FWIW, I hike with an XPan and three
lenses. Light, nice quality, and the option of panos. The other option to
save weight is digital. One of the new 8MP ZLRs might be nice.

"Spencer Douglas" wrote in message
om...
Hi. I've been researching for quite a while now trying to find the
perfect balance between quality, size, weight, and price in selecting
a system that I can travel or hike with that still will produce top
quality. I was looking into the Canon L glass first. I love what
I've heard on the 17-40 f/4L lens and the 70-300 Diffractive Optic has
piqued my interest (though I have reservations about the $1300 price
and of reports of some very odd Bokeh). However, to complement the
70-300 I would need the 24-70 F.28L (my travel/hiking system would
consist of usually those two lenses unless specifically intending to
shoot landscape). Now I don't know if you've seen this lens, but it
is a beast. It's has a large diameter and is aproximately 5 inches
long, and it weighs in at slighty more than 2 lbs. It also costs a
mint. I've looked for other zooms in canon's lineup, and I just am
not impressed with the quality of any other alternatives in that focal
range.

So I looked outside of Canon. I checked Nikon, but they didn't
seem to fit the bill, so I looked into a Contax - Zeiss Lens system.
I was initially warry because I've heard how outrageosly expensive
Zeiss glass can be, and in many of their lenses that is indeed the
case. However, I've seen a Vario-Sonnar T* 24-85mm F3.5-4.5 available
for $920 used (E+ condition) and a Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 70-200mm
f3.5-4.5 available for $685 after rebate. The 24-85 is just 1.41 lbs
and 2.8 inches long and 3.4 inches in diameter. The 70-200 is just
1.38 lbs and 4.2 inches long and 3.1 inches in diameter. Both look
good on the MTF charts and users report the superb contrast and
sharpness typical of Zeiss glass. I've thought of paring these two
lenses with a Contax N1 that I've seen available used (E+ condition)
for $684, it also weighs in light for a pro body at only 1.75 lbs.

I still have an old rebel 2000 body that I was considering getting
the 17-40 F/4L lens for and using it primarily as a dedicated
landscape camera. So how does this sound? A Contax N1 Body with 2
Zeiss lenses covering a 24-200 focal range as a travel/hiking/all
around use camera with an Rebel 2000 (lets just say light box) with a
17-40 L glass ultra-wide for Landscape. All of this equipment should
come in at about $3000, under $2300 for the conax system.

Is my thinking here sound? I would welcome any other viewpoints
or suggestions in selecting a high quality system with a broad focal
range that is relatively compact and not obsurdly heavy that I could
travel and hike with.

The Contax System is somewhat heavy, total weight being about 5 pounds
for the body and two lenses, though it weighs in at far less than an
equivalent Canon system. I of course am jelous that you have an XPAN.
However, the camera body costs almost 2 grand, and the three lenses
would cost a total of about 4 thousand, bringing the body plus 3
primes to about 6 thousand dollars. External viewfinders if needed are
several hundred extra as well. I would no doubt drool over owning an
XPAN system, but my budget is about half of what that total purchase
would cost. Also, though the XPAN has good wide angle, excellent in
panoramic, I wouldn't have the extra 90-200mm telephoto focal range
provided with the Contax system. In regards to digital, I find that
the current 5, 6, and 8 megapixel Digicams with at most 2/3" sensors
are too noisy above ISO 100/200. ISO 400 is very grainy and ISO 800
is just unuseable. I know noise ninja can compensate, but I feel that
constant need for touchup would detract from truly enjoying my hobby.
Digital SLRs are of course even heavier, and the affordable ones have
a FOV crop of 1.5/1.6 so there goes your wide angle. The full frame
ones are excellent, such as the Canon 1Ds, though they cost several
thousand dollars for the body alone.

"Bowzre" wrote in message ...
That's some heavy glass for hiking. FWIW, I hike with an XPan and three
lenses. Light, nice quality, and the option of panos. The other option to
save weight is digital. One of the new 8MP ZLRs might be nice.

"Spencer Douglas" wrote in message
om...
Hi. I've been researching for quite a while now trying to find the
perfect balance between quality, size, weight, and price in selecting
a system that I can travel or hike with that still will produce top
quality. I was looking into the Canon L glass first. I love what
I've heard on the 17-40 f/4L lens and the 70-300 Diffractive Optic has
piqued my interest (though I have reservations about the $1300 price
and of reports of some very odd Bokeh). However, to complement the
70-300 I would need the 24-70 F.28L (my travel/hiking system would
consist of usually those two lenses unless specifically intending to
shoot landscape). Now I don't know if you've seen this lens, but it
is a beast. It's has a large diameter and is aproximately 5 inches
long, and it weighs in at slighty more than 2 lbs. It also costs a
mint. I've looked for other zooms in canon's lineup, and I just am
not impressed with the quality of any other alternatives in that focal
range.

So I looked outside of Canon. I checked Nikon, but they didn't
seem to fit the bill, so I looked into a Contax - Zeiss Lens system.
I was initially warry because I've heard how outrageosly expensive
Zeiss glass can be, and in many of their lenses that is indeed the
case. However, I've seen a Vario-Sonnar T* 24-85mm F3.5-4.5 available
for $920 used (E+ condition) and a Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 70-200mm
f3.5-4.5 available for $685 after rebate. The 24-85 is just 1.41 lbs
and 2.8 inches long and 3.4 inches in diameter. The 70-200 is just
1.38 lbs and 4.2 inches long and 3.1 inches in diameter. Both look
good on the MTF charts and users report the superb contrast and
sharpness typical of Zeiss glass. I've thought of paring these two
lenses with a Contax N1 that I've seen available used (E+ condition)
for $684, it also weighs in light for a pro body at only 1.75 lbs.

I still have an old rebel 2000 body that I was considering getting
the 17-40 F/4L lens for and using it primarily as a dedicated
landscape camera. So how does this sound? A Contax N1 Body with 2
Zeiss lenses covering a 24-200 focal range as a travel/hiking/all
around use camera with an Rebel 2000 (lets just say light box) with a
17-40 L glass ultra-wide for Landscape. All of this equipment should
come in at about $3000, under $2300 for the conax system.

Is my thinking here sound? I would welcome any other viewpoints
or suggestions in selecting a high quality system with a broad focal
range that is relatively compact and not obsurdly heavy that I could
travel and hike with.

A quick follup. Looked over the specs for the XPAN Body and the three
lenses, and the combined weight totals about 3.6 pounds. That's 72%
of the weight of the Contax N1 body plus 2 zoom lens system.

"Bowzre" wrote in message ...
That's some heavy glass for hiking. FWIW, I hike with an XPan and three
lenses. Light, nice quality, and the option of panos. The other option to
save weight is digital. One of the new 8MP ZLRs might be nice.

"Spencer Douglas" wrote in message
om...
Hi. I've been researching for quite a while now trying to find the
perfect balance between quality, size, weight, and price in selecting
a system that I can travel or hike with that still will produce top
quality. I was looking into the Canon L glass first. I love what
I've heard on the 17-40 f/4L lens and the 70-300 Diffractive Optic has
piqued my interest (though I have reservations about the $1300 price
and of reports of some very odd Bokeh). However, to complement the
70-300 I would need the 24-70 F.28L (my travel/hiking system would
consist of usually those two lenses unless specifically intending to
shoot landscape). Now I don't know if you've seen this lens, but it
is a beast. It's has a large diameter and is aproximately 5 inches
long, and it weighs in at slighty more than 2 lbs. It also costs a
mint. I've looked for other zooms in canon's lineup, and I just am
not impressed with the quality of any other alternatives in that focal
range.

So I looked outside of Canon. I checked Nikon, but they didn't
seem to fit the bill, so I looked into a Contax - Zeiss Lens system.
I was initially warry because I've heard how outrageosly expensive
Zeiss glass can be, and in many of their lenses that is indeed the
case. However, I've seen a Vario-Sonnar T* 24-85mm F3.5-4.5 available
for $920 used (E+ condition) and a Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 70-200mm
f3.5-4.5 available for $685 after rebate. The 24-85 is just 1.41 lbs
and 2.8 inches long and 3.4 inches in diameter. The 70-200 is just
1.38 lbs and 4.2 inches long and 3.1 inches in diameter. Both look
good on the MTF charts and users report the superb contrast and
sharpness typical of Zeiss glass. I've thought of paring these two
lenses with a Contax N1 that I've seen available used (E+ condition)
for $684, it also weighs in light for a pro body at only 1.75 lbs.

I still have an old rebel 2000 body that I was considering getting
the 17-40 F/4L lens for and using it primarily as a dedicated
landscape camera. So how does this sound? A Contax N1 Body with 2
Zeiss lenses covering a 24-200 focal range as a travel/hiking/all
around use camera with an Rebel 2000 (lets just say light box) with a
17-40 L glass ultra-wide for Landscape. All of this equipment should
come in at about $3000, under $2300 for the conax system.

Is my thinking here sound? I would welcome any other viewpoints
or suggestions in selecting a high quality system with a broad focal
range that is relatively compact and not obsurdly heavy that I could
travel and hike with.

In article ,
says...
A quick follup. Looked over the specs for the XPAN Body and the three
lenses, and the combined weight totals about 3.6 pounds. That's 72%
of the weight of the Contax N1 body plus 2 zoom lens system.

"Bowzre" wrote in message ...
That's some heavy glass for hiking. FWIW, I hike with an XPan and three
lenses. Light, nice quality, and the option of panos. The other option to
save weight is digital. One of the new 8MP ZLRs might be nice.

"Spencer Douglas" wrote in message
om...
Hi. I've been researching for quite a while now trying to find the
perfect balance between quality, size, weight, and price in selecting
a system that I can travel or hike with that still will produce top
quality. I was looking into the Canon L glass first. I love what
I've heard on the 17-40 f/4L lens and the 70-300 Diffractive Optic has
piqued my interest (though I have reservations about the $1300 price
and of reports of some very odd Bokeh). However, to complement the
70-300 I would need the 24-70 F.28L (my travel/hiking system would
consist of usually those two lenses unless specifically intending to
shoot landscape). Now I don't know if you've seen this lens, but it
is a beast. It's has a large diameter and is aproximately 5 inches
long, and it weighs in at slighty more than 2 lbs. It also costs a
mint. I've looked for other zooms in canon's lineup, and I just am
not impressed with the quality of any other alternatives in that focal
range.

So I looked outside of Canon. I checked Nikon, but they didn't
seem to fit the bill, so I looked into a Contax - Zeiss Lens system.
I was initially warry because I've heard how outrageosly expensive
Zeiss glass can be, and in many of their lenses that is indeed the
case. However, I've seen a Vario-Sonnar T* 24-85mm F3.5-4.5 available
for $920 used (E+ condition) and a Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 70-200mm
f3.5-4.5 available for $685 after rebate. The 24-85 is just 1.41 lbs
and 2.8 inches long and 3.4 inches in diameter. The 70-200 is just
1.38 lbs and 4.2 inches long and 3.1 inches in diameter. Both look
good on the MTF charts and users report the superb contrast and
sharpness typical of Zeiss glass. I've thought of paring these two
lenses with a Contax N1 that I've seen available used (E+ condition)
for $684, it also weighs in light for a pro body at only 1.75 lbs.

I still have an old rebel 2000 body that I was considering getting
the 17-40 F/4L lens for and using it primarily as a dedicated
landscape camera. So how does this sound? A Contax N1 Body with 2
Zeiss lenses covering a 24-200 focal range as a travel/hiking/all
around use camera with an Rebel 2000 (lets just say light box) with a
17-40 L glass ultra-wide for Landscape. All of this equipment should
come in at about $3000, under $2300 for the conax system.

Is my thinking here sound? I would welcome any other viewpoints

I'm still lusting after the 17-40 f4 L (have been since its release) but
I think you should spend a few hundred bucks extra and at least buy an
EOS30(V)/Elan7E(N) body for it (even less 2nd hand). Also, if you get a
70-210 f4 L with a 1.4TC and possibly a 50 f1.4 or 85 f1.8 (I have
these two) you will have a useful selection for travel. Don't buy the
consumer 100-300 (I did) or the similar 75-300. I'm assuming you would
pick and choose a selection according to the needs for each trip.
Personally I usually travel just with the 28-105 3.5-4.5 and keep it f8
or below. Its OK.

All this stuff will still be useful when you buy a digital body.

How about a lightweight Leica system. Pretty expensive, but the glass is
great, and it isn´t to heavy...

--
Venlig hilsen/best regards

René Ernst Nielsen

+45 66122111
+45 28722962
"Bruce Graham" wrote in message
. au...
In article ,
says...
A quick follup. Looked over the specs for the XPAN Body and the three
lenses, and the combined weight totals about 3.6 pounds. That's 72%
of the weight of the Contax N1 body plus 2 zoom lens system.

"Bowzre" wrote in message
...
That's some heavy glass for hiking. FWIW, I hike with an XPan and
three
lenses. Light, nice quality, and the option of panos. The other option
to
save weight is digital. One of the new 8MP ZLRs might be nice.

"Spencer Douglas" wrote in message
om...
Hi. I've been researching for quite a while now trying to find the
perfect balance between quality, size, weight, and price in
selecting
a system that I can travel or hike with that still will produce top
quality. I was looking into the Canon L glass first. I love what
I've heard on the 17-40 f/4L lens and the 70-300 Diffractive Optic
has
piqued my interest (though I have reservations about the $1300 price
and of reports of some very odd Bokeh). However, to complement the
70-300 I would need the 24-70 F.28L (my travel/hiking system would
consist of usually those two lenses unless specifically intending to
shoot landscape). Now I don't know if you've seen this lens, but it
is a beast. It's has a large diameter and is aproximately 5 inches
long, and it weighs in at slighty more than 2 lbs. It also costs a
mint. I've looked for other zooms in canon's lineup, and I just am
not impressed with the quality of any other alternatives in that
focal
range.

So I looked outside of Canon. I checked Nikon, but they didn't
seem to fit the bill, so I looked into a Contax - Zeiss Lens system.
I was initially warry because I've heard how outrageosly expensive
Zeiss glass can be, and in many of their lenses that is indeed the
case. However, I've seen a Vario-Sonnar T* 24-85mm F3.5-4.5
available
for $920 used (E+ condition) and a Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 70-200mm
f3.5-4.5 available for $685 after rebate. The 24-85 is just 1.41
lbs
and 2.8 inches long and 3.4 inches in diameter. The 70-200 is just
1.38 lbs and 4.2 inches long and 3.1 inches in diameter. Both look
good on the MTF charts and users report the superb contrast and
sharpness typical of Zeiss glass. I've thought of paring these two
lenses with a Contax N1 that I've seen available used (E+ condition)
for $684, it also weighs in light for a pro body at only 1.75 lbs.

I still have an old rebel 2000 body that I was considering
getting
the 17-40 F/4L lens for and using it primarily as a dedicated
landscape camera. So how does this sound? A Contax N1 Body with 2
Zeiss lenses covering a 24-200 focal range as a travel/hiking/all
around use camera with an Rebel 2000 (lets just say light box) with
a
17-40 L glass ultra-wide for Landscape. All of this equipment
should
come in at about $3000, under $2300 for the conax system.

Is my thinking here sound? I would welcome any other viewpoints

I'm still lusting after the 17-40 f4 L (have been since its release) but
I think you should spend a few hundred bucks extra and at least buy an
EOS30(V)/Elan7E(N) body for it (even less 2nd hand). Also, if you get a
70-210 f4 L with a 1.4TC and possibly a 50 f1.4 or 85 f1.8 (I have
these two) you will have a useful selection for travel. Don't buy the
consumer 100-300 (I did) or the similar 75-300. I'm assuming you would
pick and choose a selection according to the needs for each trip.
Personally I usually travel just with the 28-105 3.5-4.5 and keep it f8
or below. Its OK.

All this stuff will still be useful when you buy a digital body.

Go for a rangefinder (Leica, Voigtländer/Cosina or Soviet): Tiny & light
lenses.
Unless you need long teles (and that means carrying them) or want to do
macro work, a SLR is superfluous on a hike.

I often also take a Soviet MF folding camera (6x6 or 6x9) which is the
lightest & most compact way to do MF.

Chris