I am 55 years old, and in reasonably good shape. I am going to do a 60 mile hike over terrain that will prove somewhat challenging, (Killarney, Ontario - Cloche trail), and am trying to figure out what I should take in terms of camera gear. So here are the selections that are fixed:

1) D800 camera - mandatory;
2) CPOL, 9-stop ND - with conversion rings to fit all lenses;
3) Light Tripod - (carried by another photographer);
4) Two batteries; 3 - 32GB cards;
5) Cable release.

Optionals - Lens choices.

1) 14 - 24 mm
2) 24 PCE - tilt-shift
3) 50 f1.8
4) 105 macro
5) 135 DC f2
6) 300 f4.

My inclination is go with 2 thru 4. My main aim is to get some good landscape images, and a nice starscape or two. I will pick up a camera condom since bad weather will likely express itself on one or two days. I think that about covers it.

If anyone has ideas about the lenses, or if I have forgotten any other must haves not mentioned in the list, please comment.

Thanks,

Nick.

I remember reading about how author Harlan Ellison in a case of gradual escalation with a problematic publisher slowly escalated through the complaint process, (with no satisfaction.) One day, spotting a dead gopher he packaged it up and sent it from L.A. to New York via 4th class mail in the middle of a heat wave. You could do worse than to emulate a master in the art of causing a great stink.

Haven't we all done that?

I still love back-focusing though.

The following link is worth reviewing. It covers court decision in the various circuits with respect to the right to photograph and take video in a public space.

http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/photography-the-first-amendment

One just general observation: Always state if asked that your photos or videos are intended to communicate information to an audience. It can be something as simple as, I share my photos with visitors to Flickr, and hence I am in the business of taking photos to share with members of the public and not merely for personal use.

The reason for that will become evident when you peruse the link provided.

In many circuits there are outstanding questions around the right to photograph or video police, and even public buildings. Keep in mind where you are, and the ruling of circuits in the places over which they have jurisdiction.

It is a sad day when a citizen has to know more about the law than policy and district attorneys, but that is the age we live in.

You and me both. But let's say right now that I give myself $500 / month as spending money, (which is about what I have as play money.) If I reduced that to $300 and put the other $200 away, I would save $2,400 a year for my camera project. In about 3.5 years I can afford the body, new, (by which time it will have dropped a bit, or a newer generation will have appeared.) The tilt-shift lens is going to be a big expense as well though. I fully expect to pay 6K - 8K for that, (if such a beastie ever finds its way into the field.) The new Hartblei-Zeiss 40 looks pretty impressive, (but it still is not wide enough), and it hits the 10K mark so that makes that a stretch unless I want to dedicate all my spending money for the next 3 years to the project, and become an anti-social recluse - otherwise known as a photographer-hermit.

Still, I can dream - and use my D800 and 24mm PC-E ... (I really have nothing to complain about there.)

double post

The Hassy which uses the same sensor, and which does not appear to have the weather sealing of the Pentax is 28,500; and the standalone Phase One back is 35,000; so for someone interested in medium format it is a bargain, (but still out of my snack bracket for awhile.)

Here is a preview ... the pricing is excellent for what it is, and the only thing holding me back is I lust for a wide tilt-shift lens, and I don't quite have the immediate cashflow ... but it is a tempting prospect for the landscape photographer.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/pentax-645z/pentax-645zA.HTM

And then there is the .600 Nitro Express revolver

http://www.tonyrogers.com/weapons/pfeifer-zeliska.htm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7yK7pW6VuE

Everything I learned when about steady shooting of a camera I learned when I was becoming a marksman in the army. Breathing - key; gentle release of the trigger - key; support from triangular body configurations - key; finding and using available means to support such as light posts, mailboxes, anything else - key. I have shot handheld at 1/4 second in a sitting position using my knees for support with my elbows pushed in to them, mirror-up, with a cable release. (And yes, I took the shot about 5 or 6 times to get it right.)

Throw on a prime lens, and go out with a small memory card.

Now, go out and do something totally unlike what you usually shoot. If you can't decide, choose a road or a street and start walking. Do you usually shoot at the golden hours: Go out in the middle of the day. Do you usually shoot portraits: Shoot architecture or macro.

The idea is to be creative through imposing limitation and change - to see the world in a new way.

Super-colourize the whole shebang, call it "high art", and tell her that as an "artiste" your vision must never be tampered with. Throw the CD down at her feet and walk off in a huff like a Parisian waiter ... but don't give that venomous ole viper a penny or a second more of your time.

A crop factor merely is a mathematical measure to indicate how much of the image area is lost in reference to full frame sensor.

The perspective does not change by using a FF or a crop factor when shot from the same place and using the same lens. The depth of field in the area common to both cameras is identical given the same lens stopped down to the same aperture.

That said: Most people choose the focal length to use based on decisions of framing the image, (for non-macro applications, and a few other specialty applications.) Hence what really happens in these discussions is that someone is comparing depth of field characteristics for common framing, but with different focal lengths to maintain the same framing between the two formats of camera.

Really what it comes down to is choosing the appropriate tools to capture the raw image from which you will realize an image you have in your mind's eye.

Somehow this has become emotional when that was not my intent.

My intent was and is only to point out what a tele-extender is doing, and that it has applicability, (from a technical/physical perspective), if and only if, the lens out resolves the camera.

Whether the use of it has artistic validity is a different matter entirely, and that really is about the mindset and skillset of the photographer.

Other issues, such as FPS, while relevant to one's choice of camera do not pertain to the logic and truth of my observations. Those observations should stand or fall on their own without regard to whether I do or do not shoot wildlife or BIF.

I am disappointed by the ad hominem and red herring fallacies in your comment. As stated, my intent was to inform, not to criticize your choice of tools from an artistic perspective. The art always speaks for itself, and that is far and away more important than tool choice.

Shoot a little further back and crop slightly. A longer lens crops, merely changing your angle of view, and with the 24MP of the D7100 you have a wee bit of cropping available. So just stand back the extract couple of feet then crop by 15% or so and you have the same image that would be produced with a slightly longer lens. So doing that, you can use the 50 as if it were a 60, (which is to say effectively a 90).

As Adams said, "It is the 12 inches behind the camera that is most critical".