Best Camera For Elk Hunting?

[ELKampMaster]

As I was busy spending money just prior to the start of the 2003 Elk Season, one of the things I was trying to work into the budget was a digital camera -- didn' t happen, so I pondered how to " make lemonade out of lemons" . My strategy ended up going just the opposite direction....

I bought three of these:



27 shots, about $10, okay --- cheap, so what is good about it?

The problem when elk hunting is NOT having a " good enough" camera. The problem is ever stopping to take a photo in what " feels ordinary at the time" situations which are really quite special (having something quick and very handy is key here) AND being at the right place at the right time (having a bunch of people with cameras is the key here).

This camera wins on almost all counts.
(1) It is " good enough" (especially with 800 film) -- we had 2 out of 81 that were dark and we threw away [Especially since many websites will not allow you to upload pictures that are " too good" i.e. too much memory space required].
(2) It is disposable so you can be " fearless" with it. Now, it is likely to be in your " easy access" pocket along with your loose ammo, two candy bars, and God knows what else (would you stick a nice digital camera " in there" ? [Nope, probably put away in a safe place -- hard to get to -- that is a problem]).
(3) It is cheap enough that you can buy three of them, keep one, and give two to others in your party and constantly ask them, " Taken any pictures this morning?"
(4) Towards the end of the hunt, collect the cameras from your friends " burn off" any remaining shots [don' t forget the " unimportant" shots like your camp]
(5) Develop the film with extra prints for each hunter in camp.
(6) Take all the photos and put them into some sort of " story order" before you give them to your hunting partners.
(7) Use a simple flat bed scanner and PhotoShop to pull the good shots into your computer for upload to embellish any threads/posts you write. (If you know someone who has the scanner, you can upload everything to Hunting101.com in an evening.)

Two shortfalls I can see are: (1) you cannot review your photos right after taking them to make sure it is what you want (as with a digital) and, (2) memory sticks (digital again) hold more total photos (but at 27 x3 = 81 we were hard pressed to shoot enough) -- other than that they are a win-win, especially if the budget is running low at the finish line! Try it! Especially the " buy a camera for everyone" --- Hollywood don' t shoot just from one perspective and you can' t be everywhere at once!

Never Go Undergunned, Always Check The Sight In, Perform At Showtime,
EKM

[elknut1]

I use a disposable camera as well, they work good enough for me. I' m not a picture taker though. I' ll take two or three of a downed critter, then save it for the next one, many times it' ll set in my pack till turkey season before I ever finish them up. The pictures seem fine for the most part, a black on once in a while. Wish they' d make them things with 10 or 12 exposures instead of 27.
I' d hate to lose a 300.00 camera, but can afford a 7.00 one. elknut1

[Cyrus]

EKM
I know exactly what you mean. A number of years ago I recieved a very good camera as a gift. All the bells and whistles, a 20-80 removable zoom lense. I then got a 80-200 zoom and was pretty much set for what I need. People always comment on how nice the pictures from my camera are. Nice camera. Sure, but not real practical for pack in type hunting.
I love taking pictures while on trips. There is no better way to remember a trip than to look at pictures during the off season or years later. However, my camera isn' t exactly the " fit in your pocket, always handy" type. When I' m all loaded down with the gear I need and can barely close the zipper on my pack, the camera is not a priority. And if the weather is crappy and rainy or I' ll be in really rough terrain I' m loath to take it. Having dropped it on a rock and seen little bits go flying and dropping it in a lake, only a foot or so deep but still not good, and a few trips to the repair shop it' s taken me a few years to learn. Now it stays in camp a lot more than it used to and I don' t have as many pictures.
I think next year I' ll do like you did and get some cheapo disposables. I' ve been admiring you pictures on this board for the last little while and obviously they worked well for you and they look like great pictures as well.
I' d rather have more " good enough" quality pictures than only a few really good pictures.

Now if only you could get disposable video cameras. Same old problems there too. Weather, terrain, space/weight. What a guy really needs is a camera man to follow him around.

[Sigma7]

EKM:

With you there. I had an older point and shoot that started to act up in early October so it bacame a play toy for the kids. I was torn between a disposable and a newer camera - I like zoom lenses sometimes. Well I went and bought a new one with a zoom and did not even load it until I got to CO. Then of course I found that i did not like how it worked and it was a pain to use. So I would have been better off with the model you chose. I returned the new camera when I got back here. Not sure how to get around the zoom issue but likely i will go with a disposable next time around (and for the start of the whitetail season this weekend here)

[Power]

I just bought a digital camera (Olympus C-750) with a 10x optical zoom. It' s a pain to carry and I always worry about it but it takes awesome pictures, especially with the 10x optical zoom lens (380mm equivelant). I just keep it in a quart-size Ziplock freezer bag to protect it.

However, for most I think the disposibles are the way to go. I even have a few that I use when conditions are really bad. My 1 piece of advice is to get the ones that are waterproof (for underwater pictures). That way you can use them in the fog/snow/rain and also when things are dusty/dirty. Only a couple bucks more but then you can really abuse them.

[oldelkhunter]

EKM...I have a Olympus 4 megapixel digital camera but it is way to unwieldy and fragile to take on any kind of hunt except maybe a local deer hunt... I have told my wife that I would love the Canon Powershot 320...basically a Canon Elph with a 3.2 megapixel lense on it...size of a pack of cigarettes made almost entirely of stainless steel and I would still put it in a sturdy zip lock bag while hunting to keep water out of it...I don' t know how one could do better than that...

[BeaverJack]

I ain' t seed a camera yet thet will kill a elk. If they is one, its likely a big sucker. I' ll stick to my ' 06.

[oldelkhunter]

Hmm seems like a little while ago there was a genuine wyoming mountain man posing here with his Elk... Must have been a buddy packing that camera...

[BeaverJack]

We took thet pictur injun style. A rock for the camera, a piece of ice for the lens, an used the film from my tongue. Best to eat artichokes an' raw clams to git good colors, but we did ok with plain camp food an' snickers bars.

[noway]

I use an Olympus 35mm. I paid $120 dollars for it 10 years ago. Has a 10 second timer and a tripod mounting screw on the bottom. I carry one of those 6" adjustable tripods for taking timer pictures. it is very small and pretty flat so fits well in the outer pocket of my day pack.

Usually take appx 10 pictures of an animal. Usually get one or two good ones out of the bunch. I normally use 100asa film or 200 if I know the weather is going to be dark and dreary to try to get the best quality photo I can.

For me the photos are a major addition to a good hunt and would never trust them to an instant camera. If I happen to get a good animal I always get an 8x10 blown up and hang on the wall.
I don' t know for sure but I do not believe you can get good quality enlargements from the disposable camera photos. Just my opinion.

I' m with the rest of you guys however, noway I would carry an expensive camera out on a hunting trip. Just one more thing to keep track of and worry about.