I've gotten a few e-mails asking what kind of pack/hat/binoculars/books/etc I like to use in my outdoor recreation. So here, complete with biases and everything, is a run-down of the stuff I like (not necessarily the stuff I have, though).
I use a Deuter AC Lite 25. This pack has what Deuter calls an "Air Comfort" system, which consists of a webbing which rests on your back while the modest internal suspension holds the actual pack an inch or so away. At the time of purchase I thought this would do nicely to keep things inside the pack from jabbing into my back, and it does. But in the store I did not appreciate how much it helped from a ventilation standpoint. The improvement over my old, more traditional daypack is not subtle.
At 1500 cubic inches the pack is plenty big enough for dayhikes, even stuffed with a camera and other not-really-needed gear. It also has a couple loops for hanging trekking poles.
Because I have a small frame, finding a pack that hugged my hips and put a significant part of its weight there - rather than on the shoulders and back - was difficult. The Deuter was one of only two models that could accomplish this when I was trying them on in the store.
Inside the pack I keep a Platypus hydration bag, the biggest available size. I haven't wanted that much water yet, but you don't have to fill it, and the large size has a nice zip top that allows you to get in there for a really thorough cleaning (or whatever).
I adopted trekking poles for use on some alpine hikes in Glacier National Park in the summer of 2002. I got some Leki Makalu poles, which I think were the second-cheapest available in the Leki line at the time. These are straight-handled poles with springs.
They took some getting used to. The only immediate benefits I noticed were during stream and snow crossings, where they significantly and immediately improved my balance and decreased my chances of getting dumped. It took a dozen miles or so to figure out how to use the poles while hiking on good trail, though. Once I did, I found that taking a bit of the weight with the poles helped my legs quite a bit.
At this point, I rarely go on a hike without them. Even on very short and flat hikes, I'm taking my daypack anyway (for water), so the poles are almost always strapped to the back. The bottom line is I think they are well worth the weight.
Addendum: As of early 2005, I can report that for the last year or more I've settled into definite trekking-pole usage patterns. I use the poles for stream crossings and snowfields most of the time. I don't use them when crossing level ground or when walking uphill. However, I find them absolutely invaluable when going down steep hills - they really save the knees. So my usage has changed a little since the above was written, but my conclusions have not - they are very much worth it.
For a hat to keep the sun off, a friend turned me on to the Sonoran Sombrero made by Outdoor Research. This is not an especially fancy hat, and it is the same relentless color as the desert around here, but it is well made. It crushes down into the pack very easily. It has a chin strap (which can be untied and removed) which keeps it on in the wind - which is an issue here, especially during March. The headband is adjustable and allows some air circulation beneath. I'm not sure it is the best sunhat available, but it is better than anything I've had, and is the one I like.
The Seattle Sombrero by Outdoor Research.
First thing I would say about this is, don't get a GPS if you don't know how to use a map and compass, and don't bring your gps unless you also bring your map and compass.
The original impetus for getting a GPS was to have a walking odometer for short hikes for which we didn't have maps. To a large extent this was a result of getting ambushed by National Park Service trail length information, which underestimated the length of a trail we took by almost a factor of two. The concept grew a bit from this original use, and expanded into more general navigational uses.
I use a Magellan Sportrak Pro GPS for both hiking and car navigation. The main advantages of this unit for my use are its small size and light weight. I wanted something that was waterproof and floating, for use on canoe trips.
The kit I purchased included Mapsend Streets. I did also buy the Mapsend Topo product. These maps are roughly equivalent to the 15 minute USGS series, though not the same. It is adequate for hiking but I prefer a 7 minute paper map for planning and most navigational purposes. Nevertheless, having a topo on the receiver is very handy at times.
I'm very happy with mine, but I'd advise you to do some other research to decide which unit is best for you. There are several gps review sites on the web which are worth looking at, and there are certainly enough different units on the market to confuse the consumer.
In 2002 I replaced my old binoculars with a new model. I spent some time at my favorite optical retailer and compared a bunch of binoculars. My conclusions and choices were somewhat unorthodox, according to several birding-oriented critics who can't imagine why I have been so stupid. On the other hand I'm an astronomer with 20 years of experience with applied optics, optical theory, and optical evaluation, so maybe I'm not completely ignorant. I ended up getting a Canon 8x25 IS binocular.
My rationale was:
Prior to purchase, I believed the IS would be superfluous at such a low power, so I started by evaluating the binoculars on their optical merits. Now that I've had some use of them, I see that my skepticism about the utility of IS at 8x was wrong. I don't care how steady our hands are - at 8x heartbeat jitter can still be seen, and the IS nulls even this. The result is a significant positive difference in what can be seen.
What I sacrificed for this was close focusing capability, which is probably not sufficient for butterfly enthusiasts, and weatherproofness. I've handled the weather issue with a look-through case and informed risk-taking, and just live with the close-focus limitations.
Since my wife has been joining me on more and more hikes lately, sharing one binocular has been troublesome. We're planning to get a second pair shortly. The Canon 10x30 IS is the one we will choose, based on further testing and the (possibly irrational) desire not to have two of the same kind. We may add a pair of weatherproof binoculars to the arsenal at some point in the future, but it is not a priority.
I'm not an expert here; I don't even really consider myself a birder. I use two most frequently - The Sibley Guide to Birds, and the National Audubon Society Guide To Birds (Western and Eastern Regions, as applicable). These latter guides are frowned upon and ridiculed by some of my die-hard birder friends.
Sibley is an incredible work; large and quite comprehensive. The bird images are reproductions of Sibley's bird paintings, and the book provides the various plumages for each North American bird. The book is arranged, like most field guides, more or less by genus.
The Audubon guides depict each bird photographically. The arrangement is morphological. Duck-shaped birds are put in a duck-shaped bird section. Songbirds, which often look much alike to a beginner, are arranged in part by color. Descriptions and range maps are separated from the photos.
I have to admit to using the Audubon more often, mainly because it is a much smaller and lighter field guide, and more warrants the term field guide than the Sibley, which I consider to be at the threshold of being a reference book. (Update Jan 2003: We finally got around to buying a hip pocket thing that is Sibley-sized. I now use the Sibley much more often than the Audubon.)
That said, when operating near the car or house, I use Sibley almost exclusively. It is the superior work in almost every respect. My main complaint is that the color saturation of some of the art is not consistent with what I usually see in the field.
For hummingbirds, local author Sheri Williamson's A Field Guide to Hummingbirds of North America is my choice. Though Sibley's is adequate for identification in most cases, Williamson provides more detail and more information about the birds, and eases identification (especially of the lookalike females) considerably.
I grew up pretty much understanding the taxonomy of North American mammals through voracious childhood reading, so I have less cause to use a mammal field guide than other kinds. I have the Audubon Guide to Mammals and occasionally use it, often to sort out ground squirrels or the like. For reference, I have a collection of National Geographic books and other naturalist's guides.
For butterflies, I use Butterflies of Arizona: A Photographic Guide (ISBN: 0966307216). One of the authors, Priscilla Brodkin, gave a nice talk to the Huachuca Hiking Club in November 2002. I also use the Audubon Field Guide to North American Butterflies. I'm very impressed with the former, and I'm not married to the latter - I picked it up mainly because I saw a good price on it used.
Ok, that's it - a quick rundown of everything outdoor-gear related that I've received an e-mail about so far (I think).
Jeff Medkeff's home page.
Jeff's astronomy pages.
Copyright © Jeff Medkeff, 2002, All Rights Reserved.