Cutting down

[GeneW]

Going through another cardio rehab, I find like to travel very light. Weight gets to me. So I often go out with one body, one lens, sometimes two. I don't find it limiting. Even with my DSLR I often go out with a single prime attached.

Another fave of mine, for travelling light, is a TLR. One body, one lens, all in a fixed package.

Gene

 

[Steve Meltzer]

No. I brought the laptop because I was in the middle of editing a book and had to be able to communicate with the editor in the US. Carrying the laptop wasn't a lot of fun but at least I didn't have to carry it around all day.

 

[BillBingham2]

As good as my old M6 and 35 'Cron was for a one hand camera, I have to say the S3-2000 and either the 50/1.4 or 35/2.5 beats it. The dial focus beats the ring finger only focus. I am able to use a Gordy and carry it without a case, quick to eye level.

B2 (;->

 

[figfoto]

I used to carry 2 M6's: 24mm on one, the 35mm summicron on the other. 50 1.4 and 90 in the bag.

Now it's just the 1 M6 w/24mm and the Xpan w/45mm. The Xpan's 90mm in the bag. With this set up it's a little lighter [not by much].

 

[kalokeri]

Said something like this before, "travel light" and reduce yourself to one camera and one lens helps to see. It´s a relief and a burden because you have to choose the most versatile focal lens - it´s 50mm for me.

An alternative is a two lens kit with 35 and 90 - still light, but more to play with.

Thomas

P.S. Even with dslr you can use primes. With the crop of 1,5 a 24mm and a 50mm make a perfect, small and light couple.

 

[kalokeri]

Although "the industry" makes you decide between a small and slow "kit lens" or a heavy one with 2,8 isn´t it a relief to use small and fast primes?

I don´t know if my AF-D Nikkors 2,8/24 and 1,4/50 are good enough to get the best out of my dslr, but I´m content with the quality they offer.

Thomas

 

[zuikologist]

kalokeri, agree on the dslr kit. A Canon Xti with 28 and 50 makes a compact, lightweight kit. I use just that kit when I need digital but don't want the 5D's hanging around my neck.

I use something similar: a Pentax istDS with 24/2.8 and 50/1.7. Simple and light.

 

[Bill Pierce]

Anyone using a Tri-Elmar as a one-lens RF rig? Or is it just too slow?

 

[JNewell]

Anyone using a Tri-Elmar as a one-lens RF rig? Or is it just too slow?

I have been, on an R-D1. They seem perfectly suited for each other. It's not perfect - the lens is long for the focal lengths and the handling is a little funky (especially the order of the focal lengths on the selector ring, but that's driven by the M finder setup which unfortunately doesn't work on the R-D1). I used this combination (it was all I took with me!) at a family Thanksgiving get-together. The house was pretty well-lit. I left the ISO at 200 and used available light. The price of that decision was that a fair number of the pics are not critically sharp due to camera movement. OTOH, used outside in decent light, it's a really wonderful combination.

I'll link to some pics shortly.

 

[marke]

I cut down because I was sick of having this huge camera and being able to shoot 4000 images in one single 30 minutes outing. What a waste of talent and vision those DSLRs are.

You're crazy, Ned. Why can't you control yourself better than that? 🙄 Discipline yourself, man!

Seriously, I made the move for the same reason. I still need my DSLR to shoot certain events that warrant quick compositions that can only be done with a zoom. And if I ever get back into wildlife photography, I really "need" a 500mm/f4. I rarely get wider than 400 with my 100-400. Oh yeah, and then I better replace my pre-historic 10D too! But otherwise, I would rather not have that kind of "freedom".

 

[amateriat]

I cut down–way down–in early '02. Took the SLR system (two bodies, five lenses, including two large zooms, etc.) and traded it for a two-body, three-lens system that serves me to this day. This constitutes the "large" system; it stays permanently in my Domke F-803 to grab at a moment's notice (just add film). Outside this, there's a somewhat-working Konica Auto S3 (was supposed to go out for service a while back, but stuff happened...), and a Ricoh GR-1 which has been on the D.L. way too long. These two cameras are great to grab and go with, a few rolls of film in the pocket (and a Metrocard, for those days when I'm not on the bike). Then there's the Casio EX-Z850, the only digicam in the deal. This goes out with me a lot, although it's not as quick-on-the-draw as the Ricoh or S3 (as digital p/s cameras go, it's pretty fast). It only writes files in JPEG, but for what I do with it, that's not a big deal (I created a 16-bit TIFF-conversion action in PS to handle this).

Less can be good. A little bit less still, even better at times.


- Barrett

 

[dseelig]

When I am on a walk with my wife the tri elmar is the only lens now. When I travel for pro football I take -espically in the bay area- my 28 summicron and my 50 summilux, as small low light kit. I tend in the bay area to take bart despite traveling with a 400 2.8 and 2 1d bodies in a roller cart . When working for my local paper I take my wate tri elmar and my regular tri elmar and maybe my 25 zeiss all on my one m8 . The leica m8 is my personal camera the canons for assignment work, unless I need telephotos . When in a city at note I take my 28 summicron 35 and 50 summilux and a 75 summilux. I magine taking the equivalent in canon primes it would weigh a ton .

 

[df cardwell]

What was it that Smith said about available light ?

I keep a D-Lux-3 in my pocket today.

And when nobody is looking,
I make 5x7 palladiums from the files.

 

[sam_m]

I cut down because I was sick of having this huge camera and being able to shoot 4000 images in one single 30 minutes outing. What a waste of talent and vision those DSLRs are.

In my pocket? Probably a roll of film.

Waste of talent and vision? That's right, just keep blaming the camera.

[edit for spelling]

 

[Andrew Sowerby]

I try to cut back but it's kinda difficult. The scary thing is, when I look at my Flickr account, most of my pictures were taken with a beat-up Olympus Stylus Epic.

 

[Bill Pierce]

Somehow, I've never felt, however small it was, that a camera in a pocket or a belt pouch was ready to take pictures. I've missed enough shots, just out of sheer laziness, that I know I have to carry a camera ready to go. It's just as easy for me to carry a Leica on a shoulder strap (or even a DSLR with a small, fixed focal length lens) as a small point and push. So, i do tend to carry an M8.

Where the small point and push comes into play is it's ability to make you look like a crazy tourist. Nobody takes you seriously and tries to interfere with you. Also, in bad neighborhoods, if you're robbed you loose hundreds rather than thousands of dollars worth of cameras.

Bill

P.S. Where digital comes into play is that one 4 gig card is a lot less bulky than the equivalent in 36 exposure rolls of film.

 

[alexz]

I shrinked down 2 years back dumping my entire Canon pro SLR system once realized it sits in the closet about 95% of time and the desire to shoot an immediate pictures (even my kids) often got killed only by a thought of the need to take the heavy bag out, unpack the gear, set it up, etc...
I used to enjoy the sophysticated technology of pro photo grear for years, but suddenly realized how tired and lazy I became to be due of that.
That led me to RF world shrinking my "ammunition" to M6 and M3, and three lenses that cover my entire range if FL interests: 35mm, 50mm and 90mm.

Now, my everyday "take everywere" setup consist of beatup but very smooth M3 with 50mm 'Cron usually loaded with roll of Tri-X, often another roll along with a small meter in the pockets. T a times I feel like need to give some nice work to my 35mm so I take with me my M6 with 35mm Asph. 'Cron. In general, I favor one body - one lens approach, if I expect the need for 2 lenses for a particular session, I prefer to take both bodies with lenses "glued" to them then single body with two lenses and to be forced to switch lenses in the middle of session.
So that when heading to a dedicated street work (unfortunately not as often as I would like to) often both bodies with 50mm on M3 and 35mm on M6 get onto me, unless I intend to dedicate one to a particular lens in which case a single body is my choice.
But in general, I feel a single camera + single common lens would suit 80% of my needs and most certainly in such case I would rather have M3 with 50mm. However, that 35mm Asph. is too darn sweet on M6 to leave it calm too often....

 

[Harry Lime]

Anyone using a Tri-Elmar as a one-lens RF rig? Or is it just too slow?

I would like one, mainly so I can carry only one body on the street and switch quickly between my two focal lengths, 35 and 50. Even at f4 it would be plenty fast for 80% of shooting. I could always carry an extra fast lens in my pocket.

But alas, the Tri-Elmar is discontinued, expensive and uncommon on the used market.

 

[maddoc]

I would like one, mainly so I can carry only one body on the street and switch quickly between my two focal lengths, 35 and 50. Even at f4 it would be plenty fast for 80% of shooting. I could always carry an extra fast lens in my pocket.

But alas, the Tri-Elmar is discontinued, expensive and uncommon on the used market.

That Tri-Elmar is for sure interesting (travel photography) but recent prices for that lens make the Noctilux appear as a bargain ... 🙁

 

[Harry Lime]

The more I shoot, the less gear I use. I started out with a 50, but this quickly evolved in to a 21/35/50/90/135 combo on multiple bodies, with all sort of other junk.

The gear trap can be difficult to escape. I tended to take along a lot of gear, so I would be prepared for everything I could possibly encounter. After a while I noticed that no matter how much gear I took along, 99% of my shots were made with the 35 / 50 combo and one M body. Everything else was dead weight that was slowing me down and distracting me, because with that much gear I constantly had the wrong lens mounted, the wrong wrong camera type in hand or was shooting the wrong format for the situation at hand. Turns out this was mostly psychosomatic. So, eventually I let go of the security blanket and put everything, but two lenses and bodies on the shelf.

Also, over time your eye (hopefully) evolves and your lens choice corresponds to the way you see the world. (very difficult to get to this point with a zoom...)

So, now I'm down to the 35 and 50. I carry two M bodies, both for redundancy in case of failure and so I don't have to juggle lenses. I also like to put Tri-X in one and Delta3200 in the other, for day and night shooting. If I am going on a real shoot, I'll also toss in a Rolleiflex 2.8/80 or Nikon F/F3P, because I really prefer to shoot a 50 on an SLR for framing accuracy.

And it really works. My shooting has improved and I now 'see' like a 35 or 50.

You look at the work of most great photographers and you will notice that the vast majority of them eventually settled on one or two focal lengths. (Capa 50, HCB 50, Winogrand 28 etc). There are exceptions like Eugene Smith, who apparently used enough gear to stage the invasion of a small country, but then again it does help if you are a 'slightly off kilter' genius...

Last spring at the VII Photo Seminar Christopher Morris told us that he only carries a full frame Canon and the 2.8/24-70mm. If I remember correctly he may also have a fast 50, but borrows a 80-200 zoom for the occasional shot from a fellow shooter.