lucasjld
Member
Hi there!
I'll be going around Europe (solo backpacking) in Jan/Fev 2013 and was thinking of taking my Bessa R2M + 35mm 1.4. OR a Canon 5D Mark II + Voigtlander 40mm f/2 pancake (aka little fella).
I have some pros and cons. But before I share with you my doubt, I have some questions about x film vs y film.
Last month my friend brought me 15 rolls of Kodak Portra 400 (I live in Brazil and it costs around US$ 25/roll, so he got some in US).
Before he arrived, I had a Fuji Superia 400. Cheap, mostly the only one you still find around here.
I was "amazed" with the contact print. I've not printed all the pics yet, but the colors were so nice, I was like "Is the Portra 400 that better?" Of course, I mean if it will make that big a difference for ME, uni student around europe, not wanting to spend lots of money, but still wants good IQ.
Travelling 20 days I'd use about 40-50 rolls at least.
40 x £6,50 (Portra 400) = £ 260
40 x £8,05 (processing in good lab) £ 322
Total: £ 582
(I'll finish my trip in London, where I'll stay for 2 weeks, so these are "UK" prices)
That is a LOT of money. BUT, if I bought the Voigtlander 40mm f/2 for my 5D, that has the lightness and size I need (thats why I bought the Bessa R2M), I would spend nearly the same amount of money (around £500).
If I use a cheaper film, it would cut down half the expenses with the film itself. I know the Portra 400 is a kickass film, but is it enough to make me pay all that much?
So, Bessa R2M:
. Pros
- Light
- Small, fits in jacket pocket
- Film (good IQ)
- Doesnt draw too much attention
- f/1.4 lens
- Battery is smaller than a thumb nail.
. Cons
- Take 40 rolls of film in my backpack (it doesnt take THAT much space, but it still counts)
- Nightshots not easy with a ISO 400 film
- $$$$$$$
Canon 5D Mark II
. Pros
- Frame count/money are not related
- Review/wont loose shots because of exposure
- Still good IQ
- Nightshots possible
- 28mm 1.8 / 50mm 1.4 kit*
. Cons
- Weight and size
- + Weight and size* (even more if I took 28/50mm instead of 40mm)
- Battery, cards, charger... they also take space
- Draws a bit more of attention
- $$$
Sorry for the long post but this thing has been going in my head for ages.
I'll be going around Europe (solo backpacking) in Jan/Fev 2013 and was thinking of taking my Bessa R2M + 35mm 1.4. OR a Canon 5D Mark II + Voigtlander 40mm f/2 pancake (aka little fella).
I have some pros and cons. But before I share with you my doubt, I have some questions about x film vs y film.
Last month my friend brought me 15 rolls of Kodak Portra 400 (I live in Brazil and it costs around US$ 25/roll, so he got some in US).
Before he arrived, I had a Fuji Superia 400. Cheap, mostly the only one you still find around here.
I was "amazed" with the contact print. I've not printed all the pics yet, but the colors were so nice, I was like "Is the Portra 400 that better?" Of course, I mean if it will make that big a difference for ME, uni student around europe, not wanting to spend lots of money, but still wants good IQ.
Travelling 20 days I'd use about 40-50 rolls at least.
40 x £6,50 (Portra 400) = £ 260
40 x £8,05 (processing in good lab) £ 322
Total: £ 582
(I'll finish my trip in London, where I'll stay for 2 weeks, so these are "UK" prices)
That is a LOT of money. BUT, if I bought the Voigtlander 40mm f/2 for my 5D, that has the lightness and size I need (thats why I bought the Bessa R2M), I would spend nearly the same amount of money (around £500).
If I use a cheaper film, it would cut down half the expenses with the film itself. I know the Portra 400 is a kickass film, but is it enough to make me pay all that much?
So, Bessa R2M:
. Pros
- Light
- Small, fits in jacket pocket
- Film (good IQ)
- Doesnt draw too much attention
- f/1.4 lens
- Battery is smaller than a thumb nail.
. Cons
- Take 40 rolls of film in my backpack (it doesnt take THAT much space, but it still counts)
- Nightshots not easy with a ISO 400 film
- $$$$$$$
Canon 5D Mark II
. Pros
- Frame count/money are not related
- Review/wont loose shots because of exposure
- Still good IQ
- Nightshots possible
- 28mm 1.8 / 50mm 1.4 kit*
. Cons
- Weight and size
- + Weight and size* (even more if I took 28/50mm instead of 40mm)
- Battery, cards, charger... they also take space
- Draws a bit more of attention
- $$$
Sorry for the long post but this thing has been going in my head for ages.
kshapero
South Florida Man
I carry a Nikon D7000 and 35/1.8 (FOV 50mm) lens plus an M3 and 21/.3.4. It's all good.
bugmenot
Well-known
Can I ask you what gear you currently use for your photography?
If I were in your position, I would grab a 5DII with the 24-105 (L glass) kit lens for under $2.2K that they go for nowadays, cheaper if used.
Then grab a couple of extra batteries, some compact flash cards, an external hard drive (rugged one), and a small laptop or tablet of some form, perhaps a Windows 8 tablet, and you are good to go for ... a good hundred thousand photographs or so.
Those would be the perfect companion for backpacking, albeit a bit heavy.
All of that would still come out at under $3000 if you purchase them in the US or Canada. Even purchasing them in Europe would come out cheaper than Brazil.
Of course, if you already own the memory cards, extra batteries, the 5DII, and perhaps even that lens, etc ... you are ... already saving money
If I were in your position, I would grab a 5DII with the 24-105 (L glass) kit lens for under $2.2K that they go for nowadays, cheaper if used.
Then grab a couple of extra batteries, some compact flash cards, an external hard drive (rugged one), and a small laptop or tablet of some form, perhaps a Windows 8 tablet, and you are good to go for ... a good hundred thousand photographs or so.
Those would be the perfect companion for backpacking, albeit a bit heavy.
All of that would still come out at under $3000 if you purchase them in the US or Canada. Even purchasing them in Europe would come out cheaper than Brazil.
Of course, if you already own the memory cards, extra batteries, the 5DII, and perhaps even that lens, etc ... you are ... already saving money
Michel154
Established
70 photos a day , i would go with the canon
Brian Legge
Veteran
I don't think I could sustain 70 photos a day. Even shooting digital for a few hours I rarely came away with that many photos.
Are you sure you want to sort through 1,400 photos at the end of your trip - or more if you're shooting digital? What percent of those do you expect to keep or post somewhere?
That might sound naive to the digital shooters out there but... thats a lot of shots, however you slice it.
Are you sure you want to sort through 1,400 photos at the end of your trip - or more if you're shooting digital? What percent of those do you expect to keep or post somewhere?
That might sound naive to the digital shooters out there but... thats a lot of shots, however you slice it.
lucasjld
Member
My current gear:
Canon 5D MkII + 17-40mm f/4 + 50mm 1.4 + 28mm 1.8
Bessa R2M + Voigtlander 35mm f/1.4
I can't go around with a 17-40mm or 24-105. Its way too big. Thats the reason I got a rangefinder. I can't take two cameras as well.
About the 70 photos a day, I don't know if I would take all that. Its actually good for you people to tell me that its way to much. I normally take two shots of everything (when possible). I might use 1 and 1/2, even less, around 40 pics/day.
I won't take a laptop either cause my backpack will be full and my current one is not that small.
Canon 5D MkII + 17-40mm f/4 + 50mm 1.4 + 28mm 1.8
Bessa R2M + Voigtlander 35mm f/1.4
I can't go around with a 17-40mm or 24-105. Its way too big. Thats the reason I got a rangefinder. I can't take two cameras as well.
About the 70 photos a day, I don't know if I would take all that. Its actually good for you people to tell me that its way to much. I normally take two shots of everything (when possible). I might use 1 and 1/2, even less, around 40 pics/day.
I won't take a laptop either cause my backpack will be full and my current one is not that small.
thegf
Established
this whole idea that rangefinders go unnoticed is a bit overrated. think of how many people in Europe you will see that have DSLRS. how many would be shooting with "discrete" rangefinders? you need to just hide in plain sight.
also, bear in mind that 40-50 rolls of film would take up a LOT of space. you don't avoid the issue of editing your images either. in some ways shooting film would just complicate things.
also, bear in mind that 40-50 rolls of film would take up a LOT of space. you don't avoid the issue of editing your images either. in some ways shooting film would just complicate things.
lucasjld
Member
When I say "discrete" is actually sizewise. I don't worry about safety around Europe, I know it is not 100% safe, but I'm quite used to worse scenarios.
Yeah, it would be the size of film that woul concern me
How do you find manual focusing with the canon?
How do you find manual focusing with the canon?
mfogiel
Veteran
If you shoot colour and own a good digital camera, shooting film is pointless. On the other hand, if you wanted to shoot B&W, using the digital camera would be pointless.
skibeerr
Well-known
When I walked the Camino de Santiago de Compostella I forwarded film "Listo de correos".
There are many rff members in the EU, maybe you can arrange little stashes of film all over Europe and thus take the volume of film out of the equation.
There are many rff members in the EU, maybe you can arrange little stashes of film all over Europe and thus take the volume of film out of the equation.
bugmenot
Well-known
You plan to carry that much film, but consider the 24-105 or other standard/wide zoom L glass for your 5DII to be heavy?
Just a question: Have you ever actually held 50 rolls of film, in their plastic containers, in hand to see how heavy it is? Let me do the math for you.
A regular roll of 36 exposure in its canister, inside the plastic container weighs ~25 grams.
50 rolls of that would be 1.25 Kilograms.
The Canon 24-105L weighs 670 grams, which is half of your rolls of film.
Not sure what entices you to want to shoot film with a rangefinder, and go through all the troubles of possibly losing some shots because of crappy labs or exposure to the sun or the elements of the wild or even airport security or atmospheric radiations. Not only that, you want to shoot colour film, when Digital is superior to colour film in just about every way ...
To me, and I had done this for 4 years when I travelled to many countries and hiked in their wilderness with this exact setup, it makes much more logical sense to take the 5DII, some batteries and memory cards, a good strap, and the 24-105 lens (and only that lens if you wish) than to take a Rangefinder with perhaps one or two M mount lenses. That lens covers just about every standard focal lens you would want to use, while your primes on the Bessa won't offer the same flexibility. Not only that, it also saves you money, or rather, prevents you from spending more.
And the notion of being discrete ... well, a rangefinder tends to attract MORE attention nowadays ...
You will see many many people with DSLR and large lenses all over Europe (except if you venture to the more ... shady areas), and you can blend in nicely with any of these tourist crowds, and capture photos, while being completely ignored (for the most part, though watch out in Germany).
In the end, it just comes down to this: Shooting film while trekking a continent, backpacking through it all is just not worth the trouble.
Just a question: Have you ever actually held 50 rolls of film, in their plastic containers, in hand to see how heavy it is? Let me do the math for you.
A regular roll of 36 exposure in its canister, inside the plastic container weighs ~25 grams.
50 rolls of that would be 1.25 Kilograms.
The Canon 24-105L weighs 670 grams, which is half of your rolls of film.
Not sure what entices you to want to shoot film with a rangefinder, and go through all the troubles of possibly losing some shots because of crappy labs or exposure to the sun or the elements of the wild or even airport security or atmospheric radiations. Not only that, you want to shoot colour film, when Digital is superior to colour film in just about every way ...
To me, and I had done this for 4 years when I travelled to many countries and hiked in their wilderness with this exact setup, it makes much more logical sense to take the 5DII, some batteries and memory cards, a good strap, and the 24-105 lens (and only that lens if you wish) than to take a Rangefinder with perhaps one or two M mount lenses. That lens covers just about every standard focal lens you would want to use, while your primes on the Bessa won't offer the same flexibility. Not only that, it also saves you money, or rather, prevents you from spending more.
And the notion of being discrete ... well, a rangefinder tends to attract MORE attention nowadays ...
You will see many many people with DSLR and large lenses all over Europe (except if you venture to the more ... shady areas), and you can blend in nicely with any of these tourist crowds, and capture photos, while being completely ignored (for the most part, though watch out in Germany).
In the end, it just comes down to this: Shooting film while trekking a continent, backpacking through it all is just not worth the trouble.
It always amazes me how much photographers hate looking at their own work (I.e. editing or post processing). Anyone who knows me personally knows I shoot a lot of photos. I actually love looking at what I have. It takes a few second per pic to delete the garbage in Lightroom (and admittedly, there's always a lot).
Brian, this isn't aimed at you, so please don't take offense. I have to say though... If one isn't willing to sift through the crap to get to the good stuff, then I wonder why one would be into photography. Most photographers who go out to photograph on the street with no objective but to photograph what they think will make a interesting photograph are going to have to shoot a lot to get very little. Many of the small format masters of the past shot ALOT to get what we know as their best work. ALOT. Do not be afraid to shoot a lot of photos. Museums, galleries, books, etc. do not keep stats on how many frames it took you to get your best work.
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
Because you are shooting color, take the 5D and the 40mm. It is hard to make an argument for shooting 35mm color film these days. The biggest challenge won't be the equipment, it will be not shooting clichés.
robert blu
quiet photographer
I agree 100% - As for the choice it depends on how and what you want to shoot: a little of everything, go digital. Selected subjects go with film.
It's my just my idea.
robert
PS: I know it is not among your opportunities, but this seems a case where an OM-D would be ideal...
ottluuk
the indecisive eternity
Take the Bessa for 'serious' stuff and a decent digital P&S to take care of casual shots. This should obviously cut back your film expenses as well, maybe by half, even.
I would definitely NOT go on a long and expensive trip without a backup camera. S*** happens, no matter if you have a Canon, Nikon, Voigtländer or Leica.
And I think with today's choices in compact camera gear, a 5D II + 24-105 is pretty much the last thing I would take on a backpacking trip. The DSLR form factor is really ill-suited to packing - a weird lump with bulges that take up more space than the actual volume of the body. And they're pretty heavy, too.
I would definitely NOT go on a long and expensive trip without a backup camera. S*** happens, no matter if you have a Canon, Nikon, Voigtländer or Leica.
And I think with today's choices in compact camera gear, a 5D II + 24-105 is pretty much the last thing I would take on a backpacking trip. The DSLR form factor is really ill-suited to packing - a weird lump with bulges that take up more space than the actual volume of the body. And they're pretty heavy, too.
Paul Jenkin
Well-known
I would take the Bessa and learn to shoot a bit more selectively. Assuming you are awake and able to shoot 8 hours a day (allowing for meals, transport and other things that must be done that distract you from your camera) that's around 10 shots an hour for the entire duration. That's a lot of shooting. The Bessa is also less conspicuous and a lot more compact.
If you can't help yourself and you're more of a machine gunner than a sniper (photographically speaking), the digital camera makes more sense. However, as much as I like my digital (I have a Nikon D700) I much prefer shooting film. No definitive reason, just personal preference. I shot my holiday in Morocco on Ilford XP2 Super using a Leica M6TTL and 2 lenses.
As for the film, Fuji Superia 400 is excellent film. Very fine grain, great exposure latitude and well worth the 1/3rd saving off the cost of Portra. It also scans really well. You can get Superia 400 for less than £4 a roll if you buy in bulk in the UK. Google "Ag Photographic" and see what's on offer. Portra is a bit better for skin tones but there's not a massive amount in it - especially if you have access to Photoshop.
Enjoy your trip.
If you can't help yourself and you're more of a machine gunner than a sniper (photographically speaking), the digital camera makes more sense. However, as much as I like my digital (I have a Nikon D700) I much prefer shooting film. No definitive reason, just personal preference. I shot my holiday in Morocco on Ilford XP2 Super using a Leica M6TTL and 2 lenses.
As for the film, Fuji Superia 400 is excellent film. Very fine grain, great exposure latitude and well worth the 1/3rd saving off the cost of Portra. It also scans really well. You can get Superia 400 for less than £4 a roll if you buy in bulk in the UK. Google "Ag Photographic" and see what's on offer. Portra is a bit better for skin tones but there's not a massive amount in it - especially if you have access to Photoshop.
Enjoy your trip.
boomguy57
Well-known
I would say only take the R3M if you really love shooting film. I carried 40 rolls of film with me to Portugal last year with my M6, and had my X100 as my digital 2nd body. You could always take down the number of rolls of film you bring with you--take the Bessa and 15 rolls of film, for example--and still carry the Canon and your 2 primes you mentioned in the OP.
I always take 2 cameras, in case of theft, damage, or other kinds of loss. I'd hate to be without a camera on a trip.
I always take 2 cameras, in case of theft, damage, or other kinds of loss. I'd hate to be without a camera on a trip.
leicapixie
Well-known
i love film. But! You will go thru numerous security checks. Film WILL be X-Rayed. Add that to possible lousy labs and or one's you are not familiar with..
A large unknown. Plus carrying all that film. Film will reduce the number of photos taken, but you may not be opening yourself to new visions and vistas.
Take a small P/S that can handle everything. You don't need high end. i travel with a Canon Powershot s-590 and now the Canon Powershot 1200. A few ounces, a good back up, possibly becoming your main camera!
i traveled regularly to South Africa. it is a dangerous as Brazil. Europe will be better but there are places and times, where carrying the Large 5d is not a great idea.
My last trip from North America via Europe was pure small digital. Fun glorious fun. Memory cards are so cheap.
i can take 100 pix per day, at events i usually do about 500 to 1000!
Yes one must do editing. I 'd rather have more to see, than wish i had captured something that was not done. Using film, i tend to be cautious and so selective. The images are not better., simply more like my usual..
Leave the film for home. i have done books of my travel for family, me. i have prints done with the P/S at about 8x11"plus hundreds of 4x6".
i seldom can see difference between the small cameras and my 35mm. Oh! If there's flare, it's my Summicron! If sun is in photo and no star shapes, it's digital.
Enjoy your trip.
A large unknown. Plus carrying all that film. Film will reduce the number of photos taken, but you may not be opening yourself to new visions and vistas.
Take a small P/S that can handle everything. You don't need high end. i travel with a Canon Powershot s-590 and now the Canon Powershot 1200. A few ounces, a good back up, possibly becoming your main camera!
i traveled regularly to South Africa. it is a dangerous as Brazil. Europe will be better but there are places and times, where carrying the Large 5d is not a great idea.
My last trip from North America via Europe was pure small digital. Fun glorious fun. Memory cards are so cheap.
i can take 100 pix per day, at events i usually do about 500 to 1000!
Yes one must do editing. I 'd rather have more to see, than wish i had captured something that was not done. Using film, i tend to be cautious and so selective. The images are not better., simply more like my usual..
Leave the film for home. i have done books of my travel for family, me. i have prints done with the P/S at about 8x11"plus hundreds of 4x6".
i seldom can see difference between the small cameras and my 35mm. Oh! If there's flare, it's my Summicron! If sun is in photo and no star shapes, it's digital.
Enjoy your trip.
Gumby
Veteran
I understand these "what should I bring" dilemnas but sometimes it seems like a lot of overthinking going on. Here's my approach:
1. Decide if 60-70 frames/day is an achievable reality.
2. Decide if money is an issue or not.
I think this will help drive your decision.
Reading between the lines, though... I doubt that you'll have too much fun/success with such high expectations, and money seems to be an issue. If I were in your shoes I'd take option #2.
Whatever you do... have fun.
1. Decide if 60-70 frames/day is an achievable reality.
2. Decide if money is an issue or not.
I think this will help drive your decision.
Reading between the lines, though... I doubt that you'll have too much fun/success with such high expectations, and money seems to be an issue. If I were in your shoes I'd take option #2.
Whatever you do... have fun.