Gumby
Veteran
p.s. I always travel with film, have never had a problem with weight or film-management, and strive to take fewer but better images.
Do I really need it?
- Thread starter lucasjld
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 57
- Views 5K
lucasjld
Member
Thats actually something I thought. B&W is THE thing about film.
Well, I've never held literally 50, but around 35-40. Is it not that light indeed. But when I mean "big and heavy" is something that will be around your shoulders. The rolls will be in the bag. And as "ottluuk" said, the form factor of a big lens is ill-suited to packing.
Anyway, I'll think about the 24-105 as well. It is a really wide zoom cover!
While I was testing my camera, one roll lasted 2 or 3 days. But I wasnt going around a place I didnt know.
So I came up with this "24 hours" workflow:
I might take 1 or 2 pictures of where I'm staying, 1 or 2 pictures of each meal I have (if its something different), 5 or 6 pictures of the places I visit, 5 or 6 pictures of people, the city itself, architecture, etc. Around 30 pictures a day.
I exaggerated a bit on the "40-50 at least". I assumed that 1 roll a day would be to tight, but it may be not.
Do trains have all that annoying checks like airplanes?
I'll also try to center all the processing in one lab in London where I've read some good recommendations.
Gumby
Veteran
another p.s. If you go with film, don't go with a discount film unless you know what you are getting. Kodak has some inexpensive film that is good but getting difficult to find, and some inexpesive film that is easy to find but not very good... unless you like the 1960's look of grain, lousy IQ, and muted tones.
Gumby
Veteran
This is the kind of honest self-reflection I was suggesting.
tomnrides
Established
How difficult could it it be to buy film in whatever the parts of Europe you are going to? Buy film as you need, whatever you get. Just as people, food and culture you are to experience.
Film, unless hand checked at airports, will be x rayed. I understand checked luggage gets heavy doses.
Digital or film, which is more fun for day to day including expenses?
Night shots with tripod, cable release have been around a long time. Take a watch and a flash light to time.
Have fun with less kit to lug around.
Film, unless hand checked at airports, will be x rayed. I understand checked luggage gets heavy doses.
Digital or film, which is more fun for day to day including expenses?
Night shots with tripod, cable release have been around a long time. Take a watch and a flash light to time.
Have fun with less kit to lug around.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I've done a lot of personal and business traveling, carrying every kind of camera kit imaginable. Film, digital, zoom, prime, SLR, medium format, RF, mirrorless, you name it. All work fine, some imply more versatility or less PITA, or more convenience, or more or less bulk, etc etc.
What I pick follows the following principles nowadays:
- pick your intent before you assemble the kit :: do you want versatility? Convenience? What sorts of subjects do you want to shoot? How much time will you have to do photography? How little? And think through to what you might want to do with the photos afterwards, a little bit ... A travel book? For yourself or for publication? Stock photos for sale? An exhibition? Web photos for bragging rights with your photographer friends? All are fine goals ... Just think about which describes what your aim is.
- carry as little equipment as possible to achieve the basic intent. Use it for everything by being creative.
The first sets up the goal you want to achieve. The second provides the constraint in which you will try to achieve it.
Given the equipment choices you proposed, I'd be inclined to take the smaller, lighter Bessa with two lenses and ten rolls of film as a base. It's simply less to deal with when in motion, which is a high priority to me, and the lack of review and potential for manipulation will keep me focused on subject rather than equipment. However, I've also done the SLR and two compact lenses quite successfully too, and enjoyed that as well.
Concentrate on your intent first, then go with what your gut tells you is right. No one else can make the decision for you. 🙂
What I pick follows the following principles nowadays:
- pick your intent before you assemble the kit :: do you want versatility? Convenience? What sorts of subjects do you want to shoot? How much time will you have to do photography? How little? And think through to what you might want to do with the photos afterwards, a little bit ... A travel book? For yourself or for publication? Stock photos for sale? An exhibition? Web photos for bragging rights with your photographer friends? All are fine goals ... Just think about which describes what your aim is.
- carry as little equipment as possible to achieve the basic intent. Use it for everything by being creative.
The first sets up the goal you want to achieve. The second provides the constraint in which you will try to achieve it.
Given the equipment choices you proposed, I'd be inclined to take the smaller, lighter Bessa with two lenses and ten rolls of film as a base. It's simply less to deal with when in motion, which is a high priority to me, and the lack of review and potential for manipulation will keep me focused on subject rather than equipment. However, I've also done the SLR and two compact lenses quite successfully too, and enjoyed that as well.
Concentrate on your intent first, then go with what your gut tells you is right. No one else can make the decision for you. 🙂
lucasjld
Member
Sorry man, while I was replying all of them, you posted, so I just saw what you wrote.
Mark T
Established
Film will be fine for travelling. People have been doing it for years. If that is your desired medium, then that is what you must use and there is no question.
X-Rays at airports are film safe. I have taken the same rolls through numerous x-rays and have not noticed damage to the image as a result. It is no more inconvenient than having to X-ray a lap top. Fear of x-rays is a very overblown issue.
X-Rays at airports are film safe. I have taken the same rolls through numerous x-rays and have not noticed damage to the image as a result. It is no more inconvenient than having to X-ray a lap top. Fear of x-rays is a very overblown issue.
bugmenot
Well-known
One last thing to consider: Always account for failures. I have had a a 5DII and a 24-70 drop a nice ~3-4 onto rock before, and the camera only suffered scuffs, while only the lens filter cracked. It worked perfectly as soon as I unscrewed the filter. It is not completely weather-sealed, but mother DSLR, especially full frame ones are really built like tanks, despite the plastic look.
On the other hand, bang your Bessa once against a tree or rock, or drop it, and the RF is out of alignment, you risk your M mount lenses breaking, and then you will be left with no camera at all. 🙁
On the other hand, bang your Bessa once against a tree or rock, or drop it, and the RF is out of alignment, you risk your M mount lenses breaking, and then you will be left with no camera at all. 🙁
Messsucherkamera
Established
A few observations:
1 - Think about the end result that you want. If you want B&W images/prints, use B&W film. If security x-rays are a worry, take ISO 100 film. Any quality B&W film can be pushed from ISO 100 to 400 if the need arises with very little to no ill effect.
2 - If you want both B&W and color images, take both types of film or consider shooting film for B&W and digital for color.
3 - Digital shooters disparage the supposedly horrid burden of carrying 30-40 rolls of film. This while thinking nothing of dragging around a laptop, a wad of computer cables, a charger for the laptop and one for the the camera, an external hard drive for backup and multiple camera batteries. JMHO but this strikes me as nonsense of the highest order.
4 - Regarding the cost of film, this sounds like the trip of a lifetime. No doubt you have spent a lot on transportation and will spend more on food, lodging, etc. If you buy your film from a source like www.bhphotovideo.com you will get reasonable prices, which will make using film a lot more affordable.
5 - As someone else rightly observed, cameras sometimes break or malfunction. I would not go on any kind of trip without at least one backup camera and lens, whether you choose to work with film, digital or both.
6 - Think about image quality. A 35mm film camera will exceed the final image quality of any digital camera that does not have a full frame (24x36mm) sensor. Many will claim that the miniature sensor cameras are "just as good as" 35 mm, but based on what I have seen, they fall short by a significant margin. I know this is a statement that will cause umbrage in many digital lovers but this is what I have seen. Tiny digital cameras are light, small, convenient and cute - but you pay for all that by sacrificing image quality. A once in a lifetime trip is not the place to sacrifice image quality for a bit of convenience.
6 - With film, you have a permanent hard copy (the negative) that is not subject to hard drive failure or being made unreadable by future technology that is not backward compatible. As long as there is light you will be able to read and use your negatives and chromes. If you take some basic precautions in storing negatives and chromes (Prim t File archival pages and archival storage binders or boxes) and store them in a low heat and humidity environment, they will likely outlive any of us here provided the house does not burn down or blow up. If that is a serious concern, a bank safe deposit box might be something to consider, although usually only professional shooters will take that extra step of precaution.
The above is intended as food for thought - YMMV.
1 - Think about the end result that you want. If you want B&W images/prints, use B&W film. If security x-rays are a worry, take ISO 100 film. Any quality B&W film can be pushed from ISO 100 to 400 if the need arises with very little to no ill effect.
2 - If you want both B&W and color images, take both types of film or consider shooting film for B&W and digital for color.
3 - Digital shooters disparage the supposedly horrid burden of carrying 30-40 rolls of film. This while thinking nothing of dragging around a laptop, a wad of computer cables, a charger for the laptop and one for the the camera, an external hard drive for backup and multiple camera batteries. JMHO but this strikes me as nonsense of the highest order.
4 - Regarding the cost of film, this sounds like the trip of a lifetime. No doubt you have spent a lot on transportation and will spend more on food, lodging, etc. If you buy your film from a source like www.bhphotovideo.com you will get reasonable prices, which will make using film a lot more affordable.
5 - As someone else rightly observed, cameras sometimes break or malfunction. I would not go on any kind of trip without at least one backup camera and lens, whether you choose to work with film, digital or both.
6 - Think about image quality. A 35mm film camera will exceed the final image quality of any digital camera that does not have a full frame (24x36mm) sensor. Many will claim that the miniature sensor cameras are "just as good as" 35 mm, but based on what I have seen, they fall short by a significant margin. I know this is a statement that will cause umbrage in many digital lovers but this is what I have seen. Tiny digital cameras are light, small, convenient and cute - but you pay for all that by sacrificing image quality. A once in a lifetime trip is not the place to sacrifice image quality for a bit of convenience.
6 - With film, you have a permanent hard copy (the negative) that is not subject to hard drive failure or being made unreadable by future technology that is not backward compatible. As long as there is light you will be able to read and use your negatives and chromes. If you take some basic precautions in storing negatives and chromes (Prim t File archival pages and archival storage binders or boxes) and store them in a low heat and humidity environment, they will likely outlive any of us here provided the house does not burn down or blow up. If that is a serious concern, a bank safe deposit box might be something to consider, although usually only professional shooters will take that extra step of precaution.
The above is intended as food for thought - YMMV.
lucasjld
Member
After doing more math, here is what I came up with:
1. I already have 10 Portra 400 rolls that will be used in the trip. Reducing the whole thing to 30 rolls (50 pics/day), I would only need to buy 20 more rolls
. Portra 400 - £6,60/each = £132,00
. Superia 400 - £4,00/each = £80,00
Thats a £52 difference. If you compare with the whole trip expenses, is not that much. But for comparing two films with similar results, it is quite a difference.
2. Buying the Voigtlander 40mm f/2 would be the most expensive option. The lens costs a bit less than twice the price of buying more films plus processing in a really good lab.
What I'm worried now is the backup camera. I could leave the 5D + 50mm in the bag, just in case something happens. But again, is not a small thing to pack.
1. I already have 10 Portra 400 rolls that will be used in the trip. Reducing the whole thing to 30 rolls (50 pics/day), I would only need to buy 20 more rolls
. Portra 400 - £6,60/each = £132,00
. Superia 400 - £4,00/each = £80,00
Thats a £52 difference. If you compare with the whole trip expenses, is not that much. But for comparing two films with similar results, it is quite a difference.
2. Buying the Voigtlander 40mm f/2 would be the most expensive option. The lens costs a bit less than twice the price of buying more films plus processing in a really good lab.
What I'm worried now is the backup camera. I could leave the 5D + 50mm in the bag, just in case something happens. But again, is not a small thing to pack.
robert blu
quiet photographer
How about looking for a pre-owned bessa as back-up? And eventually sell it when back home.
robert
Gumby
Veteran
Even at 50 frames per day you're biting off a lot. But that should give you some margin for shooting more some days, and less on other days but still having enough film.
I totally understand the comments on back-up gear. When shooting for $ I was never without back-up gear. For personal shooting I almost always go with just one camera body. The improtant thing is to know that it is a reliable body. I've only been disappointed once.
I totally understand the comments on back-up gear. When shooting for $ I was never without back-up gear. For personal shooting I almost always go with just one camera body. The improtant thing is to know that it is a reliable body. I've only been disappointed once.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I dunno. I *never* worry about a backup camera unless I'm being paid to shoot a job. Are you being paid to shoot a job? On the one and only trip where my camera was damaged, I just went out and bought an inexpensive replacement (I think it was a 20-year-old Olympus Trip 35 or something like that) at the next opportunity. Got great photos with it.
Most of my photography-oriented vacations have run about 2-4 weeks, over the years. Let's say three weeks or 21 days including transit time, that's the most common.
- With 35mm film cameras, I've found I only very rarely used more than 10-36exp rolls or 360 exposures. That's about 17 exposures a day. So I pack 15 and don't worry about it, I usually come home with 5-6 rolls un-exposed. (With medium format film cameras, it sometimes takes me three days to complete a 12 exposure roll ... !)
- With digital cameras, I've found that I'm more opportunistic and for the same 21 day trip I'll make about 1500-2000 exposures. Call it 1750 ... that's about 70 shots a day. My current cameras will store 1500 exposures on a single 32G SDHC card, so I bring two or three of them (they're cheap and small). I always bring three batteries (one can be on the charger while I go out with a fresh one in the bag and whatever's left on the one in the camera).
Of course, when I get home and input all those digital exposures into Lightroom, I uaually find that I discard so many of them that I'm down to the same 15-20 a day that I do with 35mm film ... from which I discard typically half as junk anyway. With medium format film, I try hard to make 10 out of 12 be at least a decent snapshot. 🙂
Of course, I didn't know all this until I'd done it five or six times. As time's gone on, I've carried less and less equipment, made fewer and fewer exposures, and come home with better and better exposures. I'm about to go away for the weekend and I think I'm just going to take one camera and one lens ... I hope I finish a 36 exposure roll if it's a 35mm film camera. ;-)
matt_mcg2
Established
I tend not to shoot colour film in any volume these days, as I don't find I gain enough over using a small digital camera (for me, everyone's different). So if I was going on any length of trip and wanting to take colour pictures, I'd probably go digital.
That said, you can probably get acceptable colour processing done in the UK for less than the prices you quote, so it needn't be quite as expensive as you'd think.
For me, I tend to shoot black and white film when travelling, and carry a small digital camera for colour. My favourite travel photos have tended to be taken on film, though. Either shooting mostly medium format black and white, or a mixture of colour and black and white 35mm film [before I had a good digital compact]. I did a trip to Paris a few years back when I took a single 35mm compact camera with no backup; half a dozen rolls of black and white, and two or three rolls of colour film, and came back with probably the best hit rate I've ever had. There is something to be said for simplicity.
That said, you can probably get acceptable colour processing done in the UK for less than the prices you quote, so it needn't be quite as expensive as you'd think.
For me, I tend to shoot black and white film when travelling, and carry a small digital camera for colour. My favourite travel photos have tended to be taken on film, though. Either shooting mostly medium format black and white, or a mixture of colour and black and white 35mm film [before I had a good digital compact]. I did a trip to Paris a few years back when I took a single 35mm compact camera with no backup; half a dozen rolls of black and white, and two or three rolls of colour film, and came back with probably the best hit rate I've ever had. There is something to be said for simplicity.
Platinum RF
Well-known
I walk around 5-8 hours a day when I travel in Europe. I own many cameras from Hass to Leica, Nikon, and Zeiss. For practical I only bring my Nikon D5100 with 18-200 and Sigma 10-20mm plus Olympus EP1 with 14-140mm as back up. Bring a film camera is looking for trouble go through all airport security.
matt_mcg2
Established
If you are back packing round Europe and using trains and buses, you won't really go through much security. I think that was Roger's point above. Most of Europe is in the Schengen, so once you arrive, you pretty much won't see security again until you leave.
I've never had any problem with film going through security, whether flying within Europe, or to the US.
I've never had any problem with film going through security, whether flying within Europe, or to the US.
richardhkirkando
Well-known
Maybe consider an older NEX body as a backup? You can use the same lenses as your Bessa, and it can fit in a lens compartment in most camera bags. Even the old NEX-3 handles low light really well.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
It was indeed, Schengen or not. The only place I've ever faced an X-ray in Europe, when not flying, was the Topkapi museum in Istanbul. And there, they were happy with a hand search. Who else has has encountered X-rays anywhere else on the ground (other than before flying) in Europe?
Cheers,
R.