Going Travelling: What Camera and What Film?

[kyonthinh]

Which city of Vietnam will you go to? Saigon or Hanoi?
My 2 cents if you go to Saigon: Don't ever let the camera on your neck for a longer than 1 minute, you will lose it faster than you think.

Cheers,
Thinh.

 

[greywind]

Which city of Vietnam will you go to? Saigon or Hanoi?
My 2 cents if you go to Saigon: Don't ever let the camera on your neck for a longer than 1 minute, you will lose it faster than you think.

Cheers,
Thinh.

We're going to both Ho Chi Minh City and Hanoi, we're travelling the length of the country.

But having the camera stolen was one reason why I wanted a fairly cheap one (or two).

 

[ferider]

When traveling, because of plane flights, I usually shoot on ASA 400 or below. ASA 3200 is risks to gets fried during xray, IMO.

Which implies, if you want to shoot indoors or in the evening, an f2 or faster lens. And a rangefinder helps. Within your budget ? Maybe a Canon P and 50/1.4 or a Hexar AF, both of them exceeding your budget a bit but not much.

If you only take one camera, use it extensively before your trip, to make sure you can rely on it and that you like it. The latter, only you can decide.

My 2 cents. Enjoy your trip !

Roland.

 

[02Pilot]

Which city of Vietnam will you go to? Saigon or Hanoi?
My 2 cents if you go to Saigon: Don't ever let the camera on your neck for a longer than 1 minute, you will lose it faster than you think.

Cheers,
Thinh.

There's another reason to go for something small. A Rollei 35 can easily live in a pocket; even a Canonet will fit relatively easily in a jacket or cargo pants pocket.

 

[Gregoyle]

If you look at a picture of a Canonet and an Olympus OM with 50mm 1.8 side by side, they are about the same size. If you went with the OM, you'd have an option to take a wideangle or telephoto lens with you as well. If you go with the f/2.8 versions they are cheap, with great IQ. You'd also have the option for 50mm f/1.4 for cheap, too.

The Nikon FMs are not much bigger, although the lenses are a little larger. The only camera mentioned in this thread so far with a significant size advantage is the Olympus mjuII, which easily fits in a back pocket. If it were me, I would choose the OM with an mjuII. Oh wait, that's exactly what I did! I have them both, they are great.

This is not my image, it is on flickr:

-Greg

 

[Roger Hicks]

When traveling, because of plane flights, I usually shoot on ASA 400 or below. ASA 3200 is risks to gets fried during xray, IMO.. . .

Dear Roland,

How about experience instead of opinion? IME (not IMO) I've never had a problem. Even when I've tried. I think the biggest number of X-ray exposures of Delta 3200 was something like 6: UK, Emirates, Goa, Bombay, Goa again, Emirates again.

Cheers,

R.

 

[ferider]

Dear Roger,

it's neither my nor your risk, but the OP's, and this has been discussed numerous times on RFF before, so we don't need to re-hash.

I personally like to stay on the conservative side and follow TSA rules: "the X-ray machine that screens your carry-on baggage at the passenger security checkpoint will not affect undeveloped film under ASA/ISO 800". and "If the same roll of film is exposed to X-ray inspections more than 5 times before it is developed, it is possible that damage may occur."

No fogged film until now. That is my experience.

Also, Roger, when was your last trip to/from the US ? That being said, not sure where the OP starts his trip from.

Roland.

 

[Bob Michaels]

A real life perspective: Don't buy or even select a camera for this trip. Decide what you want to use in the future. If not your Zenit, buy that camera now. Become totally familiar with it. Know it's idiosyncrasies. Let using it become second nature to you.

The best camera for any trip is your normal one that you use every day. Same thing for lenses and films. A trip is not the time for you to be learning something new about your photo gear or technique. That is a recipe for disaster that you may not realize until you return home.

 

[Roger Hicks]

. . . Also, Roger, when was your last trip to/from the US ? . . .

Dear Roland,

Do you think that X-ray machines for carry on luggage have become MORE powerful and destructive of late? Without anyone's noticing or mentioning it? Especially in the USA?

I was merely pointing out the difference between opinion and experience.

Cheers,

R.

 

[ferider]

Do you think that X-ray machines for carry on luggage have become MORE powerful and destructive of late? Without anyone's noticing or mentioning it? Especially in the USA?

Since 9/11, processes and machines have changed for sure, and it's difficult not to notice. Recently added full body scans, search for previously not restricted items (for example fluids), etc. Whether or not the x-ray machines have become more powerful is less relevant than if their usage has changed. Regarding x-ray machine power (and their relevance to film), two months after 9/11, Kodak published the following: "low intensity x-rays, used at security checkpoints in US airports ... may now be supplemented in some cases by high intensity machines" (http://motion.kodak.com/motion/Support/Technical_Information/Transportation/xrays_airport.htm).

 

[David Hughes]

Agreed.

Many of the older cameras, especially cheap ones, won't be trustworthy without service. But a Nikon F3 or FM or FM-2n will be very trustworthy.

Hi,

As we are talking about film and - I guess not the M9 - I'll second that and bitter experience makes me add that a test roll through it after it comes back is an essential task.

I've been taking pictures for nearly 65 years now and have had to take cameras back to the makers for repairs to the repair. And I've taken 2 year old cameras back under guarantee to a top maker, fairly recently. I'm also about to pack and return a fairly young top of the range lens to another respected maker.

Reliability is something you discover with hindsight; usually after selling it for a pittance on ebay...

Trouble is, you can't make specific comments about cameras these days as (for us non-millionaires) all the film cameras we buy and use will be second-hand and that introduces a lot of unknowns into the theory. Hence my and others comments about back-ups.

BTW, I'll add that most mechanical cameras are usually repairable and electronic ones are very dicey. Often they (repairers) won't touch them. I had to scrap a Contax for that reason. Mechanical cameras with only the meter using a battery are - luckily - still usable after the meter dies but mean a good hand held meter is needed. (And good hand held ones break too. My Gossens has a 9v battery inside and the snap on battery terminal came off with the battery one day... )

Regards, David

 

[alan davus]

My Two Bob's worth.... I'd take a manual camera like a Nikon FM or FM2. If they have worked well for 30 years without problems (like all my Nikons) then I'm sure they'd last a few more months on the road. I'd add a 50mm lens then probably a 28mm. I travelled for many years in the '70's with just a manual body and one lens and survived. Less is more and keep it simple, especially in hot climates.

 

[David Hughes]

Hi,

I don't want to start a row but experience of mechanical ones is that they gradually deteriorate and it's so slow that you don't really notice until something gets bad. I noticed it on one when the shutter started sticking.

A lot of little bits were adjusted and so on and when it came back the camera was completely different and I wondered how I'd not noticed it. I've noticed others saying that a CLA (whatever that is) has worked miracle and guess that supports my theory. Funny thing, but people accept it with posh cameras and blame poor QC for not so posh ones: despite the evidence on these forums that a humble FED can be transformed into a thing of beauty and a joy forever etc, etc.

I guess that is why a lot of makers recommend returning their cameras for a check up every year or so.

Regards, David

PS We've still got a proper camera shop in town that loves old Nikons and has dozens of the things for sale. You'd love it. They've even got an on site workshop for repairs and a website with a 360 degree view of it somewhere; lovely.

 

[Sejanus.Aelianus]

I'm still wondering why anyone would prefer film to digital, given the scenario quoted. 45 35mm films is around £135 in the UK. 45 process and scan is around £225, so you're spending £360 before you start. That will buy a very nice digital camera and save a lot of space and weight in your luggage.

Of course, if film is the thing, then these arguments become irrelevant. 😉

 

[blue4130]

I spent the first six months of this year on a trip that took me from Beijing, to Canada, to Poland, Czech Republic, Germany, Thailand, Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam and back to China.

I took a Leica M2, a 35mm, a 50mm, and a 90mm. I only took one camera. Never had any issues with it. In hindsight I would have left the 90mm at home. It was used too little and I could have gotten most of those shots with the 50.

I also took 120 rolls of film. 100 rolls of Arista 400 premium and 20 rolls of color. The key thing for me was a ND filter. The sun in S.E.Asia is BRIGHT!

I would guess that I went through 20 x-ray machines (could be more) and there were no issues. I never bothered to try getting a hand inspection.

The key to the film is to take it out of the boxes, alternate the canisters right side up and upside down. I taped 5 rolls in a row and then stacked them like honeycombs. actually was quite manageable for space. Weight was a bit heavy, but not THAT bad.

I never had problems in any city, including Saigon at night. Just keep aware of your surroundings and keep the strap wrapped around your wrist.

Most important, enjoy the trip.

 

[Spicy]

oh one other thing, i think it's already been mentioned, but NEVER go on a trip with a new-to-you camera that hasn't had at least a test roll through it and developed. one of my buddies found that out the hard way after coming back from a 2 week trip having picked up a new camera and immediately leaving on the trip. got back and had his negs dev'd, only to discover that the second shutter timing was off. whoops.

 

[David Hughes]

Dear David,

I'd be a lot MORE worried if I couldn't take pictures, or if I were restricted to nasty little point-and-shoots; and sorry, they are nasty from my point of view. Regardless of whether I'm going somewhere new or somewhere familiar, I want to use the cameras I'm most familiar with and that give me the most control.

Cheers,

R.

Hi,

Well, yes, like red wine there's some nasty, almost evil stuff out there. But people have been surprised by reds from those petrol pumps that was taken home in a plastic carrier bag and turned out to be very pleasant.

Some of the best P&S's can punch well above their weight and are ideal for carrying about all the time. You ought to try something like the mju-II with it's spot metering, it might be a pleasant surprise. The other surprise is that getting one checked, parts replaced and so on can come in at about twenty quip and that and the pound or two they cost isn't to b sniffed at.

As for restrictions, I agree but my M2 has restrictions and so do all of them (macro, 200mm lenses etc), even SLR's can restrict you. I shudder to think what I'd need to carry if I won the lottery and could spend a month or so wandering about (say) the Canadian Rockies. At least two M's, two SLR's and several hundreds of pounds worth of macro lens, a trolley or two and still a couple of P&S's would be part of the package to do the trip properly. Somehow how I don't think this photographic odyssey will ever happen, like my knighthood, but you never know...

Regards, David

PS What's weird is that they put tripod bushes on P&S's but none of them take a lens hood. Weird isn't the word, is it?.

 

[Fettsack]

I'd suggest getting two little Rollei 35s. Go for Tessar lens - although you might get a Sonnar . Keep one set aside for the Delta 3200 ( shoot it at 1600 ) for evenings and indoors. Even old ones seem to have functioning meters but I'd get a separate handheld, which are cheap these days.
I said two ( which is possible within your budget ) because you're less likely to be devastated by theft , loss or mechanical failure. It's worth noting that with care, those rollei 35s can be disassembled and worked on more easily than most.
Philip

Ditto on that one.

I have just spent three weeks in Andalusia/Spain with a Leica R 6.2 and it was too darned big and cumbersome. I wish I had brought along my Rollei 35SE. Superb lens, and I can cradle it in my right hand and carry it around unseen all day. I will also buy a small Gossen Digisix to go along with it.

The camera has to be small, otherwise it will be a bother to carry around all day. Also, taking two of the same is good advice. The Leica will stay at home next time.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Hi,

Well, yes, like red wine there's some nasty, almost evil stuff out there. But people have been surprised by reds from those petrol pumps that was taken home in a plastic carrier bag and turned out to be very pleasant.

Some of the best P&S's can punch well above their weight and are ideal for carrying about all the time. You ought to try something like the mju-II with it's spot metering, it might be a pleasant surprise. The other surprise is that getting one checked, parts replaced and so on can come in at about twenty quip and that and the pound or two they cost isn't to b sniffed at.

As for restrictions, I agree but my M2 has restrictions and so do all of them (macro, 200mm lenses etc), even SLR's can restrict you. I shudder to think what I'd need to carry if I won the lottery and could spend a month or so wandering about (say) the Canadian Rockies. At least two M's, two SLR's and several hundreds of pounds worth of macro lens, a trolley or two and still a couple of P&S's would be part of the package to do the trip properly. Somehow how I don't think this photographic odyssey will ever happen, like my knighthood, but you never know...

Regards, David

PS What's weird is that they put tripod bushes on P&S's but none of them take a lens hood. Weird isn't the word, is it?.

Dear David,

No, it wouldn't be a pleasant surprise. I've used all kinds of point and shoots, often quite good ones such as the Rollei AF35M. I gave that to my daughter but among pocketable cameras I still have (for example) a Retina IIa and an Olympus Pen W, either of which I'd take over any point-and-shoot any day. Better still, I'll use a Leica: more control, better ergonomics, better (and faster) lenses. Why would I want a point and shoot?

As for limitless kit, well, I've sometimes come close (especially with review gear), and no, I wouldn't load myself down like that. I'd rather miss a few pictures (or even a lot) while getting better versions of the pictures I can take. More and more, I use a single camera (plus a back-up) and one, or three lenses.

It seems that we view things very differently. For that matter, I have not the slightest desire to go to the Canadian Rockies: far rather the Himalayas, Malta, Greece, Mexico, the Pyrenees.... Or among places I've not been, maybe Anatolia, the South Seas, parts of South America.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Andrea Taurisano]

I travel quite a bit and in 6 weeks will be leaving for a solo train journey from Europe to Japan. This, and the fact I also will be shooting film, gives me similar thoughts to yours.

But I did make up my mind. I'll be carrying with me a Leica M6 with 50mm and a Ricoh GR1 (28mm) for the wider shots and as a back up body. That's it. Actually, as only alternative to the 50mm for the M6 body I'll have with me a pinhole camera cap.

Oh, I'm counting a roll a day. All Tri-X with a few Adox color negative rolls in addition. By all means, bring ony gear that you know well and have tested before..