How many cameras do you take on a long trip?

How many cameras do you take on a long trip?

  • 1 camera

    Votes: 93 14.4%

  • 2 cameras

    Votes: 313 48.4%

  • 3 cameras

    Votes: 173 26.7%

  • 4 cameras

    Votes: 39 6.0%

  • 5 cameras

    Votes: 13 2.0%

  • more

    Votes: 16 2.5%
  • Total voters
    647
I take two cameras, one slr & one RF and LOTS of films(few as 20 to many as 200 rolls)
And I only use one lens on each cameras for lighter package.
Fm3A, 28mm & Hexar RF, 35mm(or 50mm depends on where i'm going).
Good enough for street and general photography.
Sometimes I would take one more Holga 120s and that would be just being experimental and for fun.
But after several long and short trips so far I found that using different film type(35mm <-> 120mm) is too much and heavy. 🙂
 
one for each and one for the pot

one for each and one for the pot

I voted two. First I thought that it's a new habit to me, but turned out I was wrong. Afterthinking my latest vacations/longer trips I usually took two cameras.
Sometimes it's a small one, sometimes the newest...
And yes, my wife also takes her Ixus.

nemjo
 
You know, it depends on too many factors to really say. For a LONG trip, I might take as many cameras as I would take for a short trip : 1. I'd take one camera and three lenses (wide, normal, and long). Unless you own a Bessa L/Super Heliar and a Fuji 6x9 90mm, or some equally diverse selection of gear, it seems illogical to bring a pile of things on a trip of any duration.

I know that I would be just fine with the RF645/3 lenses for the rest of time (and it seems this will be the case given the certain demise of film camera manufacture).

It isn't about the number of bodies - it's about the selection of glass you want to have on hand. An ideal selection of lenses for a Leica M camera would be 21, 35, 75. At least, for me. That pretty much covers what I would enjoy working with.

It might be about the bodies if you have bodies with widely varying capabilities. But then why not grab the body with the most capability and forget the others?

For the Bronica, I have 45, 65, 100, and I've never wanted for more.
 
shutterflower said:
But then why not grab the body with the most capability and forget the others?
Click to expand...

It is great until you slip and break the only body you have. The only time I broke a camera is when I was at 3,000m in the Japanese alps with the nearest bus stop two days hike away. I could have used a back-up body then. Now I always have two cameras with me.
 
Finder said:
It is great until you slip and break the only body you have. The only time I broke a camera is when I was at 3,000m in the Japanese alps with the nearest bus stop two days hike away. I could have used a back-up body then. Now I always have two cameras with me.
Click to expand...


good point. If you only bring one, a break is the end of the line. Strange that such an obvious detail escape me.
 
When travelling I usually take with me two cameras: the FM3A for the day and the M2 for the night. The FM3A comes with a 50 lens (or the 55 microNikkor) and carries colour negative film while the M2 comes with a 35 and a 90 and is loaded with B&W.

If I have to travel light then the Leica is the only camera I will take - in this case with a 50 lens.
 
I posted "one camera". One of my reasons to use rangefinder cameras is their compactness compared to SLR equipments. So why should I carry several bodies around? I'll go on a China trip soon, and will take the R-D1, some lenses (15, 28, 40), four accus and a fistful of 2GB SD cards.
Didier
 
stesm said:
I am going on a 5 day trip to Vermont. I feel compelled to bring 2 canon P, 2 Canon A-1, a IVSB, Hassy 500C, 6 lenses for the various systems, a tripod and at least 15 rolls of film. Always stowed in the car are a Yashica GT and a Pentax IQ Zoom. Even with all that gear there will be room to carry my psych meds- which reminds me that I've skipped 'em for a few days.....

almost forgot the Retina IIIc that I need to run a roll through before putting it up for adoption
Click to expand...



Hope you're not married, friend! (or planning on staying married) 🙂
 
Perhaps two next week, alas SLRs with lenses from 24 to 300mm hoping to catch a moose or bear with cubs and some nature stuff.
 
I'm amazed that people carry more than two camera. It would seem a tremenous weight to carry around if you were walking around all day. I imagine that it depends on your luggage situation and how you like to travel? If you have bags that you can leave at the hotel and then only take what you want for the day, I could see that working. If you were carrying all you supplies on your back touring around Europe, wow, 3 cameras, you would get in good shape!
 
I plan to take my Canon P with 50 and 85mm lenses, my Ansco Speedex, and a point and shoot with me to Colorado when we go. Why? The point and shoot is going to afford me a relatively speedy 35/2.8 lens with a flash and the Ansco will afford me large negatives for the shots of the mountains and such that I'd like to blow up larger than normal when printed.
 
Sirius, I agree. We are renting a house next week in New Hampshire. We will be near the top of a mountain, I have seen bear and moose up there in the past. I will take two Minolta SRTs, one will be in a bag for my carry around and one on a 300mm lens mounted on a tripod waiting for them moment. I have simplified things, I don't have the strength to carry so much around any more.
 
As I stated earlier, normally I carry one plus a backup.

However, if the primary purpose of the trip is non-photographic business, I may stick only one small film rangefinder or a small digital in my luggage.

If the primary purpose of the trip is to shoot a wedding, I will take two for shooting and one for backup.

I have never taken a long trip with more than three cameras.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom