Just one camera, No 2

[DougK]

http://www.kyphoto.com/classics/penees2repair.html But it's only a tutorial for the repair of a stuck aperture, not the shutter. (And I didn't wrote it, if you tought that 😉 )

That's a good start, thanks for the link! 🙂

 

[Nikon Bob]

Bertram

If you put animals on the list in your world travels you all but rule out RFs as a fast 200mm is even too short for alot of wildlife. I have had some luck with a fast 180 F2.8 in national parks where large aninals are habituated to people but it is not a lens that I would want to carry around the world on the off chance of seeing animals. A fast 300mm to 600mm would be even better and bigger.

Bob

 

[cp_ste.croix]

Well I would take the camera I am most familiar with, as learning on the road is not a good option as far as I'm concerned...with that in mind it would be my EOS 1V with the PBE2 for it's AA battery capability and my tamron 28-205 2.8 and maybe my canon 70-210.

Of course, I don't own a leica, but if I did...

O/T...Last night I watched Spy Game with Pitt and Redford and noticed the two Leicas Pitt's character was using...I wonder if the movie company sells those off afterwards?

 

[Bertram2]

There are some modern wide range zoom lenses that are very attractive in terms of quality and features -- although I don't think I own anything that was made within the last thirty years!!!

Hi ,

well, this solution is not the easiest to carry, that's true. I'd take my F80 and my Tamron 28-300 with me on a trip around the world nevertheless, if the climatic conditions were not to bad for a fully electronic SLR. It's the first version of the 28-300, which performs much better than one can excpect such a zoom to work . Here some examples which also illustrate a bit what I meant when I was talking about a certain kind of pics I would not want to miss on that trip:

http://www.usefilm.com/image/608121.html
http://www.usefilm.com/image/281239.html
http://www.usefilm.com/image/273675.html
http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=1531063

The only negative points are a clearly visible barrel distortion at the edges for 28mm and the weight of about 550gr but this is balanced quite good by the F80 which is a lightweight. ISO 400 or 800 (the examples are Superia 800) or a monopod are recommended to use it carefree fully extended.

If it gets stolen or robbed or the ferry goes down the loss isn't a drama, the combo is available today for about $900 new.

The only RF alternative could be a MF Rangefinder ( M7II) with a 150mm or 200mm lens, one could crop at factor 5 and would still have a nice pic.
But unfortunately the price would be a factor x5 price too , maybe one day I'll afford such a combo, if I ever get rich 🙄

Best regards,
Bertram

 

[Natron]

I haven't read all the responses to this thread BUT, just a few weeks after receiving a pre-ordered Canon 20D digital SLR to replace my 'old' D30 digital SLR, I flew out to Philadelphia for a trip. My 20D was brand new and took wonderful photos but the camera kit I took to Philadelphia was my Bessa R2, Konica M-Hexanon 50mm f/2 and Leica Summicron-M 35mm f/2 pre-ASPH lenses. I never wished for more, was thrilled at the kit's small size and was very, VERY happy with the resulting photos. If I could do it again, I'd skip the 20D and take the Bessa kit again without giving it a 2nd thought.

 

[Pecker]

Canonet 28...all you need (steal film as you go 😀 )

 

[Bertram2]

Bertram

If you put animals on the list in your world travels you all but rule out RFs as a fast 200mm is even too short for alot of wildlife. I have had some luck with a fast 180 F2.8 in national parks where large aninals are habituated to people but it is not a lens that I would want to carry around the world on the off chance of seeing animals. A fast 300mm to 600mm would be even better and bigger.

Bob

Hi Bob,
I could not exclude this issue at least tho I did not think about a safari which would be a complete different thing for which you need specialized stuff. You can't cover this with a one and only combo and the highspeed zooms or primes would not be what you want to lug around all the time. I know focal length is nothing when it comes to wild animals. It begins at 600 and 1200 is not the end.

But my animals were shot in a park, Vladimir Vinokurov I caught in ca steaming crowd of excited female fans, the dog was a extremely excited waiting for his race and I had to keep quite a distance. I could not have shot one of them with less than 200 mm and so far i think they still fit in this general trip-around-the-world hypothesis I've put up.

Best regards,
Bertram
.

 

[Nikon Bob]

Bertram

That 28-300 Tamron that you mention should do the trick especially with 400 or 800 speed film. I had the 2nd version 28-200 and liked it very much as a travel lens. You are right though that with animals and especially birds you never seem have a long enough lens if you want to fill the frame. Same as an RFers never a large enough F stop for available dark shooting.

Bob

 

[sf]

camera for an around the world journey. . .

camera for an around the world journey. . .

I have and use cameras of every format from 35mm to dslr to medium format to large format, and all experiences in mind, I'd have to say I'd take my R3A with the pancake 35. I don't do too much switching of lenses - got used to making due with a single lens thanks to student level income.

Experience tells me:

the medium format is way too heavy, bulky, slow to operate, and difficult to handle on short notice.

the large format is simply impossible

The DSLR is nice for those capabilities many of us appreciate, but I still feel unsafe trusting important moments to a CCD. I trust good old film every time. Also battery consumption and ccd delicacy is problematic (dusty ccds after changing lenses or in dusty conditions)

Pocket sized, fast lenses, reasonably little battery use, durability in the face of daily jarring, and easy to shoot in the blink of an eye - these are the things that really matter when you are on the road or in a plane or train. Maybe even quiet operation and stealthy appearance in order to escape being branded a tourist. I used to lug the Pentax on hikes and bikerides into the mountains. Bad idea every time. Pretty pictures aside.

Perhaps the R3A isn't ideal given its apparently delicate VF. If I had money , I'd buy the following items:

m6 TTL .85 with 50 summicron and 21 elmarit
or
Leica CM (40mm 2.4 lens is pretty good for a compact 'point and shoot')

Pelican case large enough for camera with lens attached and strap, extra batteries and a few roles of film. - roughly the size of a woman's purse. Pelican cases are tough as nails too. I've used them for 5 or 6 years and they've saved my stuff at least a couple of times from water and impact.

 

[Bertram2]

Bertram
That 28-300 Tamron that you mention should do the trick especially with 400 or 800 speed film. I had the 2nd version 28-200 and liked it very much as a travel lens. You are right though that with animals and especially birds you never seem have a long enough lens if you want to fill the frame. Same as an RFers never a large enough F stop for available dark shooting.
Bob

Bob,
the idea of one camera only for a travel around the world is of course all about which extreme compromise would you accept personally , no question that we all would have to accept those no matter what we choose. . Take what you want and pay for it is the saying.
I would have to lug around a relatively heavy SLR combo, others would have to exclude a certain kind of results.
But this idea is still nothing like hypothesis, and it has nothing to do with the real life.
Maybe there are some folks among the RFF members who really would go with a
RF body and a 35mm only, possibly because they are simply interested in results only which the limitation allows.
But the very most of us would take some more with them as I suppose. A travel around the world is something unique in the life of most of the people and I could imaginge that travelling light ist not the priority No 1 then but mor not to miss some unique opportunities.

I nother words I would never leave my RFs at home and take the SLR only with me for a travel around the world, I'd rather risk do die from overload 😀

Best regards,
Bertram

 

[Doug]

I have taken 90mm with me on 2-week trips but seldom use it. I once took along a 500mm lens that I had just gotten, and I did have fun exploring its use. But atmospheric haze has an unfortunate effect on the distant subject (and where compression of perspective may be interesting), while nearer subjects seem to suffer for that flattening, are extracted from their context, and IMHO better treated by moving close with a wider lens. If I were taking the SLR anyway, the 500 mirror is a minor additional burden, so I might take it again, but at the time I had only that one lens for that body.

I'm tempted to say I'd choose the Bronica RF645 plus its 45 and 100mm lenses if limited to two. That would be very satisfactory, I think, as it's quite compact... about the same size as a Leica M, though 1" taller. But several other kits would be satisfactory too, depending on how dedicated is the trip to the pursuit of photos, transportation details, etc.

Interesting thread...

 

[MCTuomey]

Heretically, my Elan 7 with Tamron 28-75/2.8. Versatile and fairly light, but clunky. Second choice to save space, my R2A with CV 35 and 75 lenses. If I thought hard enough about weight and keeping it simple, then I'd go M4 + 50mm + meter, and nothing more.

Above assumes I wouldn't suffer or be able to afford pre-trip GAS.

 

[st3ph3nm]

Heh, if I HAD to choose, I guess I'd take my Pentax ME-Super, for the changeable lenses - and it's no bigger, really, than a Besa R. But then, the XA is so small, whenever I travel, it goes with me as well...

Cheers,
Steve
(funny thing is, I bought the XA simply because it was a cheaper alternative to getting a decent Pentax 35mm prime!)