Traveling with MF cameras

[raid]

I would like to see feedback from people here who have traveled on some trips on which they used only MF cameras.
Did the weight slow you down?
Were lenses too slow without using a tripod?
Did you wish you had brought with you 35mm camera instead or a digital camera?

Do you have tips to follow?

Thanks.

 

[Vics]

I've done two trips to Europe with nothing but a Rollei, and I still think it's the best camera for travel, but both times I wished for my 35mm. I think now that I just wasn't a good enough TLR shooter and I knew it. So now I'm doing regular sessions with my Rollei to get better at seeing with and handling that camera.

 

[raid]

I once traveled with a Rollei and a Minox GT. It went well. Developing film was very expensive though. This was 13 years ago. Since then, I have more stuff. This includes an M9, say.

 

[mbisc]

I don't think I have done any trips where a MF camera was the _only_ camera, but I have done trips where a MF camera was the only serious camera 😀 (and I had a digicam or something for misc. family shots). And I should add, that in the last few years, my MF camera of choice would have been either the Bessa II folder, or the Medalist II.

I think the tool dictates what you can/should do (or put differently, select the tool that you think will be the correct one for the trip). Trips where a MF camera was the correct choice were trips where serious photography was somewhat limited (so the small number of frames per roll of film wasn't a problem) and where the light conditions were good (daylight landscapes or cityscapes). On the flip side, I would take my MF cameras as the only camera on a family gathering or for low-light city shooting...

EDIT: Of course when I was living in Delhi a couple of years ago, the MF camera was the camera of choice when the LF & tripod were too unwieldy 😀.

 

[eavis]

Just did a trip with just a Plaubel Makina and a Mamiya 6. Neither is cumbersome or that heavy. The slower apertures weren't a problem, even in low light. You do take a lot less photos than if you shoot mainly 35mm film, so you do miss some shots, but you gain some you wouldn't have shot with 35mm. The bigger, richer negatives are always nice to have, of course. I actually decided to go just with 4x5 on my next trip, a Graphic with a working RF.

 

[hausen]

I took my tripod with my Rollei last year too Switzerland and am happy I did with 4 shots on the wall here in my office. I have a Linhof 612 that I will be taking to Hawaii in July🙂

 

[Bingley]

I'm also interested in this thread, having recently acquired a Rolleicord from a member here. I'm enjoying the camera so much, I'm thinking of taking it along on future trips. It fits in my little Domke 5xb bag and it weighs noticeably less than the Rolleiflexes I've held. I'm thinking I would not take it as my only camera on a trip, however, but rather in combination with 35mm film camera or a small digicam. I like the slower, more deliberative approach to photography when using the 'cord.

 

[SteveM]

For holiday travel my typical setup is a Bronica RF645 with 45, 65 and sometimes the 100mm lens. The 45mm lens gets used the most (close to 28mm on 135). Like others, I don’t rely exclusively on MF. I almost always take my Pany GF1 with 40 & 14mm lenses (both are really tiny) and use it for casual snaps and family. This all fits comfortably in a Hadley Pro along with the usual bits and pieces.

Depending on how I’m travelling, I may take a monopod for the Bronica. Early morning or evening shots in lower light need more stability than hand-holding can give, but apart from that the slower aperture lenses are never a problem.

With this combination, I never miss a 35mmm film camera. The higher quality of MF make this an easy decision, and the Bronica is so compact for MF that it’s a delight to use. One more thing, I nearly always use slide film when travelling. For what I like to photograph, high speed lenses and film aren’t necessary, and if I need low light capability – the Pany can do that with more flexibility than film. Best single piece of advice – travel light.

Steve

 

[raid]

I may favor using an M9 plus a SWC for a two week trip to Italy with the family. I am undecided though.

 

[hausen]

Sounds like perfect kit Raid.

 

[KenR]

I hiked in England last summer with my Mamiya 6 and had a great time. Mostly I used the 50mm lens on the camera and on days that promised to be tough, didn't take either of the other lenses with me (nor did I take filters etc. on those days). I used a binocular harness to keep the camera on my chest, instead of flapping around on my side if the strap was on my shoulder or unavailable if the strap was worn bandoleer style across my chest.

 

[RObert Budding]

I traveled with a Mamiya 645 once for a few weeks. The next trip I packed a Bronica RF645, and now I have a Mamiya 7. MF rangefinders are easy to carry about. Highly recommended!

 

[jwicaksana]

I spent a few week-long travels with only my Rolleicord, never feel happier. Especially since it is such a good ice breaker, I met awesome people in awesome places.
Although an M9 and an SWC would bring a HUGE smile on my face. Enjoy your trip, Raid!

 

[Harry Caul]

I travel often with only my Plaubel 670. It's a bit heavier than a TLR, but it also folds flatter for storage and when I'm on the move. I keep it on a sling strap and when collapsed it sits nicely right where my right side meets the small of my back. If I'm wearing a jacket or sport coat you don't even seen it -- yet it's ready in a few moments if necessary.

I don't always travel like that, but when I do my only backup is my iPhone.

 

[raid]

I have many options for equipment, and I may enjoy trying out the SWC for architecture and people photography, and I could use the M9 with one lens (35mm 1.4) to keep things manageable. I still need to convince myself whether the SWC is suitable for my needs in a family trip. Another alternative if focusing on faces, and using the Olympus E-P2 with Zeiss 85/1.4 in place of the SWC.

That's why I asked for feedback on using a MF camera. Do I really "need" it?

 

[awbphotog]

Raid,

I've recently traveled with only my Fuji G690BL, and while it was certainly an exercise in self control, I'm happy with my decision.

 

[raid]

I have such a camera, and I know from many years of using it what type of first class images you can get with it. It is also very heavy.

 

[awbphotog]

Heavy indeed, though with the optech strap it really isn't so bad. If I sling it diagonally over my shoulder/chest, I hardly notice the weight. The upside to the weight is the durability that comes with this particular camera...which may well inform your decision on which camera to take. I was hiking lots and didn't want to worry about the camera as much as if I took, say, my Bessa R or my Bessa I. Either way, a small digital as a complimentary piece to the MF cam would be ideal. Good luck with your decision!

 

[z.bruce.li]

I have traveled in Europe with only a Rolleiflex and a small P&S digicam, and most of the more artistically satisfying photos are out of the Rolleiflex. The only caution will be higher iso film through x-ray. I have some Fuji 800 color negative films ruined. Otherwise 120 film survive well through security.

My small digicam has zoom to cover the tele end and macro use cases. In my case, capturing details are also important during travel.

 

[raid]

My thoughts are to balance digital camera with high quality MF film camera. I don't have any small digi cam, so the M9 will have to do. It is heavy, but it gives very nice image quality. I can choose between Rolleicord, Rolleiflex and SWC for MF.