Is medium format worth it for travel photography?

[tommyboy]

Beautiful photo Andreas.

This IS beautiful!

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Beware, the guards would not let me use a tripod one day but did another, with no apparent consistency (or avenue of appeal).

Theoretically you can buy a tripod permit for the complex from the administrative office. If they are still offering it, it will be pricey ($300 or so when I was there in 2003? 2004?). Investigate if this is still the case - it would be helpful to have a piece of paper in Khmer to wave at the guards that says you can use your tripod.

 

[RichardJack]

NOPE. The other medium is the way to go.

 

[thuggins]

Yes.

 

[JOR]

A trip to Asia implies landscape photography, in which case the largest negative is preferred if the negative is to be enlarged. Landscape doesn't need extreme focal lengths - a kit with a modest wide-angle, a 'normal' and something longish would cope with everything. The weight of a reflex camera is an unnecessary penalty when travelling, since there is no requirement for critical close-up focusing. So why not try a Mamiya or Fuji 6x7 or 6x8 rangefinder? They are soon snapped up when they appear on reputable websites such as Ffordes, but not at bargain prices. The lens performance is superlative because the construction is simple - for instance, there is no need for the back element of the wide-angle to clear the swinging SLR mirror, which hugely improves resolution, geometry and evenness. And there are typically fewer glass/air surfaces, so glare is reduced. Hand-held exposures longer than 1/60 sec work because there is no mirror-induced camera shake.
With larger image formats, where grain is less likely to be intrusive, you can exploit the characteristics of relatively low-speed film and use a 'grainy' developer such as Rodinal to exploit the film's toe curve, just as you could with 5x4.
I use Hasselblad 500CM, with 50, 80, 150 optics. Magnificent but heavy. And a typical print ratio of 4:3 uses only 63% of a square negative, compared with 6x7 or 6x8. I enlarge Ilford Delta 100 (box speed, Rodinal) up to 30x40cm with barely any visible grain. You should be able to take a 6x7 or 6x8 cm negative up to 40x50cm or beyond and retain a clean rendering.
Is this heresy?

 

[removed account4]

i wonder how the OP's trip went, its been 13 months since his last installment to this thread

NOPE. The other medium is the way to go.

i tend to agree with you if the person is familiar with the other medium..
as i mentioned in my post IDK 14 months ago if someone goes on a trip and uses
gear s/he isn't used to, whether it is a box camera or some sophisticated computer
their resulting images will be sub par .. give him/her something they use they will both
enjoy the process of stealing fractions of seconds and the resulting images made...
even when close to home, there is nothing worse than fumbling and bumbling and
the instantaneous moments ... well as bill or was it ted said to so-crates .. dust .. wind ... dude..

 

[Alan Gales]

i wonder how the OP's trip went, its been 13 months since his last installment to this thread

i tend to agree with you if the person is familiar with the other medium..
as i mentioned in my post IDK 14 months ago if someone goes on a trip and uses
gear s/he isn't used to, whether it is a box camera or some sophisticated computer
their resulting images will be sub par .. give him/her something they use they will both
enjoy the process of stealing fractions of seconds and the resulting images made...
even when close to home, there is nothing worse than fumbling and bumbling and
the instantaneous moments ... well as bill or was it ted said to so-crates .. dust .. wind ... dude..

Very good point! I bought my first 35mm SLR camera in 1982 right before a trip to the World's Fair in Knoxville, Tennessee and then on down to Florida's gulf coast. Not being able to get familiar with the camera before the trip, I fumbled a lot with it. I was able to catch some nice memories with it, fortunately. Some screwed up photos too!

 

[Sirius Glass]

Very good point! I bought my first 35mm SLR camera in 1982 right before a trip to the World's Fair in Knoxville, Tennessee and then on down to Florida's gulf coast. Not being able to get familiar with the camera before the trip, I fumbled a lot with it. I was able to catch some nice memories with it, fortunately. Some screwed up photos too!

Back in the Dark Ages when I sold cameras, I would tell a customer who was buying a camera for a trip to take two rolls of film and have them developed before the trip. I would even give them the two rolls. Many of them took my advice and came back with questions. After the trip they would come and thank me for my insistence and buy a lens or two.

 

[johnha]

A trip to Asia implies landscape photography, in which case the largest negative is preferred if the negative is to be enlarged. Landscape doesn't need extreme focal lengths - a kit with a modest wide-angle, a 'normal' and something longish would cope with everything.

I agree.

The weight of a reflex camera is an unnecessary penalty when travelling, since there is no requirement for critical close-up focusing. So why not try a Mamiya or Fuji 6x7 or 6x8 rangefinder? They are soon snapped up when they appear on reputable websites such as Ffordes, but not at bargain prices. The lens performance is superlative because the construction is simple - for instance, there is no need for the back element of the wide-angle to clear the swinging SLR mirror, which hugely improves resolution, geometry and evenness. And there are typically fewer glass/air surfaces, so glare is reduced. Hand-held exposures longer than 1/60 sec work because there is no mirror-induced camera shake.

I have a Pentax 6x7 and looked at a Fuji G690 hoping it would be smaller & lighter (probably for 6x9 it would be but I'm happier with 6x7). It isn't much lighter or much smaller than a P6x7 with a metered prism, the lenses I have (and metering prism) make the P6x7 much more versatile. The later Fujis with fixed lenses mean you need a camera per focal length, I also like to be able to detach the lens and carry the camera & lens separately.

As noted, the Mamiya 7 & Fuji GF670/Bessa are hugely expensive in the UK, and along with the Fuji rangefinders, generally very hard to find.

 

[Luckless]

Very good point! I bought my first 35mm SLR camera in 1982 right before a trip to the World's Fair in Knoxville, Tennessee and then on down to Florida's gulf coast. Not being able to get familiar with the camera before the trip, I fumbled a lot with it. I was able to catch some nice memories with it, fortunately. Some screwed up photos too!

I spoiled what I (kind of) hope was a very lovely photo of a dog playing in the water at a local harbour over the weekend thanks to being unfamiliar with an old camera I recently picked up - It isn't working perfectly, and no longer has enough spring tension to reset the shutter lever on its own after a shot. Lesson hopefully learned, and it is part of why I try to take random photos while out and about on my daily travels.

And hopefully I'll have also learned to be more careful while advancing the film. Seeing as I managed to wind past one frame on my first roll, but in my defence it was pretty dark, and I doubt any of the photos from that section were really worth taking anyway so it probably balances out in the end really.


It doesn't matter how simple or advanced a tool is - If you're not familiar with it, then you're more likely to fumble with it. Surgeons stitch up grapes, photographers take photos, in the end it is really all about practice and understanding what works and doesn't. Not every frame you take needs to be a masterpiece, and I'm of the opinion that if you aim for every click to produce a perfect award winning photo then you're probably falling far short of where your skills and abilities could be.

 

[Alan Gales]

A very good friend of mine and I once had a discussion about owning too many cameras. If you only shoot one camera, then you know that camera inside and out. We were not saying to limit yourself to one camera but at some point you can certainly have so many that you get less familiar with each one. Of course, we are amateurs and don't shoot everyday.

 

[Alan Gales]

Back in the Dark Ages when I sold cameras, I would tell a customer who was buying a camera for a trip to take two rolls of film and have them developed before the trip. I would even give them the two rolls. Many of them took my advice and came back with questions. After the trip they would come and thank me for my insistence and buy a lens or two.

That is really good advice. Many years ago I sold cameras at a Venture department store. I used to give the same advice using my experience as an example. Unfortunately, if I would have given away two rolls of film at Venture they would have fired me! Besides buying another lens, they probably had your store do all their developing and printing. Those two rolls of free film probably made your store a lot of money over time!

 

[Tim Stapp]

Sirius, Ilford must have borrowed your idea for the paper/2 rolls HP5+ package -.

 

[Ricochetrider]

I bought my Hasselblad 5000CM to carry around with me, not to leave it at the house. It has already crossed the Atlantic ocean and back with me, and will see a great many more miles before all is said and done. Got an upcoming trip to England in summer 2019, and who only knows what'll happen between now and then. .
Currently looking for a more efficient way to carry my gear (see "backpack" thread).
Cheers.

 

[Alentejo]

I will travel to Portugal, carrying my Mamiya RB67 6x8, 37mm Fisheye, 50mm, 90mm, 250mm.
It will be meditation pur, to take pictures with a medium format camera at the tripod and taking my time.

 

[wyofilm]

Earlier in this tread I mentioned that I carry a MF camera when I travel. Leading up to a Christmas trip with my wife and kids to visit in-laws in Norway I was heavily wavering on bringing a MF camera. Maybe Scrooge was getting the best of me. In the end, I packed my Mamiya 7 II with two lenses and seven rolls of film, including two rolls of delta 3200. As many can guess, it was worth it. I just finished developing the six rolls I shot and now I have nice, big juicy negatives to work with.

As a side note, it was no problem having film hand checked, both in the US and in Europe. In fact, it was treated as nothing unusual, which might mean that it is still fairly common. One of the reasons I tossed in the delta 3200 film was so that I could claim 'fast' film. The issue of film speed never came up.

 

[abruzzi]

One of the reasons I tossed in the delta 3200 film was so that I could claim 'fast' film.

I was planning to do the same thing on my next trip...

 

[wyofilm]

I was planning to do the same thing on my next trip...

While no one ever questioned film speed it seems like cheap, though not absolute, insurance.

 

[johnha]

As a side note, it was no problem having film hand checked, both in the US and in Europe. In fact, it was treated as nothing unusual, which might mean that it is still fairly common. One of the reasons I tossed in the delta 3200 film was so that I could claim 'fast' film. The issue of film speed never came up.

It's pretty much impossible in the UK and I don't think ISO 3200 would help either. Trying to make it easier for them (out of boxes in clear plastic bag etc.) doesn't help, they're far too busy rooting in bags for errant lipsticks.

Note also that many UK 'budget' carriers only allow small carry-on dimensions/weights (and some charge you extra to put anything in the overhead lockers).

 

[mshchem]

V.H. enjoying medium format. 1 lens no fancy finders. Easy to carry.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Good evening all.

I had some great advice on APUG previously, so thought I'd post again on this particularly topic.

I am looking at a trip to Asia as soon as I can viably take it, and will not be taking my 5x4 setup.

I am in posession of a Nikon F5, which is an obvious contender, and need to either:

a) Add a second F5 for backup and a new lense or two, or
b) Go the 645 medium format route (Pentax or Mamiya, both of which I have researched a lot)

I was under the impression that there was a limit to the detail that could be eked out of 35mm film, even slide film, but then I happened upon this:

http://www.christies.com/lotfinder/...derimages/d56362/d5636201&IntObjectID=5636201

And this:

http://www.clickittefaq.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Sharbat-Gula.jpg

Even if there's been computer higgeryjiggery involved, there has to be that detail there to start with.

So, is there actually any point in swapping to medium format for travel photography? I understand the size difference in gear can be neglible in some cases, and I see it is all pretty affordable these days, so I'm really looking for insights in how the gear handles in the field (or, more accurately, the streets and fields), whether there are any big advantages or disadvantages you have gleaned from experience.

Any pros/cons on this, or any random thoughts would be appreciated, since I have zero experience of medium format SLRs. I do prefer the 645 image aspect ratio to 3:2, and I know the shots-on-a-roll difference and all, but I thought you medium-format-shooting guys would have a better insight on this especially for travel photography, which would include street and scenery both. I'd be shooting either Provia or the Agfa equivalent slide film, or Kodak Ektar 100, plus Ilford FP4+.

Thanks!!

that's what I bought my Mamiya6MF with three lenses forgone of my better decisions.

 

[Jim Andrada]

Last trip to Japan I tooka 1937 Zeiss Super Ikonta 6 x 4.5 folder that my father bought new in 1937, as well as Mamiya 645 a Technika and aa Canon C100 video cam. And a tripod. Maybe to much in most places but we were planning to travel to the Noto Peninsula on the Sea of Japan side and rent a car for a week - also went to take lessons in sharpening at a knifemaker near Kanazawa so I took the videocam to record the lesson for future reference. For most trips it would have been eay to many cameras, but we rented a car for a week (easy to drive in Japan) and you can check luggage overnight from hotel to hotel, so it wasnt too hard to get around. Of all the photos I took, best was with the Zeiss and (IIRC Tri-X). , next several best with the 645 with Ektar 100.

We were in Europe for 3 weeks last Octobr so I took a Mamiya 645 AFD with one film back and one digital back. Had a Mamiya C330 in my checked baggage as well - didn't wind up using it much/Used out phones for "we were here" stuff. I weighed the 645AFD against my 5Diii 70-200 2.8 and the 645 was lighter and less bulky.

Zeiss

645/EK100

 

[wiltw]

[QUOTE="Jim Andrada, post: 2145903, member: 52624" I weighed the 645AFD against my 5Diii 70-200 2.8 and the 645 was lighter and less bulky.

[/QUOTE]

Canon 40D + 17-55mm f/2.8 = 3lb 10oz
Canon 1DsIII + 24-70mm f/2.8 = 4lb 10oz
Bronica ETRSi + prism + magazine + speedgrip + 45-90mm = 5lb 9oz

 

[Jim Andrada]

Last trip to Japan I tooka 1937 Zeiss Super Ikonta 6 x 4.5 folder that my father bought new in 1937, as well as Mamiya 645 a Technika and Aa Canon C100 video cam. And a tripod. Maybe to much in most places but we were planning to travel to the Noto Peninsula on the Sea of Japan side and rent a car for a week - also went to take lessons in knife sharpening at a knifemaker near Kanazawa

 

[wyofilm]

It's pretty much impossible in the UK and I don't think ISO 3200 would help either. Trying to make it easier for them (out of boxes in clear plastic bag etc.) doesn't help, they're far too busy rooting in bags for errant lipsticks.

Note also that many UK 'budget' carriers only allow small carry-on dimensions/weights (and some charge you extra to put anything in the overhead lockers).

That is a bummer.