MF Travel Camera idea sense / nonsense... or is it just GAS?

[JWMster]

bunip: Wow. You clearly don't mess around. Nice collection! Thanks also for the text comparison of weight. I think weight is a real issue... and is either handled easily or not. Much depends on the package. Take a Bronica SQ vs. a Rollei 6008 and for about the same weight, the Rollei is waaaay easier and more of a shooter's camera IMHO. So handling is as important as anything else and a difficult, almost intangible aspect to factor into the equation. Thanks!

 

[bunip]

JWMster if you’d like to try some I could send you a bag of 5-6 folders for the price of one rolley...

 

[Sirius Glass]

A Hasselblad is much less bulky than a Mamiya CXXX.

Unless you have 2 or 3 lenses.

More so with two or three lenses. Mamiya lenses are twice as large.

 

[bunip]

JWMster
here you can see some of my cameras, many are in regular use.
#292

 

[MattKing]

More so with two or three lenses. Mamiya lenses are twice as large.

My 65mm + 135mm + C330 with prism and WL finder kit is positively portable.

 

[JWMster]

Bunip: I am SURE you need more cameras! THere was still some empty floor space on one side!

 

[mshchem]

My vote is for a nice Fuji 645, no auto focus nonsense. But if you want to really impress the locals try this setup. Remember the French love it when you talk American at them, especially if you repeat yourself slow and loud!

 

[film_man]

More so with two or three lenses. Mamiya lenses are twice as large.

Eh? While a Mamiya TLR is marginally bigger in volume than a Hasselblad when comparing with a 80mm lens the lenses are tiny compared to Hasselblad ones.

 

[JWMster]

mshchem: LOVE the Texas 10-gallon (or close) with the Texas Leica! Great shot! Amazing flash rig btw, too.
bunnip: THAT collection is one of the most prodigious I've ever seen. Never seen such a number of folders in one place. I suppose you have some 35mm somewhere... but MF is definitely your thing. Sweet deal!

 

[JWMster]

JWMster if you’d like to try some I could send you a bag of 5-6 folders for the price of one rolley...

Sweet offer. May get back to you. Thanks!

 

[RichardJack]

Hi,
My two cents. I love MF and film and own at least 12 cameras and 30 lenses. I recently travelled to Ireland and I am so glad my MF camera stayed home. I travelled light with my DSLR (Nikon D850) and a few lenses and I know my results would not of been any better with MF & film. Think it over seriously. No film to carry (you won't buy it there), ability to shoot ISO 100 - 10,000, B&W or color, and your travelling light.
have a great trip.

 

[film_man]

Hi,
My two cents. I love MF and film and own at least 12 cameras and 30 lenses. I recently travelled to Ireland and I am so glad my MF camera stayed home. I travelled light with my DSLR (Nikon D850) and a few lenses and I know my results would not of been any better with MF & film. Think it over seriously. No film to carry (you won't buy it there), ability to shoot ISO 100 - 10,000, B&W or color, and your travelling light.
have a great trip.

...well might as well dump all the film gear then.

 

[pbromaghin]

...well might as well dump all the film gear then.

Why did it take so long for us to figure that out? Shoot. All these years wasted.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

If you're thinking of a folder, take a look at a Moskva (Moscow) V - it's a 6x9 rangefinder that has an actual coupled rangefinder and a really nice 105mm lens on it. It can do 6x6 or 6x9, but to shoot 6x6 you have to insert a mask at the film plane and shoot the entire roll in 6x6.

 

[macfred]

If you're thinking of a folder, take a look at a Moskva (Moscow) V - it's a 6x9 rangefinder that has an actual coupled rangefinder and a really nice 105mm lens on it. It can do 6x6 or 6x9, but to shoot 6x6 you have to insert a mask at the film plane and shoot the entire roll in 6x6.

Scott, I have a Moskva V - mine is mechanically unreliable - lots of technical shortcomings (film transport, film flatness, camera back door, bellows, ...) - lens is quite decent.
All in all no comparison to the archetype (Super Ikonta).

 

[grahamp]

When I'm traveling (as opposed to going somewhere to photograph), I prefer to stick to one format of film. That usually means 120 with one or two of: GS645s, Mamiya 6 (new), or YashicaMat. I tend not to use 35mm because I find it harder to work with my vision limitations when out and about. The GS645s scores for little weight, and 15 on 120. The Mamiya 6 has lens alternatives and is still reasonably compact in one bag. The YashicaMat can be risked in checked baggage, and offers (literally) a different viewpoint from the rangefinders.

That works for me, but probably nobody else!

 

[JWMster]

macfred: Love your Zeiss Ikonta btw and the shots shown ...which I'm not sure with it, or the Nettar... but a great shot either way.
grahamp: Good thoughts. Next trip might be a Mamiya 6... but that's in the more $'s than I wanna swing for at the moment category. Caution on 2 types of film... I hear you. Kind of why I posted this, too.

 

[warden]

When traveling where it's harder to carry, i.e. lots of walking or hiking, I take one 35mm camera and one or two lenses. But if it's easy to carry, i.e. with a car, I'll take two Makina folders, one wide and one normal. I'm usually happier with the MF images, and eventually forget the headaches of the extra weight.

 

[bunip]

every time i go on holiday or go somewhere interesting for photography i have to choose what gear to bring with me. it’s every time less digital and more film because I like the darkroom work. usually i bring the mamiya press, one rollei, the mamiya 6 with its 50, my super isolette and another 6x6 and 6x9 folder just in case. but when i go around walking the mamiya 6 or the rolley + one folder is my standard.
oh, and yes, my toyo field 5x7 with 3 lenses...

 

[JWMster]

bunip: Yes, less and less digital. I'm using digital for the time being as a vehicle for making contact sheets from my film negatives. Use a darkroom frame, a blank white light table, and make a quick shot. Helps avoid dead time scanning discards.

So I bought a Voigtlander Perkeo II from Certo6. Seems to be in good working order though there's definitely some getting used to it features.

Notes so far:

1) Move and Keep Trigger Finger away from shutter release
2) Wind the film advance
3) Frame the picture and estimate how many body lengths away the subject stands
4) Put reading glasses on or get microscope to read and adjust settings
5) Focus before you forget distance estimate
6) Set the F-stop and shutter speed
7) Push reading glasses back on head so that I can
8) Cock the shutter and recompose the shot and
9) Shoot the picture

The trick seems to be that if the shutter release is tripped, even if the shutter hasn't been cocked so that the shutter actually fires, the double exposure prevention will require rolling ahead one frame, and so the current frame is lost. I'm getting about 9 shots per roll so far due to this safety feature. Yes it will get better. I'm not worried about that, just one of those doggone moments.
I've never had to use reading glasses for a camera before. I think perhaps the type font for aperture, shutter speed and focus distance must be about size 6 font. The camera's over-all size is otherwise literally no bigger than a Leica M4-2. The other handling bugaboo in my view is that the case is nice, but if you go out shooting, you're going to have to remove the case in order to reload.
FWIW, Certo did a nice job with this machine. Shutter speed, aperture and focus all move easily. Film advance works fine. And the bellows is light tight so far as I can tell, and everything works. The film advance works fabulously using the flip lever once you get to the 1st frame, and the spacing of shots on a roll seems pretty doggone good.

The one thing that's not "sweet" is identifying the 1st frame. I mean seriously: The red window makes the numbers all but invisible. Somehow I remember the Kodak camera I had with a window for this as a kid had big honking numbers you could actually see. These? Nope. Neither an Ilford or Kodak roll were much help. Yes, there's an => (Big Arrow) and I assume if I go just a little ways beyond this, I've hit # 1, but so far, I haven't found a film where the numbers are legible. They're like dots or something in an invisible ink test. What I'm not sure about is why.... if there's this very nice little cover for the window... why not make this window easier to read? Yes, the red glass is what I remember as a kid, but I also remember it being easy to read.

Anyway... size is MUCH smaller than I figured and that's actually nice - with the exception of making me feel like I need eye surgery.

So that's my report so far. Verdict? Folders have far more potential than I figured. I'm not sure I got the right one, but I'm sure I'll get the hang of it and we can worry about the "right one" later. It's a fun camera in a vintage sort of way. Glad to add a folder to my bag. Thanks for the suggestions. Nicest looking shots from a folder I didn't get that... for a $150 more fits the "might have been"?
Zeiss Ikon Super Ikonta III - if that's how you refer to it. But we're hanging with this for now.

 

[DWThomas]

I normally wear progressive bifocals, so the glasses are on all the time. As such, I don't remember a problem with reading the settings on my Perkeo II. What was a bit of shock happened after I had owned it for several years. I foolishly agreed to take some informal B&W shots (not "official," just casual as an eccentric uncle) at an evening wedding that was outdoors. I armed myself with flash for fill, but by golly, the event ran late, and it was in a wooded park setting and it was just plain dark! The numbers could have been an inch high and I couldn't read them! Most of my go-to cameras, even back to 1980 or so, were either auto, or had LED readouts. I survived, and got some shots, but the possibility of that whole problem never crossed what's left of my mind when I was preparing.

The auto-indexing is a bit quirky, but so far I generally do OK. You can actually get 13 shots on a roll if the moon and stars are in alignment, but then the extra shot won't fit in a standard negative file page. As it happens, I don't think I've tried any of the latest Kodak backing paper in it. I don't recall a problem with Fuji Acros or Ilford film in the red window, and I've put lots of the earlier 400TX through it.

 

[MattKing]

Consider carrying a small LED flashlight - it works great with the red window, and makes reading the camera settings much easier.
It helps in "atmospheric" restaurants too

 

[DWThomas]

Consider carrying a small LED flashlight

Yes! There has been one on my keychain for a few years now. AAA cell and LED bulb surprising how much light it puts out and how long the battery lasts.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

You can actually get 13 shots on a roll if the moon and stars are in alignment, but then the extra shot won't fit in a standard negative file page. As it happens, I don't think I've tried any of the latest Kodak backing paper in it. I don't recall a problem with Fuji Acros or Ilford film in the red window, and I've put lots of the earlier 400TX through it.

I’ve found I can get 13 shots on the Perkeo II quite reliably, but stopped doing so exactly for the reason you mention—the negs are hard to file and won’t proof on a single 8x10” sheet. It’s less of an issue for transparency film.

 

[mooseontheloose]

The one thing that's not "sweet" is identifying the 1st frame. I mean seriously: The red window makes the numbers all but invisible. Somehow I remember the Kodak camera I had with a window for this as a kid had big honking numbers you could actually see. These? Nope. Neither an Ilford or Kodak roll were much help. Yes, there's an => (Big Arrow) and I assume if I go just a little ways beyond this, I've hit # 1, but so far, I haven't found a film where the numbers are legible. They're like dots or something in an invisible ink test. What I'm not sure about is why.... if there's this very nice little cover for the window... why not make this window easier to read? Yes, the red glass is what I remember as a kid, but I also remember it being easy to read.

The ink is an issue - if you've seen this thread (or others like it) you'll know that Kodak has issues with the ink from the backing paper transferring to the film. Both Kodak and Ilford seem to get around this by having very pale numbers compared to what they used to have. Fuji (Acros) on the other hand, has numbers that are very easy to see. If you think daylight is bad, try finding those numbers at night! In any event, I do use the sun during the day, or the flashlight on my phone (not directly) in dark situations to check the numbers and make sure they are centre in the red square.