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

[Alan W]

Yes.MF and 35mm is essential,I find.For me,One Mamiya 7 with 65mm,43mm and 150mm lens.One Konica hexar with 50mm f2.One Minolta CLE with 40mm,28mm and 90mm.Some batteries,filters and film.All wrapped up in a Lowepro slingshot 200.Less than 15 pounds of anything you could possibly want.

 

[Trask]

MF and 35mm for travel works for me. I usually travel with an Olympus OM3-Ti or OM4-Ti and a Fuji GF670 (6x7). The Fuji is a folder. Sometimes I'll take one my Zeiss Ikon Super Ikontas (also folders). As the folders do not have interchangeable lenses the bag stays light. When I am shooting both formats I tend to be quite selective in what gets taken on MF. Of course the lack of interchangeable lenses means the folder is not as versatile as the 35mm SLR but it works well for many things. Some scenes deserve the bigger format, others are just mementos to jog my memory in the future and will do on 35mm.

+1 — I operate along much these same lines. I often travel with a Plaubel W67 w/ 55mm lens (it’s a folder) and an LTM camera with a handful of small lenses — a 21mm CV, a 35mm lens and a 90mm LTM canon take up about the same space as a large SLR lens. I do tend to shoot color in the Plaubel and B/W in the LTM. If I have a bit more room, I might swap in an M-mount body like an M5 for the Leica IIIa. All this, with a light meter and some film, will fit in a smallish camera bag.

 

[Svenedin]

+1 — I operate along much these same lines. I often travel with a Plaubel W67 w/ 55mm lens (it’s a folder) and an LTM camera with a handful of small lenses — a 21mm CV, a 35mm lens and a 90mm LTM canon take up about the same space as a large SLR lens. I do tend to shoot color in the Plaubel and B/W in the LTM. If I have a bit more room, I might swap in an M-mount body like an M5 for the Leica IIIa. All this, with a light meter and some film, will fit in a smallish camera bag.

The shorter OM lenses are very compact and the OM cameras themselves are small. I take my gear on trips in a dedicated camera bag but actually when I'm out for the day I just use an ordinary, small daypack. It's easily big enough for a MF folder, OM body, 50mm, 28mm (and/or 24mm) and perhaps a 100mm + filters, hoods and film (and that's with the lenses in their cases although sometimes I put them in a thick hiking sock which gives some protection). I am not a fan of bulky camera gear. If I need longer lenses and a tripod then it gets a bit more bulky and is better carried between 2 people. I only use a tripod for indoor shots and night photos though.

 

[mooseontheloose]

I always travel with 35mm and MF - usually my Nikon FE (with 20 or 28mm + 50mm), my Holga (weighs next to nothing) and a TLR - now it's a Rolleiflex, but in the past I also used a Minolta Autocord (my favourite) or some flavour of Yashica. I don't necessarily take them all out at the same time. The 35mm is there for backup, or for alternative film (colour, infrared, etc) while the Rollei is the workhorse. I haven't used folders much, but there are certainly cheaper options to a Rolleiflex (the Autocord in particular) that take just as good photos.

 

[Down Under]

More and more as I move into what my beloved partner likes to call "over the hill and a fair way beyond" (= past 70), I find that, as cameras go, less is better. I've done architectural photography for many years, but never with big cameras, only 120 and 35mm without swings, tilts or other fancy bits. I'm now doing much less of this, and when I do it's more selective, mostly colonial architecture in Asia and not every new building I come across.

I still intend to travel around Asia this year and the next, but I'm now much more concerned with carrying less photo gear.

On my next trip, I'll take a digital camera (maybe of my Nikon Ds), but not as the base of a multi-lens kit as I did before, and definitely not a D700, it's heavy enough to sink a ship. this year a Fuji X-whatever with two lenses may be on my radar.

In the past I've shot overseas with a Rolleiflex and lately a Rolleicord Vb, but for my next journey in midyear, film-wise I want to go ultra-light.It pleases me to see so many here praising the Voigtander Perkeos. I have a Perkeo I with a Color-Skopar lens and I find it an ideal camera for me to travel around. (I realize this is very much a multiple-choice option and what suits me may not really be your type of shooter, but my basic point is we have so many options here.)

The Color-Skopar lenses produce results I often think can be compared to small (6x6) engravings, they are that sharp.
If only the Perkeos could be adjusted to shoot 16 on 120, my preferred travel format.

More and more in my travels I meet people, some very young, who have taken to the notion of KISS. My partner's sister, recently retired from a lifetime of teaching lecturing, is now in Europe, shooting with her Kodak Retina II or III (the f/2 lens model). She easily buys films and get her films processed almost everywhere and she sees more film shooters than ever. I've seen her posts (photo shops in France and Germany can apparently process and scan as a one-day service, wow!) and her images are truly outstanding.

There are many options out there for in-the-pocket film cameras, the Retina and the Perkeo are ony two of a long list. A friend uses a circa 1950 Zeiss Nettar on loan from me, to shoot landscapes in Tasmania. His results (I scan them when I'm home from my wanderings) are not quite as technically good as with the Perkeo, but he is doing very fine work.

So as the great Ella Fitzgerald sang (was it really so long ago?), "things are looking up" - for film shooters.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Planning on trip to France with my better half early this Fall. MF Rollei 6008 will likely stay home, and my current 35mm RF (M6 and ZM lenses) make the trip. But as a possible 2nd camera, I'm thinking of a Voigtlander Perkeo II. Prices are about a quarter of TLR's for a Rollei 2.8D... which runs upwards from $800-ish. TLR's? See recent "Traveling with my Rollei" discussion which planted the idea... and then eBay kind of said, "Next year, kiddo." I know zippo about folders, but saw ref to them here and RFF, and this model as decent. So the question is more "IS it really worth the bother, or is it gonna be fun and 'done', and leave me wishing I'd have either dropped the idea, or sprung for a better option. Does anyone really find taking a MF and 35mm works on travel (if the MF is a small Perkeo for example)? or is that a bridge too far? Curious what your experience is. Even happy to hear honest advice, "Don't do it... wait until you do it right." or "That's just money down a rathole."

I found the Mamiya 6MF withers excellent lenses to be the best MF travel camera ever; puts twelve great 6x6negatives on every 120 roll of film.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

... Does anyone really find taking a MF and 35mm works on travel (if the MF is a small Perkeo for example)? or is that a bridge too far? ...

Usually I take just one camera on trips because I travel light. However last year I took a Zeiss Nettar 515/16 (this is 6x6 format) and a Leica III simply because they were both so small.

You left out that I use my Hasselblads as pillows at night and cushions for the sofa.

Careful... You don't want to give the impression that Hasselblads are soft.

 

[macfred]

... However last year I took a Zeiss Nettar 515/16 (this is 6x6 format)....

My solution for travelling ultra-light :
Super Ikonta III - 531/16 by Andreas, on Flickr

It fits the inner pocket of my Tweed jacket - allthough it's a Novar (not the Tessar), it's a great lens !

An der Emscher by Andreas, on Flickr

 

[Svenedin]

Super camera MacFred and a lovely photo too. There is something so attractive about the way those lenses render sunny scenes -they sparkle.

In 6x6 I have the Super Ikonta IV but also Super Ikontas in 6x4.5

 

[macfred]

...There is something so attractive about the way those lenses render sunny scenes -they sparkle.

In 6x6 I have the Super Ikonta IV but also Super Ikontas in 6x4.5

I totally agree !!

Mia by Andreas, on Flickr

 

[guangong]

About folders. Only Zeiss constructed a folder which allowed the lens to be on the same plane as film. With other folders the lens support could go out of alignment. Since most folders are now quite old, this point should be kept in mind.
Although when traveling by car from home I feel free to carry everything from 4x5 on down. In the 60s and 70s I carried a lot of stuff when traveling abroad, but today’s world is very different. Now I travel very light...a Contax T3 for film and a small Olympus digital (horrors!) as well as my always present Minox subminiature.
My difficulty with photography when traveling is that I sometimes become so interested in what I see that my camera is forgotten.
If I were to take a MF camera to Europe or Asia it would be a Rolleiflex TLR accompanied by an Olympus XA , Contax T3 or something similar. As fond as I am of my folders a Rollei would be more worry
free of possible breakdown. Take batteries for meter and second camera. I wasted a lot of time looking for batteries in Cairo (right before Egypt was destabilized; and taken over by Muslim brotherhood). However, in my quest for batteries I discovered a small very interesting bookstore run by Copts, from which my wife was able to purchase two small paintings by a very famous Chinese artist.

 

[klownshed]

I'd just take one camera. I've made the mistake of taking too much stuff with me before and always regretted it.

Your 'better half' has better things to do on holiday than watch you fiddle about with cameras. Having just the one removes the fiddle factor and your 'better half' will thank you for it, I'm sure

Oh, and simplicity, in my experience at least, makes for more interesting photos. It seems that the more kit I take with me, the less likely I will be to take a half decent image.

 

[DWThomas]

I'd just take one camera. I've made the mistake of taking too much stuff with me before and always regretted it.

I understand where you're coming from, but to me that decision would depend on where I was going and what I expected to see. I would hate to get back from a multi-thousand dollar excursion somewhere halfway around the world and discover something went amiss with that one camera on the second day of the trip. I generally like to have the camera I plan to use, and one, likely more compact, backup. I will confess since I replaced my iPhone 5c with a 6s I shoot a lot of miscellaneous snap shots with that. So I suppose at some level, the phone is a backup. On long trips where schlepping stuff around will become tiresome, I try to minimize the accessories; perhaps a fairly wide range zoom and one fast prime. On most trips the last ten years I've taken one film camera and one digital. I may or may not take backups depending again on trip specifics. (I favor B&W film when visiting my revered olde rusty stuff!!! )

 

[Colin Corneau]

Different cameras are simply different tools - some tools are better for specific jobs.

For you, the specific job is travel and daily life. That'd leave out a Hasselblad, lovely as they are, in favour of something lighter. A folder is a good idea, as is a Mamiya 6 or 7. Keep it to one lens (if it's interchangeable lenses) and most importantly -- whatever camera you choose, get to know it BEFORE you leave. Don't learn on your vacation...it's a vacation, not work.

Consider the idea of keeping it to one camera - in other words, choose only your M6 or only a MF camera. Simply, simplify....

 

[Marco Gilardetti]

I don't think it's GAS sometimes during a travel you really wish to have a specific type of camera with you, depending on the subjects you are likely going to see, the dress you will be wearing (heavy and clumsy or light, with many pockets or without, etc.), the overall weight of your luggage, and so on.

I just warmly suggest you not to purchase a new camera and then leave, especially cameras as old as folders. Travel cameras shall be long tested and well mastered before carrying them anywhere, or you might regret it!

 

[02Pilot]

The Perkeo is a great little travel camera; it's small, but moreover it's light. There are lots of small folders, but few weigh as little as the Perkeo while still remaining capable. I've taken mine on several trips and it's done well for me.

That said, I am now firmly in the "take one camera" camp. Whenever I've had multiple cameras (not counting a spare body kept unloaded and solely in case the primary fails) it's always made things cumbersome and slow, which I really do not like. Decide what you want from the trip photographically, then tailor your equipment to that objective. For example, I went to Berlin last year with the intention of capturing something akin to what I grew up seeing in B&W photos from the early Cold War; I took a Leica IIIc and Elmar 50/3.5, loaded with HP5+ that I pushed to 1600. That's it. It was exactly what I wanted, and the camera facilitated, rather than hindered, my objective.

It may be that you can't do what you want with only one camera, but decide that first before settling on your equipment.

 

[faberryman]

The Voigtlander Perkeo II has an 80mm f3.5 lens, which is 40-ish in 35mm terms. It therefore likely overlaps with your Leica/Zeiss kit. So the only reason to buy and take it is the larger negative. Do you need/want a larger negative for some of your vacation shots? If so, buy and take it. If not, don't. Only you know whether this is GAS.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Different cameras are simply different tools - some tools are better for specific jobs.

For you, the specific job is travel and daily life. That'd leave out a Hasselblad, lovely as they are, in favour of something lighter. A folder is a good idea, as is a Mamiya 6 or 7. Keep it to one lens (if it's interchangeable lenses) and most importantly -- whatever camera you choose, get to know it BEFORE you leave. Don't learn on your vacation...it's a vacation, not work.

Consider the idea of keeping it to one camera - in other words, choose only your M6 or only a MF camera. Simply, simplify....

A Hasselblad is much less bulky than a Mamiya CXXX.

 

[pbromaghin]

We're planning a trip for next month where the photo subjects will range from close details of a bonsai plant to surfers 200 yards away. While I have done it with all-medium format, this time it's going to be all 35mm (2 bodies, 4 lenses) and B&W (hp5 and fp4). For the occasional color shot, I will bring along a pocket camera, the 6x4.5 Super Ikonta loaded with Ektar. I prefer it to the 6x6 Ikonta because it's a bit smaller and lighter and gets more shots between reloads.

With the Perkeo II you are making a very good choice. I have found with the ordinary Ikonta 523 vs the Super Ikonta, that zone focusing a lens having a depth-of-field scale, like the Perkeo II, is much more conducive to keeping your sanity when accompanying an impatient spouse, than is fiddling with a 75-year old rangefinder.

 

[MattKing]

A Hasselblad is much less bulky than a Mamiya CXXX.

Unless you have 2 or 3 lenses.

 

[bunip]

I have traveled with many folders, often used a folder as my main holiday camera to take family and landscape pictures. I used mostly agfas, voigtlanders and zeiss. As I collect them and have hundreds I was able to compare them. Considering similar prices or value the agfa isolette is the winner in terms of quality: you get the same optical quality from the solinar 75 and the color-skopar 80 but pay less the first. Usually I bring one with bw 400, another with bw 125 and one with E6 film. Perkeo’s lenses have an f16 minimum aperture and if you have the Prontor-s shutter 1/300 maximum speed so with 400 asa film in summer daylite you could need a filter ( ND or RED), zeiss ikontas and agfa isolettes have 1/300 on f22 or 1/500 on f22. Having many at hand i found that if you measure effective shutter’s times you get a 30% +/- variability so it is more important to know effective speeds than to know the camera had been clad. My favourite is the agfa Isolette III with uncoupled rangefinder and solinar 75 3,5 followed by the Zeiss ikonta M (with uncoupled rangefinder and the legendary Opton-Tessar 75 3,5); the perkeo even if top optical quality is too small for my taste. Speaking about optical quality if you consider same level lenses tey are all similar quality level; the biggest difference is between each sample as I found owing 5 or 6 samples of each model. If you consider the focal plane alignment issue the Perkeo is difficoult to find in good conditions while the zeiss and agfa are very well mantained. Regarding what guangong said about lenses on the same film plane also voigtlander and agfa produced such models (Bessa II 6x9, Super Isolette 6x6) but all these suffer from the same problem as even if the lens is geared to move on the same plane the weak point is the folding mechanism and how is designed. agfa and zeiss had a better design than voigtlander. About weight if you consider the models in my pictures the range is from 524g to 628g being the perkeo the lightest and the M Isolette III the heaviest. As you can see dimensions are similar for 6x6, in the picture you can see also two 4,5x6 zeiss.

 

[JWMster]

Y'know, if I could, I'd take the Rollei 6008-Integral. Though I don't have a Rolleiflex TLR, I'd suppose that before you hang a lens on a 6008, you're talking about a similar size package. And the 80mm is pretty small. But the issue is "Just 'cause you can doesn't mean you should" and the temptation to take more than more than one lens suddenly catapults you into mega-travel size. Like many of us, I "try" to travel light, but I've given my camera gear too much of a pass. Fine for car based travel... much less so for air based. When push comes to shove, a Leica M kit is pretty hard to beat. I'm still working out in my mind whether it's better to take a 2nd 35mm, a small MF like the Perkeo, or not. A 35mm and MF mean 2 film sizes in addition to however many emulsions. Temptations... they're everywhere!!! and first thing y'know you've bulked up a small bag bigger than The Hulk. Definitely NOT the idea. The challenge of shooting a folder nevetheless appeals...intellectually as much as might fall flat pragmatically. So much to think about here. Thanks guys! Keep it coming.

 

[bunip]

Agfa Isolette III Solinar 75 f3,5
Agfa Isolette II Solinar 75 f3,5
Zeiss Ikonta M Opton-Tessar 75 f 3,5
Voigtlander Perkeo II Color-Skopar 80 f3,5 - Zeiss Ikonta 4,5x6 Opton-Tessar 75 f 3,5
Voigtlander Bessa 66 Color-Skopar 80 f3,5 - Zeiss Super Ikonta 4,5x6 Opton-Tessar 75 f 3,5

 

[JWMster]

bunip: Good thinking! Yep... the issue of summer sunshine is a real deal and a 1/500th shutter or an F/22 aperture handy. Difference between F2.8 and F3.5 is far less important. I'd heard the Mamiya Six was supposed to be excellent in the sense that it avoids the lens movement by substituting movement of the film plane, but seems like they are increasingly hard to find in clean condition, and I don't know who handles CLA's for these things. Hard from photos from online hawkers whether some cameras are just a tad behind the cosmetic curve or seriously...actual beaters. I guess this is why folks often gravitate to the Fuji's. As for me, I've had some of Fuji's digital cameras and fine as they are - and they're quite good, I prefer a Zeiss-type lens. Guess that's the weakness that pushed me into Leica and Rollei. For now, I'm holding off from a TLR 'cause there's a learning curve / lore / collector issue that probably needs more time to negotiate well than I have to give it at the moment. And so for now I'm resisting all the more expensive options: Rollei TLR's, Fuji GW690's, Mamyia 6's... and so forth for some of the technical considerations passed along - but price is a bit steeper than I like for a round one travel camera. And my preference for 6X6 in MF... is another issue that narrows the options. So there's that great British saying that applies: "If wishes were horses, beggars would ride" and it surely applies!

 

[bunip]

Being a folding camera also the Mamiya six has the same alignment problem of the others. The way the lens focuses does not matter with the weakness of the folding mechanism that will retract and expose the lens. Coming from all these folding cameras I used for almost 10 years two years ago got a mamiya Super 23 with a 50, 65, 100mm lens and recently I got some rolleiflexes (2 planar F 3,5 and one xenotar F3,5) a mamiya 6 with the 50, 75 and 150 lenses. All this high optical quality gear is so heavy compared to the folders that was much easy to get used to a tlr composing view than to it’s weight, not speaking about the mamiya super 23.