Road trip with slide film- camera choice? 35mm Lens ?

[flavio81]

So I plan on a 10 day road trip (NY to the West Coast) where I'll be burning off my reserves of E100VS-
I was thinking either my Nikon F3 with my 28 F2 and 50 F1.8- or just my F100 1.8- Trying to minimize bulk
Will the 35mm be versatile enough of a focal length? I can see AF being useful for me, plus I can rely on Matrix Metering
How useful would a tele be? (the only one I have is a 105 2.5)

You have all that you need. I'd say the F3 is perfect for travels due to being small, light, and reliable.

The 35mm is indeed very versatile and perfect for travels.

With the 105 is an excellent combination; 105 for portraits and closeups; 35 for everything else. Although i'd pick a 85 over the 105, only because some 85mm lenses are smaller. Or the 100mm Series E which is very compact.

The 35mm replaces the 50mm lens for everything except portraits. But for that, the 105 comes to the rescue! That's why it's an ideal combination.

You can also bring the 28/2.0 instead of the 35; it is also a general-purpose focal length. I have a Canon FD 28/2.0 and it's indeed really versatile. Also, because it's a wider lens, you can shoot it at a slightly slower speed than a 50/1.8, and still get usable images.

I have never needed "matrix metering" or such things. In fact last trip I made, i did not use the meter at all, judging exposure by eye. (This is easy on daylight + negative film). Of course, for slide film you need a meter, but the heavily centerweighted pattern of the Nikon F3 is very very reliable; and I have certainly shot slide films without any problem with the F3 i owned.

Finally, if you want to bring only ONE lens, then ditch the SLRs altogether and carry a compact rangefinder like the Olympus 35RC. Or you know which camera? The Olympus Trip 35. Or, if you shoot fine grained film and do optical enlargements, one of the Olympus half-frames like the Oly Pen EES-2. Seriously. Or the XA2. Or one of the Kodak Retinas (they were used for the first expedition to Mount Everest).

 

[frank]

My travel lenses are usually 20/28/50 for RF or slr, with a point and shoot like the xa2 and its 35mm lens.

 

[jeddy-3]

Bring it all I say, then next time you'll know what you really need or what you can really do without, or even sell. Everyone likes to shoot different ways, and the only way you'll learn what you like is to experiment. Just FedEx everything else back to your house before your flight out . Well worth the money for the learning experience, IMO. I've traveled with everything (different formats, lenses etc) before and it was invaluable to learn that I didn't need any of that junk and actually prefer the challenge of making due with less. It's EXTREMELY liberating (for me) to travel with one camera and lens (two tops). But you need to learn what suits you. This trip seems like the perfect opportunity for that.

One camera &lens allows you to focus on what matters most, the experience of trip itself and the people you're with.

Plus you don't annoy everyone else around you...as much

 

[frank]

Different people work different ways. For some but not all, less is more.

 

[jeddy-3]

Well said

 

[mdarnton]

It kind of matters how you see, I think. I had just a 28 and a 50 for a couple of years and that was fine. I took a vacation with a $50 Russian "Leica", 15 and 50/3.5 once, and that was fine. I hardly ever bring any tele and never miss one. I would never leave the house without a 50, though, for sure. A 35-50 spread isn't big enough for me to bother with a 35 most of the time.

 

[Sirius Glass]

(I admit I've been spoiled by zooms but . . . ) Assuming we're talking mostly time spent in "the Great Outdoors" I would lean toward the 35 and 50 -- I tend to think of expansive panoramas (but that's me). My experience (none recent) with telephoto primes is that no matter what one I have with me, I always find myself wishing it were a different focal length. And if you get into cities, museums, etc. the 100 might be a bit long in working distance. But you are making the trip!

My 1.3 (after tax) cents

Compared to the 50mm lens the 35mm is not wide enough to justify its cost or its use. The 28mm lenses is wide enough for most photographs. I strongly and regularly recommend the 28mm and 50mm combinations especially to vacation road trips. While telephoto lenses are useful, they generally are not used as much as the 28mm and 50mm lenses.

 

[ME Super]

If it were me, I'd take the 28, a fast 50, and a 105. Though I did find a couple times in Yellowstone that a 70-210mm zoom came in very handy at the long end. Definitely bring a fast 50 though. Funny thing is I have a 28-200mm zoom on the camera now, and a lot of the time I focus, zoom back to where it looks good and take the shot. Then I look at the lens barrel, and it's set right around 50mm.

 

[destroya]

i have made many road trips. some bringing lots of stuff and then later on bringing much less. used to bring a 35mm with 4 lenses and my fuji 645 rangefinder for slide film. later just the 35mm with 3 lenses and someone else mentioned, its more about enjoying myself and not taking pictures!

so now my travel setup is the same as my hiking set up (cargo shorts are great for putting lenses and extra film in having all those pockets). if its slide film then my FA, B&W the F3 with a 28mm ai-s 3.5, a 50mm ai 1.4 and either the 85mm ai-s f2 or 105 ai f2.5. this gives me plenty of coverage, great metering when needed and small light lenses that cover almost all i might need. I find that I rarely miss having a longer lens than 105. I found that taking a few steps forward or backwards can sometimes replace a zoom lens. the nikon 35-70 2.8d lens a a great lens but for walking all day, primes rule for me

 

[Sirius Glass]

When I use 35mm cameras I carry two 35mm cameras, one for black & white and one for color, a 28mm to 300mm Tamron zoom lens, a 28mm to 200mm Nikon lens and a 20mm to 35mm Nikon zoom lens.