whwiden

I am considering an alternative for an upcoming trip that I am sure will strike some as crazy. In short, it is to take only film equipment on a trip to Namibia using the type of equipment that a photojournalist might have used circa 1980. I would use a Nikon F2 photomic with longer lenses: 300mm 4.5, 200mm f4, 2.0 and 1.4 teleconverters. For shorter work, an M4P rangefinder: 21mm 50mm 90mm 135mm. Maybe a medium format with a fixed 80mm lens. I could go all Nikon with a 24mm 2.8, 105 2.5 and a 35-70mm 3.5 zoom. Or go Leica for shorter (I think this might have been a common practice at that time). Some mix of these seems to me about right for that era. I welcome comments on what a kit of this era would look like. If it does not fit in a Domke F-2, it will not go.

As background, I am pretty good with a monopod and the 300mm, pushing tri-x or HP5. I have shot this a lot for late afternoon twilight, etc. at sports events (mostly kid soccer).

The film selection is up in the air: probably some 50 ISO or 100 ISO color, like a Cine film or Ektar--but mostly black and white for action (though could consider 400 ISO Portra). If I am pushing film, however, it will be BW that I develop myself.

Others on the trip will have superzooms, so memories will not be a total loss.

A hybrid approach would be to take a Nikon D750 and the F2, but use only older manual focus glass to create a somewhat vintage look, etc.

I am rebelling a bit against, electronics, batteries, the large size of modern equipment and, perhaps, looking to create a bit more adventure and interest.

I am curious for any thoughts on this approach. And would be grateful for any insights if others have recently shot film on such a trip. Advice on appropriate vintage equipment also welcome.

NMGal Loc: NE NM

I cannot help on equipment but would be very interested to hear and see how it goes. Have a great trip.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

If I were taking such a trip, I would be taking a Pentax 645n (1997) with, 45-85, 200mm, 400mm and 1.4X. Film? - Fuji Velvia 100 and Kodak 400 T-max. - BTW, AFAIK, this is the camera Salgado used for "Genisis". Otherwise, I would consider the earlier Pentax 6X7 system - it has LONG lenses.

Otherwise, the Nikon 300 4.5 EDIF AIS is a GREAT lens - maybe with an FM-2 ?? - Sorry, these all have some tronics in them ....but so does F2 Photomic and M4P.

..

whwiden

Thank you. If I do this, I was considering using the approach to write a short article about the experience--assuming I got a sufficient number of usable shots without ruined film, etc. I figure the ISO 50 film should be relatively safe. I like film. I sometimes like digital, for all it can do. But I am not sure that digital has advanced the casual or family shooter that far for all the money that is spent. I will not argue with photojournalists and sports shooters, etc. Digital rules the high ISO realm.

whwiden

Thank you. F2 photomic has a battery for light meter but is otherwise all mechanical. M4P all mechanical. Great point about Salgado. Worth looking at. Probably should take some medium format film.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

Not any crazier than what I did about 5 years ago in September. I went to Iceland with a Rolleiflex, two Leicas plus Ektar 100, Portra 400 and some Tmax 100 and 400. I didn't want any long lenses because I was mostly after landscapes. My only regret was not taking some transparency film because the light was a little dull.

But since you are going to find wildlife, the 300 f/4.5 (mine is manual focus) and an assortment of shorter primes should be just about right. I would leave the Leicas and the maybe look for a spare Nikon body. An by all means, take the 80mm medium format and a nice fiberglass tripod.

I don't think you will need to push your HP5 or Tri-X. Your best B&W will be in bright daylight.

whwiden

Thank you for this. I went to Iceland a few years ago and took digital to play it safe. Did not print a single photograph even though I did the entire ring road. I like to imagine I would have done better with film (probably a delusion). My 300mm is an old manual lens. My F2 kit is basically what I imagine one might have used to document the fall of Saigon (though the manual zoom is around 1980, if I recall). I like Extar for color. A monopod is a must. Might be able to take a tripod, but it will be tight. This approach will likely tend toward more landscapes--maybe with animals in the mix. Harder to get close up shots of large animals, but who knows? My tendency, like most amateurs, is to zoom in too much on the details of the animal because you can, and not get a better shot showing context...birds will be hit or miss. I got one good shot in Botswana last year of elephants crossing the Chobe river. Was shot at 150mm from a boat with a VR lens. Probably could have pulled it off with the F2--but not sure. Lots of longer shots look poor due to atmospheric haze.

In any case, an adventure.

How did you enjoy your experience with film in Iceland?

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

We were only three days in Iceland, only saw the southern portion. We should have spent much more time there and left Norway, Sweden and Denmark for another trip.

If we do Iceland again I will take more medium format film plus my full frame digital Nikons but the same range of lens formats - 28-85 mm prime lenses (50-150 for Hasselblad). The Rollei and Leica film cameras are better suited for other purposes.

bylinecl

WH:
Perhaps this will help. You have all the perfect elements: keep it light, stripped-down, and simple. Fewer equipment choices means becoming more creative and adaptive.

As a former AP & Reuter's stringer/journalist/war correspondent ( '60s, '70s, '80s and '90s ) who operated in the Middle East, South and Central Asia, Africa, etc.) While not primarily a photographer, but a journalist with a camera, being able to illustrate my stories offered me a budget-conscious edge, i.e.: hire one guy, not two.

Here's the kit I carried: Leica M4-P (rangefinder) w/ f2 Summicrobn-M50, Tele-Elmarit 1:2.8/90, and a 1930s vintage 28 mm Hektor f 6.3.

With the exception of the old 28mm Hector lens, which I replaced recently with a 28mm Elmarit, I still have and use these lenses, today, with a Leica Monochrom 246.

Used in addition over the years were a series of Nikon Fs (2 & 3) with 50mm, 24, and a varied series of longer-range lenses.

When working in the Persian/Arabian Gulf Emirates, (Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Quaatar) or Israel, Jordan, Saudi Arabia I augmented the Leica with damn-near built-proof/water-proof Nikonos 1 and later a Nikonos 2, both with a single 35mm f2.5 lens and a 90mm. That area's abrasive, wind-born desert dust and Gulf of Arabia's salt-rime would ruin anything else. Correspondents will recall the Riad Intercontinental's lobby containing g a 55-gallon drum filled with ruined Canon and Nikon bodies.

Used in addition over the years were a series of Nikon Fs (2 & 3) with 50mm, 24, and a varied series of longer-range lenses.

My 35mm B&W film-of-choice for assignments was Tri-X, 400 ASA, or Illford 400. Rarely shot color. Developed using Belsonal in hotel room sinks (comfort) or in a helmet with canteen water (field conditions).

Carrying weight of more that 5 or 6 pounds, and large bulky camera bag under even modestly difficult or climatically challenging conditions is not only uncomfortable, but slows you down, reducing chances of getting a salable shot. My favorite bags were/are the small un-padded F-6 Domke, or an old GI-issue M-61 butt-pack.

Everything was quickly reduced to a condition of "un-appealingly-worn, shabby-and not-particularly-attractive-to-thieves," who are a constant factor of which to remain aware.

Nothing shouts "TOURIST" more visually than a new and expensive-looking camera bag or a Tilley hat. Go light, keep it simple, have a terrific time. cl/

whwiden

Thank you! It is worth driving the ring road if you get a chance. Need about 8 days. Best to do on the edge of the season. Mid september, early oct.

whwiden

Thank you so much for a fascinating post. My most used bag is a Domke F6. I use two biner S clips on my Domke's for quick open, while retaining the original clips for extra security.

bylinecl

Carabiners are good. I use a couple of small stainless snap-shackles. Same principle. Probably wise–––in the kinds of places, like Africa. where you already look very different–––to avoid the Louis Vuitton and smart-looking English leather look a little ratty. Thieves love places where people are in either in transition, airports, railway stations, cultural centers such as museums and galleries or big events, political rallies.

DaveC1 Loc: South East US

Kodak Ektar 100 gets my vote for film, along with an assortment of Ilford B&W. You might want to consider at least 2 bodies loaded with different films. Or plan on shooting only color and do B&W conversions post (after scanning) which will retain the grain structure of the film. http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-526454-1.html is what that looks like

Good luck with your venture.

whwiden

Yes. My older Domke's pass the ratty looking test pretty well. I also just like those basic camera bags. They carry a great deal for the modest weight and can fit in luggage spaces or under seats. Thank you.

whwiden

Thank you. Ektar is very good. BW conversions would be flexible. Keep it simple. I will take two cameras. My F2 and a rangefinder (or my F2 and D750 on the hybrid approach ). If I went all Nikon film, I would need another Nikon film body. Thank you.