Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Africa-Safari-Film-Circa 1980
Page <prev 2 of 3 next>
May 3, 2018 09:58:23   #
rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona
 
Sounds like a great plan. My last two outings were with one film camera. No regrets what so ever. Total of 5 exposures, all keepers.
--Bob

whwiden wrote:
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.
I am considering an alternative for an upcoming tr... (show quote)

Reply
May 3, 2018 10:05:53   #
Rickyb
 
I am now living in the old times now. I have just had the joy of scanning 35mmg neg and positive going back to the 80's. There was no digital then. Now I have a camera that I wish I had in the 80's Yes it is heavy but the results are much easier to use. I don't have to spend days developing all sorts of bw and color film, not counting positive. So I have gone back and relived the times with film again. The 35mm format does not go well with 8.5 and 11 paper. 11 x 17 is the format.

Reply
May 3, 2018 10:09:44   #
bpulv Loc: Buena Park, CA
 
whwiden wrote:
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.
I am considering an alternative for an upcoming tr... (show quote)


Why the 80's? Why not an earlier period? A time when big game hunting was legal. I would suggest 50's rather than 80's equipment such as the original Nikon F and a Leica M2 or M3. I would take 35mm, 50mm and a 90mm and 135mm Leica lens because they were most typical and highly superior to Nikon lenses of the time, and for the Nikon F I would use a 300mm and perhaps the teleconverters. Don't forget a Weston reflective light meter and a Norwood Director incident meter since few of the cameras of that era had built in meters except for the Leica light meter attachment that fit on top of the M2 and M3 models.

Reply
 
 
May 3, 2018 10:10:26   #
selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA
 
whwiden wrote:
... 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.

The F2+D750 might be the better choice, even though it hedges on the commitment to film, since you will then need only one set of lenses.

Another benefit is that, for those shots where you want to use your long lenses, you can also take advantage of the higher digital ISO and shutter speed and not worry about camera shake.

The film option may be better for normal to wide angle situations.

Reply
May 3, 2018 11:03:27   #
whwiden
 
rmalarz wrote:
Sounds like a great plan. My last two outings were with one film camera. No regrets what so ever. Total of 5 exposures, all keepers.
--Bob


Thank you. You are giving me some confidence! Like many amateurs, I worry about missing something--and then end up missing a lot by taking too large a kit.

Reply
May 3, 2018 11:06:55   #
whwiden
 
bpulv wrote:
Why the 80's? Why not an earlier period? A time when big game hunting was legal. I would suggest 50's rather than 80's equipment such as the original Nikon F and a Leica M2 or M3. I would take 35mm, 50mm and a 90mm and 135mm Leica lens because they were most typical and highly superior to Nikon lenses of the time, and for the Nikon F I would use a 300mm and perhaps the teleconverters. Don't forget a Weston reflective light meter and a Norwood Director incident meter since few of the cameras of that era had built in meters except for the Leica light meter attachment that fit on top of the M2 and M3 models.
Why the 80's? Why not an earlier period? A time wh... (show quote)


I picked the date because it matches the equipment I have, though some is earlier. I have a seconic studio light meter that does not use batteries. I use this to get a quick read when using meter less cameras. Like your old school meter references. Thank you!

Reply
May 3, 2018 11:08:28   #
whwiden
 
selmslie wrote:
The F2+D750 might be the better choice, even though it hedges on the commitment to film, since you will then need only one set of lenses.

Another benefit is that, for those shots where you want to use your long lenses, you can also take advantage of the higher digital ISO and shutter speed and not worry about camera shake.

The film option may be better for normal to wide angle situations.


You state exactly the case for a hybrid approach. Thank you for your thoughts.

Reply
 
 
May 3, 2018 11:12:51   #
whwiden
 
Rickyb wrote:
I am now living in the old times now. I have just had the joy of scanning 35mmg neg and positive going back to the 80's. There was no digital then. Now I have a camera that I wish I had in the 80's Yes it is heavy but the results are much easier to use. I don't have to spend days developing all sorts of bw and color film, not counting positive. So I have gone back and relived the times with film again. The 35mm format does not go well with 8.5 and 11 paper. 11 x 17 is the format.


Yes indeed about the format. When I use film, I often fall behind in developing. Sometimes I send it out--but I like my own results better. Digital and a do everything can give very good results compared to film in most cases. The old lenses have much less distortion. Thank you.

Reply
May 3, 2018 12:00:17   #
bpulv Loc: Buena Park, CA
 
whwiden wrote:
I picked the date because it matches the equipment I have, though some is earlier. I have a seconic studio light meter that does not use batteries. I use this to get a quick read when using meter less cameras. Like your old school meter references. Thank you!


Consider that you are taking a possibly once in a lifetime trip and spending thousands of dollars. I would guess that you can probably afford the 50's equipment, used of course. You could use it on your safari and then sell it when you return. The 50's era Nikons and especially the Leicas always go up in value and you might be able to make a profit when you sell them. Even though most film cameras loose value over time, both the original Nikon F and Leica M2 and M3 and earlier Leicas such as the G have continued to increase in value because of collectors.

Reply
May 3, 2018 12:06:38   #
whwiden
 
bpulv wrote:
Consider that you are taking a possibly once in a lifetime trip and spending thousands of dollars. I would guess that you can probably afford the 50's equipment, used of course. You could use it on your safari and then sell it when you return. The 50's era Nikons and especially the Leicas always go up in value and you might be able to make a profit when you sell them. Even though most film cameras loose value over time, both the original Nikon F and Leica M2 and M3 and earlier Leicas such as the G have continued to increase in value because of collectors.
Consider that you are taking a possibly once in a ... (show quote)


That is a very interesting point. And true. I have been looking at some used sites for a second nikon film body. Many are pretty well used. An M 2 or M 3 I could find.

I am trying to swear off new purchases of any equipment--but that applies to digital or so I could rationalize. Maybe use somebody like Japan camera hunter?

Reply
May 3, 2018 12:38:07   #
ecurb1105
 
whwiden wrote:
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.
I am considering an alternative for an upcoming tr... (show quote)


Neat trip, great idea!
I would take just two Nikon bodies, my 1957 Nikon F with straight prism and my Nikkormat ftn, my 135mmf2.8 and my 28mmf2.8. With 100 rolls of Tri-X only as you can't get Kodachrome 64 anymore. Thats the gear I had in 1980 so thats what I'd take.
Have a great trip and let us know how it works out.😎

Reply
 
 
May 3, 2018 13:16:32   #
selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA
 
whwiden wrote:
That is a very interesting point. And true. I have been looking at some used sites for a second nikon film body. Many are pretty well used. An M 2 or M 3 I could find.

I am trying to swear off new purchases of any equipment--but that applies to digital or so I could rationalize. Maybe use somebody like Japan camera hunter?

KEH and B&H have a couple of F100 bodies for a good price.

Reply
May 3, 2018 22:16:05   #
barryb Loc: Kansas
 
Went to Kenya in 2016, and wondering how you are going to get the shutter speed up to 1000, to be able to stop the action you might encounter? Looking forward to seeing your pictures.

Reply
May 4, 2018 03:04:35   #
Cheese
 
whwiden wrote:
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.
I am considering an alternative for an upcoming tr... (show quote)



I assume you are not going there in a modern airplane. When does your boat leave?


Reply
May 4, 2018 04:15:52   #
bylinecl
 
WH:
To compliment and refine your theme of carrying what the previous century's working press carried, probably as important as your selection of cameras/lenses/film and your choice of the classic little Seconic meter (I have an old one and use it, as well) is your footwear and head cover. Photogs, like light infantry, travel on their feet.

In Africa, despite all the constant gut pounding and ass-bashing in the ubiquitous, neat-looking, and inordinately uncomfortable Land Rovers——you'll spend a lot of each day on your feet. The African bush is merciless.

/cl

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 3 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.