Wow-- thanks for the many replies! Lots to chew over.
I agree that 80 rolls of MF might be excessive... but from previous experience, 3-5 rolls of MF a day is probably what I would do (some days not shooting much, some days shooting a lot). I will be traveling for about 20 days, and I'd hate to start running low or feel the need to be conservative with shooting. Film is a lot more expensive over there (in Sweden anyway, not sure about Spain). A roll of 120 is probably the same as taking 4-6 shots of 4x5 for me. For better or worse, I would have the 4x5 with me less and would therefore shoot less, just focused work.
Option C (4x5 + Rollei) is tempting, except that I need to get the film transport on my Rolleiflex repaired and the good repairmen I know probably couldn't turn it around in time (using someone in NYC is very expensive so I would prefer to send it off). I tend to use the Hasselblad more due to a preference for the 120mm lens over the 75mm on the Rolleiflex, so I've been putting off having it repaired. Also, I need to take digital equipment along for work purposes, and having 4x cameras seems truly excessive!
If I was in a situation where I could be making enlargements, I'd probably stick to the Hasselblad. I find scanning negatives annoying and am never really pleased with the results. I probably just need to work on my technique and be more patient... or start ponying up the cash for serious lab scans of the good negatives.
I just got back from 9 days in France with just a Rolleiflex (see my gallery here for results). I thought it might be limiting with just the one lens, but it was anything but. The 80 rolls might be a bit much also, but that's a matter of personal experience - I did go through 34 rolls in 9 days in France, and probably would have shot more had I been by myself instead of with my dad. I probably brought way too much film with me (think 150 rolls give or take), but it was as much insurance against having to try and find some in France where it is much more expensive than here. If your Rollei needs servicing and you have to take the Hassy instead, I'd probably take just the 60 and the 120 and leave the 250 at home. It's a boat anchor weight-wise, and you'll in all likelihood only use it for a half-dozen shots on the entire trip. The less you have to fiddle with, the better.
For that reason, I'd not bring the roll film back for the 4x5 if you go that route. Switching between formats while shooting is a royal pain, and if you only have the 135mm lens for the Busch, what is a mild wide on 4x5 becomes a mild tele on 6x7. Your brain can't handle that kind of switching easily, especially when it's a question of b/w large format sheets vs color roll film. Too many variables.
My light weight kit is a Press camera either a Crown Graphic or more likely a Super Graphic with a couple of lenses and a TLR (usually a Yashicamat 124) plus a small Slik tripod.
I sort of agree with you, but other formats don't usually require you to remove the film in order to compose and focus, or to do the routine with opening the aperture, opening the shutter, focusing, closing the shutter, and stopping down. It's not LF per se that's slow, it's ground-glass focussing at the film plane.
Originally Posted by jnanian
And, sure, of course you can get that process to be automatic enough that it isn't one-shot-per-hour slow, but doing it is always going to be slower than not doing it! But the Pressman typically has a rangefinder like a Speed Graphic, right?---which would mean GG focussing doesn't need to be involved.
I stand by what I originally said, but personally I see some enjoyment value in running around Europe shooting large format from the hip.
San Diego, CA, USA
The lady of the house has to be a pretty swell sort of person to put up with the annoyance of a photographer.
-The Little Technical Library, _Developing, Printing, And Enlarging_
I agree and I disagree, I think that yes you should take your time to make a good photograph, that's why I thought that 80 rolls was just way too much because I can't imagine being able to take the time to shoot that many rolls with actual thought, and rather being snap snap snap snap snap.
Originally Posted by jnanian
However there is a huge difference between setting up a large format camera on a tripod, and setting up a 35mm SLR camera on a tripod. The timeframe it takes to take the strap off your neck clip it to the tripod with a quick link look through the viewfinder focus on the subject set the aperture shutter speed etc., use that in camera meter and take the shot is relatively short amount of time perhaps one minute if you really wanted to make it a really long process. On the other hand, setting up a 4 x 5 camera taking it out of the case unfolding it, getting it on the tripod, adding a lens, adding the focusing cloth, focusing, framing, adjusting tilts /shifts etc, adding the cable release, taking the sheet out, exposing, notating what's on the sheet, and then packing it all up again... Takes about 30 minutes, (7-15 if you're super fast) but it certainly is more than 1 minute.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Sorry OP, i don't mean to pollute your thread with my ramblings
stone, you mean you don't use a handheld meter when you use smaller formats ?!
my gosh man, snap out of it !
i agree NT it certainly take a little more time and care because
you have to open/close the aperture and put film in manually
but it doesn't take that long
that's one of the reasons i love graflex slrs so much, all the joy of LF
without the hassle of removing and installing film every exposure
and it shoots well "from the hip"
Last edited by jnanian; 11-18-2013 at 12:29 PM. Click to view previous post history.
Oh I do agree. My Graflex RB Auto was one of my best buys. Once you start to get the hang of setting shutter curtain speed and slit width it is great. And it is real tough to argue with 4x5 negs.
Originally Posted by jnanian
But, as much as I enjoy my Graflex, I am not sure I would want to pack it on vacation with the family.
I worked only on smaller formats and digital. I got no experience with Medium format, even though I've been considering how a trip would be with it... My word is on choosing Medium Format for its convenience.
I've seen a thread on LFF of a guy that carried 4x5, MF, 35mm and digital on a trip to Bali. I couldn't manage! Depends though on the way you travel.
You mention a GW690 which is an option I've been seing for Medium format. Older models go for good prices and it's a quite modern camera. I see the 8 shot both a blessing and a curse. At home it's the former, as 35mm's 36 is endless but on the move I tend to be more trigger happy.
Originally Posted by Bruce Osgood
Reports say it's a huge and bulky thing but quite similar to a 35mm RF except for this. An optimum if I had $ would be a GF670.
My next big trip would be to SE Asia (hopping between countries, so logistics are important) and I'd love to take MF. But no more, no less.
I also shoot MF and LF, although in my case the minimal LF setup is significantly bigger/heavier than an average MF setup.
If I am travelling for photography, I usually take both setups - but when travelling for other reasons (business or family), I tend to bring just the MF kit - I will usually bring the camera with prism finder (no need for an extra meter), and a total of two lenses - either the 80 and 50, or 80 and 150 depending on where I am going.
Another difference for me: 99% of what I shoot in LF is black and white, while 80% of what I shoot in MF is colour - I tend to think differently with one camera vs the other.
the hassy works but is a bit bulky.a mirrorless 6x6 such as the Mamiya 6 is a great travel option.it's light,handy and has great optics. and it uses common 120 film!