Travel with Film or Digital

<p>I'd bring both. Definitely get the G10 or 11. But you should also bring the Minolta and a few rolls of slide film, some print film, and some BW film.<br>

You may well enjoy the slides more than the digital, the print film gives you lots of extra exposure lattitude, and BW film still has a unique look.<br>

But, if you are only moderately into photography (are not hopelessly addicted), make your life simple, and just take the G10.</p>

<p>I'd bring both. Definitely get the G10 or 11. But you should also bring the Minolta and a few rolls of slide film, some print film, and some BW film.<br>

You may well enjoy the slides more than the digital, the print film gives you lots of extra exposure lattitude, and BW film still has a unique look.<br>

But, if you are only moderately into photography (are not hopelessly addicted), make your life simple, and just take the G10.</p>

<p>I'm reminded of a comment my pop made when I was a kid and I felt sure I had to choose between two "things". "Why not both, you should never limit yourself if you can help it." Of course he said it with a grin. Take 'em both. The G10/11's aren't that big and you won't even notice you have it. It will be like having a few extra rolls of film in your Minolta bag.</p>

<p>i second wil fenwick & ty mickan's thoughts: take what you already have, and maybe get a small digicam for chimp-shots; here's some shots from my latest trip - to venice, italy - all taken with a humble olympus trip 35 [buyable for $5-$10]: http://www.flickr.com/photos/j12t/sets/72157623467624860/ - i can't recommend them highly enough!</p>

<p>Awesome pics Ian! What films/scanner did you use?</p>

<p> </p>

<p>David, as Ian said, a pocket film camera can give you convenience and way superior quality than a G10.</p>

<p>An Olympus Epic is a top choice. It is also ran/splash resistant.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>until you can get back to civilization</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>WTF!?!?!?!?</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p ><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=3995956">Mauro Franic</a> <a href="../member-status-icons"></a>, Mar 23, 2010; 03:16 p.m.</p>

 

<p>David, as Ian said, a pocket film camera can give you convenience and way superior quality than a G10.<br>

An Olympus Epic is a top choice. It is also ran/splash resistant.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>I don't know, the G10 produces some mighty nice looking photos. You got and sample from you pocket film cameras to look at.</p>

<p>Here are a few samples you might want to take the time to look at<br>

<a href="http://67.18.178.219/downloads/">From Luminous Landscape G10 shoot</a><br>

<a href="http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/kidding.shtml">The article</a></p>

<p>I would love to see a pocket film camera that has "way superior quality" then this photo for example<br>

<a href="http://67.18.178.219/downloads/G10-tree.jpg">G10 photo</a></p>

<p>I was in Brazil and Argentina last fall and there were plenty of places where film was available. I didn't try their developing last fall (had a dslr) but in 2007 I was going around in Argentina by bus & taxi with a Canon AV1 and some tamron adaptall lenses, no problems at that time getting over a dozen film rolls developed in the larger towns or in the city. In Brazil everyone told me to be very careful walking around with any expensive-looking equipment because armed holdups are common, I did take my chances there in some places but certainly not everywhere.</p>

<p>mauro: thanks - it was mostly lab-scanned fuji reala [boots, uk - a budget lab];<br>

scott: those g10 examples lack a lot of punch and seem lifeless, to me. i think Quality means different things to different people: i wouldn't swap my Trip 35 for a g10, based on what i've seen.</p>

<p>Scott, I took this with Ektar I believe:<br>

http://shutterclick.smugmug.com/Photography/Lily-Ektar-Cont/7470716_5DUvG#491477785_7Pqx6-X3-LB<br>

The lens on the Olympus Epic is about flawless and the film is obviously the same film you load into a full size 35mm SLR.<br>

The sensor of the G10 is a puny 1/20th of the size of the 35mm Olympus Epic. Several people debate on whether a full frame digital slr can now match 35mm film. What makes you believe than 1/20th of size of the sensor of a dslr would be comparable?</p>

<p>If you had an art project or some other specific end result in mind you would already know what media you'd need.<br>

For shooting around, get a digital camera (any), set it to Auto and fire away.<br>

<img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2034/2155956777_09c83d3aa5.jpg" alt="" width="500" height="400" /><br>

Guanajuato Mummy Museum</p>

<p>My G10 paid itself off long ago, and my photos from it exceed anything I took with 35mm film of the same ISO ratings. I can completely edit and print at home, upload to a number of sites, etc. I didn't mean to be derogatory about film and film cameras, earlier. I sold them and worked with them for over thirty years. But here in the Midwest in a town of 15,000 we have lost availability of film almost entirely, and there are fewer labs doing lesser quality work, now. They just don't return the quality for the effort and expense. The handwriting's definitely on the wall, here. Maybe where the OP is traveling, this isn't the case. As far as someone saying that an Olympus Stylus Epic film P&S is so much better, I can't see it. I'm very familiar with those and what they do. Maybe it's just in the eyes of the beholder for both of us.</p><div></div>

<p>Showing outdoor daylight shots with a pocket digital camera and talking about how great they are is silly. Anything takes good photos with enough light. A G11 has a tiny sensor that limits its usefulness, and a variable aperture zoom lens. A 35mm camera has a frame size that's more than 8x that of a G11.</p>

<p>OTOH a G11 is fine as a backup camera. If you don't mind that it's a $500 point&shoot with a tiny sensor that weights 3/4 of a pound and doesn't fit in a pocket.</p>

<p>I love film. I still shoot it, but I also have a dslr. Both have their places. However, one point that I don't see anyone else bringing up:</p>

<p>Travelling with film these days is a hassle. In the US, the TSA screeners will manually inspect your film, so that it does not have to go through the carry-on x-ray. They don't like to do, it and you may have to insist. Carry your film, both exposed and unexposed in a plastic bag, without the film cannisters. Unload your camera and send it through the x-ray.</p>

<p>Whatever you do, don't pack any undeveloped film in your luggage. The x-ray machines used to scan checked luggage is more powerful than the ones for carry-on bags. It will probably fog your film.</p>

<p>Don't use the lead-foil bags. Yes, they will protect your film, but when the screeners see a big, black rectangle that is opaque to x-rays, they get suspicious and may do a hand search of your bags, which will slow things down, make a mess of your bag and maybe lose things.</p>

<p>That's in the US. I've heard that, in other countries, their security screeners are not always so cooperative, and may insist that everything, including your film, go through the x-ray.</p>

<p>If you decide to use film, the best way might be to find out if there are stores where you can buy film there, and labs that can develop it before you return home. That way, you don't need to carry undeveloped film through the airport.</p>

<p>YMMV</p>

<p>Paul Noble</p>

<p>Paul, I travel with my film (since I have a wide range of emulsions I use) and I never have problems. Very seldom I get asked to manually inspect the lead pouch and I am ok with it.<br>

A pocket 35mm camera with a few rolls in your shirt pocket is as convenient as it gets. No bulky DSLRs, chargers, etc.<br>

If for a particular application I need better quality I just bring a 6x7 camera.<br>

(For larger format slides I just mail to the lab from my destinations.)</p>

<p> </p>

<p>i hitch hiked across southern africa in 99-00 with 40 rolls of film and my pentax k1000. total pain in the butt. my wife has the g10 and i have a dslr - cards are so cheap and the results so good. edit your shots on your computer - at home - at your leisure - you cant go wrong.</p>

<p>Use what you like and be happy. I like 35mm film as much as the next guy but resolution would be the last reason I would shoot it over a DLSR. For a 3 month trip I would take the camera I like to use most. If I did not know how often I would have have access to electicity I would probably take my FM2, 35mm and 105mm prime lenses and a selection of color neg films but not because of resolution or anything like that.</p>

<p>http://s3.amazonaws.com/masters.galleries.dpreview.com/124239.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=14Y3MT0G2J4Y72K3ZXR2&Expires=1272004653&Signature=uKxmPs7jKu8JpQoFaEV4Yz626CY%3d</p>

<p>http://s3.amazonaws.com/masters.galleries.dpreview.com/212034.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=14Y3MT0G2J4Y72K3ZXR2&Expires=1272005677&Signature=MBKSKU94QRusm7GtXfUdV4z2mdY%3d</p>

<p>David,<br>

As someone said, familiarity is important. If you are going to make the switch though because of the conveniences (no film, development, instant results, etc), you need to consider a few factors:<br>

- If you are expecting film like quality or shallow depth of field, go with a digital camera that can give you something close. At this point ANY DSLR from ANY brand will do, you could also get a Micro-4/3 camera like the Olympus E-P2/E-P1.<br>

- If you do not mind less quality, most notably above the base ISO, then a compact will do. If you use manual controls then the Canon Powershot S90 is probably your best bet. It is very efficient to use, effectively having two control dials and shares the same sensor as the G11 but adds in an F/2 lens which compensates for the performance of one stop of ISO. Unless you really want the hot-shoe, then there is no reason to get a Canon G-series anymore, and even so a Micro-4/3 camera is not much bigger.<br>

- If you shoot mostly on automatic and want something compact, the very best image quality comes from the Fuji Finepix F200EXR which has excellent dynamic range and a wide-angle lens. It actually does have manual controls, which are slow to use but at least they are there just in case.<br>

Personally, I own a F200EXR which we always leave on a table or counter at home to get some quick shots of the kids without getting the big guns out. It is really an outstanding device. I also had a S90 for testing and I really loved the controls and their efficiency. If I were to use a compact camera as a backup for photography (not snapshots), I would pick the S90. The decision comes from how you use your camera.<br>

- Itai</p>

 

<p>Digital without question. I did both film and digital on a three week trip to Peru a couple of years ago. Film was a hassle, too delicate (flash cards are very durable), and did not get the same IQ really. And, I was using a MF film camera. I did get some good scans of the film, and it is pretty good. Its just that digital is cleaner and allows you to do more with it, more prints and more web sharing.</p>

<p>IMO don't worry about getting use to digital, it will go pretty fast, just practice using the histogram to judge the exposure. And you can take a lot of exposures and pic the one that you like best.</p>

<p>Ah, the airport...you haven't lived until you've tried to take a hundred rolls of film through airport security! Seriously, you can still buy (at least some) film most places in South America; so you do not need to carry it all with you. Now days I like to travel with a hybrid film/digital kit. In tropical and semi-tropical environments, rain and humidity can sometimes present an issue and place a premium on water-resistant gear. As far as preserving film in that climate goes, I've not too had many problems as long as it was kept in canisters and usually a small plastic cooler as an extra measure of caution (except of course for the time I left the film in the back of a locked rental car in 95+ degree heat). One major concern when traveling with a digital rig is access to power. Be sure to have the proper converters/adapters for the places you'll be visiting. If you happen to really be out in the sticks, you may not have regular (or any) access to power; that's when I really appreciate my film cameras. Good Luck.</p>

<p>Film is pretty resilient as other mention. Especially -and most importantly- after it has been shot, you can drop it in a lake at night and come look for it in the morning and it will still be fine.</p>

On my recent vacation, over Christmas, I travelled through an airport with some film. Due to TSA policies, they would only agree to manually check my high speed films, over ISO 800 I believe. My slow films, ISO 50, 100, and 400, they insisted on running through the X-ray machine. This is because it takes them forever to check by hand. They have to wipe down the exterior of each roll with a particle cloth and test it for bomb dust in their little analysis machine. It's a little bit of a hassle, but if you need to shoot ISO 50 E-6 film, it will be fine in the carry-on luggage X-Ray machine. Some things just can't be replaced by digital. I'd leave the high speed film at home, though: it's not worth the security headache. Digital SLR's are better at high speeds anyway.

<p>The moderator removed the dimensions I posted for the film pocket cameras vs the G10/G11 also. The point was that you can travel with an even more compact camera than a G10 while carrying a 35mm full frame film.</p>

<p>If you were only going for 3 weeks I'd say take the XD11 since it's so small and makes a good travel camera. For 3 months though, I'd consider a DSLR since you won't need to worry about 3 months worth of film, only enough memory to capture the number of pictures you might take during that time. I personally would take both, because that's what I do any time I travel because I like backing up each with the other, at least the most critical shots.</p>