The feasibility of international travel with FE2/film?

Is International Post scanned? Could you not simply post it home to yourself?

Is International Post scanned? Could you not simply post it home to yourself?

 

Mike this is my question as well. Can't seem to get an answer.

Is International Post scanned? Could you not simply post it home to yourself?

Mike this is my question as well. Can't seem to get an answer.

There is no Yes/No answer as there is no uniform rule even in the USA alone.

 

From USPS FAQ on mail security (link):

 

" Is Mail X-Rayed?

Some of the mail that is sent through the United States Postal Service will pass through an X-Ray machine. There are no specific guidelines as to what may or may not be x-rayed, though mail sent to or through larger cities is likely to pass through an X-Ray machine.

 

If you have additional questions about X-Raying of items, contact your local Post Office.

 

Note: Marking a mailpiece "Do Not X-Ray" will not forgo the X-Raying of a mailpiece, and may result in the item being considered suspicious."

Edited October 20, 2020 by Mary Doo

(snip)

If I were to seriously use a digital camera I would need several large hard drives, a large calibrated monitor, an Epson printer and a supply of expensive ink. Then I would have to learn Photoshop and Light Room etc., which I would find daunting and not at all fun. No, that's not for me.

 

No, you don't NEED all that, though it would be nice.

 

What do you do with all your film photographs?

 

It is nice to have at least one, and even better two, backups of your digital data.

 

You can view them on a small monitor, or connect a large screen TV set. If you write them

on to a writable DVD, you can put it in most DVD players, and they will make a slide show from them.

 

Many places will make 4x6 prints from digital files for very low prices, likely less than the ink for the Epson printer you don't have.

 

Do you have a full darkroom for printing color negatives?

 

Even so, the easiest way, and they way they will do it if you take them to most places now,

is to scan and print from the digital image. They might print on silver halide based paper, so you

might not even know it is from a scan.

 

There are plenty of programs that can do simple processing on digital photographs,

cropping and a little color change. Though automatic white balance usually works pretty well.

 

Do you have a full set of color correction filters for all the unusual light sources you might run

into with your film camera?

I have a B&W darkroom that I use regularly and make prints up to 20x24. I enjoy this. My last color photos were negatives printed by a friend but unfortunately they are not really riight. Before that I shot slides that I had printed professionally using Cibachrome, unfortunately a thing of the past. I did some color darkroom printing years ago but never mastered it. I have a large color project in mind overseas but simply can't figure out how I'm going to do it. At the moment I think I will buy film and have it processed on location.

As far as I know, the most reasonably priced way to do large color prints now is digitally,

so from scans of slides or negatives if not from a digital camera. I have had 16x20 prints

done that way, mostly from digital camera pictures, but maybe from scans.

 

If you mean wall size, I don't know who does that now, but I suspect that there are still some.

 

The largest I have done in a darkroom is 11x14 in black and white.

I have a 16x20 Unidrum, in case I get in the mood for that.

At the moment I think I will buy film and have it processed on location.

IMO, that's the photography equivalent of Russian roulette. "Will it get buggered up in processing or not?"

 

No such gamble with digital.

Wot, no twin cassette film cameras?

 

No self-respecting shooter will ever buy one of these non-pro bodies.

 

Oh, wait.....:p

It's a super Sony compact digital that zooms from 24-200mm and does video superbly. Hwvr, if you enjoy film and can have the time to buy and process it in a foreign country, that sounds like fun.

Hi Mary and anyone else that cares to join in. How about a Z50 and very slow 16-50 kit lens as the main travel camera. It would fit in the inside pocket of a denim vest. Not noticeable. How much IQ will I be sacrificing. Of course I could take my giant D700/24-120 - no problems there, but big, obvious, and I'd have to carry it everywhere I go. Great for the Mayan sites, but so so great in the markets. To a somewhat lesser extent, the same could be said of the full frame Z cameras. Absolutely no qualms about IQ, but the cameras would be wedded to me everywhere I go. Absolutely no leaving cameras in the hotel. Still might take the film camera as a supplement, buy and have the film developed in Guatemala, but I'm looking for a main digital camera. If it were U.S. travel, it'd be the D700 or a full frame Z. Anyone, do you think the Z50 is up to rainforest archaeology and street photography. It is sure liberating to be carrying a good camera in an inside vest pocket instead of the backpack or noticeable shoulder bag - all which call attention. I did a similar trip about 5 years ago with just a Panasonic LX7 - IQ was hit and miss - sometimes excellent, sometimes pretty bad.

I use a film camera when I am in a place that my camera could be snatched by the thieves. I would buy film and process locally. I have enough functioning film cameras that worth little to do that.

How much IQ will I be sacrificing.

Vs what? Film? Does this really need answering? Vs D700/24-120 - having shot with a D700 and with a D500 (similar sensor to Z50) I don't think there's any IQ advantage in using the D700 over the Z50. The 16-50 kit lens is reportedly excellent - though I find the range somewhat limiting - as well as the maximum aperture towards the longer end. Would definitely recommend getting the 2nd kit lens too - 50-250/4.5-6.3.

 

A Sony A7c might be a full-frame alternative - but I don't know which lens to recommend that would allow the combo to fit into a jacket pocket. Certainly not a zoom lens - some of the Samyang primes might fit the bill - but you'd be filling all pockets of your jacket to carry a full set.

X-Rays have little effect on silver halides. Fogging is caused by fluorescence of other excipients. Phosphors are deliberately added to X-Ray film for this reason. Digital sensors behave differently. Higher voltage results in shorter wavelengths, which penetrate better. They penetrate better because they aren't absorbed as much. The digital inspection display reflects AI processing of shapes, as well as density.

Hi Mary and anyone else that cares to join in. How about a Z50 and very slow 16-50 kit lens as the main travel camera. It would fit in the inside pocket of a denim vest.

I suggested the Sony precisely for this reason. It is smaller than Z50 + lens and it does more. It is really very good. 24-200mm, superb video capability, and weighs less than 11 oz. This beats the Z50 lens kit, minus the ability to swap lenses of course, but who needs to with 24-200 for a walkaround. IQ (and video too) is excellent. No worries.

Edited October 21, 2020 by Mary Doo

If this thread wanders away from film much further...;)

 

I suggest the Nikon J5 with the 10-100mm CX (28-280mm EQ)

If this thread wanders away from film much further...

The further, the better ... :cool:

Nikon J5 with the 10-100mm CX

Does Nikon produce them anymore?

My experience from years ago is that the higher the sensitivity the more the X-rays will effect the film, 100ISO, maybe 2 or 3 doses, thats it. Develop locally if you know the lab. Always use lead bags and ask for hand search, worked for me from Finnland to the White House, even for 4x5 sheet film. Also consider that air travel will radiate your undeveloped film. So the less travel of undeveloped film, the better (and yes, I did ship developer and fixer to Africa as a kid....)

Other than weight, nothing wrong with taking both film and digital.

Sometimes I even use both for the same scene.

 

A few years ago, I brought a Canon IID along with a DSLR to Hawaii.

The Canon worked fine except for a shutter pinhole, so the sun is up in many

scenes where it shouldn't be. Probably should have tested that first, though it

isn't all that heavy as cameras go.

 

The FE2 isn't quite that old, but isn't so new, either. It is a fine camera, but probably

shouldn't be the only one. I had one out on a trip earlier this year, and it worked fine

until about the 36th shot on the roll, when the shutter just stopped. Since it was close

to the end, I just rewound the roll. After a little while, I figured it was just dead battery.

Like the FM and FE, if it works, the battery is good, if it doesn't ...

 

Be sure to bring spare batteries!

My experience from years ago is that the higher the sensitivity the more the X-rays will effect the film, 100ISO, maybe 2 or 3 doses, thats it. Develop locally if you know the lab. Always use lead bags and ask for hand search, worked for me from Finnland to the White House, even for 4x5 sheet film. Also consider that air travel will radiate your undeveloped film. So the less travel of undeveloped film, the better (and yes, I did ship developer and fixer to Africa as a kid....)

 

TSA says it is safe up to ISO 800. It doesn't say how many times through at that speed.

 

Last year, I had some file inside a lead bag in my luggage. TSA wanted it out, and scanned it separately ... with the film inside the bag.

 

It seems that 70keV machines can see through lead just fine.

At 20keV, lead absorbs much more than other metals, but they are much closer at 70keV.

 

I tend to keep film in lead bags, as it makes it easier for me to keep track of.

I traveled to Eastern Europe last year and took a D300s, an F4s and two lenses, also a small laptop. No problems getting hand checked and no technical problems at all. I guess travel to other places may be different.

 

Rick H.

Does Nikon produce them anymore

Sadly not, but they're a great bargain 2nd hand!

 

... and very small....;)

OK, you've got me thinking about digital. What camera would give me a Portra 400 or Fujifilm 400H rendition with the least amount of tweaking or adjustment? I would like to be able to shoot in aperture priority or program mode quickly and with the least amount of difficulty.

No problem: Fuji X-100 cameras--T, F or current V model.

No problem: Fuji X-100 cameras--T, F or current V model.

Agree, I took this route and I haven't regretted it. Since then, I rarely use DSLRs on trips (D850).

I have the F. The hybrid viewfinder is a feature I like a lot on the Fujis. I mostly use the OVF, but there is an EVF as well if needed. The viewfinder activator works fine, and the image quality at 24Mp and base ISO is quite good. It`s not a have-it-all kind of camera, but great for shooting tons of jpegs on trips. If needed, there are a wide and a "tele" converter which adds a minimal bulk (compared to any other camera).

I was waiting for the new "V" version which add some nice features, but it stubbornly keeps the AF-ON button in the wrong place (actually AEL-AFL), as well as the silly "Q" button, so I won't upgrade.

Edited October 23, 2020 by jose_angel

Fuji X-100 cameras--T, F or current V model.

Whoa!

1300 quid for a one-trick-pony camera?

As a good friend of mine used to say "You could get a real one for that money".

What camera would give me a Portra 400 or Fujifilm 400H rendition with the least amount of tweaking or adjustment?

Would that be with or without the horrendous grain Arthur?;)

 

Most digital cameras allow a 'picture style' to be selected, or you can preset the contrast and saturation to your personal preference.

 

We'd need a few more details of what you want to shoot, etc. before making a specific recommendation.

Edited October 23, 2020 by rodeo_joe|1

What camera would give me a Portra 400 or Fujifilm 400H rendition with the least amount of tweaking or adjustment?

Probably no digital camera will produce the exact film look you are looking for. But, as Joe mentions above, some camera settings and post-processing can help. The DXO Filmpack (software) attempts to help bring back some semblance of film nostalgia.

 

I am not familiar with Fujifilm 400H but I loved Portra 400 for people photography. My favorites were Fuji Velvia 50, 100, Provia 100 and the improved Provia 400 in later years for wildlife photography. Those years are gone and I am looking at boxes of slides with mixed emotions. I have scanned some of them in the last few days and they are refreshingly good, each with precise composition. - One thing about digital is that it's easy to take a little liberty with precision. as one can easily crop, straighten, etc. afterwards. But this aspect can also be considered an advantage.