[Q] gear setup for Chicago city scapes and locations

Discussion in 'Classic Manual Cameras' started by vlad_p, Aug 24, 2010.

  1. hi, I will be Chicago late October on a conference.
    I would like to take pictures inside as well as some city scapes (I have never been there). Looking for faithful color reproduction and sharpness from the gear.
    Looking for recommendation of gear, film (color negative) and locations around
    Lewis Tower Loyola campus.
    I could get access to the following
    Nikon: nikon 24mm, 50, 105, 135, 24-200 zoom (tokina),70-210 Vivitar series 1
    Bronica etrs (645): 45, 75, 105 macro, 150,
    Olympus zuiko 35mm shift, 50mm 1.8, 28-90 Vivitar series 1
    Cannon canon 24 mm, canon 50mm (1.4), 90mm Vivitar macro, 70-210 vivitar series 1
    Minolta md 28mm f3.5 (tokina I think), 45 f2, 50 f1.4, 200 mm rokkor f 3.5
    For film I was thinking Ektar 100 (but I have not used it before)...
    I think I also would like high speed film for inside -- but do not want to pay 10bucks
    for kodak 800.
    Also would like to know what if any color filter I need for inside (I will not have flash).
    thanks in advance
     
  2. Chicago has a lot of beautiful architecture, museums, street scenes. Wide angle to short telephoto will be enough. 35mm is probably best, and if you were going to shoot medium format, I would just bring a Holga. The Nikon with a 24mm, 50mm and 105 will cover it. If you are shooting color negative film, don't worry about filters, but a polarizer for outside might be useful.
     
  3. Downtown Chicago is an amazing place for photography. Fountains, architecture, river tours, Navy Pier, museums, Millennium Park, Hancock Tower, and of course Lake Michigan with its vistas and numerous sailboats. You won't be far from any of it at your location.
    To me, the city is one of many visual extremes, so I'd go with what Mark said above regarding a Nikon kit. You'll use the 24mm quite a bit. Chicago has many spaces that are hard to define with a 50mm's limited point of view. The 105mm (or 135) is needed for the reach to capture architectural details (of which there are many), and for shots near the lake. Keep your kit light in weight, you'll do more walking than using a cab, most things are quite close to one another.
    Many museums are of vintage era and offer plenty of natural light (the Field Museum for one) so don't worry about filters. Ektar 100 is a great film, but at street level even in mid-day, you'll find yourself using large apertures as the grand buildings can shield a lot of sunshine from you. No matter, stick to the 24mm and you'll eliminate most shake at even very low shutter speeds.
    Enjoy Chicago. I've been there many times and always find something new and interesting to do or see. And good to eat. Expect to go home carrying a few more pounds on you. Chicago is a great town for great food.
     
  4. There's no need for a lot of gear when street shooting in a big city like Chicago. I do almost all of m street shooting with a single 35 mm body and a trio of lenses, a 24, a 50, and an 85. The 105 is almost too long, but it is workable. The 135 is completely off the hook for what I do. As beautiful as Ektar 100 is, it's too slow. Sorry guys, but big cities with tall buildings means lots of dark side streets and scenes with extremely high contrast range. You'll find yourself shooting at wide apertures and relatively slow shutter speeds more often than you'd think. If I know exactly what I'm going to do, and I know that I'll have the light, I'll use a slow film in the ISO 100 range. But when I don't know in advance, I'll pick a 400 speed film any day. It's not too fast for today's cameras with fast shutters and it gives you the flexibility to get shots that you'd otherwise not be able to execute successfully. As good as Ektar 100 is, it's no good if you wind up with a bunch of clinkers ruined by camera shake. If I were thinking of doing something like this in color, I'd be happy with a run of the mill, consumer print film. Any from Kodak or Fuji are better than good, and a very good choice for quick candid photography. Unless you plan to optically print these films yourself, there's no advantage to using a specialized film. If you're scanning and doing a digital post process, you can tweak things any which way you like.
     
  5. I live and work in Chicago and I'd agree than the Nikon with the 24, 50 and 105 should be good. It is a busy place so a fast lens shot wide open can help isolate elements a bit. If you leave one lens home, it would be the 105......it may be nice for detail shots, though. If you are comfortable shooting the Bronica hand held, that would be a reasonable choice also. The Bronica would be OK too if you are comfortable shooting fast and heldheld with it.
     
  6. I went last fall with my Canon T90, and a 24-40,, f/2.8 Tokina ATX zoom. I had some Kodak 400UC film and the new 100 Ektar. I can tell you, I am happy I had the 24-40 zoom, because the wide end is what I shot with most for the buildings. Have fun, and enjoy Chicago....
     
  7. I went last fall with my Canon T90, and a 24-40,, f/2.8 Tokina ATX zoom. I had some Kodak 400UC film and the new 100 Ektar. I can tell you, I am happy I had the 24-40 zoom, because the wide end is what I shot with most for the buildings. Have fun, and enjoy Chicago....
     

Share This Page