MF for Expedition Travel

[jeff_drew4]

Projecting the images? If taking 35mm, skip the 645. I use Pentax 67 and it would be a load in a Zodiac, but if it is a primary tool with a nice telephoto lens, it's okay. If you plan on projection, 6x6 slides are gorgeous! If it were me, and I had the budget to do this again, it would be Hasselblad + telephoto + projector & lots of film & backs. Yeah, I have old Nikons too and if I had a 'blad system, I'd leave the Nikons at home too . . . in fact you have me thinking on system changes again . . .

[db1]

If you don't choose the Mamiya 7II, then I would opt for the Hasselblad Xpan.

 

The M7II neg is 56mm x 69.5mm and the Xpan is 24mm x 65mm. So technically, the xpan is a medium format camera.

 

Check ebay. The xpan is now going for about $1200.

[dave_cattell1]

I went to Antartica with 35mm - Now I need to go back.

 

For me it was the most wonderful place I've ever been. I've seen places like Scotland, Alaska, Yosemite, Yellowstone, Kauai, Iceland, Nepal, Kenya, Utah, Arizona.... So I've seen a few of the best.

 

The ONLY reason I carried only 35mm was because I was travelling on for 6 months. I now wish I'd taken either my MF or even large format to Antartica.

 

Take as big a negative as you can manage. A Mamiya 7 is probably the best/lightest way. You don't want to overload yourself with weight too much for the Zodiacs - the crew will look after you, we still had one lass who fell in, but a MF kit would be fine. Once you have the weight on the ship it will no longer be an issue - but do watch the weight restrictions of the airlines - those in the US do tend to be more relaxed on this.

 

35mm for wildlife and MF for landscapes, in this combo an M7 would be great (with 43mm, 80 and 150). You can get fairly close to penguins - the limit of around 15 feet(?) is human imposed. You may want an MF setup that allows the use of 220 - you'll burn film like crazy.

 

Definitely get used to the kit before you go. Cold temps and gloves are not conducive to learning something new.

 

Main thing is to have a wonderful time.

Dave.

[richard baznik]

>>"Bronica lenses are as sharp as a steamed up window."

 

Come on! This is starting to look like the Leica forum!

 

I've traveled with a two-lens Bronica GS-1 kit,plus a Leica M system (all fitting on one smallish bag), and was happy to have taken the MF gear with me. The Mamiya 7 or Pentax 67 would probably be a bit more convenient, but my preferred overall MF choice (not just for travel) is the GS-1, so that's what I have.

 

BTW, Bronica optics are excellent.

[christopher perez]

<i>The advantage of the Mamyia 7 are the interchangeable lenses, but I?ve heard these cameras can be temperamental and are quite complex; not something I would take to that part of the world ? not without backup...</i>

<p>

In general, MF SLRs can be a real hassle to load film (I'm thinking of Hasselblad and Bronica), what with all the twists and turns film takes to go from spool to spool. For metering, one needs a separate handheld meter, or a heavy metering prism (I think Rollei SLRs are the exception here). When traveling, I can't stand fumbling with manually operated meters (either on or off camera). And I don't like weight nor am I comfortable with the level of noise they create when you fire one off.

<p>

For these reasons, I travel the world carrying a Mamiya 7 with an 80mm and a 50mm lens. There is nothing tempermental or complex about this system. Its different than an SLR, so personal training on the use of the camera ahead of leaving for far-away lands will yield the best results. The Mamiya 7 is simple as they come and easier to load film than many 35mm cameras. My camera has been very reliable and the electronics have never failed me. The shutters are nearly silent and I use the built-in AE meter almost exclusively. The optics are simply worldclass (ie: outstanding in every respect). And it takes 220 film. The 80mm focuses to 3 feet and should be good enough for most subjects (including very cute flightless birds).

<p>

Your adventure sounds like fun. Neighbors of mine spent several years down at the research facility in that part of the world. You'll want to travel as simply as you can. I hope everyones thoughts about carrying a Mamiya 7 help.

[wayne_crider4]

Don I just returned from a trip down to Mexico City and took two cameras, both

35mm as I decided to leave my mf equipment at home. (I figured a first time

visiting gringo with a mf camera that couldn't be hid very easily would stand

out too much.) Anyways, I took a digital and a film camera. I shot the heck out

of the digital and only one roll with the film camera, and that is only because I

had a wider lens on it. The point is, I find that carrying two different systems a

drag and one will usually get used the majority of the time. If you do decide to

take a mf camera with you, don't go whole hog out of the gate. Make it a very

small kit, maybe with one lens and a couple of approiate filters. My choice

would be something wider than normal, preferably 6x9 or up.

[pearse_stokes]

My advice is: "Go for it!"

 

If you are going to the expense and trouble of getting to somewhere exotic, and if you have ever seen the difference medium format can make, you won't forgive yourself if you take the 35mm option!

 

On a 2004 trip to Tanzania, Serengeti etc., I took a 1963 Mamiya Universal Press with four film holders, and 65mm and 100mm lenses for the Press. The 6x9 shots taken in Black and White from a baloon floating over the Serengeti bring tears to my eyes. Distant herds of Buffalo snaking across the plains can (on VAST enlargement) be seen to be individual animals. They'd be lost in the grain if they had been shot on 35mm.

 

Nothing can give you the tonal range of big film, and in my mind, most Mamiya lenses are simply stunning. If you want photos that will bring back the smell, taste, and sight of the trip, go for medium format every time. You'll take fewer shots, but love more of the results.

 

Even if you just take an old Zeiss Ikon 6x9 folding rangefinder, you can pocket it and whip it out when necessary. I used one as a point-and-shoot camera in the Middle East, and it worked a treat!

 

If working in subzero conditions, make sure to have your gear serviced before you go. A mechanical camera is less likely to give trouble (being without sensitive electrics, batteries etc) but sticky cold oil on a shutter would be a problem. Put the camera in a zip-lock bag, and shove it in your fridge. Then see if it works at low temperature. If you are going to be even colder, then make sure to test it colder! Nothing is worse than having gear that lets you down.

 

Simple is always best.

 

And don't hesitate to use black and white! If you do, make sure to use filters too, and regardless of what anyone says, use a tripod whenever you can. At the least, use a monopod. Some walking sticks have a thread adapter on top of the handle. Or, take a 'bean bag' type support with you. If you don't, you might see a wonderful night sky, and kick yourself all the way home for the lack of camera support.

 

Good luck!

[chris_willson]

Don,

So many great answers, I can just say what works for me on my travels and I hope it helps.

I use a Pentax 67II system packed in a LowePro Dryzone Pack and a Gitzo carbon tripod. I take about 5 lenses with me and if I have to the big telephoto in its separate case. I nearly always use 220 film as it gives me an extra shot (21 on a roll) and halves film changes when I might miss the shot.

The bag is heavy, but I have managed to take it as carry-on (except to Heathrow this summer)

Film - I use Fuji Provia 100, fantastic stuff.

Lenses - how close are you getting to your penguins (check out my monkey photos for use with the Pentax 400, if you are getting real close go for the 100mm macro)

Please take a look at some of my work

www.travel67.com

Have a fantastic trip

 

Chris Willson

www.travel67.com