Backup for 1Ds for Sudan Reportage

[yian nyc]

(Hi, here comes the postscript first. It?s a long post, written mainly to clear my head.

Wouldn?t mind your thoughts though. Yian)

 

I am running myself in circles thinking of a backup camera for my upcoming reportage trip

to the Sudan. This will be my first big trip, the first part of which will be with an NGO aid

organisation. I'm not sure, but am forecasting a few months.

 

I'm pretty sure of my shooting style. For all (100%) of my PJ shots, I use a 28/1.8. For my

posed portraits, I use 50/1.4. I have one body (which I've broken the shutter before, not

sure how. Am very disappointed with Canon?s 200,000 cycle claim, but am somewhat

grateful for the wake-up call to get a backup camera), and a shitty backup (my first

camera, the canon G2. Which I had to use when my aforementioned shutter broke. With a

client. With embarrassment.)

 

In decreasing order of price:

 

OPTION #1: 1Ds Mark I. USD 8,000. Used is cheaper. +500 for lenses.

The simplest solution (in theory) is an exact duplicate, since I like my current system. Find

a minty 1Ds, 28/1.8 and 50/1.4.

 

OPTION #2. 1Ds Mark II. USD 8,000 approx. (Available late this year?)

Then I started the mental masturbation (excuse my language). Wait for the new 1Ds2,

make that my new prime camera, and use my current 1Ds as the new backup body. I'm

pretty sure I don't need the extra resolution though (is that the main benefit of Mk2 over

Mk1?) and that this is pure technology-chasing. I'm planning on a November departure, so

this might just not even be an issue. For options #1 and #2, there is the added option of

juggling of lenses. I'm thinking of the slower/lighter 28/2.8 and 50/1.8 to keep weight

down.

 

OPTION #3. 1D Mark II. USD 4,000 + 500 for lenses.

Now for the more practical matters. Money. As in let's try not to spend so much of it here.

(Splurge $4,000 more on hiring a good driver and translator, which will translate to better

pics, and more probably keep my ass out of trouble.). The next step down (for me; no

offence intended to anyone) is the 1D2. Half the price, and more than capable. I do,

unfortunately, really like the FF sensor, especially for selective focus portraits. Since I don?t

plan on using the backup anyway, it?s not so important (right?). This also has the added

advantage of 8FPS, which might be nice. (I know, go rent one and see if I like it.) I also

need to start thinking of new lenses. Sigma 20/1.8 or Canon 20/2.8 = 26mm. And a 35 =

45mm.

 

OPTION #4. 1D Mark I. USD 2,000 used +500 for same lenses as above.

This downgrading starts a slippery slope. By my former argument of not wanting to need

the camera unless something breaks in my primary body, then there should be nothing

wrong with a used 1D. 4 good megapixels is ?enough?, isn?t it? For emergency situations.

A ?beater? camera means I won?t mind leaving it in a not-absolutely-trustworthy place.

 

OPTION #5. 20D. USD 1,500

More mentalbation (excuse my new coining of phrases). How far down can we go for the

?backup? body. 20D. Advantage smaller size, and lighter weight (means I?ll less likely leave

it in the base camp). Disadvantage #1 loss of weather sealing. Disadvantage #2 cannot

share batteries (I plan on buying 5 sets) and cannot use charger as backup. Lenses 20/1.8

= 32mm (not as wide as I would like, but not too big an issue). 35 = 56mm

 

OPTION #6. 300D. USD 800

Well, then the 300D sensor isn?t so far off, is it? How bad is this camera in terms of usage.

It?s the sensor that matters, right? It?s even lighter. I can bring three for the weight of the 1

series cameras. (or about 10 or them for the price of the 1Ds) Lack of weather sealing is

offset by quantity. Advantage, I can carry one all the time in a backpack, leave one with the

driver and 3 in base camp. Where does this argument end?

 

OPTION #7. Pro 1. sub 1,000.

Offers silent shooting. Offers 200mm. (But I hate teles. And I hate zooms. And yes, those

are two separate issues). Shitty quality and handling, but I could take a 20D and Pro 1 as

double backup for less than the price and weight of a 1 series camera. And these two

share batteries and chargers. Going back to my prior experience of having to use my G2

when my 1Ds shutter broke, I wouldn?t want to use the Pro 1 as main camera, but what are

the chances of a 1Ds AND a 20D breaking down by themselves? And I?m not talking

mugged or lost or stolen or I-fell-into-a-river, because then the extra 3rd backup body is

a winner whatever quality it might be.

 

 

Sorry about the lengthy post. Here is a summary of my priorities.

 

1. I need a backup (at least one; but how many?)

 

2. Keep weight down. (camera, but also spare batteries and chargers)

 

3. Electricity dependency

 

Option #1 and #2 are true backups. They duplicate (or exceed) my current setup. Do I

need a true backup? A true backup means it stays sealed until my primary breaks. One less

thing to worry about (bonus point).

 

Options #3 through #7 are not true backups. They do not duplicate my primary picture-

making capability (quality of fullframe sensor and weather sealing are most important to

me). But they offer good consolations and capabilities (that I?ve never been able to justify

having a second body). This also means I can/will use the camera for other purposes

(another kind of bonus point).

 

-- price reduction by at least 50% to 90% (all of them)

 

-- higher FPS (1D, 1D2, 20D). Might be nice to have, since I?ve never had a second body

before.

 

-- Decreased size and weight (20D, 300D)

 

-- Extreme price and weight reduction, leading to possibility of multiple backups (20D,

300D especially)

 

After writing and re-reading, I?m leaning towards the 1D mk II. Tough body. Good sensor

size. New feature 8FPS to offer. Half price of 1Ds mark I or II. (ie. can upgrade to 1Ds mark

III when that come out). Shares batteries. No silent capability (not so important, I don?t

think). It?s not small like the 20D, but since I?m going to stand out anyway, the big size I

can deal with. And I have another final backup (see below)

 

Post Script on FILM

 

P.S. I know a few photographers who have been to the Sudan, from whom I have been

getting great beta (information). But, they shot film. On Leicas. I have no experience with

film, nor do I like it. (My first camera was the Canon G2, as mentioned). No experience on

Leicas for that matter.

 

P.P.S. I?m planning a third backup, which I call my Armageddon Camera, for when all else

fails. An Olympus Stylus Epic, a brick of colour negative film (no idea which yet), and a

backup battery.

[__hank_boneroneo1]

Get all of em.

[leslie_cheung]

Hope you'll have access to electricity there else none of your

options matter much. My personal take on extended travelling

with cams is getting the most in the smallest, most reliable

package.

[rick_helmke]

Option 4 and find a low miles unit. Add a very good 10D or a new 20D, bring your existing camera as well. Make an effort to take care of your equiment, bring extra cards and a stand alone method of putting them on disc.

 

Rick H.

[gary_woodard]

be careful.

[andrew robertson]

Spend a few hundred on one of those folding solar powered battery chargers. Bring a

bottle of Eclipse solution and some PecPads - you'll need them in a desert environment if

you choose a DSLR.

[msitaraman]

No offense, but what kind of Sudan oriented NGO reimburses you for $8,000 cameras?

 

Also, "$4,000 more on hiring a good driver and translator". I'd say that's a priority-unless aid organisations have vastly inflated wages for intermediaries and hangers-on, perhaps your estimate of Sudanese wages is a trifle on the high side?

 

:-)

 

My opinion? Take two rugged film cameras and a ton of film. But what do I know?

[el_fang]

I find it difficult to believe that you're good enough to be sent on a reportage trip to Sudan yet you can't figure out these simple issues for yourself. Or maybe I'm just jealous ;P

[ishik_tuna]

"My opinion? Take two rugged film cameras and a ton of film. But what do I know?"

 

agree...would add "ton of color slide film", not color negative

 

i'd bring a portable water purification kit as well.

[gsbhasin]

Bonjour,

<p>Yian since you mention Paris, i am thinking maybe the AFP is a very rich organization, if they are whom are you work for... :-)

 

<p>For backup just use 2 20Ds, and why on earth do u need the full frame 1Ds anyways? You are shooting a war and not a fine art nude or product portfolios. 8MP ought to be fine for war stories, even 6 MP might cut it. For your budget i might just get 3 20Ds and o weightlighting to lug them around, you mention one body, which one is it? 1 D Mark II? If so just get a couple of 2 Digital rebels.

 

<p>If there is armageddon, get the best kevlar chest jacket you can buy in Paris, hey dont u love urself?

 

<p>And to be really cheap, just get 2 1Vs and you will save a lot of grief and weight of batteries and chargers and portable hard drives.

 

<p>Mon ami,

<p>Do you really expect electricty in a war ravaged third world nation like Sudan? And how are you going to store the images? Portable hard drives? And send them? High speed T1 lines from a Ritz Carlton in Khartoum ?

 

<p>Just get film, two cameras and ton of rolls of Fuji press 400, Africa is pretty well lighted, you might even do good with Agfa 200 or any other film.

 

<p>You might be able to handover the film to the "Foreign Legionnaire" or others like marines. The fact that you have never shot film before and are going to spend so much on digital for a war coverage makes me suspect that a press organization in sending you. Neither is a govt. funding you, for they should know what they want to use. Unlmited budget?

 

<p>If i were so brave i would get 3 FM3A Nikons with 35, 50 and 20 mm lenses. This camera has the least battery consumption of all cameras currently being built now. You might even get an F3HP, but what the hell, dont think all 3 will fail....go this way, u would save a lot of weight and money...

<p>But seriously, do you jest?

<p>Prenez garde,<br>gurpreet

[yian nyc]

Thanks for the helpful replies, guys.

 

Leslie (Cheung) -- Love your advice about smallest and most reliable. In the

mechanical film world, there are simple solutions, starting with Leica and

working your way down price. Add a requirement for autofocus, we're now

talking (for your stated goals of smallest and most reliable) 1V or F100 type

cameras. Add a digital requirement (or preference), what's small and

reliable?

 

Gary (Woodard) -- Thanks.

 

Andrew (Robertson) -- Going to stay away from the complication of solar

power for now. Maybe next time. Thanks for the reminder on Eclipse.

 

Ishik -- Forgot about purificaion. Thanks.

 

Mani, El Fang, and Gurpreet -- No offense taken, and the NGO doesn't pay for

my equipment. I don't work for AFP. I'm not that good of a photographer, but

every aspiring war photographer has to start somewhere, right? Sorry about

the Armmegedon exageration, I just meant when there's no electricity. That's

pretty Armeggedon to me. I've decided on digital. Will transmit from NGO or

press locations, hand off CDs if needed, etc

[jean_marc_liotier]

I you worry about electricity, get a car cigarette lighter adapter for charging your batteries. It is cheap and simple and you can be pretty sure that wherever western NGOs are there will be cars and trucks whose owner you can somehow convince to let you charge your batteries off their cigarette lighter. I have been to many African places with no electricity, but seldom did I find a place with not a single vehicle available somewhere.

[msitaraman]

If you do so, make sure the adapter works off both 6V and 12V car power supplies. Africa is likely to have cars (new and older) from both sets of standards.

[gaius1]

The 20D and below should not even be considered. A Canon 1 (digital or film) is in a whole 'nother league when it comes to physical resilience. They are built to take a lot of abuse and keep working, the 20D is a consumer camera that is not meant to be taken too far from civilization.

 

There's a reason those other journalists shot film cameras. Film is pretty robust, especially once you've transferred the roll back into its tub. You can send a roll of film in the post if you have to, or develop it and send the negs. No need to rely on fancy telecoms equipment that might or might not exist, let alone work. Once you've posted your pictures back, they're safe, no need to worry about carrying them around. Film cameras can shoot dozens of rolls on one set of batteries (or no batteries at all in the case of Leicas). You don't need to constantly recharge them, you don't need to also worry about power for your portable image tank or CD burner. You don't need to worry (so much) about dust when changing lenses. I am not a professional PJ, but I can tell you from much experience, everytime I've ventured into wild country with a digital camera, power has been by far the biggest constraint.

 

You are suffering from what we engineers call "golden hammer syndrome". You have chosen your tools (digital cameras) before you have understood the task at hand. Digital cameras for war reporting are fine if you are Reuters and can go in mob-handed with teams of specialists, fleets of Land Rovers, high-bandwidth satellite phones, a support unit back in the nearest safe city with spare equipment, computers, etc. But Reuters can afford that because people are paying them for speed above all else. If these are the sorts of images that are destined for a book or a gallery and not the front page of tomorrow's newspaper, then the main advantage of digital - fast workflow - is lost, and all its disadvantages remain.

 

My recommendation to you is 2-3 EOS 1v's for bodies and as much TRI-X as you can carry.

[ellis_vener_photography]

The 1Ds is one of the last cameras I'd take to Sudan: too heavy, too slow, the AF isn't what

it could be , and battery consumption is high. Better to take a trio of 1D mark II cameras

instead of a pair of 1ds cameras.

 

p.s. There are extremely good logistical and environmental reasons for serious

documentarian /pj's photographers taking non battery dependent film cameras to Sudan.

[mark u]

I think you should assume you will have no access to electricity, and that a digital camera will be worth several AK47s to a thief. You won't have the support of a motorised regiment of the US army - you'll be on foot much of the time. If you haven't recognised that film is the only sensible approach to covering the Sudan, then you haven't recognised many other pitfalls of your trip and how to deal with them.

[paulr]

Ellis has a pretty good point. A couple of Leica M2's may be a good idea. There was

someone on photo.net that was in Afghanistan that used Leicas until recently. If my

memory serves me right he switched over to digital using D100's. He

did some work for the Red Cross over there.

 

I travel to Asia frequently and use my "battery" dependant Leicas under some pretty

extreme conditions. Never a problem.

[ishik_tuna]

how about a gun?

[trevor_little1]

whatever you do dont bring a gun (what are you going to do....use it?), just extra weight and an excuse to get shot, no to mention you lose your status as a non-combatant.

But yeah, in case you havent read what everyone else wrote and you want my 2 cents I would definatly agree with the film. Right now I am shooting both (FM3a and D2h) and there is a time and a place for both of them....and the D2h doesnt belong in Sudan. When time isnt a factor with image transfer, I dont have a clue why you would bring a digital. Its heavy, battery reliant, theft prone, you'll have to carry chargers, (probably more than one if you have 2 different cameras) a laptop, a stack of CDs, and did i mention batteries, batteries, batteries? Plus cost, I wouldnt bring anything less than a 1D out there.

My recomendation would be film. Tri-x and colour slide and lots of it. As far as camera's go, I am not to framilier with the canon lineup, but the Nikon F6 (im not sure when you are leaving or when it is available), (from what nikon says) it is robust, fast AF, less battery consumption than your 1Ds, etc etc and I would take one with the battery pack and one without. Without the battery pack and with the silent mode it is a far less intrusive camera, especially for people who arent used to cameras. And yeah, throw an FM3a in there, it can handle all the same lenses (gotta love backwards compatibilty) and it is probably the best "Armageddon" camera you can get.

thats my 2 cents.

 

BE CAREFUL!

[hugo drax]

Bring Cash! you will need lots of cash for special Payola in the field. Cash can sometimes even save your life or get you access.

[mark_tomalty]

Yian

 

Like many others I'd recommend,as a first option,a film solution,EOS 1n's or V's.

But,it would appear,from your responses you're committed to digital and ,besides,you've

also indicated that you've never shot film so it might not be the best time to learn the

subtleties of transparency film exposure.

 

Factoring in these conditions I'd recommend going with the 1D Mkll with a pair of

20D's as backup.Actually,I'd have no trouble suggesting the 20d's as primary

cameras for this type of shooting.Sure,they're not as robust and responsive as the '1'

series cameras but short of throwing them to the ground they are well built and the

file quality is very respectable.

A friend of mine worked in Iraq with 2 10d's and had no camera related issues,either

with reliability or reproduction.To boot,he was second runner up behind Jim Nachtwey

and Chris Morris for photographer of the year in recent POY competition.

First and second place photogs used 1D and 1Ds,for the record :>))

Lens choice with a 1.3x or 1.5x body will have a bearing on your desired lens choice

(the 28 1.8 and 50 1.4 you said) and with this in mind you might have to look at

the 24 and 35 as alternatives with maybe the 50 or 85 1.8 thrown in for a 'long'.

Personally,I'd go with a 16-35 2.8 and 85 1.8 in a compact 2 body,2 lens kit.

 

Mark Tomalty

[gsbhasin]

Mark,

<p>Iraq was a second world country even after its defeat in Gulf wars I and II. Also, your friend might have had a lot of help with the US forces in securing electricity to charge their batteries, portable drives, DVD-burners etc.

<p>That probably might not really be true of Sudan, where Yian is going probably by himself.

<p>There is no doubt 1D is great PJ tool, but the question will they work there if there is no electricity? AA/AAA batteries can be found probably on most of the planet except maybe the deep interiors of the Amazon river.

<p>Yian should seriously consider 2 1Vs, cheaper, reliable, and eat batteries hell lot slower than 1D, plus batteries might be easily locally available.

[msitaraman]

"AA/AAA batteries can be found probably on most of the planet except maybe the deep interiors of the Amazon river. "

 

Er, that's not actually true. They can be pretty hard to find in rural India, depending on where you are. Leica Ms or Nikon FM3As are a pretty good idea...

[gary_ferguson1]

Yian, I've used the 1Ds for nearly two years now and rate the camera very, very highly. However, it's probably the last camera I'd choose to take for a project like yours. If there was ever an application that screamed out for a Leica M and a big bag of Tri-X then this is it!

[yian nyc]

Thanks once again for all the helpful replies. Jean-Marc and Mani -- for the

adapters. Guy, do you what is the origin of the term "golden hammer"?

Trevor, thanks for the well wishes.

 

WIth regards to film, thanks for all your well-intentioned advice. But I think

Mark (Tomalty) said it best when he said to me "you've also indicated that

you've never shot film so it might not be the best time to learn the subtleties of

transparency film exposure. "

 

I don't mean to condescend, but have you guys ever gotten that wonderful

feeling of deciding to commit to something, whereupon there's no turning

back and no more indecisiveness? Regarding photography, I have made a

few of these solid commitments to myself:

 

(1) to shoot only primes. Some good photographers drummed this one into

me early on.

 

(2) to shoot only wides (28mm) for reportage. I allow myself a 50mm for posed

portraits.

 

(3) to shoot only digital. (My first camera was a digital, and I've never looked

back = one less thing to learn = more time to focus on priorities)

 

(4) recently -- to have the courage to shoot colour. (And even more recently,

to go to the Sudan.)

 

There's no more waffling. The camera just gets out of my way, and lets me do

my thing. I'll deal with digital's drawbacks, just as I'm sure I would have to

deal with film's. Maybe I made a wrong choice, and if I did, no big deal. This

trip is my first, not my last. I'll come back to this thread and tell you that you

were right. (But I'm confident that won't be the case)(smile).

 

For the record, I've used a 1V (with 35mm lens, for a week on a fishing boat),

Leica (with 15mm, two afternoons), Hasselblad 500/c (80mm, one morning in

a fishing village); done some 4x5 work reluctantly, and I own two Seagull

TLRs. None of them have ever done it for me. Nothing. No mojo. No zen.

 

I will grudgingly admit to spending quite a few hours this past weekend

drooling over the Rolleiflex 4.0 FW online. (more smiles)

 

Wish me luck!! And BTW, I still haven't decided on my backup yet. (Please, no

more advice on my primary system = 1Ds).