Medium format travel camera for trekking

[cimino55]

Hello all,

I am planning to go to Thailand, Burma, and Nepal. I am in the

decision phase as to what type of medium format gear suits me best.

I used to shoot 35mm Canon, but I decided that medium format was more

practical for trying to sell prints larger than 11x14. I shoot

mostly monochrome landscapes, architecture and some environmental

portraiture. On a trip such as this, which involves humid

temperatures and then trekking in Nepal sometime in November/January,

I want to get some input about what exact format is most feasible for

print sales. My choices thus far have been: Hasselblad 500C/M or

501 C/M and shoot with the "square" and then crop if needed, or the

Mamiya 645 or AFD so I can have the versatility of possibly moving to

digital, as much as I resist it. My last choice was to buy a 6x7

Rangefinder such as the Mamiya 7II. Weight is a consideration, but

the end result should be high quality negs. I have not decided if I

shall bring a tripod, or if I will try to use my environment to

stabilize the camera. Weight is also a concern, and I have reduced

the weight of other things in my pack in order to not have to skimp

on photo gear. I will be living out of my pack for about 3-4

months. I want to shoot landscapes in the Himalayas, street scenes

in Bangkok and Kathmandu, but then again want a medium format camera

I can use if going to say, the Grand Canyon for a vacation somewhere

down the line. Versatility in format is an issue, as the cost of MF

gear can be a limiting factor on one's budget. I understand that

there are compromises in all formats, but what is the best all-around

system for my needs described above? Can these systems be handheld,

if I decide not to bring a tripod? I appreciate any input on this

subject.

 

Thank You,

Adam

[bob_chong]

Before everyone chimes in with their recommendations, from Leica to a 4x5, I'm wondering just how important size and weight are in your decision?

 

The reason I ask is that on picture quality alone, the three systems you mentioned are all top-notch (but there is always some angels-on-a-pinhead quibbling about quality differences). Get the cameras in your hands--rent, borrow, or at least play with them for a few minutes in a store--and you might be able to narrow the field right then and there.

 

Have you looked at the Fuji GA645zi? It might be a good compromise among the size, weight, and versatility concerns. And if you can't fit a tripod, what about a monopod?

[brian yarvin]

If your goal is to sell prints, then you know you must be prepared for a bit more hard work than the average photo netter.

 

From the point of veiw of backpackability, the rangefinders are the best bet. Their lenses are smaller and they are lighter overall. My own best backpacking images were made with Fuji Rangefinder cameras.

 

There is my good to say about the Mamiya and Hasselblad systems, including readiness for the digital future. (as you mention) But the future of photographic technique isn't going to jump you during your trip.

 

Think rangefinder.

[steve_hamley]

Adam,

 

The Mamiya 7II is an excellent choice if you don't pack a tripod because rangefinders lack mirror slap. The negative size is large and the lenses are excellent. The Hasselblad would be an equivalent choice in my mind if you have a tripod. If you don't use a tripod, I'd suspect that many shots won't go bigger than 11x14 with the quality you want.

 

Thanks!

 

Steve

[barry schmetter]

Medium format SLRs like the Hassy are great cameras, but might not be the best choice for trekking. Those big flapping mirrors make a tripod almost a necessity. I still recommend taking a tripod -- small, but not a tabletop. I think you might be happier with a rangefinder, like the 7II or possibly a Fuji 6x9. The rangefinders can be handheld at much lower shutter speeds than SLRs. The Fuji produces a monster neg, has a superb lens, and is a very reasonably-priced option as long as you can live with the fixed lens.

[graham_line]

A nice clean Rolleiflex weighs 2 pounds, is reliable, has a nice lens, and is familiar to repairers all over the world if something goes wrong. Handholding down to 1/15 is easy, and it's easy to prop it on a flat surface and go longer. Mine has cost $160 so far, including purchase and a little cleanup.

[jay_.]

I should start by saying that for travel photography such as trekking I use the Leica rangefinder, because although it has some acute limitations of its own, plus the disadvantage of the small format, it is only one of two small-format systems that IME gives MF a run for the money...and for landscapes I shoot them on a tripod, albeit a lighter one than I'd need for most MF.

 

That said I used to own Pentax 67 and later, Horseman VH-R and also a Fuji 6x7 rangefinder, and ultimately ended up with 3 completely different MF cameras: Hasselblad, Rollei TLR and Fuji GA645Zi. The Hasselblad is the only one which easily lends itself to ND grad filters, an important accessory for my landscape photography. However IMO a tripod is mandatory other than for indoor flash photography. The Rollei TLR would be the ideal trekking camera (small, light and battery-independent)save for the noninterchangeability of lenses. The Fuji Zoom is great for travel photography, but depends on batteries. Basically, there is no MF camera which is perfect for all phases of travel photography from people candids to landscape, and is durable and light enough for rough trekking. And speaking of weight, I would not go on such an expedition with no backup, and that adds up to more poundage. Perhaps that is the reason the Leica became the darling of the intrepid travellers long before it was pigeonholed as a candid street-photography tool.

 

Of all the MF cameras I've owned, the Horseman (a clone of the Linhof 2x3 Tech)would come closest to fitting the bill: body with little chance of malfunction, lightweight interchangeable lenses with no mirror to slap, and a coupled rangefinder and viewfinder for handheld shooting; but rise/fall/tilt/swing/shift movements and a GG back for complete control for serious landscape photography.

[hellomichael]

if you decide not to bring a tripod I recommend

F2.8 lens is the first priority

high sensitvity ISO film

 

the best all-around system in vew of system choices: Bronica

 

numberous second hand accessories could be share between

different models in 6x6 format.

 

 

However, I will choose DSLR + several 512MB compact flash

(not afraid for fell down from height) if go for travel

because the size of film rolls is too bulky.

 

Which system you choose the main factor is not expensive

and lens,filmbacks, interchangable.

[louis_webb]

A 645slr sounds like what you need.Up to 16x20 prints,cheaper,lighter,etc.I hand-hold a Bronica Etrsi,with speedgrip,prism,150mm lens with good results.However,I would urge you to take a tripod for best results-Gitzo do a diddy little thing(carbon-fibre)that would fit inside a decent sized backpack.The Mamiya 645afd would seem to suit all your requirements-af,digital,able to use filters easily etc.As you've got some time on your hands before you head off on your adventure,how about renting 1 or 2 of your candidates,shoot some film with/without tripod and see what you find?As you say,cost is a consideration for most of us and if it were me,I would want to make sure I was making the right choice before forking out all those spondoolees.

[nikola_kovanovic]

"Medium format SLRs like the Hassy are great cameras, but might not be the best choice for trekking. Those big flapping mirrors make a tripod almost a necessity."

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Hasselblad is IMHO the best choice for trekking if you limit lens choice to two, say 50 and 150 mm.

 

Some of the reasons for this are: Reliability, fully mechanical, screen viewing and accurate composing/framing and focusing, with proxar 0.5 or extension tube and extender 2XE you can cover macro (with a tabletop tripod) and telephoto.

 

As for handheld shooting, with some practice mirror can be pre-released just before releasing the shutter. This is a common practice, for handheld shooting, among hasselblad users. Yes, you get a blackout before releasing the shutter, but this is not a problem.

[conrad_drake]

Having played in some wet environments, (lousy snow,actually), I'd have to say take <b>two</b> cameras. #2 is something that either needs no batteries or is essentially waterproof. In either case it should be small and light - either a 6x6 or 645 folder or a mjuII or similar.

<p>

Anything electronic should run on AAs if you expect to purchase them on the road. <p>

This is a really hard question and you need to think long and hard about how you will travel. If you're carrying it all yourself...for three months - ack!

<p> I've got to ask a stupid question - you are going to be getting a trekking pole/monopod, aren't you?

[steve_hovland]

Take a look at the new Bronica 645 RF.

 

Check this link: http://www.tamron.co.jp/english/rf645/index.htm

 

A review: http://www.bjphoto.co.uk/cms/words/equipment_reviews/medium_format_cameras/2.shtml

 

Also I seem to recall that years ago Fuji had an all manual 645 wide-angle camera that was pretty good- if you can identify it the cost may be $600 or so used- not cheap but light weight.

[ulrik_neupert]

The Hasselblad is a good choice. Lenses according to your taste, financial and physical strength. Send everything to the service for a check before you go. Take a monopod with you (e.g. Gitzo mountaineer). Gossen makes a new mini lightmeter called Digisix which is my next investion. Don't forget an extension tube. Hasselblads need mechanical sympathy, make yourself comfortable with it for a while, understand how it works.

Ulrik

[jackflesher]

Trekking, lightweight, monochrome, quality 11x14's, and NO tripod; I think you've relegated yourself to a high-quality 645 SLR, a 645 or 6x7 rangefinder, or frankly a Leica M. With the 645 SLR, you still have reasonable light weight, reasonably fast lenses to aid handholding the bigger camera, and great imaging quality out of the lenses. In MF RF, I would look at the Mamiya 6x7, as the lenses are the same speed as the Bronica's or the Fuji's and you get the added bennefit of a larger neg, although you'll go through more film. Lastly, since I've trekked and traveled with all of the above systems other than the 645 RF, I would say that the Leica M would be my first choice. It is very light, the lenses are excelent, and the image quality at 11x14 is very good. (See any of the Salgado work -- he has shot all over the world with Leica M's and SLR's, and regularly produces outstanding 16x20's and 20x24's for museum shows. Plus, he uses only two films, Tri-X and T-Max 3200...) Also, it is the best of the above systems to use "tripod-less". If color 16x20's were the order for the day, I would probably go with my Contax 645 as the faster lenses help with hand-held shots.

 

BTW, My Leica M outfit with two bodies and four lenses weighs in at less than 10 pounds. My Contax 645 with two backs, the 45 and a 140 weighs a few pounds more.

 

Cheers,

[alex_p._schorsch]

I took a Mamiya 6 with me on two trips and it's great for landscapes. The problem is with people shots - close-ups are out. The mamiya 7 would be the same thing. If you want to sacrifice people close-ups (post devolopment cropping could solve this), go with the Mamiya RF's, which are also great for non-close-up street shooting. If not, go with the Hassy. With the Hassy, for some street shooting you may want to have a prism finder, otherwise the waist level finder can be very cunning for candids! The Mamiya can definately do REALLY well hand held - it's a hand holders dream. Your idea of not bringing along a tripod will limit your early morning and late afternoon shots at exactly the times when lighting is most dramatic. FWIW.

[andreas_carl]

On a trip to Indonesia and Malaysia a few years ago I took Fuji GSW 690 - main disadvantages: need of external meter and single lens. The negatives (or slides) however are to die for!!! I felt uncomfortable carrying my entire Hasselblad gear through these countries and was extremely pleased with the results I got. In fact, I have sold my Hasselblads earlier this year. If you desire inbuild meering and lens choices, check out the Bronica RF645.

[richardcook]

It sounds like money is no object -- lucky guy! -- at least if you're talking about choosing between Blads and AFDs. I am sticking to 6x7cm for the time being (M7II) but I have talked to many folks who love their Bronica RF645s and suspect that would optimize the tradeoff between weight, cost, ruggedness, and lens selection. You can find these on that auction site right now for about $1200-1500 with all three lenses. (Perhaps you would do well to think of taking two cameras so that your trip is not ruined by theft or damage to a critical component of a system like the Bronica or an M7II. Although you would need two stocks of film, there are plenty of small 35mm rangefinders with really good lenses (Leica and Contax) and you could get a used Contax G1 and a couple of prime lenses for about $800 -- the same as the cost of a used 65mm lens for a Mamiya 7II -- and have a pretty reliable backup.) One other observation: every time I leave the tripod at home I regret it. I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that you wil get more per dollar investing in a strong carbon fiber tripod than any other single component. I am amazed at people who spend $4000 on camera gear and have $30 tripod. I would buy a good one and take it.

[godfrey]

How much you can carry depends upon your fitness and the depth of the

trekking you intend to do. My inclination is always to carry as little as possible.

 

For landscape work, you might want lens choices but I doubt you need close

up framing accuracy, and, for trekking cross country, ruggedness and light

weight are essentials. Whether you want/need alternative focal lengths is

another question you have to answer.

 

My inclination would be to eschew SLRs and stick with RF type cameras. 6x7

and 6x9 are always a boon for landscape work due to the large film area, but

645 is another boon in that you carry half as much film for the same number of

exposures. So the choice for me would be between the fixed lens Fuji 6x9

models (or two of them, one with each focal length lens), the Mamiya 7 with

two or three lenses, or a Bronica RF645/Fuji GA645zi. I would certainly carry

a tripod ... A Manfrotto 3444D plus modest size ballhead weighs just 5 lbs and

will improve your picture quality enormously.

 

Godfrey

[chris_patti1]

I brought a Mamiya 6 with me when I went trekking in Nepal a couple years ago, and I felt it was a near-perfect camera for that purpose. The whole system (body, 3 lenses, filters, and miscellaneous accessories and maybe 10 rolls of film) fit easily in a small LowePro photo runner fanny pack. I generally wore this in front with my pack on my back. I also brought a flash, a spot meter, and a Gitzo 126 tripod, which went in my pack. The Mamiya 7 would be a similar choice, but is bulkier because it does not have the 6's collapsable lens mount. This makes a big difference: with the lens mount collapsed, the 6 can be easily slung over your shoulder and worn under your arm, even while hiking. Against that, the 7 has the bigger film area and more lens choices. You might also take a look at the new Bronica 645 rangefinder. The Fuji 645 with zoom lens seems nice, but it's sort of a big point and shoot, and the zoom range is rather narrow.

 

Also give some careful thought to film choice. You'll have to bring it all with you, and it can really add weight and bulk. The size and weight of the film, not the camera, is likely to be the biggest factor when moving from 35mm to MF.

[christian deichert]

I second the numerous recommendations for a good RF. But for training hikes, you could always get a nice, heavy Mamiya TLR...

[gregruskin]

Ditto for the Mamiya 6. Great for treks/hiking: used mine recently for two weeks in the Cordillera Blanca, Peru. Pattie is correct about the collapsible mount: it makes a huge difference vs. the Mamiya 7 in terms of portability/comfort while hiking. Only three lenses, but they are superb. The camera shines for landscapes and environmental portraits. I chose it over the 7 for treks/hikes.

[emile_de_leon9]

Get a Leica M w/fast lenses for unbeatable speed hand held and wide open, or for slow fine grain film. Use it in combination with a Brooks or Horseman wide angle camera at 6x9 to 6x12 for huge grainless enlargements on 400 asa film.Two cameras in a very small package will cover pretty much everything.Be careful in Nepal.

[wayne_crider4]

"Versatility in format is an issue, as the cost of MF gear can be a

limiting factor on one's budget"

 

I'd take a Mamiya 645 Pro TL with 2 lenses and a carbon fibre

tripod and a handheld. Bodies and lenses are of reasonable

cost. Whatever you get make sure you take a small carbon fibre

tripod! Those late evening sun skimming mountain top shots

will definetly need it. Also take 1 or 2 very small peanut slaved

flashes for dark nooks and crannys or as fill for faces and

flowers. Try the Morris units. Get the ones that will also fit the hot

shoe.

[donald_brewster]

After experimenting lugging various photo contraptions around, my simplest, most compact, and most versatile travel package is a Mamiya 6MF with 50 and 75 lenses, a Manfroto/Bogen tabletop tripod, a 35mm point and shoot all fitting nicely in a LowePro Photorunner. It is almost unbeatable for travel IMHO.

[douglas_green1]

No matter WHAT you decide on a camera setup, you ABSOLUTELY should get yourself an excellent combination Walking Stick and Monopod. You might even want to have one made for you by having a Tripod head mounted on the top of a walking stick or ski-pole. For what you are doing, I would get one with an Kirk/Arca Swiss type quick release mount