What would you bring? A little different "Film vs Digital" Question

[bms]

<p>OK, so I am 4 days away from boarding a plane to visit the Europe - mainly to see friends, family and one wedding (of which i am NOT the photographer). "We'll travel light" says the wife, "do <strong>NOT</strong> take all you photo gear." I'll be shooting in the city, mostly street, probably some portraits of friends, landscape. So I boiled it down to taking my D700 or my Leica M4 and a few lenses. Advantages and disadvantages to both.... Our last trip was to Florida, and I only took the Leica and came back with beautiful 'chromes and B&W's.</p>

<p>Option one: D700, 24mm f 2.8 AF-D, 35mm f2 AF-D, 50mm f1.4 AF-D and 105mm f2.5 AIS - 5 lbs<br /> Option two: Leica M4, 21mm f4 Voigtlaender (not pictured), 35mm f3.5 Summaron, 50mm f2 DR and 90mm f2.8 Elmarit - 4 lbs</p>

<p>Ok, those are pretty much diametrically opposed choices but I though a poll would be fun. What would you bring?</p>

<p>Cheers</p>

<p>Ben</p><div></div>

[joseph_leotta]

<p>tell wife-to travel light and take fewer outfits - Take more photo gear.</p>

<p> </p>

[Brad_]

Honestly, I think that's a question only you can answer.

[thomas_sullivan]

<p>not going to Europe, but when I go somewhere and want to bring both film and digital....I don't repeat the lenses in the two systems. Well, maybe the 35mm lenses I do (my favorite angle of coverage)....the rest I split up though. Mind you, in a general relationship....meaning the 21 and 24 are close enough to same........the 90 and the 105 are close enough to same....</p>

[jcoffin]

<p>It depends on what you shoot -- for architecture, the wider lens in the Leica outfit is worth having. If you concentrate primarily on people, the longer lens of the Nikon might be worth a little (but the difference is a lot smaller than between the 21 and 24mm). If you do a lot of museums and such, definitely the Nikon -- most museums allow neither tripod nor flash, and often have relatively low light levels as well, so the faster lenses and higher ISO capability will be extremely useful. If you attend symphony, ballet, opera, etc., the Leica -- you'd love to have the low-light performance of the Nikon, but the lower noise level of the Leica will mean even more.</p>

[bobcossar]

<p>If this....If that........you can't do everything AND enjoy the experience. Get a Canon SX10 ......or something like it. Really....cameras like these CAN do more than all that iron you want to take.<br>

And they do LESS as well........worth a thought tho'...</p>

[james_lai]

<p>It would be nice to have a backup along, just in case.</p>

<p>If my brother hadn't handed me his little Kodak P&S on the way to the airport, my wife & I wouldn't have (m)any photos of our honeymoon trip to Europe. A tiny part broke inside our main camera putting it out of action shortly after we arrived in London, our first destination. That little P&S saved the day!</p>

[john_elder1]

<p>M4 kit. Smaller than the other kit and it worked well for you on the last trip. Your wife(and everybody else) won't notice the M4 as much. AND the M4 is the nicer, more fun to use, and has better glass. Sell your digital equipment before the trip and buy an M3 for the 50 and 90 lens.</p>

[tobey_bilek]

<p>Leave the wife and take both ?</p>

<p>I would hesitate to carry film thru X-rays and also would not like to protect what appears to be a very nice Leica set up.</p>

<p>With digi, you get black/white, fast slow, tungsten sun all on one card.</p>

<p>Something to be said for a vacation camera too, small light.</p>

<p>I would not take more than I could keep fastened to me 24/7 no matter what.</p>

[jason_hall5]

<p>Well your question is what would I bring, not what I think you should do. I am not crazy about traveling with a bunch of film. I know folks have done it for years, but I would just feel it easier to transport and take care of memory cards. You can carry a holder of 6 or so CF cards in your pocket with no trouble. Lets don't even start with X-rays and film.</p>

<p>So I would take the D700 with a 24, 50, and 105mm. maybe sneak in the Leica with my one favorite portrait lens (90mm or maybe the 50) lens. Buy the film when I get there and have it shipped home well packaged. I would have the family/friends drop it into the mail a few days after I leave so it does not beat me home.</p>

<p>Jason</p>

[bueh]

<p>I would bring the dSLR. Digital results are far more useful for sharing them with the people you visit, the instant feedback can be very valueable in difficult light, the variable sensor speed is handy, the high-ISO/low-light performance much better than with film, and you can take a lot more pictures with the D700 to capture many more snapshots, memories and masterpieces...</p>

[starvy]

<p>ditch the nikon and take the leica with the 21, 50 and 90mm lenses. you are not shooting the wedding as the main photographer so speed is not of essence. have fun.</p>

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

<p>I'd shoot B&W film at the wedding, but I'd buy it in Europe to avoid the airport hassles. Why film? Because the main wedding photographer is already shooting digital. So you'll produce something unique. And I'd use my Mamiya 7 because I don't own a Leica.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>All in all, I agree with Bueh and for pretty much for the same reasons.<br>

However,</p>

<blockquote>

<p>With digi, you get black/white, fast slow, tungsten sun all</p>

</blockquote>

<p>but with color negative film you get pretty much the same benefits, even if there is not a "14-stop" range with it. ;)</p>

[bms]

<p>Hey Tobey, leave the wife.....there is an idea :)</p>

<p>Thanks for the advice and letting me bounce my idea off of y'all. I know I eventually have to make up my mind, and only I can. Good point about maybe leaving the 35's and taking both. Thing is, if I take both I'll probably be shooting the Nikon.... and have it glued to my face and come back with 2,000 pictures. Maybe not the best "family vacation"... =}. I think I may just repeat the Leica thing, sneak a little P&S in anyways, just as a back up, and use it for the social gatherings. Probably have just as many keepers...</p>

[john_h.1]

<p><em>What would you bring?</em></p>

<p>I wouldn't submit to a demand that I leave the other equipment home unless there were a good independent reason not to. Good reasons would be...</p>

<p>1) It is actually too cumbersome to bring.</p>

<p>2) It is too unsafe, where I am staying, to leave equipment I don't need at particular moments.</p>

<p>3) The wife is the one carrying the equipment or bringing both kits actually has some other negative impact on her. The glued to the face/depriving wife of companionship issue you brought up is a legitimate negative impact assuming there really is deprivation caused by having the Nikon.</p>

<p>If one or more of these apply, the small kit goes unless I really want digital over film. Otherwise, I would bring all the equipment I desire.</p>

<p> </p>

[James G. Dainis]

While I applaud your choice of prime lenses, for a vacation camera I would bring the Nikon and one nice zoom lens.

 

JDM - " '14-stop' range". Groan. Please don't start that again. :)

[dangoldman]

<p>you taking two suitcases, one for you? carrying your own stuff anyway? Just take both. If you're the one lugging it around, whats the difference?</p>

[luis_g]

<p> I'd take the DSLR with one zoom (24-85), a small Nikon Flash, push the ISO when you have to, and eat the compromises. You seem prepared to take the Leica. Take whatever works best for you. No matter which you take, I'd also bring a P&S back-up, something small, like a Fuji 200 EXP, or an Olympus Stylus Epic should you take the Leica (and leave the 35mm at home). </p>

<p> You can't go wrong with any part of your kit. Have fun, and let us know what you ended up taking, and how it worked out.</p>

<p> </p>

[jpo3136b]

<p>Leica with the 50mm or Leica with the 30mm and the 90mm. Pocket full of film. That is all you need.</p>

<p>Surprise the wife with some off-the-schedule dinner reservations. Load some fast film and take at least one silly picture of the two of you in a cheesy pose, having fun. Make at least one good photo of her in a nice dress or something, showing how pretty she looks. Do this with minimal photo gear, and don't forget to enjoy the trip before its over. Bon voyage. J.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>Since I don't have either a D700 or M4, I'd take an FM2N and 35-70/2.8D AF Nikkor and a bunch of Tri-X or TMY. Much as I enjoy digital for all kinds of reasons, I don't enjoy lugging more than 10 lbs of gear tops, in a shoulder bag and my only waist bag is too small for anything but the FM2N. I'd rather spend more time looking and just being there than having a camera plastered to my ugly mug.</p>

[oskar_ojala]

<p>D700, but I would instantly ditch the 24/2.8 and get two quality wides for it.<br>

A high-quality zoom would be nice, but there's no real high quality, high range (e.g. 28-105) modern zoom for travel in the Nikon system.<br>

Of course the Leica would be tempting and ultimately it's your choice, not the result of a poll.</p>

[astral]

<p>I take only what I <em>know </em> need: more gear means more frustration and possibly 'paralysis through indecision'. Less gear means (actually demands) more decisiveness in my photography. I take only what I am utterly proficient with. I adjust my photography to optimise on the available equipment and not the other way round.</p>

<p>For my digital photography one <em>good </em> wideangle zoom lens and one favorite, much-used, prime is a better choice than 4-5 primes (50% of which may be used for less than 25% of the shots). My Leica lenses are good enough to crop images down one lens size - so a super-wideangle (21-24mm), a wide (around 35mm) and a short telephoto (75mm) is usually more than enough.</p>

<p>That's my experience, based on regular long-ranging jaunts around European cities and countryside. My 'serious' travel kit is: D200 12-24 AT-X. Leica M6TTL & 15mm Heliar, 25mm Skopar, 35mm 'cron (50mm 'cron if space permits - if I had a 'lux I'd probably take that whatever the consequences.). Finepix F30. Pocket tripod. <em>Lots </em> of memory and <em>range </em> of favorite films.</p>

[sasvata__shash__chatterjee]

<blockquote><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=2390878">Benjamin Schaefer</a> <a href="../member-status-icons"><img title="Subscriber" src="http://static.photo.net/v3graphics/member-status-icons/sub3.gif" alt="" title="Subscriber" /> <img title="Frequent poster" src="http://static.photo.net/v3graphics/member-status-icons/1roll.gif" alt="" title="Frequent poster" /> </a> , May 22, 2009; 09:45 p.m.</blockquote>

<blockquote>

<p>Thing is, if I take both I'll probably be shooting the Nikon....</p>

</blockquote>

<p>There, you've already answered your question. :-)</p>

<p>Just don't shoot the indiscriminate 2000 shots, at least not mindless duplicates with the continuous release, treat the DSLR as if it were a film camera and try to get as much in-camera as you can.</p>

<p>The 21mm does give you some advantage over the Nikon, but I find too much perspective distortion in interior shots. For European travel, the 35mm will probably be your most used focal length, there the larger aperture advantage on the Nikon is offset by the hand-holdability at slower speeds on the Leica - it;s a wash, as is the 50mm. For daylight shooting either setup works fine, but I think for evening/night shooting the Nikon wins hands-down: not only can you change ISOs at will, but the instant feedback is very useful.</p>

<p>That said, my next trip I am taking my 6x6 film SLR, weight be darned!</p>

[david_manning1]

<p>Benjamin,</p>

<p>From past experience in Europe travel, I'd say light sources, and the lack thereof, should dictate your camera body. The Leica is a romantic notion to be sure, and beautifully made, but the advantages of the D700, in both low-light and change-on-the-fly ISO, make it the winner. I'd take the D700 with the 24/2.8, the 35/2, and for me, an 85/1.4. Your 135 would be fine too. I'd leave the 50 at home. I like that lens a lot actually, but like someone mentioned, you'll probably use your 35 as your primary lens.</p>

<p>If you're really brave, just bring the 24 and 50 with the D700...you'll be down to about the M4 weight. Low light in churches, pubs, houses, and overcast skies really does call for the flexibility of high-ISO shooting. Also, remember that the D700 has an onboard strobe, for when it really gets dark, or when you want some snapshots in the pub.</p>

<p>As an aside, Silver Efex Pro will let you convert any shot you want into a very authentic B&W picture, including grain structure, without the hassles of scanning, dust spotting, and the expense of contact sheets. </p>

<p>Trust me, I've tried shooting in the classical philosophy (basic rangefinder, Tri-X) out of a sense of romance, and experienced all the limitations and frustrations they did back then when they were FANTASIZING about equipment like the D700 :)</p>

<p>----David.</p>