just one camera...

[._._z]

Much better for the runs.

[kaiblanke]

I did a lot of hiking over the last years with my M2 and a Sixtar meter. Nice combo, but I really would have liked the Hexar RF's automatism at some places (still looking to 'upgrade' one of my M2's towards a RF).

<p>

The benefit of the RF and M3 are the interchangeable lenses; if I would have only one I would rather go for the Canonet or the T4 instead. Both nice lenses. But the Canonet is just better for some shots since you can control the aperture. The GSN would be just too large and the AF is to automatised for me, but maybe also a nice option for you.

<p>

When talking weight then a T4 and the canonet have about the same as the Hexar RF or M3, so why not take both ? Alternatively I would strongly consider selling one of the cameras and buy a second lens for the RF or M3: The excellent VC 25/4 costs about $200 used, for the same price you may also get a used 90/4. This equipment would then make the choice of the RF more easy.

[beepy]

<blockquote>

Only time it was a problem was on a 30km hike when I had the runs!! if I was doing

it again, I'd take my Leica M3, and F100 with 24 and 50.

</blockquote>

I'm assuming it is the Leica that is much better when you have the runs.

[allan_yates]

I would go with a Leica MP with the 0.72 finder. It is small, built like a tank, totally manual in operation, and a joy to use. The light meter uses the small button type battery; the camera will not lock up if the batt dies, because it is all mechanical, therefore extremely reliable.

 

My lens choice(s) would be:

One lens kit - 50mm f/1.4 or 35mm f/2;

Two lens kit - 35mm f/2 and 90mm f/2 -OR- 28mm f/2 and 50mm f/1.4;

Three lens kit - 28mm f/2 or 35mm f/2, 50mm f/1.4 and 90mm f/2.

 

The 50mm f/1.4 is a great all-around lens, outstanding for low light shooting.

The 35mm f/2 is the classic Leica lens; it is small and light.

The 28mm f/2 is an excellent wide lens; it is small and light, and is the widest lens that does not require a shoe mounted finder.

The 90mm f/2 is a great lens for getting in close and isolating your subject. A bit heavy, but worth the weight.

 

The three most used focal lenghts in the Leica M range are 28mm, 35mm and 50mm. The 28 is sometimes used in place of the 35, especially when paired with the 50. I would not go with the 28-35-50 tri-elmar zoom, as it is slow at f/4 - too slow for low light work, IMO and low light work is one of the joys of shooting with a Leica.

 

The Hasselblad XPAN 2 would be my second choice - an outstanding camera, but it is not mechanical like the Leica MP; if the batts die, you're toast until you get new batts. The lenses for it are made by Fuji and are very sharp, but are slow - f/4 for the 45mm and 90mm, and f/5.6 for the 30mm.

 

I would also take a hand held meter - my choice would be the Sekonic L508. It pretty much does it all and is very light and accurate; it runs on one "AA" batt, which should be easy to find about anywhere.

[adrian_morgan]

Yep little known fact that a Leica will stop you getting the runs. Since I have owned my Leica, not one case of the runs!

 

*grin*

[._._z]

Leica ownership prompts runs on the bank.

[adrian_morgan]

Not as much runs on the bank as one might think - M3 cost me AUS$700, Nokton 1.5 AUD$250 (I think) and CLA AUD$200-300. About the same as my nikon F4E.

[._._z]

Wow, Leica makes Noktons -- who knew.

[jeff_drew4]

. . . and IF money were no object, then I agree with the Leica/Xpan choices. They are

the pinnacle of photoquality based on 35mm. I have had and used 3 of the RFs above

and have traveled extensively with them - all good choices but the Yashica T4 has the

best size/weight/lens/cost ratio of all on the list. I prefer my Minox ML or 35GTE

because it's smaller & lighter than the Yashicas, Hexars, and way cheaper than the

Leica. HOWEVER, have you considered the Cosina/Voigtlander Bessa R series and a

couple lenses? Excellent optics & relatively inexpensive and it's compact. A good,

digital 5MP P&S is not a bad choice either. In fact, P&S film & digital cameras with

35~135 range zooms are fairly useful and available almost anywhere.

[._._z]

<i><blockquote> IF money were no object </blockquote> </i><p>

 

Given his list of choices, there does seem to be a budget, Jeff.

[adrian_morgan]

Wow �[� Z I thought someone of your wisdom would know leica doesn't make Noktons.

[._._z]

They don't. Hence the reply to my statement about Leicas and, er, the runs, is not

addressed.

[rich_dutchman1]

D100 & 28 1.4. I choose the body over the D2H/D1x because it is light and has a pop up flash.

[don_leonard1]

I'll hold my breath and step into the DIGITAL Breach. Even with infrequent access to electricity (say, once a week or two), digital has now become usable. I am leaving for the Peace Corps in August, and have assembled the following.

 

-Camera: Olympus C-5060 5MP Digital (28-110 zoom, comparable in size to small rangefinder). Solid Magnesium Alloy construction. Also have adapter lens (gives me 19-28mm).

 

-Power: The stock batteries on this model are outstanding. Using the LCD, I took over 450 pictures during a three-day weekend, 2/3rds of which were on top of a mountain at sunrise (temp ~20F). All this on one battery. Turning off the LCD gives infinately longer shooting times. I am planning on bringing 3-4 batteries with me to Peace Corps

 

-File Storage: Vosonic X-Drive II with 40gb drive. About the size of a small paperback novel, Enough battery power to perform about 20 Compact Flash file transfers per charge. Based on my shooting, one charge should last between 3-4 weeks of intensive shooting.

 

-Pocket Automobile Cigarrette (DC) Inverter to charge camera and X-Drive batteries when I don't have access to a household outlet.

 

The advantages of shooting digital while traveling are:

-No worries about X-Rays at Airports.

-No worries about film storage

-No worries about film development

 

The disadvantages:

-Need access to power (car cigarette charger or household outlet)

-Need to provide storage for image files (I calculate that a 40GB X-Drive will store over 7000 of my files).

 

An alternative would be to go with devices that use AA batteries (rechargable or otherwise). Examples are the C-5050 and AA adapters for external Hard Drives like the X-Drive.

[Aoresteen]

Good question Ken. Here's what I would do:

 

1. I prefer 120 negatives. I'd take my battered 1969 Hasselbald 500C & chrome 80mm and my Sekonic Studio Deluxe meter. All are in tip top shape and are smooth as butter. The 80 is a wonderful lens you can crop to get a short tele effect or print it full for a normal view.

 

2. If I had to take a 35mm camera it would be either my Leica IIIg with a 50mm f/2 Summitar or my Pentax SL with a 35mm f/2 SMC Takumar. If you let me sneek in one more lens then I'd take my 28mm Ultron with the IIIg or my 24mm f/2.8 Vivitar for the Pentax. My IIIg is solid like an M3 and I like 50mm lenses. My SL is also a tough camera (a Spotmatic wityhout the light meter).

 

Either way I'd take the Sekonic meter as well.

[ilkka]

The first time I did a round the world trip, I took two cameras, a 35 mm Minox for colour negatives and an Olympus XA for slides. Both with fixed 35mm lenses.

 

The second time I did a round the world trip, I took a Fuji GA645, a compact 6x4.5cm medium format camera with a fixed 60mm lens, equivalent to about 35mm in small format.

 

The next time I will take either the XPan or digital. Or maybe both...

 

Reasoning? It is good to have a back-up. So two cameras, not one. That will put even more emphasis on the size. That's how I came up with the first combination. The second time I wanted better quality and thus medium format. But I did not want to carry two medium format cameras and to standardise on one film size, I did not want to take a 35mm back up camera. So risked at going with only one.