jan_bremnes

<p>From Oslo to Stavanger there's a choice of going along the coast, or driving over the mountains. The coast saves you time, the mountains give you so much more. You will be seeing two stave churches (one of which is Norways largest) as you drive across the Telemark County, from east to west. The route I would recommend is as follows:<br>

From Oslo you follow E18 south to Drammen, where you turn west on E134. This road will take you to Notodden, where you will find <a href="http://www.heddalstavkirke.no/">Heddal Stave Church</a> . Continue on E134 until you reach Høydalsmo, where you turn soutwest onto road 45, which will take you to Eidsborg where you will find another stave church, but this is a small one and cannot compete with Heddal in size or beauty. Continue along the 45 to the bottom of the valley where you can stay at <a href="http://www.dalenhotel.no/">Dalen Hotell</a> , although it's a bit expensive ($350 for a double room). From Dalen you follow the 45 until it meets road 9 which you follow south. You now find yourself in the Setesdal Valley which seperates the forested hills and mountains of Telemark, from the more rugged and bare mountains of western Norway. A few miles south along 9, you turn west onto <a href="http://www.suleskarvegen.no/">Suleskarvegen</a> (the Suleskar Road), which will take you to Sinnes in Sirdal Valley. Here the road turns into 45 again (follow the sign towards Sandnes) and take you through Hunnedal Valley down to Byrkjedal, where you can have a nice dinner at Byrkjedalstunet. If you're not yet tired of narrow and winding norwegian roads, you can follow the 503, which will take you through Gloppedalsura, Northern Europes largest <a href="http://www.gjesdal.kommune.no/web/cmsmm6_5.nsf/lupgraphics/01%20Gloppedalsura%202.jpg/$file/01%20Gloppedalsura%202.jpg">scree</a> . Either that, or you can take the shorter route, which is to continue on 45. Both roads end up on E39 which you follow north to Stavanger.</p>

I've got the Yashica Electro 35G and can't complain about it's low light capabilities. Fixed 40mm/1,7 and shutter speeds from 1/500 - 15s. But a big drawback is that it's automatic exposure only, you set the ISO, wind the film and focus, the camera does everything else and doesn't let you know what it intends to do.

<a href="http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/index-frameset.html?YashicaElectro35GSN.html~mainFrame">Yashica Electro</a>

First of all, thanks a million for all the advice and suggestions!

I haven't replied before now, as I've been busy reading up on the different cameras you've suggested and asking myself

what I really want.

First of, I'll answer some of the questions that were raised:

Yes, there is a reason why I chiefly consider(ed) older film bodies; it's what I'm used to, I love the sound and feel

of the film advance lever, the setting of film speed and aperture and I consider the camera bodies works of art

compared to newer cameras. But I've realized, after giving my problem a little more thought, that none of those reasons

can defend taking such a camera with me on this trip. When I'm at home, I photograph for the pure fun of it, and part

of that fun lies in using an old camera, if it suddenly falls into bits and pieces in my hands, no biggie, I'll just

come back another day. But the goal of the photograpy during my trip will not be to have fun, but to document the trip

and capture memories that I can come back to years from now, and I've decided I'm not going to trust a 30-year

old camera body with that responsibility.

The destinations themselves will probably not be a once in a lifetime event. I'm from Norway, Europe is just a short flight or

ferry-ride away and I've spent many weeks in central and southern Europe with my parents over the years.

But this time I'm going with some really good friends, some of them will move to different parts of the country when

autumn comes, so this is sort of a last big thing we do all together.

Some of you asked me what equipment I already had and why I don't just get insurance. It's not the

loss measured in money I'm concerned about, as insurance would be cheaper than me buying new equipment. The thing is

that I use old Pentax equipment, K-mount & M42, some of which are my dad's old equipment, and both bodies and lenses are getting harder to find,particularly the lenses, at least those in a

reasonably good condition. So it's not about the financial loss, it's about me losing equipment which I may not be able

to aquire again, and which I'm quite fond of. That was my reasons a week ago, but now the above also applies.

I also thank you for the reassurances regarding risk of theft. As said before, I've been to Europe several times, and

know that you don't often experience theft, so I'm not that concerned about thieves when strolling in the cities and

stuff like that as I won't be traveling alone. But hostels, overnight trains, train stations and that kind of thing

is what gets my paranoia going. I've read somewhere that disguising my camera, by placing gaffer tape or something over

the logo and model name is an easy way to avoid the thieves' attention, so I'll be doing that to my camera, and probably

add a few strips of tape somewhere else on the body to make it look even less attractive.

Hopefully I won't be looking to much like a tourist, excpt for the "oh's" and "ah's" when visitng the St. Peter Basilica and such,

and that's why I wanted a sturdy body. When walking about in the cities, I plan on carrying my camera in a regular

satchel, along with other things like a bottle of water, some snacks, a guidebook and stuff like that. The camerabag will

be in use when on out of the more populated areas, like when I'll hopefully be hiking in the Alps.

To those suggesting digital, rest assured; I'll be carrying a digital P&S (probably a Fuji F30),

but generally, I prefer film over digital. Before I go digital (except for P&S), I'll go B&W and get wet in the darkroom

I don't have yet =)

As to those concerned about me taking unfamiliar equipment with me, I can only say that I intend it to be familiar by the time I

leave, as I plan on buying it at least two months in advance. Those two months I'll spend shooting, with and without

film until I now the camera inside and out.

And to Bueh; I've got a Yashica Electro 35G, and it's a really nice camera, but I feel a bit limited by the fixed lens

and I don't want to carry that big a camera as a backup when I've got a digital P&S backup.

Now, that should cover the questions I think.

On to what I've decided on:

I now believe that the Nikon F80/N80 might be the right choice for me. There's plenty of used lenses to get for it,

it's relativley new, has AF but also give me the option to focus manually, it's got built-in flash, reasonably good build quality and finding a replacement if it breaks down

will be easier than with ay other brand except Canon. If I later want to get a manual body, the FM3A seems like a safer choice than any other. And I can easily

go the other direction, getting a more advanced body, as used F100s go really cheap, even here in Norway.

Feel free to come with any further advice, but I think I've made my decision. Come August and I'll know if that decision

was a wrong one, but I hope it won't be.

Again thanks for all your help!

- Jan Bremnes

Hi!

I'm planning a trip around Europe this summer, and since I don't want to take my

regular equipment with me (yes, I'm paranoid about theft) I'll most likely buy

some new (used) equipment to go with me on this trip. Photography is not the

main goal of this trip, but I plan on spending some time photographing trying to

capture something else than the regular snapshots.

I'll be backpacking, traveling mostly by train or foot and therefore need

something small and lightweight, something that fits in a small camerabag so I

can carry it in my backpack without it taking up too much space. And sturdy

enough so that I can put it in a regular backpack or satchel without worrying

too much that something will break.

I first considered the Olympus OM-series, because of their small size, light

weight and sturdiness, and the fact that they're quite cheap. If I hadn?t been

so short on money at the time, I would have gone with an OM2 with three primes.

But seeing as I didn't have the money to spend, I had to wait a little longer

before buying. Before long, I discovered that Canon FD glass is incredibly

cheap, so is Minolta Rokkor. When it comes to Olympus and Canon, I don't want to

buy a zoom lens as I don't know if they made good zooms back in the old days.

But when I thought of Minolta, their Maxxum/Dynax series popped into my mind.

Checking out the prices on KEH.com I realized that the cost a Minolta Maxxum

body, a fast 50mm and a zoom covering the range I want (28 - 105/135) wasn't

that different from an OM2 with three primes.

I was intent upon buying a small OM-outfit, but now I'm totally at loss when it

comes to what I should buy. And therefore I'm asking for your help.

So, the bottom line is this;

I want a camera outfit I can use as my travel camera.

I will buy used, since I can't afford brand new equipment.

I do not want digital, I'll have a compact digi-cam to use as backup and to take

snapshots.

Brand is not important, as I will build my outfit from scratch, though please do

not make me more confused by bringing in any other brand than Olympus OM,

Minolta Maxxum/Rokkor or Canon FD, unless you have a really good reason.

The camera needs to be: Reliable, small and lightweigt, sturdy, quiet and

unobtrusive, aparture and/or shutter priority and as cheap as possible without

sacrificing any of what I just mentioned

Thanks!

Questions are never stupid. You're only stupid if your not asking questions.

My reply, on the other hand, might be stupid :p

I have no experience with the MZ50, but I've handled both the K10D and the K100D. The viewfinder in K10D is a huge step up from the one in K100D, not so much because of its size, but because of its brightness.

If you have looked through the viewfinder in a Canon 350D and/or Nikon D50, I would say the K100D is alot better than 350D and a little better than D50.

Compared to DSLR's with an APS-sensor (meaning all DSLRS excluding Canon EOS 1Ds/1Ds Mrk II and EOS 5D) the MZ-50 viewfinder would be considered big as far as I can tell.

Below (or above, dunno where it will be put) is an illustration I've made where I try to compare the sizes of the viewfinders. (MZ-50: 36*24mm, 92% coverage, 0,77x magnification. K10D: 23,5*15,7mm, 95% coverage, 0,95x magnification. K100D: 23,5*15,7mm, 96% coverage, 0,85x magnification).

The two ferries and the road-toll, will cost you approximately 1 700 - 1 900 NOK, all depending on your vehicle being under 12m (1 700NOK) or over 12m (1 900NOK).

Unless you already have decided that the E39 is the desired route for you, might I be so bold as to suggest another Stavanger ? Bergen route? IMO the E39 is quite a boring route, it's purpose is to get people from A to B in as straight a line as possible. If you got the time, driving to Bergen via Voss is a much more charming and beautiful route.Choosing this route, which takes only a few hours longer than the E39, unless you stop along the way and take a hike (plenty of opportunities for that), you will get to see numerous waterfalls, including Låtefoss and Langfoss. You will drive through the scenic Oddadalen, where you will catch your first glimpse of Folgefonna (Norway?s 2nd largest glacier) lying on top of the not-so-far-away mountains. A narrow road takes you north along a part of the Hardangerfjord, surrounded by mountains and orchards on both sides. A small detour will take you to Vøringfossen, yet another spectacular waterfall. In short, Stavanger - Voss- Bergen, will let you see alot more of what makes Norway so famous, fjords and mountains, than Stavanger - Bergen. It might make the trip a bit more expensive, considering the longer distance, but in my eyes definetly worth the extra cost (200 - 300NOK).

- Jan Bremnes

Driving a car and Caravan shouldn't cause you any trouble. This stretch of the E39 is fairly good by norwegian road standards, which can be translated into lousy when compared to German roads for example :P but don't let that scare you. Just adjust your speed according to the quality and state of the road, and don't let the angry, impatient norwegians behind you with fire shooting from their eyes make you nervous, that's just how we are on the road.

The ferrys accept vehicles up to 22metres, and I hope you don't plan to bring a longer caravan than that, as 22meters are the maximum allowed vehicle-length in Norway.

If you have a number of passengers, and estimated vehicle-length, I can give you a fairly exact price-estimate for the whole Stavanger - Bergen trip.

- Jan Bremnes

Take a piece of advice from a norwegian like me; if you're only having a couple of days in Norway, do not waste them in Oslo. In fact, don't waste any dyas in Oslo even if you have 200 days in Norway.

Stockholm and Copenhagen will give you all the city you need.

Yes, Oslo is the capital of Norway, but it has very little norwegian to it. Norway is all about mountains, fjords, waterfalls and scenic landscapes. You won't find much of that in, or around, Oslo. You need to go either north or west, and west would be your best bet as Oslo lies pretty far south in the country.

If i may, I would suggest an alternative route. Driving Stockholm - Oslo and back is quite a long drive, going all the way across Sweden. I would recommend you start in Bergen or Stavanger, both being fairly small, cozy port-towns. Both have a larger number of well-preserved historical buildings in the city center. Bergen having Bryggen, dating from the Hanseatic period, which is on the UNESCO list for world cultural heritage sites. Stavanger has the cozy Old Stavanger, which is one of Europes largest collections of wooden buildings, most dating from the 19th century. From Stavanger you can also take a boatcruise of the majestic Lysefjord, lasting about three hours, which shows Norway at its best. If the weather is good, you can see people sitting on top of the 600m high Pulpit Rock, dangling their legs over the edge. If you don't feel like seeing the fjord from the water, you can always take the hike up to Pulpit Rock yourselves and enjoy the magnificent view of the fjord and surrounding mountains, and if you dare, take a peek over the edge.

From your starting city, Bergen or Stavanger, you rent a car and drive to Oslo, either taking the coastal road or driving over the mountains. I would recommend the latter as the southern and eastern coast can't compare to the beauty of the mountains. Driving from Bergen/Stavanger will take roughly a day if you don't stop too much, but being in the middle of summer, you won't mind driving at night as it hardly gets dark. If you don't spend too much time on the road, or in your starting city, you could spend a day in Oslo if you really want to see the city, otherwise you can perhaps spend a day taking a hike, as norwegians love to do. From Oslo you can either drive all the way to Stockholm or drive over the border and take a train.

Alternatively you can fly into Copenhagen and start there, and drive from Oslo to Bergen/Stavanger and catch a flight home.

- Jan Bremnes

By "getting into this industry", do you mean how to make a living as a travel photographer or how to photograph while traveling?

If you meant how you can become a professional travel photographer, I would guess the way to go would be for you to travel, take a lot of pictures, sort out the best ones and send them to whoever employs travel photographers and see if they're interested in hiring you.

If you want to know how to photograph while traveling, I can't help you as I've been searching the internet for tips for about the same amount of time as you. I've come to the conclusion that I won't learn anything from just reading it on the internet, so I've bought a cheap and used camera on eBay, that I wont be afraid of loosing or using, and if I do loose, I can easily afford a new one. This camera I plan to learn inside & out, so that I know just how it will respond in any given situation, and so that I can use it without thinking. Hopefully I will achieve this before I go backpacking around Europe for a month this summer, and if any of the pictures I hopefully will be taking, turn out any good, I'll share my experiences with you, if you still need advice on that point.

Hi!

I've got a Soligor 135mm/f:2,8, a Elicar 35mm/f:2,8, a Petri 55mm/f:1,8, a Porst

28mm/f:2,8 and a Vivitar 400mm/f:5,6. And I also have a 28-70mm/f:4 Cosina and a

set of three m42 extension rings (total of 50mm). I've never made any large

prints from the pictures I've taken with this equipment, so I don't know how

good they are. Any of you guys have any experience with any of these brands? I'm

thinking about buying the Pentax K100D, and one of the main reasons for the

choice of camera is the set of lenses I already have (those listed above). Do

you think it's a wise descision? Or are the lenses just crap?

Thanks!

The mirror bumper is one of them.

But I haven't had problems with the light seals, well they're not tip top but they still have that foam substance. And they've been the same way for a year and haven't caused me any problems yet.

But I think I'll run a film through and check, just in case.

The one I said was located between the mirror and the shutter... argh.

Let me try and illustrate in with my wonderful skills in MS Paint<div></div>

Hi

Today I noticed some foreign objects in the viewfinder on my camera

(ME-Super). It turned out some foam padding (orwhatyounowcallit) had

found it's way there. So, I tried to get it off, but it held fast in

fear of it's life. Decided to try a more brutal approach and went in

with a toothpick, causing most of the foam to come out, but now

there's a few black stripes of foam instead. Better than a lump of

foam though.

Then, as I pulled the toothpick out, I somehow came in contact with

the strip of foam that the mirror hits when it slaps(?) up, resulting

in the destruction of the mentioned foam. Had to blow the foam off

the mirror and out of the camera, after succeeding in doing so, I

noticed that a strip of foam that should normally be up somewhere

between the mirror and shutter had fallen down. Luckily I got that

out of the camera without anything else being destroyed.

So, since I'm going camping for a week, and I need my camera on that

trip, I ask the good people on Photo.Net if my camera will survive a

week without having the foam replaced?

I know, I should get it fixed before I leave, but since I leave

tomorrow, I can't.

Thanks!

Whoops! Sorry I haven't replied before... forgot about this thread somehow.

I tried fiting another K-mount lens on the camera and it worked just fine, so I figured, logically, that the problem is confined to the lens. (I'm smart ain't I? =))

The two levers on the back of the lens seems to work fine, but it seems like something has broken of one of them. Not the aperture lever, but the other one...

Anyhow, it's not that big a problem, usually have time on my side when using that lens, and now I know what aperture it insists on having so I just need a little time to adjust the shutter speed and it works just fine.

Thanks for your help!

Hi!

I've got a pretty annoying problem with one of my lenses. When I

attach my 50mm K-mount lens to my camera (ME-Super), the camera

refuses to measure the light correctly. It insists on exposing at

1/60 when there's light enough for 1/125. It seems that the meter is

reading the light as if the lens is stopped down to f22, or more. I'm

not sure about this, haven't got the pictures I took trying to

compensate for this, back from development.

When I attach the lens, I don't get the normal "click", first I hear

a deeper click, when it's about halfway on, then the normal click

comes.

My other lenses are M42 with adapter, so I haven't had the chance to

check if it's the lens or the camera there's something wrong with.

So, does anyone know what's causing this? Had the same problem? Ever

heard of the same problem?

Thanks!

-Jan bremnes

Greetings!

I know, this has probably been asked several times before, but i just

don't have the patience to search for the answers I want.

My whole school is going to take a day off to go skiing in the

mountains next week. The area in which I live haven't seen snow for

more than a week, 11 days at the most, this winter, (counting from

november until today), and what little snow there's been, had trouble

covering the grass. That's a shame, since I love snow-covered

landscapes. And since I didn't get into photography before last fall,

I haven't had the chance to take any pictures containing snow. But

now, that is going to change.

So, please answer me these questions three! (If you would be so kind)

1. I've got my camera, my 28mm, 50mm and 135mm, tripod, cable-

release, extension rings and camera bag. As you may have noticed, I'm

lacking film. That's because I'm not sure if I should go with print

or slides. Which is the best pick if I've never taken pictures in

snowy conditions before?

2. Now knowing what film to choose (I hope), it's time to move on to

the speed of the particular film. 50,100,200,400,3200?

From what I've seen, 100 seems to be the preferred speed. But what if

it gets cloudy, or I want to take pictures of other stuff than just

snow? Small things protruding from the snow perhaps? What then?

A mix between 100 and 400?

3. The Exposure. How should I proceed to expose my film the correct

way? It seems quite tricky taking pictures in (of) snow. I know, a

spotmeter can be used, but i don't have a spotmeter. All I have is

the meter in my Pentax ME-Super, and that's center-weighted.

I've heard that one way of doing it is to under-expose 2stops,

another is to take a reading from the clear, blue sky (if that

happens to exist when I'm there), yet another is to take a reading of

the palm of my hand. I'm getting a bit confused. So, have I already

answered my question or is there more to it?

Thanks!

-Jan

Thanks for your help!

I'll get my local camera-store to order one for me then... and hope it works.

Greetings!

I've just started with photography. I have a Pentax ME-super with a

50mm f:2 lens, and now want a wide-angle and tele-lens.

My budget is quite tight, so i figured I'd see if my dad had some

equipment I could use.Rummaging thrugh some boxes in the attic, I

found a couple of old Petri-lenses with screw-mount. A 28mm f:2,8 and

a 135mm f:2,8 to be exact. These lenses are just want!

So my question is: Does anyone know if I can use these lenses on my

Pentax with a k-mount adapter?