jaydann_walker

<p>Absolutely. But Erick, you left out a few important points.</p> <p>6. Avoid bucket airlines like the plague. This will cover most 'budget' Asian airlines and not a few North American ones. Flights never depart on time. In-flight staff smile sweetly and treat you like sheep at an abbattoir. No service whatsoever.<br> 7. Insure yourself to the hilt, especially yourself. At least 101% cover. Expensive, but hey, this is about you, and aren't you taking the two Leicas and the darkroom along too? All worth big bucks.<br> 8. Always go First Class. You will thereby avoid having to sit with the peasants who are friendly enough but will invariably offer you a styrofoam container of sheeps' guts on rice to enjoy as no in-flight food is worth buying anyway. Applies to 6. above.<br> 9. Carry lots of cash. Ideally in $20s and $50s with at least one $100 for when yo arrive in Bali and a customs-immigration goons target you for some serious squeeze because you have half a camera shop with you in expensive-looking bags. I've seen it happen.Fortunately not to me. My one cabin bag and small canvas camera carry bag didn't rate any attention at all. All I was asked was, "do you have any duty free?" (in some Third World countries, duty free is often confiscated for resale later on the street). I didn't, and I was quickly waved past the line-up of suckers with big bags. <br> 10. Take the time to read - http://www.onebag.com/. I did, and it changed the entire concept of my travels. I am now FREE of all this angst! You too can be free.<br> One camera, two lenses, a few accessories. Forget that darkroom.<br> Travel is meant to be fun, and we need to lighten up about it. And go with less.<br> My thoughts. Tongue in cheek, sort of (initially wrote "tongue in sheep" but no), but valid, I think. Disagree if you want. Open to intelligent discussion.</p>

<p>As a relative latecomer to SLRs, I held out til 1974, happy til then with my Rolleiflex TLR. That year I did a long and slow trek in Asia, 12 countries in six months, during which time I shot 100+ rolls of 120 film, a massive extra load to drag along as I traveled. Back then the well-heeled tourists all had TLRs and occasionallysomeone (usually American) sported a Nikon F or its counterparts of the time, Pentax, Minolta and Miranda. At various shoots I did, I noted how easily they were using their SLRs to easily and quickly record everything in sight, while I fiddled with an exposure meter, composed in squares, resisted the urge to shoot static scenes, and to me the most annoying of all, changing films after a dozen exposures. </p> <p>Something went click! (bad pun intended) in my head, and not long after I parted with the then immense sum of CDN$500 for a Mamiya SLR (a 500TL, DTL or TDL or some such model) and two Hanimex lenses, 28mm and 90mm. </p> <p>The following year I redid my 1974 Asian journey and rephotographed almost everything I had previously done, this time in 35mm. The feeling of liberation was tremendous. A brick of Tri-X or Kodachrome took up no more room in my bags than 40 rolls of Ektachrome or Plus-X. Processing was quick and easily and could be done almost anywhere in Asia, tho a near disaster did occur when a Chinese photo store in, I think, Penang, developed 10 rolls of my Tri-X in Dektol (the resulting negs scan well and print OK up to 5x7" but beyond that, the grain goes to mush). No more was I enslaved to the tyrrany of the 6x6 square format...!</p> <p>Of course it didn't stop there. The Mamiya was stolen in an Australian B&B, and in rapid succession, I acquired a Pentax K1000, a Minolta SRT101, a Fujica with horrible ergonomics but the sharpest standard lens I had used til then - and finally, in 1977, two Nikkormat EL cameras, amazing machines which I still own and occasionally use. My love for Nikons, or specifically Nikkormats, has continued strong til now, for almost four decades. </p> <p>My Nikon arsenal now consists of three ELs (I inherited the third in 2010, from a late friend who bought it the same day in 1977 I got my two), two FT2s, and a Nikon F. My seven or eight lenses are non AI, AI and AIS, and all move easily to any camera I want to use at any particular time. Lens hoods, filters, and other accessories are all standard. The Nikkormats are the Sherman Tanks of the camera industry. No digital cameras now are being built to match them. Cast iron bodies held together with ocean liner rivets. </p> <p>My partner uses a Nikon FG20 with four lenses, a kit I was given in 2004 by an elderly neighbor whose late husband had aquired it new in the '80s. By comparison it is but a callow youth and as such doesn't quite fit into this thread, but it is as good as new, the E lenses are brilliant performers, and while it's generally seen as flimsy the FG20 is certainly sturdier than anything being produced on the market today. </p> <p>Recently as a fun experiment I put my Nikon 20mm f/2.8 D AF lens on an FT2. Fiddly to use, metering was by guess and all had to be shot in M mode on the lens, but spot-on exposures, truly lovely colors and amazing mid tones on two rolls of outdated Fuji Sensia. </p> <p>The Nikkormats take me back to a golden era in film photography where equipment was manufactured to last, with quality materials and easily repairable mechanics. </p> <p>I had my ELs serviced two times, in 1985 and again in 2004. One EL failed on me during a wedding shoot in 1985, fortunately I had the other, so I switched the lenses and went on shooting. Had it serviced and still use it. Nothing has gone wrong with any of my ELs since. This isn't a record of any sort. In fact, it's common with Nikon SLRs. </p> <p>By comparison, since 2008 I've had two Sony DSLRs bite the dust, with repairs quoted as costing more than their original prices (no thanks), and a Nikon D700 did the dreaded SDE (Sudden Death Experience from shutter failure during a shoot (I had it repaired and I still use it). This said, two Nikon D90s I bought used have lasted well and consistently turn out good (= saleable) results. So it's the luck of the draw, really. </p> <p>An odd aside. The Mamiya SLR stolen in the '70s turned up at a garage sale in Sydney in 2004. The elderly gentleman who was selling it told me he had bought it from a well-known pawn shop of the time in Pott's Point, Sydney, coincidentally quite close to the B&B where I had stayed. I didn't buy it, but I left feeling that a small wheel in my life had come its full circle.</p> <p>JD in Kuala Lumpur. </p>

<p>This may be somewhat above your intended budget, but how about a Contax G1? A 1990s RF camera, all electronic, so a little old, but a work horse, and many are still available (there seems to be an endless supply of G1s sold OL from Japan) and going quite cheaply. I bought one recently ex Tokyo, with the silver sticker and not the green sticker (the latter indicates that the camera had the Contax fix enabling the use of the 21mm and 35mm lenses, and was a factory adjustment to the early models), for US$90, to replace one I originally bought in 1996, which now has a now and then rewind problem, but otherwise still works well. </p> <p>the lenses are something else. Carl Zeiss Japan-made G lenses cost a small fortune. And are well worth it. The glorious color rendition, tonal clarity and the legendary Zeiss "bite" (cutting through the shadows) are all very definitely there. </p> <p>That said, you would be looking at $400-$600 (with luck) for a G1 with a 45mm or 28mm lens. The 45 in its day was hailed by many as THE sharpest lens ever made, a claim I've wondered about, but the images I've made with this lens are superbly sharp. The 28mm is quite common and seems to vignette a bit in wide shots, but is otherwise a fine performer. </p> <p>I have the five fixed G lenses (21, 28, 35, 45 and 90) and I hope to be around and shooting long enough to be able to use them on another digital camera, currently the only option appears to be Sony but there are a few technical problems and after several bad experiences with Sony I no longer buy Sony anything, all the Sony products I've owned and used were generally OK til they malfunctioned, at which time I quickly learned that having a Sony product repaired can be frustrating as well as ridiculously expensive. </p> <p>If Fuji ever produce a camera, any camera, capable of taking my G lenses, I will be buying two in a lightning bolt flash. Those Zeiss lenses are too good to leave them on a film camera. </p> <p>JD in Malaysia. </p>

<p>Wow!</p> <p>Martin, I know at least six people who will be very happy to know all this, and I will be sending them the information later today. I reckon there will be orders going out very shortly.</p> <p>Thanks for posting the additional information. The price is OK. Even shipped from North America.</p> <p>JD</p>

<p>I used a lot of Technical Pan in its time, with excellent results as I would expect from any Kodak film product. I would be interested in running a few shooting tests on this film.</p> <p>However... Two important points you did not address:</p> <p>How much does it cost?</p> <p>Is there a minimum order, and if so, what is it?</p> <p>I checked the web site, but could not find any answers to my questions.</p> <p>Over to you.</p> <p>JD in... somewhere in Asia.</p>

<p>As always, much good and useful advice here on what is, to me, a highly subjective matter.</p> <p>I cut my teeth in photography in the 1960s with TLRs, first a Yashica, then a Rolleiflex, when 80mm standard lenses were the norm. The Rollei added a 35mm insert kit, and the option of +/-120mm altho' on a smaller format.</p> <p>In the 1970s I went to a Mamiya 500 SLR with a 50mm Sekor and 28mm and 135mm Hanimex lenses. Trekked across Asia and shot thousands of good images. Sold a lot of stock. The good old days. Even B&W images of Bali. Unthinkable today you can't give away a Bali shot, however good. Then Nikkormats. For 20 years my walkabout lens was a 35mm f/2 on an FT2. I still have it, and I use it every year, to remind me how good it</p> <p>I briefly returned to MF in the 1980s. A Mamiya C3 with three lenses. A pain to lug around, also changing lenses on windswept fields or high peaks. The Rollei outshot the Mamiya, but didn't have interchangeable lenses. A big plus.</p> <p>In the 1990s, back to SLRs. The 35mm lost out to a 28mm, a marvelous street lens and even (with a lot of TLC) for architecture. 2000s, definitely digital. Nikons, D90, now D700. Ten lenses, including two zooms. I'll replace the now 7 year old D700 later this year, with... ??? Still considering. Another Nikon, definitely</p> <p>My most often used lens is the 28mm, then 50mm, then 24mm, then 85mm. A 20mm and 180mm see little use now. For years I used a 28-85mm zoom which produced fine images with (almost) everything but architecture, too much distortion of verticals at the 'wide' end. This lens now mostly stays on the D90, used a few times a year by my partner. It's a good lens, and served its purpose well, but it's old tech and its use by time has passed.</p> <p>For B&W it's film, a Fuji GA645wi, one lens, 45mm (28mm equivalent). In future, what? A lighter Nikon DSLR, for sure. I have two Contax G1s and five lenses from 21mm to 90mm. Am very tempted to carry a G1 with the 35mm Planar for B&W, with the 28mm and 90mm in my bag. The 45mm Planar, a wonderful lens, is as new. I've used it maybe five times.</p> <p>That's how my photographic 'eye has evolved over six decades. All this has been a personal life journey. I've been a 28mm man all along. If limited to one camera and one lens for whatever time remains, I'll stay 28mm, but heyn, that 35mm f/2 Nikkor is a superb piece of glass.</p> <p>In reading the other posts, I feel safe in saying we are mostly all the same in the long run. We start our with a modestly priced camera and one lens, and end our wandering with the same in high quality gear. To me, there is something innately satisfying about this. It seems natural. Less is... whatever. In the end, it's about the images anyway, not the gear.</p> <p>JD in Kuching, Sarawak</p> <p>PS I have way too much gear, of course. (Don't we all?) I intend keeping it all. Further down the track, my executor can decide how to deal with all those storage boxes, also the darkroom. For now, I'll just go on using and enjoying it. </p>

<p>Brian is spot on, as usual.</p> <p>In my long lifetime of shooting stock photography, I have concluded that microstocks are for the desperate, who will do (almost) anything to be published and/or recognised for the wonderful photo geniuses they (believe they) are. The mostly unfortunate experiences of my friends who fit this description, have reinforced my view.</p> <p>If you are truly so keen to be published, why not set up your own web site and post your lovely work so your images can be freely copied? At least they will be used. You can then have the bittersweet pleasure of knowing your photo work is good enough to be stolen, while surfing thru the 'net to see who and where your beloved images appear.</p> <p>Good stock agencies have high standards. Learning and perfecting your craft to work according to their standards, seems to me a good way to improve your photography. If you aim for something, at least always aim high.</p> <p>JD on the road (and still shooting stock).</p>

<p>As did the great Henri Cartier-Bresson, in his 60s. To take up painting. His stated reason, in so many words in his exquisitely spoken French, was that he believed he had reached the point in life of having done all he could with the visual medium of film. For him, it was time to paint. Which he did, for almost 30 years.</p> <p>I am far from close to the creative genius of the Franks and CBs, but at times in my 55 year relationship with the medium, I have had to put down the camera(s), walk away, and focus my time, attention and mental forces on other projects. To rejig my creative instincts, refresh my tired mind, or as happened at one point in my early 50s, save myself from a complete physical and emotional breakdown... Like everything else, photography can get to be too much, and when we reach this point, we need to move laterally, give the cameras and one's trigger finger a rest, and concentrate on other aspects of the varied interests that life throws as those who keep open minds and stay receptive to the real world and its (not always pleasant) ways. </p> <p>This year I am now finishing a five year project involving much (digital) photography of old architecture in several Asian countries. Three or four months to go. I am also bidding on a new project for 2017, which will involve 3-4 months of intensive photography in about 30 locations, on medium format black-and-white film. </p> <p>If I am successful with this project, in-between the two a break from shooting will be a Must Do for me. Time to read, reflect, make notes, plan layouts, go hiking and take in the natural beauties of my world in Tasmania, Australia (where, oddly, I have never done any photogaphy for income, preferring to shoot only for my own satisfaction and pleasure), drink some of the fine pinots our local wineries produce, eat fresh oysters, and just coast along. For a time. However long is needed. Then I will order film, check the cameras, stock up on batteries, clean filters and lens hoods, and set off again, refreshed and reinvigorated, for my new challenge. If I fail to get the project, something else will come along, and I will just have more time to indulge in yet more pinot. A win-win for me, in every way. </p> <p>Likewise, when I turn 70 (not so far down the track), I have long pondered the possibility of giving away the game of photography, hanging up the cameras, changing the entire direction of my image making. Unlike HCB, I will never be even a competent painter. I crave fewer and finer images, late cold winter evenings in the darkroom, more time for scanning (even with a cat's nine lives I will never, ever make it to the end of my film negative archives). Then I sit back and think, well, why not clean out, sell everything, keep a Rolleiflex TLR or one film camera and a small set of lenses, and shoot only B&W what time I have left? It's very tempting, and not at all limiting. To me digital photography, with all its convenience, is a craft. The creativity, the artistry, the true challenges, the testing of my limits, the anticipation and expectation and not the immediate gratification, lie entirely with film. </p> <p>JD somewhere in Sarawak. </p>

<p>I've been out in the sun too much today, I think. Meant to say M3, somehow converted it to M2. Apologies.</p> <p>The sun and light at these South China Sea beaches in Sarawak can be... overpowering. A Tiger beer will cool me down and help the healing process for the eventual sunburn.</p> <p>JD again, same place.</p>

<p>I meant to add, but forgot: Brad, a truly well written story with a happy ending. You had me spellbound to the very end.</p> <p>As a possible saga, you should go back to that shop, and see if the owner has an original Barnack Luxus in a box full of old Kodak Brownies...</p> <p>JD again, still somewhere in Sarawak. </p>

<p>Brad, we all hate you. With a passion. You know that, don't you. Yes, we HATE you!</p> <p>I am of course joking. If love and hate are like brother and sister, then it must be that envy and hate are, at the very least, close cousins. I will draw the line at envy, having never really hated anyone in my almost 70 years of life.</p> <p>I had an M2 with a Summarit in the 1980s, but had to sell it for quick cash to cover a family emergency. If not for that unfortunate event, I know I would still have it today. I found the Summarit sharp beyond belief. B&W negs with a K2 yellow filter were sublime, and color negs and slides were wonderful creamy and contrasty with superb mid tones, a truly unique look. Deep blue skies. Pristine whites. I also had a 50mm 2.8 Elmar, a fine lens and almost as good, but the images I made with it didn't quite reach the level of the Summarit.</p> <p>The M2 was by far the very best 35mm camera I have owned, and handled, in this life. M3s are, I believe, just as good. The later Ms, well, others can say.</p> <p>Add a few filters (if you shoot B&W, otherwise a Leitz UV, expensive as it is, will suffice), a lens hood, a case, and see if that Leicameter can be repaired. I would add a Leitz adjustable viewfinder, as I had one in the 1980s and it suited me absolutely. You will then have, in every way, the perfect film kit.</p> <p>Like its close cousin (here we go again with those family connections!) the Rolleiflex TLR, Leica Ms love being used, and thrive on minor servicing (the traditional CLA is often as not all they really need) every ten years or so.</p> <p>OK, so I no longer have my Leica. But no matter what happens to me in this life, I will never, ever sell my Rolleis.</p> <p>Lucky man, you are. Now go out and shoot film and shoot film and shoot film with it. Join the club...</p> <p>JD somewhere in Sarawak.</p>

<p>Can you live with the 645 format? If yes, go Fuji.</p> <p>I do tend to go on about the Fuji cameras, but as the gods know, they are supremely good value in today's ridiculously hyperinflated camera markets. </p> <p>From 20+ years of personal experience, I've found that any camera made by Fuji produces superb results if maintained properly and not damaged. The latter refers to the GA models which have autofocus which always seemed somewhat flimsy to be, but I have to say my two autofocus GAs have never broken down or given me any grief. With a little care in using these cameras, superb results are easy to achieve. Good 645 negatives easily print to 11x14" (probably bigger, but that happens to be the largest prints I've made in my home darkroom from my GA645wi negatives). </p> <p>The Fuji GAs are excellent value nowadays, and not old equipment. A good one properly maintained and used with reasonable care, will last you a long time. The GS models (which are not not autofocus) are somewhat cheaper, but much older, and may require maintenance in the shorter term. I've never used one, but a friend who did, told me he thought they were somewhat flimsy (as in "plasticky") and rather too light for his tastes. </p> <p>There are also other Fuji cameras in other sizes. The 6x7 models are also good value. </p> <p>Many Japanese sellers have GAs and GSs. They tend to describe items very accurately, ship promptly, and are always charmingly polite to deal with. Never any problems. I have bought many items from Japan, and have always been happy with what I have received. Very refreshing after having to put up with years of "service with a snarl" attitudes from most Australian retail photo shops (not all, there are one or two good ones). </p> <p>JD, somewhere in Sarawak</p>

<p>Charles - yes, Santa Fe is unique. Phoenix is best described as - well, given its name, phenomenal.</p> <p>Sandy, To me New Mexico and Arizona are two entirely different worlds. The former is Indian culture and stunningly beautiful desert mesas broken by the most amazing rock formations. Arizona is desert, and of course the Grand Canyon. As they are so close together, one can easily enjoy the best of the two.</p> <p>As a former New Mexico resident who returns every year, I know that one the best-kept secrets of our part of the Southwest is that one can enjoy the best of what the two states offer, without having to spend a fortune. Budget holidays are easily done and when one gets out of the expensive dining out and the somewhat plastic food of the bland highway eateries, an entirely new world of fine regional food opens up.</p> <p>Take it from one who has traveled around the world more times than I have fingers and toes to count my trips, film and food make for the ideal life!</p> <p>JD in Sarawak, Malaysia.</p>

<p>JDM, are you back?</p> <p>Truly, the waters of the Nile have parted, and you have returned to the promised land!</p> <p>Let me be the first to bid you a great loud WELCOME.</p> <p>Nothing has been heard from a certain "minor" nuisance for some time. You know the one, with the overbearing sense of self-importance. Hiding in the privy, probably. Or he has blocked himself from posting. Whatever. </p> <p>I for one look forward to many more postings from you.</p> <p>JD in Sarawak, Malaysia.</p>

<p>Sandy, your airport experience was entirely typical of the widespread neurotic bureaucratic attitudes and is the reason why I try to not fly when I'm back in the USA. 9/11 may have damaged something in the American psyche. My 'low point' was in New Mexico when an inspector opened my LowePro bag, took out a roll of 120 film (I had removed the boxes beforehand to make it easier for even a baboon to see what I was carrying), and asked, "what's this?" in a sneering tone. I told him, but he didn't know what "a filum" was. He then roughly tugged out my Rollei TLR and asked how to turn it on... fortunately a supervisor, a pleasant woman, overheard all this and explained it was a film camera. She then waved him away, thanked me and wished me a good day. I was grateful, and boarded my flight wishing there were more of her caliber in US government service nowadays. </p> <p>The reality appears to be that small monkeys have a need to feel like big lions, and many little nobodies in uniforms want their egos massaged. they have power but no training in using it. A prerequisite for their jobs seem to be a lack of social skills. But there are good officials, in fact many. That supervisor was a human being, notwithstanding the uniform. </p> <p>Apologies for the rant. Similar experiences have occurred too often in my past travels.</p> <p>This said, one of the great pleasures of being retired is I can nowadays drive from California to New Mexico, and I do it at least one time every year. It isn't a short jaunt, but with some planning it can easily be done without great effort and with planned stops to explore and photograph new areas. The pleasures of being behind the wheel, watching the diverse landscape and ever changing light as I go, and above all else knowing I can stop wherever I please and dally with a camera for as long as I like, are a truly freeing experience. The American Southwest is truly unique and I hope to see much more of it in what time I have left.</p> <p>I am a New Mexico boy from Santa Fe, but very early on Arizona weaved its golden magic on me. It is a true photographer's paradise. Wherever you go you find the most amazing photo opportunities. Desert panoramas demand wide lenses, and you would have made good use of the polariser, in that light. Sadly, I haven't been to Phoenix or Tucson for 20 years, but the rest is familiar territory. I will get back there some day, likely later this year, during my annual 'pilgrimage' to NM. The old gold mining towns to the south are alone worth a week of exploring. Visits to the old abandoned towns off the highways (there are many) and in particular their old cemeteries offers stark glimpses into how hard life was in those isolated areas in the 1800s.</p> <p>The Frank Lloyd Wright 'legacy' in Arizona in truly wonderful. FLW responded from the heart to the beauty he saw in the desert landscape, and his architecture reflects this. My time at the Biltmore was in the '70s, on my honeymoon, it all seems like centuries ago. It was an "expense be damned" mood, so much so, it later took eighteen months to cover the credit card bills. But what a time.</p> <p>Yes, photos please. They may lure me back for longer stopovers on my next NooMex drive.</p> <p>JD in Sarawak, Malaysia</p>

<p>There are some (okay, one or two) pleasures in being "older and wiser" and one of the great joys of my decades of photogaphy was the discovery, in my 60s, that less is best. Changing my approach to photo gear accordingly, buying less, making do with fewer gewgaws and toys, was a great liberation.</p> <p>I now do my best work with one camera, one lens (medium format) or one camera, three lenses (35mm SLR/digi DSLR). A Nikkormat with a 28mm f/2.8, similarly a D700 28mm kit, suits my viewpoint perfectly. A lens hood, UV and yellow filters, a polariser, and film fit into one pocket or a small bag. For a country weekend, the Nikkormat along with a Rollei or my Perkeo II, a few accessories, and two rolls of film for each, amply provide for any opportunities I have to go forth and actually ENJOY the outing, as well as the photography. To go lightly is to travel mightily...</p> <p>Bela has it right. Ditto Stephen with his thoughts on "a meaningful answer". To me there is no such thing. I want to let my images speak for themselves.</p> <p>For now, the rest of you can cogitate on what is "perfect" for you, and meantimes go on being the little darlings of the camera shops, where you are greatly loved, as we older lens boys and girls did in our time. As someone or other once said, there is one born every minute. I know. My camera locker is proof that P.T. Barnum was a wise (and canny) old entrepreneur...</p> <p>JD in Sarawak, Malaysia</p>

Greg, Noted with great relief... stabiliser out, fixer in! use the 'stab' for your C41 and E6 films. +1 for comments from Bill, Glen and Robert. Do you presoak your films in the tank before developing? I have for 50+ years, as a 3-5 minute presoak in water at the same temperature as the developer, stop bath and fixer, will usually remove most of the dye in the film. In the '60s Ansco (GAF) films had a sickly greenish dye and well into the '90s Ilford Pan F turned the presoak a deep purple-black. Some dye may come out in the fixer as well, but I doubt this will affect the fixing process in any significant way. A few antisoak diehards (we all know the type) may be leaping for my throat for saying this, but I have yet to see evidence of any damage to negatives caused by presoaking. Jobo also recommends a short presoak for films in a rotary processor. JD in Hobart, Tasmania.

<p>Greg, you wrote you are using "stabiliser" as part of your processing workflow for Fomapan.</p> <p>Is this C41 stabiliser? If yes, why are you using it for B&W film? Totally unnecessary.</p> <p>Curiosity prompts me to ask...</p> <p>JD in Hobart, Tasmania</p>

<p>In a few days I will be off to Asia again, for a long stay. As always, photography is my main goal, 'tho visiting new places and getting to know people are equally my reasons for travel. I will be traveling out of Brunei, initially to Sarawak and eventually, to Sabah and on to Malaysia.</p> <p>However, at the end of April or in early May, I will be in Bali for a week, to meet up with old friends I haven't seen for many years, who will be flying in and out, and only stopping in Bali. As it is impossible for them to change their travel plans to visit me anywhere else (they are on their wayfrom Europe to a family event in Oz and then on to New Zealand), it's now up to me to visit them in Bali.</p> <p>I have mixed feelings about this, as I haven't been to Bali for such a long stay in what seems like a small eternity. Given our ages (60s-70s) and varied interests, we all prefer not to stay in the Kuta-Legian-Seminyak 'strip' which, if what I'm told now is accurate in any way, has become more a mecca for bargain shoppers than in the (not so) good old days when every 'yahoo' in the Antipodes went to Kuta for boozing and partying. (I do mean the term 'yahoo' in the most sympathetic way, as I was one of them in the '70s!).</p> <p>Sanur has been suggested as a pleasant alternative.</p> <p>My problem is that I haven't been to Sanur for such a long time, I doubt I could even find it on the map. Joking - I know it's just to the north of the Kuta strip and to the east of Denpasar city, 'tho I suspect my Bali map was used by James Cook in his long ago travels. I have good memories of Sanur as a pleasant, laid back small seaside community with an okay if not spectacular like Kuta beach, a long board walk along the water front, and just enough good restaurants and other venues to keep we 'oldies' busy for a week or so. </p> <p>For photography, I will be looking for temples and religious events. My usual equipment will travel with me - Nikon D700, 24-28-60-85, and my Fuji GA645wi with B&W film. I have memories of a mid-'90s visit to Bali, during which time I shot many older temples in the Denpasar, Mengwi and Bedugul area. If time allows, I will try to organise an air conditioned car and driver and take my friends up to Bedugul, where I understand there is a pleasant and reasonably new botanical gardens, and of course the truly beautiful old temple with its lake backdrop. I will try to do a little OL research, but as I have always done, I like to talk to other photographers about my travels, and ask for (and often give) advice. </p> <p>Has anyone been to Bali, specifically to Sanur in the recent past, and if so, please would you let me have your good advice about where to stay, where to eat, and what to see and do there? Oh, and if I am wrong about the K-L-S strip, feel free to post and tell me.</p> <p>All information will be greatly appreciated and, I hope, used to our good ends. Thank you all in advance.</p> <p>JD in Hobart, Tasmania.</p>

<p>Wedding photographer, you wrote "how is that 28mm f2.8 afd compared to 24mm f2.8 afd? I keep reading the 28 is a melon. The 24 surprised me: sharp, distortion free (big plus!) and reasonably low fall-off. But how's the 28 ?"</p> <p>Well, there are good 28s, and then there are not so good 28s... I have owned two AIS 28s (still have 'em) and three AF 28s (I now have two). The AISs were beaut (I use them often on my Nikkormats with B&W film). The first AF I got, when tested, was a total lemon and I returned it for another, which was good. Ditto my third, which came attached to a Nikon D90 I picked up for a pittance.</p> <p>Like you I've read all those critiques, but during my 50+ years of shooting I've learned to do my own tests and make my own decisions. I tend to avoid zooms, but a early AF 28-85 Nikkor I picked up dirtly-cheaply in a charity shop, has given me some of the sharpest images I've ever had, in the 35-50 range. Used at 28 the curves would make the late-great Marilyn M swoon with envy (tho not my architect or publisher clients) but used within its limits, the images are outstanding. From a lens most Nikon users balk at paying even $70-$80 for...</p> <p>All this said, I have enjoyed reading this thread, and in fact have learned a few neat tips and tricks from it. I like the way everyone here has taken the time to explain in such good detail, the whys and wherefores of their individual choices. There has been much to take in and learn here.</p> <p>And me, in ten days I will be off to Southeast Asia again, for an indefinite 'trek' on fine beaches and in interesting national parks, with an occasional cultural weekend (or week) at such places as Ankor Wat (which I first saw in 1970 and again in 1975 and 1985 and now want to revisit and reshoot, likely for the last time) and other such places as I find them.</p> <p>Having read all the fine posts here, I will pare down my kit to the basics - my D700, two batteries, two cards, and the following lenses: 20, 28, 60, 85. Lens hoods and L37c filters, a Nikon polariser, and my portable Gitzo. Even then I am probably taking too much. Oh, I intend to "cheat" just a little. For space and weight saving the Fuji GA645wi will stay at home for now, but my closest friend, who often traveled with me in the '70s but is now unwell and has to restrict his wanderings late in life, will bring it with a hood, a K2 yellow filter, and 20 rolls of TMax 100 when we meet up in Cambodia to revisit Angkor together, as we did together 46 years ago - so a milestone for us. Even with digital I try to be economical but this time I will be using the entire 20 rolls...</p> <p>I have always tried to be economical, for reasons of finance and minimalism, with all my photography throughout my life. However, we now have more choices and options open to us in photography, both digital and film, than we have ever had bin the past. Film is truly wonderful, but the tyranny it imposed on us has been broken by the digital medium. All this new technology is wonderful (for the most part) and it is there to be used. as always, the end result is the image, which is what it's all about!</p> <p>JD in Hobart, Tasmania.</p>

<p>Gosh, what encouragement to post!</p> <p>For general photography and most of my travels, a D700 with a 28mm 2.8 D. My 'walk around' kit is the D700, a 24, a 28, a 60 micro, and an 85 1.8, tho often as not the last two stay at home. </p> <p>Occasionally I want to go ultra simple, and take only the D700 and an elderly 28-85 I picked up cheaply at a flea market. The lens is old, but one of the sharpest in my kit, almost (but not quite) as sharp as my 28 or 24 fixed lenses. </p> <p>Now and then, when I go on treks and want to lighten the load on my almost 70 year old shoulders and back, I take a D90 with a 24mm 2.8 D. Or the standard 'kit' 17-55. Never, ever the D700 and D90 together. </p> <p>I admired John's well packed bag, but at my age, I would have back problems if I tried to lug all that gear with me in my travels. Especially so as my air travel luggage is usually between 10-12 kilograms, which seems to satisfy all my needs. </p> <p>As I have said in enough threads that I won't bother to repeat myself, hah! I do 90% of my photography with one camera and a 28mm lens. Anything else is luxury, 'tho in saying this, I am definitely not knocking the joys of luxurious travel... </p> <p>Other 'musts' are a spare battery, a spare 8 GB card, L37a filters on all the lenses, a notebook and one pen, and a cleaning kit. Now and then a map (I tend to get lost easily). Also a small portable tripod I was given years ago, which fits into my back pack. It's a Gitzo, I think. </p> <p>All packed in a small Sakata Tokyo cloth bag I acquired somewhere in an op shop, which in turn goes into my old backpack. The 'musts' get put into one of the small pockets of the backpack. </p> <p>Now and then I carry a Fuji GA645i or wi (I have the two), with a lens hood and 10 rolls of film. If I take this along, then I also include the D90 and one or two lenses. No more. Never the D700. Weight... </p> <p>I have an Expocap and Expodisk somewhere at home, but gave up lugging them along years ago. Also no gray cards. To my mind, taking too much is the equivalent of (in film times) carrying a developing tank and chemicals with you. I did it back then for a few years, but then I decided, why? Seriously, less is better. Most misteaks in shooting can be easily fixed up in post processing. </p> <p>Ian and John, did you forget the Melitta coffee pot and drip? Laugh, I recently went around Sarawak with a small one cup French press coffee maker, and what's more, used it every day. Let us not underestimate the importance of small civilised comfort in one's travels... </p> <p>Once again, heaps of good advice here. Interesting to know what others take along when they go shooting. </p> <p>JD in Hobart, Tasmania. </p>

<p>Meant to comment, but forgot. Excellent images, Michael! To me, the grain in the D76 1+1 processed shot is a pleasant pattern, not at all intrusive. Film images are about grain, and why shouldn't they be? Either way, 1+1 or full strength, the argument for using D76 is all the stronger for your posts. Well done.</p> <p>JD in Hobart, Tasmania.</p>

<p>Donald, save yourself a pocketful of problems, and use it 1+1. One time, then turf it out.</p> <p>Or replenish it. Home mixed D76R is easily made, if (as Glen has pointed out so well) not particularly cheap, but then what is cheap about photography nowadays?</p> <p>Or check Kodak's time/temperature recommended increases for each use, and add time accordingly. Keep notes re usage etc on loose sheets of paper, put away somewhere (don't forget where you put the papers, as I usually do, which is why I use the stuff 1+1).</p> <p>Or keep a photo notebook, as I now do. Once a year I go thru the book, and type up its contents into a WP document I call 'LitNotes', and wonder at all the things I wrote down and then forgot about... but that's just me.</p> <p>With all due respect to Frank who presented an excellent and reasoned (if wrong) argument, never ever brew up partial batches from a premixed pack of developer. That is asking for trouble. For one thing, when you open a pack of developer, air seeps in, and the problems start from that point. Kodak published something about this, ages ago, when I first set up my darkroom.</p> <p>Life isn't meant to be this complex. Tho it's fun to debate all these points. </p> <p>May I say in closing, so many here have made excellent points about using D76, and I have learned some new things. Thanks. </p> <p>JD in Hobart, Tasmania. </p>

<p>To me, the most powerful images in history ae ones I have made. My archives are full of them.</p> <p>As an Australian, I also live near the world's most beautiful beach, and until I moved to Hobart, which is the world's most lifestyle friendly city (just ask any local, they will tell you), I lived in many years in Melbourne, which has been consistently rated as the world's most liveable city. </p> <p>Australianisms!, all the way...! We deal in superlatives Down Under. Australia is, after all, a superlative place. </p> <p>Please excuse my warped humor, it must be the two glasses of good red wine (Tasmanian red, the world's most quaffable vintages) I've enjoyed this evening. </p> <p>My nomination? I am with John. The amazing photo taken from the Enola Gay in 1945, of the first atomic bomb exploding over Hiroshima. Nothing in the world had compared to that at the time, and I earnestly hope, nothing ever will again. </p> <p>Another glass of the world's best pinot now. Then to bed. </p> <p>JD in Hobart, Tasmania</p>

<p>+1 on all responses posted. The test roll is the way to go, with the unopened kits. Shoot one roll, and cut it up to use with each unopened kit as you open it. Turf the opened kit, altho' some of the chems may be usable (the stabiliser has a long life, I believe). The guiding principle here, is that false economy is always a danger in the darkroom. </p> <p>As Dave and Glen said, a slight color in the part C developer may not mean it has 'deceased' on you. Again, the test is the way to go. </p> <p>Use the entire kit up quickly when you open it. Don't try to set new records for the number of rolls processed in any one kit. I long ago gave up trying to get 20+ rolls out of the Tetenal 1 liters. I value my negatives too much for that. </p> <p>You may be lucky. I recently opened an E6 Tetenal 1 liter kit I kept on a shelf for three years, and found it worked perfectly. I used it up in two sessions, and did 13 rolls in all. Lucky, I guess. And definitely not superstitious... </p> <p>As the French say (with a small add from me), life is too short to drink bad wine or use bad chems in the darkroom. </p> <p>Do let us know how the results turn out, please. We photographers are an endlessly curious lot. </p> <p>JD in Hobart, Tasmania</p>