I'm trying to get high quality feedback, so this is for all the experts, pros, and hardcore enthusiasts.(ie; Those that know their stuff). Let us say that you travel from New York to California (via land) with ONE camera, and had the opportunity to take the following 8 high quality photographs along the way:1)A nightclub inside(party goers dancing), and 2)outside (The neon atmosphere at night). 3)A riverboat on a rainy overcast day. 4)A close-up of a violet in full bloom on a clear day. 5)A desert cactus in bright sunlight. 6)A blond in a Ferrari with top down(The car!), 2 seconds before the light turns green.(Be quick!). 7)A historical monument from 300 yards away. And lastly, 8)A squirrel on a fence on a windy day-oops, there goes that blond in the Ferrari cruising past in the background...Considering the range of environmental conditions, and the fact that I specified high quality photos, the Point and shoot cameras are obviously out. So that "dream" camera you put together obviously would have to encompass a lot. What camera and lenses do you have? Wait. Remember that reliability is a key issue. So over the course of several days of travel with this ONE camera, one must take into consideration weak batteries, or other electrical(or mechanical)problems, no to mention the humid, or dusty conditions two of those pictures were taken under. So obviously, the ability to go manual is important. And oh yeah, I forgot that you are also strapped for cash. Therefore you cannot pick and choose from any of the camera, lenses, and accessory combinations that you want. That would make this too easy. So the question is, how low can you go. Hence the title "Getting the most from the least". Who is up for the challenge? I just might get the outfit you come up with. Darren.

-- Darren Harris (Searcher7@mail.con2.com), May 12, 1999

Answers

I'll keep it short:

Canon Rebel 2000 or Minolta HTSi Plus as for a body choice combined with either a 28-80 or 28-105mm zoom lens, plus lenshood (to cover the subjects you mentioned) depending on your budget.

Both have built-in flash, auto exposure modes and good metering systems. If you ever get more serious about photography you will have an excellent 2nd (back-up) body in either brand. Both should be available for around $350-400 including the lens.

You can cut the cost by buying used (the older Rebel or Elan; or the 5xi, 7xi or 500si from Minolta) with an appropriate lens.

Last but not least get a Kodak book or one from John Hedgecoe about 35mm photography.

-- Marcus Erne (cerne@ees.eesc.com), May 12, 1999.

Sigh, OK, I'll play. Used Nikon FM, 28/2.8E, 100/2.8E. Looking over your list, you could handle 1 through 6 with the 28 (reversed for #4). The 100 handles #7 and #8. Both of these lenses are available used at prices far below what their performance might warrant, and both take the same size (52mm) filters. Total cost: $350-ish in nice condition, $250-ish for beaters. Instead of the 100, you could consider the 75-150/3.5E zoom for a few more bucks (it also takes 52mm filters). Film, tripod and a couple good books, and you're all set.

-- John Kuraoka (kuraoka@home.com), May 12, 1999.

Yes, a rather silly game. I'll go with an MPP 5x4 (#100 UK pounds) and a Schneider 180mm lens (#200). I would also need a flash for (1) and tripod for (2).

-- Alan Gibson (Alan.Gibson@technologist.com), May 12, 1999.

Canon Elan IIe (or any EF body for that matter), 28-135 IS USM, Kenko extension tube set (bring only 12 & 20mm), Cullman magic tripod (the folding one), Linhof Pro 01 head (smallest head they make).

The IS is good because instead of gaining 1/2 stop going from a f/3.5 to a $1000 f/2.8 zoom, you can gain 4 by going from 1/60 to 1/8. The tripod is for the flower and nightshots.

Reliability shouldn't be an issue unless you drag your camera behind you on a rope. Depending on which of your objectives (to save space/weight/money) is most important, it's valid to get an older and used EF body, and the Cullman is no Gitzo, but it'll hold a camera steady, and packs small. You can make a bag and wear it on your back like a CamelBak H20 system.

Dream outfit? --Ha! --I live it >8^0

-- Paul Runnoe (prunnoe@aros.net), May 12, 1999.

testing, 1 2 3

-- Roseblood (kyller@annex.com), May 12, 1999.

You're asking for a camera and lens combo that doesn't exist. For what you'd ask for, I'd want a SLR that shot 4x5 rollfilm w/ a motordrive, and it would have to have the 4x5 equivalent of a 24- 300mmF2.8 zoom. A handle mount flash with a GN of 400 that runs on 2 AAA batteries would help as well (Nightclub inside..use that bastie to bounce flash off the ceiling.)

-- Roseblood (kyller@annex.com), May 12, 1999.

Unlike the camera I just described, there are some real cameras that can fit the bill. The first that come to mind are the new EOS, the Minilta 9, and th Nikon F100.

But, to be honest, any camera body that'll take interchangeable lenses would work fine.

So, you pick the camera body, I'll tell you what lenses.

-- Roseblood (kyller@annex.com), May 12, 1999.

1) 50mmF1.4(F1 for Canon) - You may want the equivalent of a 5400HS flash for whatever body it is you selected (The 5400HS is a Minolta Strobe...the most important things about it for this shot are....MODELING LAMP, OFF CAMERA TTL [With any modern Minolta SLR that has a built in flash...even the lowly, as cheap as they come, 400si], and multi-flash(strobe) effect. Just imagine the shots you can get with dancers and the multi-image effect strobe gets you.

2) The same f1.4 50mm lens...the same flash (for powerful flash that'll reach out and touch someone in the outdoors at night) and a sturdy tripod when you don't want strobe to be the only illumination of the scene.

3) Riverboat on a rainy day...if you can get close to it...the same 50mm F1.4, and/or a 35mmF2. From further away, a 85mmF1.4, a 100mmF2, possibly a 135mmF2.8, if you have enough light...or, if you have a tripod, just about anything you way :) 70mm and longer for far away, 50 and shorter for closer shots.

4) The ever present f1.4 50mm again..just slap on between 12mm and 50mm of extension tube and bring your 5400HS flash (TTL off Camera for accurate exposure, despite the "billows" extension factor of the added tubes. This will also spare you the need for a tripod.. the flash duration will last only 1/800th of a second, and that's if you really need to 5400HS to fire a full power shot, else it'll run anything from 1/800 to 1/10000 (CAREFUL OF RECIPROCITY EFFECT WITH SUCH SHORT EXPOSURES)or just get a very affordable 50mm F3.5 Macro (you can spend more for a 50mmF2.8, or 100mmF2.8...but...unless you're shooting wide open...who needs to pay more for the same quality?)

5) The Desert Cactus, in bright sunlight....anything from a 14mm fisheye, up to a 300mm or longer lens...this one has too much potential to be shot creatively that I can't just pick a single focal length... but...if FORCED to..I'd pick one of the 17-35mm zooms that are out there. [a good selection of wide angle to almost normal perspectives]) Again, see #5.... anything from 14mm, to 300mm and beyond. Seeing the light is about to change color, I'd definitely want a 700si, 800si, or 9 (all from Minolta)...all have Eyestart technology, so they'll start to focus before you have you finger on the shutter release. With their hand-grip sensors, you can leave them turned on through the day, they'll power down after inactivity, but come right back to life as soon as any control is touched, or the sensors detect a hand on the camera. For the lens, I'd want something that focuses somewhat fast...the newer 28-105mm lenses fit the bill nicely, and give a good set of focal lengths to play with... I can see myself going to 105mm right away, zapping a few frames that are nice and tight (mostly filled by the driver, just incase her top is down too [sorry, couldn't resist]) then a series of shots made while pulling back to a wider angle view..including shots just wide enough to get the whole car, and a 28mm shot that places the car in it's settings.

7) - I'd use my feet and get closer to the historical monument (unless it was Mt. Rushmore, or something similar where you can't get closer)...in which case, I'd consider any lens from 50mm to 300mm and beyond...this one is just to open.

8) any lens F4 or faster, with a focal length of 135mm or longer (the new 80-200mm F2.8 from Minolta would fit the bill, Nikon and Canon both have a similar lens, if you were to go with their camera systems.)

Reliability is a key issue...so, I'd either go with a Minolta 9, a Nikon F100, NikonF5, or the Eos1(whatever it's latest incarnation is called).

The other way to handle reliability, is to have a backup bodd...so I could just as easily go with a pair of 800si, 700si, or 600si...or a combination of any of them.... 800si paired with 600si would probably be my pick. This works with the other manufactures as well. A pair of N90s, N70s... or A N70 + N90. A pair of EllanIIEs would do the job nicely as well ... although you're very unlikely to have any sort of equipment failure with any of these cameras ... but, Mr. Murphy and his gremlins can do incredible things...so, it's always a good idea to have a backup just in case [think of it as having a seat-belt as a backup to the ABS on your car]

Now, we get down to getting the most for the least ... the hardest part of this is having a body that'll deal with rough conditions ... that makes me want to NOT compromise on the body...thus a Minolta 9, the New EOS, or the F100.

But, I'm going to compromise on that anyhow... I'd go with a pair of 600si from Minolta...they're averrable for $300 at Sammy's Camera in LA... so, for the price of any of those cameras I listed before, you could get 4 to 6 of the 600si. Two will be enough for us though :)

For added protection, I'd also have to get one of those EWA Marine camera bags...just the simplest one, to hold the camera with a short zoom (the Minolta 24-50, or the any of the fine 28-80's out there.)

As far as the rest of the system, of course I'd have the 50mmF1.7 (cost less than the F1.4) the 135mmF2.8, a set of extension tubes, a 3500 series flash (a slightly lower powered than the 5400HS, but can still use the remote wireless TTL, and has an automatic zoom to match from 28mm to 105mm lenses.)A 24-50 would be a nice lens to have as well, and the 70-210 F4 (sharp as all hell, constant F-stop, but, it's heavy as a M1A2 tank, but, it'll double as a tool for self defense if need be.) That should have me well covered.

This is very close to my actually kit....at least my autofocus one...

a 400si (My first AF Camera.... does surpassingly well for the lowest level body out there.... off camera remove TTL flash, all the features of the 5400HS are available,...the only thing I really missed w/ this camera was a DOF preview)

a 600si (Very retro control layout ... very good egornomics, great performer, what else sells for $300 that can do better? NOTHING...this camera is almost the equal of the N70, and definitely blows away the N50 and N60)

a 50mmF1.7 (great averrable light lens, and has ZERO distortion [okay..I lie 0.06% Pincushion..but, on a projected slide or 11x14 print, I detect it at all..how does one measure things so small?] and great speed, at a super low cost (I got mine for $55)

a Sigma 28-80 F2.8 ... decent all around use lens... great deal when I got it used, $125, but it was missing it's caps. Let's call it $135 after I got both caps for it.

Minolta 70-210F4 (Great sharpness in this range, built to outlast anything else created by man, but, unfortunately, heavy as all hell.)

Minolta 135mmF2.8 (great portrait lens, relatively fast for an available light telephoto..although maybe not as good as a 85mmF1.4...but this thing will set you back $150 used, I don't even want to look at the pricetag on the 85mmF1.4 again.)

I'm waiting on a 24-50mm F4 from Minolta...that'll cover me down to 24mm...as long as I don't need to focus closer than 3-4 feet.

I have the 3500 flash...where else can you get wireless remote TTL for $100?

Soon to be added will be a 24mmF2.8, or a 28mmF2.0... a 5400HS flash (then I can use it with the 3500 to have remote wireless TTL ratio flash... slap an umbrella on the 5400HS, and use the 3500 as a fill...studio lighting you can fit in your glovebox)

Dream glass includes a 300mmF2.8, a matched 1.4 and 2.0 teleconveter set for 300mmF2.8, 420mmF4, and 600mmF5.6...but...that's dream glass.

Now, let's see how I did... $300 for the 600si, $60 for the 50mm, $150 for the 135mm, $150 for the 70-210, the 24-50 $300

So, you'd end up with a kit capable of producing publishable images for $960 ... compare that to the 1300-1500 price of the F100, the new EOS, and the Minolta 9. A minimum savings of $350! Even more if you think about buying glass for those bodies.

-- Roseblood (kyller@annex.com), May 12, 1999.

Appologies for the multi-part reply. When I tried to send it all at once, I was constantly being sent something by the server that made my ISPs choke (Netzero, AOL, and ANNEX.COM)

-- Roseblood (kyller@annex.com), May 12, 1999.

OK, if you don't want to carry many prime lenses, how'bout this. - 600si for $300 at Sammy's (I bought this baby for $500!). - Minolta 28-105 for $325 (B&H price). Great all around lens that will cover most of the shoot. - Sigma 70-300 APO macro Super for $287. Decent telezoom with 1:2 macro. Get the DL Super version if this one is too expensive. - Minolta 3500 flash for $150. The least expensive TTL wireless flash available. With $1062 you have great body, decent lenses covering a very large range including macro, plus the flash too. Good luck

-- Yusuf Apsoro (y.a.r.apsoro@lr.tudelft.nl), May 13, 1999.

Roseblood wants '...a SLR that shot 4x5 rollfilm w/ a motordrive...' No problem, see here.

-- Alan Gibson (Alan.Gibson@technologist.com), May 13, 1999.

Fuji GW690 III and then crop, crop, crop.

-- rene (renequan@bigfoot.com), May 13, 1999.

Speed Graphic, flashgun, big box of flashbulbs, Tri-X.

-- John O'Connell (oconnell@siam.org), May 13, 1999.

I just wanted to thank those of you that took the time to respond to my moronic questions that started this thread. Outside of trying to learn more about the subtle complexity of photography itself, I've had extreme difficulty(despite huge web hours logged)in finding that middle ground of camera equipment that I (being a total novice) can actually learn how to take quality pictures with and have control over those subtle complexities that the modern automated cameras allow many of todays "experts" to take for granted, and therefore wouldn't know how to take a great picture if the camera's electronic components failed, or they were too afraid to use it in extreme environmental conditions. If a car speeding through a puddle gave your F100 or Eos 5 a bath, how much would you worry? Will many of these relatively expensive cameras be in use in complete working condition(without expert maintenance intervention) 20 years from now? I don't think so. But for different reasons, a whole lot of cameras from 20 years ago are not being used today. 1)First, relatively speaking, there didn't exist as many cameras/lenses/accessories options as there are today. 2)This is a fashion driven industry. Like the bell-bottoms and platform shoes of the 70's, most people don't want to be seen with outdated equipment.(I somewhat feel the same way myself). And 3)Most "picture takers" know little about the art of how to take a great picture.(A category I am trying to avoid). So a completely automated camera makes life easier for them. And as a result, the manual cameras take a back seat. Don't get me wrong. As an original Trekkie, and James Bond fanatic, I'm really a technology buff. But as we all know, the most fictional thing about the Bond movies is that all those cool gadgets always work when they were supposed to work. So, until I'm convinced that the expensive cameras with all of the "bells and whistles" can give a real photographer better picture quality(which goes hand in hand with TOTAL creative control over output), as well as reliability and durability comparable to the fully manual(and relatively inexpensive)capable cameras,(Don't hold your breath), I'll continue to look for a not too ancient manual camera(with good lens options). Or if I find a great deal(or get rich,rendering all this moot)on an auto with full manual capability, I'll go with that. Receiving recommendations encompassing the above was the goal of my attempt to get feedback from those of you in the know. I probably should not have used the random picture taking examples, and instead, just specified various and extreme conditions of sun and artificial light,focal ranges,distances,and motion shots. All this of course would be mostly a discussion on lenses(and film). Despite the many photography sites, I have yet to find a single place on the internet where I can go to get extensive feature and price/value comparisons, as far as info on a large amount of photo equipment including newer and older models,unused and especially used equipment from a variety of manufacturers. So I have no idea how much half the equipment I considering is really worth, and therefore wouldn't know a good from a bad deal. Hence my objective here. Anyway, thanks again to all those who gave their input (and those who took the time to read long babble). I hope I didn't offend anyone. God Bless. Darren.

-- Darren Harris (Searcher7@mail.con2.com), May 14, 1999.

These sites are great source of information:
Photozone at http://i31www.ira.uka.de/~klaus_s/
Photodo at http://www.photodo.com/
Good Luck

-- Yusuf Apsoro (y.a.r.apsoro@lr.tudelft.nl), May 14, 1999.

Darren,

2 simple questions:

Do you want to perform photography because a) you are attracted to photography itself or b) because you want to have nice pictures to remember and show around?

In case a) is your answer you need to spend the big bucks and buy new and high quality equipment (eventually used). If it is b) buy a well featured entry or mid level body and decent lenses to round-up your gear. I think you will find the better deals with Canon & Minolta.

How much time do you think you can spend for photography? a) You have plenty of time to spend; than it is worthwhile to follow that road all the way! b) If you intend to take only occasionally pictures while on vaccation or on weekendtrips make it as cheap&easy as possible and as good as necessary! You still can up-grade in case you get really hooked.

May be you should just borrow or rent some equipment before you take your trip. After the trip you will have a better picture of your needs. I spent 6 month with my uncle's equipment before I knew what I was going to buy.

-- Marcus Erne (cerne@ees.eesc.com), May 14, 1999.

Darren,

I am going to chime in because I think (maybe I am wrong) that you are assuming that a more complicated electronic camera is inherently less reliable than a manual camea. I know and know of many pros and serious amateurs who burn huge amounts of film, sometimes hundreds of rolls a month. They use bodies such as the F5, F4 and EOS1. Sometimes they even use lesser bodies such as N90s and ElanII. These bodies work well for them. These electronic bodies have a lot of quality built into them. While they are complicated they are also highly developed and tested. I would rather have a complicated F5 with all of its bells and whistles than the manual FM10 (not that the FM10 is bad or low quality). I believe that bodies like Nikon's F serios and the EOS1 have enough quality built in that you don't have to worry about it being less reliable than a manual body. In fact, I suspect some of thse manual bodies will fail before the F's do. Keep in mind that these bodies are also very well sealed against the elements. I doubt of the Cosina made FM10 is sealed as well. Somebody can correct me if I am wrong.

Finally, if you are worried about getting batteries in out of the way places, I suggest getting an N90s, F100 or F4. They use AA batteries which are easily available even in small towns. While the F5 may eat AA alkaline batteries like crazy, they will power the camera.

-- STanley Mcmanus (stanshooter@yahoo.com), May 14, 1999.

Despite all of my above comments I realize you are probably going to purchase a manual body due to the cost. If you do then I suggest an FM2n. And, please, please, please compare the cost of a clean used FM2 against the price of a grey market FM2 from a place like B&H. Several years ago I noticed that my local camera store was selling used FM2's for more than the grey market NEW price at B&H. And B&H had a better warranty also.

-- Stanley McManus (Stanshooter@yahoo.com), May 14, 1999.

Thanks a lot for your response. Going by what I've read on this photography site, and e-mails from different photography veterans. Like all other electronic equipment, the more features you pack into something, the more that can go wrong with it. Cameras would obviously be no different than anything else. And when something does go wrong on one of the cameras you mentioned, a higher degree of specialty equipment is needed to repair it. And maintenance is therefore more expensive, and difficult. There are enough threads in these forums to support that conclusion. So the ability to operate a camera(any camera)manually is very important. Also, like I said before. I novice like myself would not need all of the "bells and whistles" that someone like you prefer anyway.(Remember I'm in the introductory stage,and want to learn the basics). When I'm more knowledgeable in photography, I will then have a better understanding of what I what features I need and what system I prefer, as well as what new technology will be available at that time. (Providing the digital revolution doesn't leave the conventional cameras in the dust). So these are the reasons why a much cheaper manual camera is better suited for me. Darren. P.S; You specifically used the FM10 example to strengthen your point, when there are other manual cameras that are better. I could easily name some more automated cameras that didn't live up to expectations.(Or point out discussions of them on this site). Also, I'm looking into a Canon FTb-N from a veteran photographer. It appears to fill the requirements.

-- Darren Harris (Searcher7@mail.con2.com), May 16, 1999.