Does anyone besides me carry along a MF camera as part of your regular travel kit?

I do, it's the famous hasselblad SWC CT*, which BTW Hassy DID NOT improve in its latest new release!!!

Seems that the design is so good that it can't be improved on.

This was first designed in 1954! So, "old" lens design is not necessarily obsolete.

It does have a steep learning curve, though.

I'm keeping ALL of my chrome lenses, thank you.

-- chris chen (chrischen@msn.com), March 27, 2002

Answers

it was a trip to thailand last june with a rollei 6008i that made me buy a leica. it was too big and noisy and generally unwieldy. the results i got were good, but who knows what else i missed because of it). i think if i were to do it again i would try the 6x6 mamiya rangefinders. but i try to use one camera-to keep it simple.

-- john molloy (ballyscanlon@hotmail.com), March 27, 2002.

I don't use it often, but I have a Rolleicord Vb that I use for portraits when I know I'm going big. I chose this model because the Xenar lens seems to have much the same character as my early Leica glass, and I find I can intermingle prints and retain cohesion of look.

-- Bob Todrick (bobtodrick@yahoo.com), March 27, 2002.

I do have a Hasselblad outfit consisting of 2 503CX bodies, 40CFE, 50FLE, 80CF, 150CF and a 2xMutar and I use it whenever I am shooting mainly landscapes and long hikes are not required. I used to use an M4+21/3.4 along with the Blad before I bought the 40CFE, and I usually bring my Minilux just in case I want to do some casual shooting. I've also been known to tote my Rolleiflex along with a specialized 35mm wildlife outfit just in case a landscape pops up. But under no circumstances would I carry both 35 and MF at the same time...with backups and all it would be just too much gear to carry and keep track of, let alone the confusion at shooting time. BTW the 905SWC is supposed to have better internal antireflection treatment in the lens, as well as an improved shutter mainspring a la CFi lenses. I debated long and hard on the SWC vs 40FLE issue...until I actually tried them both. Optically I couldn't see any advantage to the Biogon (I don't do architecture or interiors with it)and the distorting, inaccurate finder and/or fussing with a GG back was just *way* more trouble, not to mention it doesn't have TTL flash.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), March 27, 2002.

Chris: It depends on the kind of traveling I'm doing... I used to do foreign travel everywhere with either a Mamiya 645 Pro with multiple backs, or two Mamiya 7's. I would then add my 4x5 for "domestic" travel. Now I use my Leicas almost exclusively for foreign travel, and add my Contax 645 for domestic destinations. (I sold the Mamiya 645 and 7's a few years back, and just recently got the C 645, and rarely bother with 4x5 any more)

Now, regarding your SWC... I am curious about your comment that the new one wasn't an improvement -- everybody I know that upgraded claims it was -- can you expand on that for me? I have been looking for an MF ultrawide (with better optics and much more compact than the 35 for the Contax) and the SWCM is one on my radar -- and I cannot justify the cost of the new version. I have also considered another M7 with the 43 attached, and in fact I wish I had kept that combo as it had superb optics -- it also has the bennefit of being Leica-like; a Plaubel "pro-shift"; and even a Linhof 612 with the 58 or 65 on it.

I would apprecitae your and others comments on this.

Thanks,

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), March 27, 2002.

My normal travel kit consists of 2 screw mount Leicas with 6 lenses. I'll usually also carry a Rolleiflex TLR or (less frequently) a Kodak Medalist II. When I'm out shooting, I'll carry either the Leica kit or thye MF camera (most often with a tripod, for landscapes, w/MF). NEVER both--my back couldn't take it!

-- Robert Marvin (marvbej@earthlink.net), March 27, 2002.

Jack, The comment of not being able to improve performance comes from Hasselblad themselves, specifically Kornelius Fleischer (sp?); it's on their web-site. It is also within Photo.net MF forum. It seems Hassy went to enviro-friendly processes to produce glass that did not involve lead or arsenic. While true, Hassy claims a better/stronger shutter and anti-reflectant internal surfaces, OPTICALLY, it wasn't improved:

Lower central performance in return for better edge performance. If I remember correctly.

As to price: I use the version previous to the CF (which I also have) because I find it a slightly more compact all metal construction; and it has a self timer for under $2000. It is one cool camera.

-- chris chen (chrischen@msn.com), March 27, 2002.

??The older SW has a self timer? Didn't know that.

-- Charles (c.mason@uaf.edu), March 27, 2002.

Chris: Thanks!

Jay: How do you filter the FLE, specifically with SND's? This is similar to one big issue I have with the 35 for my Contax; it takes E95 filters...

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), March 27, 2002.

I have an old Hasselblad 500CM with 50, 80 and 150 chrome lenses (2 are T*). It is a great camera, but I do not carry it with my Leica if I can help it. It gets too confusing. Great camera, but processing is always an issue as is printing with MF, so I use it much less than I thought I would when I got it. I use it for weddings, landscapes and "arty" pictures. I would like the SWC. I too am not convinced there are any really substantial differences between the old T* lenses and the current set whatever Zeiss/Hasselblad say. (FLE is maybe an exception) but obviously I have not exhaustively tested them. A beautiful camera that takes wondeful pictures. I virtually always use mine on a tripod or monopod, so it is a different ballgame to the Leica.

There is much less to say about many MF optics as most of the Zeiss or Mamiya designs are reasonably old. I assume there is not sufficient demand for them to be updated optically speaking, given the numbers sold.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), March 27, 2002.

I carry a Rolleiflex 2.8F in addition to my leica kit (m4-p w/ 35 summicron asph + 50 summicron dual range; R6.9 w. 90mm summicron). I use the TLR for portraits and scenes where i'm not in as much of a hurry. I have a lot of fun using the Rolleiflex, and it is a key part of my kit (although i need to use it more). I also like having it along because i like the option of composing in a square where appropriate. Additionally, when I get a flash, flash sinc at 1/500 will be another benefit of using the rolleiflex.

jeremyT www.lifeinblue.com

-- jeremyT (jerthomas@earthlink.net), March 27, 2002.

I've successfully used a Super Ikonta B as a medium format traveling companion (it's now being CLA'ed). Bertele's 21mm Biogon design is a indeed a classic. I occasionally carry around a "mini SWC" outfit--the original 21/4.5 CZ Biogon (c.1955) semi-permanently mounted on 1 of my Contax IIa's--but have yet to master the superwide viewpoint.

-- Chris Chen (Wash., DC) (furcafe@NOSPAMcris.com), March 27, 2002.

Chris:

While I don't travel with MF gear, I do use it occasionally. My choices are the Pentax 67 with 55mm, 105mm and 200mm lenses and a Rolleiflex 3.5E with the Planar lens. The Pentax makes great big 6x7cm negs and is noisy and heavy. The Rollei makes great big 6x6cm negs, is light, quiet and not conducive to action. I just sold my Hassy 500C/M. My actual travel kit is a Nikon FM2n w/28 and 50mm Lenses. I have travelled in Britain with my M6 and a 35mm 'Cron., but I was too careful with it. Good question, by the way.

Ben

-- Ben Hughes (ben@hughesbros.com), March 27, 2002.

I sometimes take myonly Leica-rival with me, a chinese camera 'great wall DF-4'. Why Leica-rival ? Because it has a sturdiness that reminds you of leica, about the same age and most important, accepts leica screw mount lenses !!!
Unfortunately the lens-to-film distance is quite different, so the only distance you might find an original Leica lens useful is that of some cm.
It is quite an odd-looking 6x6 SLR (including a 645 mask), with a coated 90/3.5 lens that I got very cheap (35$). Still takes nice pictures and forces you to work very careful:

-- Kai Blanke (kai.blanke@iname.com), March 27, 2002.

It's in my small bag w/M6 & 35 or 50 'cron, so I meter w/M6 and shoot with both. The front flap of the bag holds my Minolte Flashmeter III. I carry an M3 with the 35 or 50 that is not on the M6 in a separate bag solo, and occasionally the 90 TE in my pocket, that's it.

I have the 21 SA, but it gets less-and-less use. I would use it more if I can find that darn rear cap. Basically, it's "welded" to my M4 for that reason, and doesn't get carried.

-- chris chen (chrischen@msn.com), March 27, 2002.

I am proud to say that I am one of the few people on earth who uses a graflex xlsw ( with pistol grip and sport finder ! ) . If I could afford it , I would get the plaubel makina pro shift as a replacement .

-- leonid (kotlyarl@mail.nih.gov), March 27, 2002.

A $60 Yashica D TLR is my MF travel camera. It has an old Gossen Pilot meter in the shoe. Kind of clunky, but it is light and takes nice photos. Love those big square negatives.

-- John (johnfleetwood@hotmail.com), March 27, 2002.

Besides my Leica M's, I always carry my Rolei 2.8F Planar TLR. It takes up a lot less room than my Hasselblad and is certainly more quiet and is razor sharp. F. William Baker

-- F. William Baker (atelfwb@aol.com), March 27, 2002.

I occasionally carry a medium format camera along with my other gear in a travel kit. No longer an SLR, sometimes a Rolleiflex TLR, a Super Ikonta folder or a Fuji GA645.

I'd love a Hassy SuperWide, have always wanted one. Love that lens.

Godfrey

-- Godfrey (ramarren@bayarea.net), March 27, 2002.

Had a ROLLEIFLEX SL 66 SE (with only a 80 mm lens) for the last 5 years alongside my LEICA gear. After usinng it less and less I sold it two weeks ago. So far without regretting it at all. But I do not need my photography to make my living. Professional equipment should inclide larger format cameras. And digital by now IŽam afraid.

Best wishes

-- K. G. Wolf (k.g.wolf@web.de), March 27, 2002.

Someday...!

I haven't used MF since I went to digital darkroom - no scanner. Even a $60 Yashica-D would cost me $3060 - since I'd also have to buy a scanner that handles 6x6. 8^(

Sold my last MF - Kowa and 3 lenses - to get my first pro-grade inkjet printer.

Once I get the Leica/35mm system stabilized I'll look into it. Probably I'll end up with a Rollei TLR - but possibly a not-too-recent SWC if I can find one for $2000 or so.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), March 27, 2002.

I used Rolleiflex3.5F quite often when I lived in New York. It's much quieter than my M2, most of time I can aim at people directly without being noticed with the waist level finder and quieter shutter. The problem is it's size and the square format, also hard to make it exact level when doing grab shot. Even with lens hood on, I got flare problem often. I don't do it any more, Leica M is a more convenient tool for weekend amateurs like me, especially in California. For resolution, just take a look of Salgado's work, enlargement to 30 or 36 is not an issue for 35mm film.

-- Fred Ouyang (yo54@columbia.edu), March 27, 2002.

I use a Pentax 645 system in addition to Leicas (and a few other things), but I tend to leave it at home unless I have good reason to believe I'll use it. I don't have a "regular travel kit"--my expected needs tend to dictate what I carry.

-- Mike Dixon (mike@mikedixonphotography.com), March 27, 2002.

I shoot in the main with either a Hasselblad 500cm and three lenses, 60/100/180 or a Mamiya 7 and two lenses, 43 & 65 and sometimes all together with maybe an M6 or two as well, just depends on the assignment. I certainly agree with comments on the quality of the SWC Hassy having owned 3 of them but don,t rule out the Mamiya 7 with 43mm as it,s actually at least the equal optically with an extra cm!! There is a difference in colour rendition however, but both are great.

-- Gary Yeowell (gary@yeowell.fsnet.co.uk), March 27, 2002.

1955-era Rolleiflex TLR with a great 75mm f/3.5 Xenar lens. I also use the 35mm adapter called the Rolleikin.

-- Steve Brantley (sbrantley@nccommerce.com), March 27, 2002.

It depends... :-)

For overseas travel I generally carry some combination of a Mamiya M7 (65/150), M4-P (35/50/90) or a Contax TVS. I once hauled along a 4x5 to Mexico. It was far too much work to manage.

For travel in the U.S. my travel kit consists of anything from the Contax TVS, Leica, Pentax 645, Mamaya M7 to 4x5 and 8x10 kits. What I take depends on what I want to accomplish, where I'm going, how I'm getting there and how much time I have at that location.

-- Sven Sampson (ssampson@inreach.com), March 27, 2002.

Ever since I got it last year, my Plaubel Makina 670 is part of my travel kit. It folds flat and I don't think twice before packing it.

-- Mani Sitaraman (bindumani@pacific.net.sg), March 27, 2002.

I use a limited Hasselblad kit to augment my Leica M. However, I added a SWC/M and really like the camera but I bought it before Sept. 11 (actually was sending a money order for the film back in the AM of Sept. 11th) and find little joy in trying to bring an extensive amount of camera equipment through air security nowadays. I used to use a 4x5 but the bulk (not really the weight) was getting a bit much for the hiking I like to do so I converted to the 2 and 1/4 system. I picked up a 501c/m with an 80 and a 160 and added the SWC. The outfit fits in a modest pack (lowe pro minitrekker) for day hikes and provides about the right amount of diversity for my usual hiking/landscape photography.

I used part of the kit on a post 9/11 trip and was amazed that at one airport it did not raise an eyebrow (and I did see it on x-ray and is looks odd to me, I cannot believe that the screeners know what a SWC is) but at another I might as well have been a terrorists first cousin.

I have had better luck traveling with a modest leica set but asking for a handcheck of film is another thing. Since I designed the MF kit for air travel to areas with mountains (as opposed to Kansas City where I am) and since I am still wanting to fly to these areas and want as little hassel as possible in doing so I am thinking strongly about just using my leica set and eventually converting the MF set to leica stuff. I like the tonal range of the MF film but I like my 35mm results also.

If any of the folks on this topic want to inquire about my MF items I could be talked into parting with them I suspect.

RObert

-- Robert Ardinger (rardinger@kc.rr.comr), March 27, 2002.

I shoot medium format using a Holga. No complaints so far.

-- Alfie Wang (leica_phile@hotmail.com), March 27, 2002.

As far as I know, the 905SWC optical design is unchanged, but the new glass type is different. Also, the new main shutter spring is more durable. Probably lasts for 100 years instead of just 50. I am still dreaming about SWC but am contemplating about the cost. I bought a 15 mm Heliar for the Leica to try whether I really like the ultrawide view before spending my life savings on SWC.

I often use either XPan, which is kind of MF camera, or Fuji 645. The reason I bought the M6 was precisely to have a mechanical back up for these otherwise wonderfull, but fully electronic cameras.

Last time I travelled around Malaysia I carried a 4x5" field camera in addition to the M6.

Ilkka

-- Ilkka Kuusisto (ikuu65@hotmail.com), March 27, 2002.

I got into MF a couple of years ago with the Yashicamat 124G, and switched to a Bronica ETRSi last summer. Used, they are great value in the 645 format. Image quality is excellent. Perhaps more suited to landscape photography than a rangefinder. But it has languished in the cupboard since I took the plunge into Leica ownership. It's still pretty big and clumsy. Definitely noisy. Absolutely necessary to use a tripod and mirror lock-up. But I haven't written it off yet. I'm not sure whether the marginal increase over 35mm format compared with 6x7 is worthwhile. Now I'm comfortable with using a rangefinder, the Mamiya 7 looks more practical. But I don't think I could justify 2 sets of $$$ lenses to the better half!

-- Stuart Dorman (stuart.dorman@us.pwcglobal.com), March 27, 2002.

I used to travel with a Mamiya 6 with all three lenses. It really is the MF equivalent of the Leica M6. Great camera and very sharp lenses. Later I realized that MF really added no advantages for me over 35mm for my style of photography so I sold it. I kind of wish I had kept it (sound familiar?).

-- Steve Rosenblum (stevierose@yahoo.com), March 27, 2002.

I also use the SWC (non-T*); 500CM with 60mm, 100mm, and 150mm lenses. I like it mostly for black & white; though with my newer Leica lenses I can do an 11 x 14 that rivals the results I get with the Hassie. I like to use the Hassie hand-held, but will use it on a tripod prn. I like it with the chimmney finder or the 45 degree PME prism.

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), March 27, 2002.

I sold ALL my MF gear (Hassleblad & Pentax 645) after I started using a Leica M again. And, I have no regrets!!!

I do love the image quality that comes with those nice big MF negatives, but I don't like using tripods enough to maximize the format. So, the Leica M seems to be the best gear for my approach to photography.

-- Ken Prager (pragerproperties@worldnet.att.net), March 27, 2002.

When I go shooting I either shoot My Leicas OR Medium format, not both. For me they are different types of photography requiring different states of mind and very different technique. However when traveling I take both medium format, usually a Rollei TLR 3.5E, a Brooks Veriwide 100, and my Leica gear. Then when I get up and go to shoot I choose 1 system or another. Recently I have felt "Guilty" about not choosing the leica, but rather the Rollei TLR. Anybody know a good shrink!

-- John Elder (celder2162@aol.com), March 27, 2002.

Here's another Rollei shooter. Just got back from 2 wks in China, and in my Domke F6: M6TTL, 90/2.8, 35/2A, Rollei Automat (Xenar 3.5), Hexar AF, some old flash (never used), table top tripod (used 2x), extra battery, filters, cable release. And a bunch o' film. The Rollei was for scenics. The bag was a bit heavy for my taste, but overall I think it was a good kit... depending on how everything turns out, I'd probably go with it again.

-- TW (tsesung@yahoo.com), March 28, 2002.

No. I travel with an extra M body, tripod and slow film instead of carrying a second system and film.

For hand-held "candid" stuff an M body with fast film.

Close to home if I go hiking in the Rockies, I use 4x5 just for the hell of it, a change is always good. I appreciate and enjoy both formats, as well as the different subject matter.

-- Hans Berkhout (berkhout@cadvision.com), March 28, 2002.

I like em small,quiet,all mechanical when traveling.That means Leica,Brooks veriwide (6x10 ultrawide which is not much bigger than an m6),And of course ..All TLR's!Maybe next time though a Anba 5x7...only 3.5 lbs!

-- Emile de Leon (knightpeople@msn.com), March 28, 2002.

I use a Superwide and a Rollei as well but I only travel with them when I know what where and when I am going to shoot and they are always on a tripod. For the walk around with a Lonely Planet guide book type of photography I use an EOS 3 with a sole 28-135 IS zoom, M6 and two lenses.

-- ray tai (razerx@netvigator.com), March 28, 2002.

I used to carry either a Hassy or Bronica.I never hardly used them too much fussing.Unless you a really going super large i cannot see much point.

-- Allen Herbert (allen1@btinternet.com), March 28, 2002.

As I am technically homeless (home is where the hard hat is), I either take what I MAY need or it gets put into storage. I have only spent one week in Houston the last 1.5 years and didn't want to unload my storage unit to get to the e tool box in the center where my photo equip is located. So, I don't have the option of customized kits "depending" upon the situation of what/where/why/when/how I am going to shoot.

I NEED:

SWC

M6 + 35

M3 + 50

90 TE

Handheld Meter

Misc. Access.

At Least.

-- chris chen (chrischen@msn.com), March 28, 2002.

Why Chris

Just why,what are you really doing that needs all that gear.I am just q.

-- Allen Herbert (allen1@btinternet.com), March 28, 2002.

Two M's three M lenses and a SWC + meter is A LOT of equip? I don't think so.

-- chris chen (chrischen@msn.com), March 28, 2002.

I also subtracted M4 + 21 SA because I can't find rear cap for the lens and the M4 broke. It also "duplicates" the SWC coverage.

I need two M's, see comment above.

Added the 50 and 90 because of some missed opportuntities. 50 on M3 fits solo in a small strapped pouch, 90 doesn't, it goes in my pocket.

SWC is a MUST HAVE for me.

-- chris chen (chrischen@msn.com), March 28, 2002.

Okay got the point but you did say......At Least.

-- Allen Herbert (allen1@btinternet.com), March 28, 2002.

I'm glad someone mentioned the Plaubel Makina cameras - sort of very small (c. 1980) versions of the present-day Mamiya 7 with fixed lenses.

I just wish there was a Makina-sized SQUARE camera, with a normal or wide-angle lens. I just like the feeling of the square image (Irving Penn, Diane Arbus, Ralph Meatyard). The 6x7/6x4.5 ideal formats just doesn't send me - I prefer the dynamism of 24x36 or the perfect symmetry of the square.

The Mamiya 6 was just a little too big - and while the old Zeiss Ikonta Bs are the right size, I'd just like modern lens design/coatings and repairability.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), March 30, 2002.