Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/10/07
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]tina, the original post described a huge kit and called it a "conservative" outfit for serious amateur or professional. I begged to differ, although i have every confidence that there are people like yourself who need all that, and more. My standard travel kit is designed to be easily carried on planes and allow me to handle 90 percent of all situations, but i freely admit I don't seek out ALL possible situations, being just a serious amateur and more street shooter than anything else. I always carry spare batteries, but they last a very long time in those cameras. My shoulder bag holds a half dozen rolls of film, the rest goes into the carry on bag i'm also allowed. I took 30 rolls to italy for two weeks and damn near shot it all. I also have every confidence that there are many, many people on this list hauling around far more than they need. You are the exception, I am sure you need it all for your work, and I do not envy you at all. On the other hand, I see what the photogs at my newspaper carry around, and I also see that the result the achieve is not all that much better -- in fact less so in many cases -- than the work turned in 20 years ago by people carrying a hell of a lot less. Our former photo editor Dave Labelle, now somewhere else but quite famous in photojournalism circles, did marvelous work with a Nikon FM, as I recall, and one or two lenses. He had a marvelous eye. I cannot get away from the idea that too many people are equipment-dependent, mostly because the photojournalism I see seems to be less good, not more. I have not seen yours, so do not include you in this. That asthamtic german didn't have to haul it on a plane, but he DID have to haul a camera on long hikes in the German mountains. The pocketable Leica was his answer. He turned in some pretty good work, too. If i were working professionally (which, thank goodness, I am not, and never hope to) I'd hope it was on my terms so I wouldn't be required to haul all that bumpf you have to (which is why I don't shoot professionally). I'd almost certainly take the M2 or 3 instead of the CL, or perhaps in addition to it, or maybe even go nuts and take the R3 outfit. But I also have every confidence that, if sent on a trip for a month and all I had to shoot with was my little Olympus XA, that I could turn in a very creditable performance, lack of macro shots not withstanding. I used it alone in my son's recent wedding and, while the pro we hired kicked my butt on the formal shots, I was far and away superior on the candids. I had to use the XA because I was in the wedding party and they wouldn't let me carry anything that showed. thanks, travel safely charles trentelman In a message dated 10/7/04 7:49:10 PM, lug-request@leica-users.org writes: > >Also amazing how good your pictures get when you > >quit depending on equipment to do the job and start using the computer > lodged > >between your ears. > > When you are gone on an assignment for a month and are expected to come > back with the photos, you have to have a certain minimum of cameras, lenses > and film - which is what I try to carry - and which weighs more than you > can carry on a plane today.? And I carry much, much less than most > professional photographers.? No lights, no flash, no telephoto lenses, no > tripods. > > >standard travel kit: CL and four lenses (15 to 90) in a shoulder bag. > Olympus > >XA as backup. > > And the film and batteries?? If the CL jams, will the Olympus give you the > options you need for the job?? What if you need a macro lens?? If you don't > travel by air, carrying photographic equipment is simple.? It's when you > add the security and weight problems that have been imposed in the last few > years that you run into problems. > > Tina > > > Tina Manley, ASMP > www.tinamanley.com >