Film the choice for epic horse trek

[NZDavid]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

What kind of camera would you take on a three year epic trek on horseback across the wild steppes of Eurasia from Mongolia to Hungary? I have just finished reading On The Trail of Genghis Khan -- An Epic Journey Through The Land of The Nomads, by young Australian adventurer Tim Cope. Not only was his three-year journey extremely grueling (battling horse thieves, possible wolf attacks, illness, and minus 50C to plus 50C temperature extremes), it also provides a remarkable insight into fascinating cultures and history.

 

I also heard Tim Cope give a talk about his trip. I forgot to ask him what type of camera he took, but from the pictures I saw of him in action it looks like a rangefinder. He also shot some video footage. Although a cinematographer joined him for the final part of the journey, Cope did the rest of the photography by himself, and used a self-timer. He shot Fuji slide film and didn't see the results for two and a half years! You can see some of his pictures here: Tim Cope Journeys

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[250swb]

A Nikon F2, and supplement it by buying cheap P&S digital camera's along the way, to use for colour, gifts, and things to be stolen (hopefully leaving the Nikon alone). If batteries were not going to be a problem (they could be air dropped or sent ahead maybe) then I'd forget the Nikon and take an Olympus OM4Ti (the finest SLR camera and lens system ever made).

 

Steve

[pico]

In my humble opinion, a battery-free Leica rangefinder would be best. A thoroughly CLAd M4, M4-P would be best. My opinion is drawn from the experiences of a veteran National Geographic (NG) photographer friend who used them in the field for over twenty years. Typical of his assignments were remote desert sites, archeology expeditions and sea voyages. He is very rough on his hear putting 'being there' in hazardous situations ahead of gear protection. (Among other assignments, he was the photographer who covered Donald Johanson's expedition when he found Lucy, the oldest hominid find of the time.

[stevesurf]

+1 on Nikon F2, and even consider F3HP or FE.

I would also have a small CLAd manual Leica (my preference is MP or even M7 with lots of batteries), all of these except MP are available at relatively low cost in the used market.

 

I think the mailer idea is great and I would even consider one of those "instant" print cameras, but batteries are an issue.

 

Don't forget a light plastic Pelican case for both bodies.

[sblitz]

I am with Pico on this one ..... M4, toughest camera out there and all you need is film.

[NZDavid]

I checked on Tim's site on what Gear he used.

 

He took a Nikon F80 plus 24-120 lens, as well as a modest Canon A80 digital camera and a Sony PD 100 video camera.

 

If it were me, would concur with the choice of a Leica battery-less camera, such as M2, M3, M4, or M6. The 50 lens would be my go-to lens, plus a 24, 35, or 90, But maybe just two lenses.

 

I would now also probably take the M9 or M with weatherproofing, but for a long journey in such adverse conditions, film would still be mighty handy. A solar charger for the M9 battery would come in handy and make the camera more rugged.

 

Oh yes, and he used a mix of Astia, Provia, and Velvia. So who needs 12000-plus ISO?

[FrozenInTime]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks for the links - I ordered his book as I love this type of journey; though the most adventurous I've ever got is several weeks cycling NZ ( A'h the steak and cheese pies )

 

Given he started the journey in 2004, he was amazingly advanced - film camera, digital camera,laptop amd satellite phone/data.

 

It reminds me of my all time favourite travel '80s adventure - Richard and Nicholas Crane - who cycled unsupported from Bangladesh to the 'center of the Earth' in China.

They took Pentax MX cameras - which were popular back then so when one failed a MEsuper was bought from a tourist.

The Crane brothers took a Narga SN reel-reel 'spy' tape recorder and passed the recorded tapes back via tourists to the BBC for broadcast on radio 4 - I would love to hear those again.

 

If I had the courage to take such a journey, I would take a M Monochrom with all Zeiss lens line up 21/4,5,35/2,8 and 85/4 plus a Ricoh GR and sealine drybags for the water/dust.

 

I would have chosen my trusty M6 and Fuji 400H n the past, but these days finding SD cards or a USB charging port is going to be a lot easier than finding any film let alone your choice of film.

Given the spread of the global phone network, an iphone would now suffice for web sized uplinks and video/audio blogging.

[250swb]

So the real explorer chose something very close to what I suggested

 

I think an M4 and a bag full of lenses is a fine idea if you are on an expedition and your only job is to be the photographer. Not withstanding that you don't have the option of a longer telephoto lens, so you'd better hope nothing looks interesting in the distance. The 'trip of a lifetime' deserves better planning than just taking something that is tough and simple. A pinhole camera does that even better than an M4. But the simple fact is that he was multi tasking, one task being to stay alive, look after his horses, and find his way, and on a hourly/daily basis photography probably came second or third as a priority. I think in choosing to take an M4 and a bag of lenses, stopping to change them, generally faffing about cleaning them, and some people may end up looking very similar to the mummified camel corpses seen in the Gobi desert. It's a plan that hasn't been thought through, a romantic dream.

 

Steve

[AlanG]

These days, some explorers are carrying more unusual equipment to document their journeys.

 

[FrozenInTime]

These days, some explorers are carrying more unusual equipment to document their journeys.

 

 

Certainly gives a different perspective.

[NZDavid]

So the real explorer chose something very close to what I suggested

 

I think an M4 and a bag full of lenses is a fine idea if you are on an expedition and your only job is to be the photographer. Not withstanding that you don't have the option of a longer telephoto lens, so you'd better hope nothing looks interesting in the distance. The 'trip of a lifetime' deserves better planning than just taking something that is tough and simple. A pinhole camera does that even better than an M4. But the simple fact is that he was multi tasking, one task being to stay alive, look after his horses, and find his way, and on a hourly/daily basis photography probably came second or third as a priority. I think in choosing to take an M4 and a bag of lenses, stopping to change them, generally faffing about cleaning them, and some people may end up looking very similar to the mummified camel corpses seen in the Gobi desert. It's a plan that hasn't been thought through, a romantic dream.

 

Steve

 

Steve, you are absolutely right, Tim had a tough time just completing the journey. But if you have a look at his pictures, some of his best are close up, with people, often in adverse lighting conditions, like inside a yurt. One pic shows a tiny baby tucked up snuggly in saddle bag being transported by camel. The Mongolians entrust their most precious cargo to their animals.

 

There are not many distant shots which would have necessitated a tele -- a few close-ups of animals. Most could have been taken with a 50mm, the kind of photography at which Leica cameras excel.

 

Tim also had to set up a tripod and use a self-timer for some shots (so that precludes those Leicas without self-timers for a hypothetical choice). For the cover shot of him riding onto the mountains, he had to set up the camera, then dash back and jump on his horse. He said there were quite a few frames of him half way up the horse!

[Doc Henry]

David also try some b&w Kodak TX400 or Acros Fuji , Kodak Portra (KP) 400 (which I find very similar to the colors

of the M9 and 8) and KP 160 for portraits.

Film is not dead

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/other/286747-i-like-film-open-thread.html

 

Good trip and good photos

Kind regards

Henry

[NZDavid]

A belated reply. Thanks Doc, but it is not I who am going; I was just commenting on a trip by a young Aussie adventurer. I must confess to an increasing fondness for comfort these days!

 

Interesting re Portra 400 and the colors of the M8/M9. I would ant something reliable, and 400 ISO would be the go-to film speed.

 

One of the main threats to taking film into a remote country may still be potential damage caused by intense X-ray machines at airports and border crossings.

[Doc Henry]

Hi David,

Thanks for your reply

I have brand Hama anti X-ray pockets (made of lead) to put film inside.

You have more pictures of KP 400 and 160 Isos in this link :

Doc Henry

(To enlarge the photos, please click on the top, middle and right icon)

 

"Interesting re Portra 400 and the colors of the M8/M9"

This is Erwin Puts who said that the color of the M9 is like the colors of the

Kodak Portra "vivid" for M9 and "neutral" for M240

Best

Henry

[A miller]

A film camera would be nice, but how realistic is it on a 3-yr journey to a place far away that is not likely to have a photo district where one can restock on professional film?? One would need to probably pack a separate suitcase just for 3-yrs worth of film. I recall learning about how the old Magnum photographers used to do it, which is that they would have large containers of film rolls shipped to them and they would transfer portions of the film to small containers at night for their use during the next day. HCB finally got sick of this and insisted that regular film rolls be shipped to him, which it sounded like only a professional of his stature could get away with given the extra costs involved.

 

I shot over 1500 exposures on my recent 26-day trip abroad. I can't fathom what I would shoot over a 3-yr period to very protogenic places. Even at 1500 exposures, that translates into about 42 rolls of film. The cost of the film and professional development on this would run about $1000. And this is just a single month!

 

Unless a solution for the film can be found, I'd vote for the M9 (which I have) or M240 (which I don't have, but mention for obvious reasons). I agree with Doc that the M9 renders a lot like real film. So in a sense it allows you to eat your own cake.

 

I would recommend a 28mm for landscapes and either/both 35mm or 50mm. I wouldn't bring anything longer than this. I brought my 90mm on my trip and only used it once and it was only for a couple of snaps and I forced myself to do it.

[alan c. davis]

Not having read the book yet (but thanks David I intend to order it), I can see why he chose a film camera. Considering the ares he was travelling through, what where the chances of him charging his digital batteries every night? Mine and Buckleys.

[NZDavid]

Tim said charging was a problem, mainly for his satellite phone. He could use a portable generator but at one of the places he stayed he drained the battery, which meant his hosts missed out on a night's TV, beamed in from faraway.

 

Bags of film would be a hassle. One or two tiny SD cards would hold that many exposures. I agree about keeping it minimal, but with backup.