When I last went out of town on a combined buisness/pleasure trip I carried
3 different camera bodies representing 2 formats and 7-8 lenses, a flash
unit, pc cord, 6-8 filters, 2 tripods, a clampod, winder, light meter,
cleaning gear, spare batteries, vast quantities of film. All in all my
jumbo sized shoulder bag plus additional dedicated med. format luggage
couldn't even carry it all and each day I had to decide between med. format
and jumbo OM kit. That recent trip was an interesting learning experience.
I started wondering why carrying what has been lauded as one of the
smallest of SLR cameras was causing bursitis in my shoulder. Clearly I was
doing something very wrong.
Since then I've started a photojournalism course (just for fun) and my
ideas of a carry kit reflect some of the things I've learned from the last
couple vacations as well as plenty of around town & country ventures. Today
I just got in from a photo interview with a horse enthusiast.
My "assignment package" consists of an OM-4 w/winder 2, a Sunpak 383 flash,
a single Zuiko 28/2.8 MC, a circular polarizer, 2 rolls of either Tri-X 400
_or_ 2 rolls of Iford HP5+. That and a tripod. Period. That's just for a
"shoot this assignment for today" type scenario. (OK, sometimes I put
either a Yellow or Green #11 filter into my shirtpocket.)
Sure, I often still have the jumbo Lowepro Nova 5 shoulderbag with backup
OM1n and 6-8 more lenses from 19mm to 500mm, from macro to tele. in the
car. But the more that I use and appreciate the 28/2.8, the less inclined
I am to immediately assume that I'll need more. When one of the instructors
first mentioned that he shoots the bulk of his work with a 24mm and an
18mm, frankly I thought him a bit odd. But the more I get used to the
merits of the 28, the more I think I might eventually get a 24mm. I'm not
at all suggesting that these wide angles are the mythical ideal focal
length or perfect for every situation. Rather, I'm just saying that for
"get the interview" or "do a photo essay" type things, they make life
easier due to greater depths of field, more coverage and the ability to get
up close and personal and their inate ability to tolerate handheld shots at
lower shutter speeds and less critical focusing. When I started this, I'd
assumed that my tele-zooms and/or 135mm would be getting a workout, since
they're more often thought of in terms of portrature. Quite the contrary
has wound up happening so far.
At the moment, I can't think of too much that would fall under the category
of routine documentary type stuff that couldn't be done with a battery
consisting of just a 28mm/2.8, a 50 macro, (for those odd occasions) and a
100/2.8. There are occasions when other focal lengths would come in handy,
but I can't imagine too many scenarios were their lack would mean the
complete absence of printable images. (Assuming we're not even talking
about long distance wildlife photos and that ilk.)
I'm still very much learning this craft and would appreciate comments from
those who've tried this approach and found it lacking.
Thanks,
Mike Swaim
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|