Camera for Africa trip

[Robert Bowring]

I would take a Mamiya 6 or Mamiya 7 or maybe a Pentax 6x7. There are good lenses available for all of them and they easy to travel with.

[Drew Wiley]

If you need some telephoto reach for wildlife, a basic Pentax 6x7 SLR system is something already having high repute in Africa photography. I often travel with one of those for tripod or otherwise supported tele work, along with a Fuji 6X9 rangefinder with a 90mm lens for quicker handheld or tripod wider angle shots. Both can be had for less than the cost of a Mamiya 7, which has a far more limited selection of focal lengths than a P67, but would be a much lighter weight more compact package.

[Tim Meisburger]

That's an excellent choice. I have used them for years. I had the early Model IIIs and they developed cracks in the plastic bodies. I replaced them with the all metal Model IIs and have been very happy with them. Looks like the cracking problem has been solved on later IIIs but be careful.

Thanks. I'll keep that in mind as I shop.

[Tim Meisburger]

Excellent cameras. I've used them all from the interchangeable lens models to the 6x7,6x8,6x9 both 90mm & 65. Sharp lenses and reliable cameras.

Nice! I'm interested in the earlier models because its quite tempting to have a longer lens for portraits. I looked at the other formats online, and for some reason they are all much more expensive than the 6x9. I'm not really worried about the cost of film for a 6x9, as its nothing compared to the cost of the trip, so I would feel pretty comfortable shooting 6x9 images I intend to print square.

[Tim Meisburger]

Will you be needing a telephoto for the Ostrich shot?

No. I'll just chase them...

[Tim Meisburger]

I worry about transporting sheet film. If at an airport someone insists on opening it up to check it, that's it for the film. For medium format a lighter camera like Plaubel Makina, Mamiya 7 or Bronica RF645 are good travel choices.

These would be good, but I would rather have something less expensive for a trip like this.

[Tim Meisburger]

Also at the risk of being excommunicated I might suggest taking a small "Bridge" digital camera that has Image stabilization and the ability to zoom way in for Wildlife shots and a smaller Medium Format film camera for landscapes and other shots. If you don't care about wildlife shots a film camera is all you need.

Yes. I suspect my wife will take a SLR with a 200 zoom and I'll pick up a 2x teleconverter for birds and such, but don't really care that much. A lot of the fun I have is printing, so a good negative is important (I don't have a color printer, and my scanner is too old to work with my current computer!)

[Tim Meisburger]

I don’t shoot large format just for the larger negative. Regardless of the “negatives” people typically note, if you shoot large format for the experience then take that. For me it’s become a dedication to the craft, a way of life. Look at all the images that were taken back when photography was in its infancy, amazing images with very demanding conditions and equipment.

I agree. But in this case the dedication to the craft conflicts with the family agenda. If I were going alone, I would certainly only shoot 4x5.

[angusparker]

Anyone have experience with the Fuji GW690? Its 6x9 and has (I think) a fixed 90mm lens. I assume that is a normal lens for 6x9? Seems like something like that would give me some good negative, and decomplicate my life.

Can’t say good enough things about this camera, also called the Texas Leica! I have the Mark III version along with the GSW690 a wider companion fixed lens camera. The only downsides are that it is fully manual (no built in meter) so you need a separate meter, and the rangefinder patch isn’t super big or bright but it will suffice. The modern update, the Fujifilm GF670 with built in meter and improved rangefinder is a step up but even second hand its 2 or 3 times the cost of the GW690, plus I much prefer the 6x9 format over 6x7 since you have more optionality even if you burn up more film as a consequence.

[Vaughn]

...I'm thinking if I take something it needs to be relatively rugged and something I will not cry to much about if it gets lost. So, a rangefinder might make sense. A Wista would be rugged, and quick to deploy, and can be had for around $400 without a rangefinder. I was also thinking about a Busch Pressman, as I've seen them for less than $200. Then I could take a relatively cheap 90mm for landscapes, and a 150mm for general and portraits with the rangefinder. ...

The tool forms the user as much as the user forms with the tool. So it is an important choice, and much depends on the type/look of the images one would like to make. For example, movements allow for more possibilities in image management (image-creating). I am biased in this direction, so if weight, time, patience of fellow traveler(s), etc don't out weigh having camera movements, I take LF. A recent month visit to Japan w/ my two boys, I took the Rolleicord. A previous month-long camping trip in Southern Chile w/ my two boys I took the 5x7 (in 2019). Different experiences, different tools.

A possible compromise would be a light 4x5 or even smaller view camera with a couple 120 roll backs (or three...for different films and/or formats) . Perhaps a 65mm/135mm/210mm lens combo.