vacation pix in the digital age
While trying to talk myself into buying some of the new equipment Canon is releasing this month, I pause to reflect on how far 35mm photography has come within my lifetime.
Consider:
The 1982 edition of Travel Photography from the Life Library of Photography has a chapter called “Keeping the Load Light but Complete”. It describes a travel photography kit that offers a balance between flexibility and portability:
- 35mm SLR camera with 50mm lens and cap
- spare SLR body with 28mm lens and cap
- 135mm lens
- autowinder
- electronic flash unit with tiltable head
- neck straps
- ultraviolet filter
- transparent film case
- cable release
- lens tissue
- lens cleaning fluid
- plastic rain cover
- hand-held light meter with case
- tabletop tripod with ball-joint head
- aluminum carrying case
Total cost (today): ~$2200
I argue that the modern travel kit with equivalent functionality (with one exception) consists of:
- Digital Rebel XT with 17-85mm image-stabilized lens
- Canon SD500 backup camera
- remote shutter release
- disposable lens tissues
- camera holster with rain flap
Total cost: $2000
Let’s break down the obsolete items from the 1982 list:
Multiple bodies
“The extra body is useful not only as a backup in case of a breakdown, but also as a container for carrying a different type of film for quick switching from dim interiors to bright outdoor scenes, or from color to black and white.”
Digital cameras can “switch film” (i.e., change film speed) with a flick of the thumb on the ISO dial. Black and white is achieved in post-processing or in camera, often with better results than what black-and-white film is capable, and without the hassle of color filters. If you still need a backup, these days a pocket digicam like the SD500 is a decent, much more portable, choice.
Multiple prime lenses
When this article was written, 28-135mm consumer zoom lenses weren't available. Well they are now, and then some. The 17-85mm lens covers the zoom range that corresponds to the 35mm’s 28mm, 50mm, and 135mm lenses (plus everything in between). What you lose over the primes is wide-open aperture, “so a zoom may be of little use in low light.” But that’s where the Canon 17-85mm’s image-stabilization kicks in: equivalent to 3 extra stops of light for static subjects. This is about the difference between the light-gathering ability of the zoom versus the primes, and that’s not counting the Rebel XT’s lower noise levels at higher ISO settings when compared to film. Of course, the IS won’t stop subject motion, nor does it allow shallow depth of field. But given a choice between these abilities and not having to lug around and swap two extra lenses, I’ll bet almost everyone would choose the zoom for traveling.
Autowinder
I had to look up what this was, it’s so thoroughly obsolete.
Flash
Here’s where you have to make the hardest choice between portability and functionality. Modern consumer SLRs have a built-in flash. The Rebel XT’s is pretty good, but not as strong as a dedicated flash unit, and it can’t bounce light off ceilings. The new Speedlite 430EX will add another 3/4ths of a pound if you really need indirect, artificial lighting. I don’t think this is too common a need for most people on vacation, so I’m leaving it out of the kit.
Light Meter
That’s what the histogram is for.
Tripod
There are decent, ultra-compact full-height tripods these days, but the tabletops are still smaller and lighter. However, since you can’t use a tripod in most indoor tourist attractions these days, and the image stabilization does most of the tripod’s job outdoors, I’d argue you don’t need one at all anymore, at least not for photos you don’t plan to blow up to poster size.
UV Filter
Digital sensors are insensitive to UV light, so you’d only use one to protect the lens these days. At any rate, they're cheap and tiny.
Transparent Film Case
Film? What’s that?
Lens Tissue/Cleaning Fluid
Use tissues pre-moistened with fluid.
Cable Release/Strap/Rain Cover
Still need these (or the digital equivalent).
Aluminum Case
The digital kit is so much lighter and more compact, it will all fit in a small fabric shoulder bag. And no extra tripod to carry around either.
So, roughly equivalent functionality comes at one-quarter the weight, less than one-quarter the volume, and 10% less moolah. Plus, you get a huge step up in picture-taking convenience, cheaper and easier developing, and, with the SD500, movies!
Don’t you love digital?
Labels: Photography

Ah, digital... after every month you feel obsolete and feel like you need to get something new because getting it makes you feel like that that attractive model shown on the photography advertisement. You need to get the latest version because someone else has something better and you want to feel good about yourself.
Anyways it's cool that you know how to use your camera to the fullest extent. However, do you know who buys the most expensive camera, fastest car, fastest computer, etc? They're usually bought by people who don't even know how to use them! Ah, the wonders of marketing-- to get people to buy things they don't really need.
Whatever happened to the basics? Focus, F-stop, exposure, ISO, and composition. These are basic things that a good photographer from the 1900 to now still have to understand. These fundamentals are transferable throughout ages. They will never get outdated, like digital equipments. Let's fall in love with fundamentals again, not with technology that surround the fundamentals. Why am I saying this? Because, I have no love for technology anymore. Surely, technology has no love for you. Once you're old, technology will keep changing and changing until you no longer recognizes the place you once knew. Maybe technology makes our lives more convenient. But we too addicted and dependent on technology and are becoming slaves to technology. It used to be the case that we can do certain things faster on the internet. Nowadays, you can't do much without the internet. Either you move with it or you're totally fucked. Technology is scientific progress and humanely regress. Let us, as human beings and conscientious consumers, for once say no to CCD, Firewire, iPod, USB, BlueTooth, and even the internet. Let's say no to technology. Let's all go back to the basics. FUCK TECHNOLOGY.
Oh, and I don't love digital at all.
11:47 PM
This from the person whose earlier comment implied I should replace my entire computer system every year or two.
12:20 AM
You have to replace your system because... you have to, not because you want to. You have to upgrade because of speed, IO compatibility, space, whatever. It's a big hastle. I don't enjoy upgrading for the sake of catching up, I don't think anyone does. It would be so nice if things don't change so fast, but that is wishful thinking.
The root of my sentiment is that I don't think technological advances, without consideration of so many other factors, is good for the human race. In fact it's been going down the hill since the middle of last century, but to explain this will require a long discussion beyond what I can type here.
So why am I using the internet now? Well, it's like this. I don't quite enjoy driving in traffic, especially in Los Angeles/405. Maybe you can take a taxi or taxi+LA Metro, but it is simply not cost & time effective. So, I end up having to drive instead of wanting to drive, and it's a big hassle. If the city planner had actually planned infrastructures more scalable and sustainable they'd put in something that has proven to work (mass transit) instead of relying solely on something new and untested (lots of freeways). If they had just planned for growth, people driving in LA today would most likely suffer less from traffic jams. But that's not the case, so now we Angelinos are all stuck and fucked on the 405.
Likewise, technology advances in general are made without central planning, without looking into its interactions with others and how it may affect people in the future. I'm not so sure that's a good thing. In many cases it has made our lives a lot more inconvenient, and in other cases it has made our lives a lot worse.
Ah well maybe I'm just getting old. I don't like the newest and the latest technology anymore. I'll buy and use what works, and I'm definitely boycotting the latest and greatest gadgets. Come on, join me in the boycott!
7:48 AM
Hey what camera could have taken this picture? It's a bit lousy to be an SLR:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/050914/ids_photos_ts/r404176213.jpg
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/050914/ids_photos_ts/r2587077477.jpg
11:40 AM
You usually can't tell from a poorly-captured photo whether or not it's taken by an SLR. For that matter, unless it's at or near full resolution, you often can't tell from a good picture whether or not it's taken by an SLR.
The picture might have been an up-rezzed tight crop from an SLR, or it might have been taken with a good cameraphone. There's quite a bit of overlap in lens quality and price (but not sensor size) between P&Ss and SLRs these days. But, in poor lighting, an SLR with a good lens is capable of much better image quality than any P&S.
12:01 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home