Hi everyone iam taking my first trip to england this year in november. i have two ideas for photo equipment to take with me. 1.Modern eos 33 28 105mm usm. secondly my classic touch. either om1 28mm or om2n and same lens. both the bodies working very well. and also with om bodies a sony mini dv cam. last trip was to usa in 2001 with eos and g1. iam very interested in peoples opinion thanks in advance. andrew from adelaide australia.
I'm not sure what you are looking for or what you want Andrew. Perhaps, you could be a bit more specific. If you want to know about film availability, I'm sure you can get whatever you need - from what I have seen, the UK isn't as anti-film as the US is. If you want to know about equipment, I would take whatever you are comfortable with shooting - a trip is not the time to get used to a new camera or new camera equipment.
I think the 28-105 will get you almost all of the pictures you'll need around the London area - and will give you better flexibility than just a 28mm fixed lens. I was there last summer and took almost all of my shots with a 24-70 lens. If you're interested - they are at
There were a couple of shots that were taken with a longer lens - if you have one it wouldn't hurt to bring it, but you can definitely get buy without it.
thankyou for the reply. I should have re read the original post. My question was about trying to use a clasic olympus
with a mini dv cam as back up.Or take a modern 35mm along on the trip.
I have found on a number of trips that the smaller & less conspicuous the camera, the more photos you get that are "keepers".
In Europe, as well as Australia (love SA !) I used to take my Olympus OM-1 & several lenses. I had a little Olympus XA (photographic "hockey puck") 'for backup' which always wound up getting 90% of the pictures I took:
Short jaunt from the car? SLR too big to carry - get great pic of something unexpected. Long hike - the big camera is always in the way & gets heavy. Just wandering down the street in Arles, not wanting to look so much like a "tourist"? XA in pocket, gets the shots.
On two month-long trips to Australia, I wound up only exposing 3 rolls of film in the OM-1, all the rest with the XA. Exception was, I shot about a dozen rolls of Fujichrome Velvia of RT66, from Rockhampton, QLD, to Tennant Creek, NT for a magazine article on "Australia's RT66" that I never got around to writing. No point in it now that the highway has been re-designated as "A-2". A pity - I'd have thought it should have been exploited as RT66 given the interest in OZ and the USA about our RT66.
Virtually all those shots were "duplicates" of the print-film photos taken with the XA, and so doing gave me a comparison of the relative ease of use, AND the resulting pictures: no contest - I quit even taking the OM!
Then, along came Digital! Got a Nikon 990. Almost as big as the OM, but what results!! So, I started looking at small digital with similar features to the XA - read Shutterbug review of the Minolta Dimage X. Wow, so cool & SO tiny and no protruding lens, but 'only' 2 megapixils. Then came the Xi - 3mp, just like the Nikon. Took it to Tasmania for a month with just the XA for backup. Never touched the backup.
Got a Konica-Minolta X50 for it's infra-red capability & so my wife could use the Xi - took it to Tahiti, Pitcairn Island, Easter Island & Peru (Machu Picchu, lake Titicaca, & the north) all photos taken with the X50 & Xi, & all just fine! Never touched the XA back-up.
Only problem? Out foxed myself thinking ISO 400 might be good for grab-shots from a moving bus on the Altiplano, forgot & left setting @ ISO 400 & got some grainy shots before I thought to re-set ISO.
Used pictures from these tiny digitals for a family calendar: 12 x 18 photos, and they look great! Used PhotoShop Elements Image>Resize to re-sample @ 300 PPI.
This got me wondering: how do the old film slides compare? Did some scans of Kodachrome/Leica 50mm Elmar, & Ektachrome/ Fujica St701 50mm. Again: no contest, the 3MP digital wins! Presumably, I could get better scans at great price, but since the scans' biggest problem seems to be film grain, when printed @ 12 x 18 inches, why bother?
If I had it to do over, I might go for a bit more Megapixils for cropping, but that's all. I recently got my marathon running daughter a 6MP Pentax Optio WPi, and might decide to get myself one - waterproof & all!
As you may see elsewhere, my motto has become: "The camera you have WITH you, gets the picture". My tiny digital never leaves my side - need more than 3x zoom? Walk a few steps!
Exception? I do have Panasonic FZ4 12x zoom for bird-watching, but even this light-weight marvel is too big to carry all the time.