Bridge camera = 2xSLRS + 4 lenses one box camera, 10ish films and one small digital ???

[BADGER.BRAD]

O.k in a previous post about black and white digital photos someone said to me don't right digital off as one digital camera is sometimes easier than carrying different camera bodies with different film types (black and white/colour or ASA difference). I have just packed all my camera stuff for a photographic expedition in Whitby ( or holiday as Mrs Badger calls it !) including the following a Praktica B100 loaded with Black and white film a Jenaflex loaded with colour film, 2 x 50mm lenses one 28mm and one 135mm lens, a kodak brownie no2 ( first test of the camera) a small digital point and press and about 10 films covering 120 black and white and 35mm colour and black and white plus a tripod and a remote shutter release cable. I've just realized my Kodak bridge camera and tripod in reality would cover all of this and more ! So have a guess what ? I've decided to take that as well ! O.k so the Brownie is just an experiment but the rest could be replaced. The bridge camera gets rid of the need for all the lenses, for different film types in different cameras and to some degree the small digital point and press (which I will need to hide in my pirate outfit, yes you did read right) I think in the future I may actually give the Bridge camera some use although I'm not keen on sitting in front of a computer trying to make Black and white from colour photos!
Would you like me be stupid enough to take the lot ?

 

[weybourne]

If Mrs Badger is correct with her nomenclature, then my answer is an emphatic "no".

I recently bought a bridge camera because I wanted more than a phone/compact when I couldn't (or shouldn't) take all my gear, or even when just a 50D + 17-50mm is too much (such as a bike ride or hike in the rain). I also find that sometimes one has to let full-gear photography take a back seat in order not to shift the emphasis of the 'primary' activity. The other half and I took a short holiday in the Lakes recently and to prove a point to myself, I only took my bridge camera. I didn't regret it.

 

[viewfromthenorth]

If the primary purpose of going somewhere is to take the best possible photographs I can, then I tend to take a couple of bodies and multiple lenses.

If I'm going on a family holiday, then I go with minimal gear. I was away in Majorca last week and took a Panasonic travel zoom compact, and my Fuji XT-10 with a prime lens. This year I used the Fuji more but on a similar holiday last year I took the same set up and never used the Fuji.

As bridge cameras are getting better and better, I can see the attraction of an FZ1000 / 2000 or a Sony RX10 for a 2 week trip to America we've got booked next year.

 

[Teflon-Mike]

Mixing kit, trying to cover the options, is a bit of a road to madness, you can only use ONE camera at a time.

I was once told, that to take a photo, you only need one frame, one lens and one camera; the more gear you cart about, then, often suggests how much you dont know what you are doing; the dissorganisation in conception and planning, that you dont really know exactly what you need for the job... great photographers take great photo's inspite of their gear, not because of it.

In my own migration to widgetal, there's some irony that the 'front-line' gadget bag, that used to contain a pair of winder equipped Olympus OM's, four or five lenses, tele-adaptor, a couple of flash-guns, up to a dozen rolls of spare film, spare batteries, filters, and gawd knows what else, is NOW stuffed to the ginnals by ONE crop-sensor DSLR, standard zoom, long zoom, UWA and a fish, and I am struggling to find space for the two spare batteres! Eh?!?! I thought 'digital' was supposed to be more 'compact'?!?! It seems NOT.

More ironic, is that where the Digi-Pact used to be in my pocket for 'convenience' to the film gear, now the old Olly XA2 film copact is back in my pocket for 'convenience' over the Widgetal! A-N-D more often the digi-gear left behind!

And the 'Bridge'? Least said about that the better, me-thinks! My personal experience having curiousely aquired one in the horse trading betweixt daughter and O/H I seem to have paid for, would be that its a techno-blunder jack-of-all-trades, master of none, to the point its darn near useless!

Back-To-Top... you only need one frame, one lens, one camera.. and GOOD planning!

I managed to do quite well, for almost a decade with 'just' that little Oly XA2 film camera, on my travels, until my Dad gave me an OM10 and I started to get 'in' to this SLR lark.. and looking back, at least a third to a half of all the film-photo's I have taken, and a far greater proportion of the ones I actually 'like' were taken with that humble pocket compact.. and an awful lot of that likely simply from simply getting on with the job and takng photos with it, rather than faffing with 'gear'.

Trait of human nature, we seldom apreciate what we have, but always rue what we dont.... so more we have, the less we apreciate it, more we rue the things we convince ourselves we lack...

Pack light... shrug off what you haven't brought, make the best of what you did... you only need ONE frame, and one lens to take a picture...

 

[johnf3f]

Sounds like a small light setup to me, would I take that much kit on holiday?

Well my last holiday was not a photography holiday so I just took my 1DX, 16-35 F4, 24-70 F2.8, 300 F2.8 and extenders - in a decent backpack (Vertex 200) I hardly knew they were there. Didn't get much photography done so I am glad I didn't take much kit!