[LargeFormat] Re: Luggage & travel

[Diane Maher]

I took a trip to Seattle a few months ago and took a 4x5 with 90, 150, & 300 mm lenses.  I did actually use all of them on the trip, though I could have gotten away with just the 90 & 300.  My tripod was sent in a tripod bag and of course they opened it both ways.

I was surprised at the fact that I didn't have to open my Lowepro Nature Trekker AW backpack at all going through the airports either way on my trip.  Of course, if you have a small 35 mm in your bag/purse then of course you'll have to open it.  My watch set off the blasted metal detector, but the 4x5 METAL camera didn't even get a second glance.  It had no lenses attached to it.  I had my film in with my camera and none of it was searched or anything.  I thought that they were going to do a more thorough search of me after my watch set off the stupid detector.

I have read that several of you pack your tripods in your luggage.  After my experience in the UK last year, I probably won't do it again unless I have to.  My luggage was held up in Boston on my way to the UK because they had to break into it to make sure I wasn't transporting a weapon (I presume that's the reason.  My tripod was the only large piece of metal in the bag.) and despite the fact that my luggage was on the 'next flight' it took two days for it to get to me because I was so far away from London (I was in the Lake District).

Diane
--__--__--

Message: 1
From: "philip lambert" <philip.lambert@ntlworld.com>
To: <largeformat@f32.net>
Subject: Re: [LargeFormat] Luggage
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 10:27:49 -0000
Reply-To: largeformat@f32.net

On the subject of carry-on bags, how much hardware do you actually use out
of everything you bought?
Maybe with some imaginative selection you could manage a 5x4 expedition with
just three lenses, none of them very big or valuable.
Possibilities are a 180mm f4.5 Xenar or 203mm f7.7 Ektar,
a 120mm f6.8 Angulon or 135mm Symmar and for interiors a 75mm f8 Super Angulon (smaller than the 90mm).
The early battered versions are be avoided as the later editions are
typically more contrasty and sharp and don't cost much. You could fit these
in a carry-on bag with some 5x4 cameras.
For technical cameras using rollfilm backs the lens choice is better as many
suitable largeformat lenses from 47mm upwards including Polaroid Rodenstocks
or Tominars are available, usually compact and  cheap.  You soon find out
which  give bright and sharp results, which don't allow much rising front
and which give difficult screen viewing in poor light. (The f8 47mm Super
Angulon is notably worse than the f5.6.)  I could carry five such on a
flight and they wouldn't weigh a lot; if they were all stolen it would be
easy to replace them over a couple of months.
Losing an outfit isn't a tragedy if it's insured and not unique. Leave your
Dagors at home.
Philip