The Bare Bones

I was just mulling over what would be the minimalistic kit I could bear to use if I didn't have all the assorted stuff I have collected.

If it really came down to it, almost any manual body with a 50mm lens would do for a lot of things. By preference an MX with M series 50mm f1.7.

If it could expand to two lenses then the choice would be M series 24mm and 100mm.

Three lenses and it would be 24-50-100mm.

How little could everyone else really survive on? Perhaps it would be a good exercise to go out and just use one lens for a few weeks?

---

Best regards, John

John's talking about getting DOWN to an MX, 24mm, 50mm and 100mm. I'm dreaming of getting UP to that!

Seriously, when I've completed my M42 Spotmatic collection, and am ready for K mounts, I'm going for an MX body first. That has to be the sweetest little camera ever made.

Well John, I currently have 3 SLRs (SFX, Z1-P and *istDL) and a reasonable selection of lenses. For me, photography is like fishing - I love both and have the gear and in the case of fishing, I buy a licence every year but hardly ever go!
Most of my photographic kit spends months without use but I've decided to make a point of swapping things around and taking a different selection each time I go somewhere.
If I had to dispose of most of it, much as I appreciate the quality of prime lenses and the up-to-date 'convenience' of digital, I'd keep the Z1-P and FA 28-105 power-zoom.
For me, this combination epitomizes the blend of modern sophistication, quality and flexibility with the option for fully manual operation.

I'd be sad to see the rest go but would be particularly upset at losing my F 50mm 1.7 and Tamron 24mm.

---

Die my dear doctor, that's the last thing I shall do!

Indeed.............unless you consider the Auto 110 and those tiny lenses and accessories

---

Die my dear doctor, that's the last thing I shall do!

Kimbo,

I don't even know if I could buy film for 110's here - never mind processing at a reasonable price. However, I agree that it was a totally sweet little collection and brings out the inner child in me (I've always loved miniatures of anything). Maybe that's the appeal of the MX for me - solid and compact - not just small.

Oh how I wish they'd made that famous 50mm 1.7 in M42 days! It is the one lens that will lure me like a siren into bayonet bay.

Sigh.....

If we are taking manual then I would probably go fo my MX and the 35 F2 and 85 F2. That gives good scope for landscape type pictures and portraits. I had a holiday in Indonesia once with a similar kit (actually LX and 35 2.8 plus Tamron macro 90 2.8 ) and found it very versatile. I was staying in Singapore and also had my MZ6 with (at the time) the Tamron 24-135 (nice lens but rather bulky) and other lenses. I knew I was going into slightly dodgy territory so I decided to leave the flash looking camera behind and go with more well used looking kit.

AF it would be my MZ6 with the 28-105 (not quite the range of the 24-135, which I no longer have, but much much lighter!)

Once when I was traveling really light I left all my SLR kit behind and carried just an Olympus XA. Five weeks, eight rolls of Sensia 100 (I was being careful with film as well) and some wonerful pics - see
www.dabnet.org/camino

---

Tony Milner
Super A, ME Super, MZ6, K5II, Ricoh GR & lenses from 8-500mm
www.amilner.org www.flickr.com/photos/tonymilner

Tony,

I enjoyed your pilgrimage site. Thank you for the link. And I appreciated the bare-bones HTML, too. There's a virtue in simplicity.

G

My minimalistic kit, which is what I take with me when wandering around a strange city, is simply the *ist D and the 24-90 lens. For film I would use a Super A and a 35-135.

The Super A is about the same size and weight as an MX, but gives the option of using full or partial automatic exposure as well as manual. This flexibility has advantages.

In the Himalayas, where I wanted my gear to be as light as possible, I just took the Super A and 50mm 1.7. The combination of the clear light and such a sharp lens produced some stunning pictures.

G

I see thinks pretty much like George. On Wednesday, 2. November '05 I went with my daughter on the mountain caled Razor (in Slovenia) 1570m high. Before we went I was try to figured out which camera, SLR, to take with me. I wasn't sure what contition could I expect up there so I decide to take my super A & SMC A 35-70 with me. The camera and lens gives me complete satisfaction on the field. If I would know the contitions on the mountain in advance and still be limited with equipment I would go for:
1.- *ist D + 16-45 + grip
2.- Z-1 + Zeiss 28-80 or smc A 50 f/1.7
3.- super A + 35-70 or A 50 or M 100 macro...

In case of taking 50 or 100mm lens I would take 2X teleconvertor too.

Bye, till next time - Regards Saso

I recently went out and took just the Pentax KM with the SMC Pentax 50mm f1.8. I shot two rolls of Velvia and never felt limited by the one lens. The simplicity of this approach was actually very welcome, and I could just concentrate on the potential subject matter.

It's worth doing this sort of thing now and again - it sort of clears the photographic mind.

---

Best regards, John

50mm 1.7 or 55mm 1.8?

G

---

Keywords: Charming, polite, and generally agreeable.

Well spotted, George! What my brain instructed my fingers to type was 55mm f1.8, but they disobeyed....

---

Best regards, John

Just wondering why you want two of them?

G

---

Keywords: Charming, polite, and generally agreeable.

few years back I'd have said my mz5, pk 28-200, ftz500 with both long and short cables, shoe adapter fg and my 85 mm soft focus (older manual focus one) with af 1.7 teleconveter. I'll let you know how things pan out with the ist ds2 later...

Hmm, I am guessing that you are referring, George, to me bidding on eBay for more 55mm K lenses? There is always a reason, and it's because I am in the middle of a project involving the K series. I have a number of K bodies, and when I list the excess ones on eBay at some time in the future I think they will be more attractive complete with a standard lens.

It's unfortunate that although I always want to keep all these beautiful things, finances are not without limit and sometimes things just have to go....Apart from which, cameras are better in use than storage, and I can only use one at once.

If I've interpreted your question correctly, then I must say you are very observant!

---

Best regards, John