I have a cheap 70-300, of poor quality that I rarely use, just on trips for nice souvenirs pictures, nothing more.

Save yourself some money and get a nice digital camera

also, what type of lenses, filters do you usually bring with you?

Elite Chrome 100, 200 and Elite Chrome 100 Extra Color to be nice all around consumer films. .... Be careful with saturated films when shooting climbers as they mess with the skin tones.

One advantage of black and white film is that it is cheap to buy in bulk, and you can process it at home, without a darkroom.

How does THAT work? Do you mean you can devlop it at home WITH your own darkroom? I'm not trying to be a jerk here, just curious.

I find B&W film is expensive (incomparison) to get processed by the lab. $25 vs. $15ish.

The Kodak C-41 B&W stuff has given me mixed results, though I think it's the lab. In my photos on this site (shameless plug) the B&W's from RRG KY are C-41, the others are true B&W.

For 35mm I shoot Elite Crome 100 and push process it one stop. This desaturates the colors and gives more open shadows. Makes for much easier scanning.

Peppering...One thing to note, Kodak transparency films dont have this problem.

I would recommend against Kodachrome because it is difficult to process (K-14). Labs have to send the film to Kodak to process it.

About digital, the comparison depends on how much film you use. I spend nearly 15 times as much on film as I do on equipment, enough to buy at least three top digital bodies. Yes, the quality is not *quite* there, but a $1000 canon EOS D10 for example has excellent quality and all the features you need in a serious SLR. Below that, most 3 MP point-and-shoots will give great results too.

The camera and film type that is most likely to get you out there taking photos without worrying about things like cost is the best one, regardless of quality IMHO.

For 35mm I shoot Elite Crome 100 and push process it one stop. This desaturates the colors and gives more open shadows. Makes for much easier scanning.

For large format landscape work I prefer Velvia.

The Kodak C-41 B&W stuff has given me mixed results, though I think it's the lab. In my photos on this site (shameless plug) the B&W's from RRG KY are C-41, the others are true B&W.

A pro climbing photographer I know advised shooting Velvia (no brainer) most of the time, however when I went to RedRocks Nevada he encouraged me to shoot E100VS (VS=very saturated). The warm tones of the desert popped with this stuff.

hm? push-processing generally increases contrast and grain. I know that Elite Chrome 100 "Extra Color" does not push well, and in fact Kodak recommends against it, but I dont know about EC100.

Elite Chrome 100 is Kodak's entry-level slide film, and its pretty good, and cheap, like $3.50 at Costco I think. However, you pay extra to push-process ( up to twice the processing cost), so after all that you may be paying $9-$10. You might as well buy the more expensive "pro" Ektachrome films such as E100VS, etc. They will be a little more expensive but you wont have to push-process to get what you are looking for.

But if you like the look, run with it :)

hm? push-processing generally increases contrast and grain.....
you pay extra to push-process ( up to twice the processing cost)

How does THAT work? Do you mean you can devlop it at home WITH your own darkroom? I'm not trying to be a jerk here, just curious.

I find B&W film is expensive (incomparison) to get processed by the lab. $25 vs. $15ish for colour or slides.

I'm not sure I'm correct but for what it's worth, I've been told by a few people including a Kodak rep that Elite Chrome is the consumer version of Ektachrome. Assuming this works like other pro films isn't the only difference the aging process? But you can get Elite Chrome from Costco which is where I got my first 5 pack for $15. Or you can get it for less from most camera stores in NYC for about $2.50 a roll (sometimes even less).

Pushing is usually $1.00 a stop most places I get it developed but $1 is enough to justify a different film (or find a lab with free pushing) if you always push it.

No you dont need a darkroom to process b&w film. You can spool up the film in a "black bag", basically a double-zippered lightproof bag with two elastic-band armholes, then mix the chemicals in a small lightproof container. The chemicals and materials are inexpensive, and you can do it in your bathroom. It does waste water though.


Wow where do you do your processing? I get a roll of 36 exposures of E6 for about $6.50, and a little less for b&w. Also, Kodak TMAX 400 for example can be found for <$5 per 36-exp roll, and it goes down to <$3 per roll if you buy it in bulk spools of 100 feet.

REALLY? I'd never heard of darkbag developing. I've heard of darkbag film rolling, and "in the field" emergancy use, just no developing.

I go to a fairly decent lab, and that's in Canadian $$, so 2/3's the number value, still pretty expensive for true B&W develping on true B&W paper.

Has anyone heard good/bad about kodak tmax B&W film. I develop and print myself (nothing better than hanging out in a darkroom when you cant climb). Also, what ISO speed do you generally use for climbing photography. (I use 100 for everything right now).

I like Provia 100F a lot, especially if I can use a tripod. I've been using Provia 400 in my Stylus Epic, becuase usually in the places I'm carrying it I'm either being blown around or puffing from the altitude and exertion(or both). I do quite a bit of quilt photography for my wife and like Astia for it's accurate color rendition.

It's been pretty good in my Stylus. Before it came out I was using Ektacharome 200. I usually try to remember to turn on the fill-flash--I wish I could set it to default to on.

You won't have as much use for tele stuff which is good because long non mirrored lenses are expensive and heavy.

Actually, I would love to have something like a 100-300. alot of the great photos you see of climbers are shot with long lenses for their shallow depth of field and accurate rendering of proportion.