lens for trip


Status
Not open for further replies.

bruno84sg

Senior Member
Jul 12, 2007
580
0
16
North
#1
Hi Expert,

I'm going on a Europe trip and struggling on the decision to buy a lens. (Currently only own AF 50mm f/1.8, new to Nikon)

1. Nikkor 28-300 f/3.5-5.6 (versatile long range of zoom, able to reach further taking detailed architecture/sculpture/cathedral/etc. It might be indoor or outdoor)

2. Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 (love wider for landscape & indoor)

3. Nikkor 24-120 f/4 or f/3.5-5.6

I do have a budget.
Personally like wider image for landscape but I think Europe has a lot of nice sculpture that is quite far away. Therefore need the range as well. Mind sharing your experience? A combination of lens is better, 28-300 or 24-120 is more than enough?
 

avsquare

Senior Member
Jan 26, 2012
3,306
0
0
#2
If you want a do-it-all lens and to travel light, then there's no other than 28-300mm.

I'm not sure what kind of far far away sculpture you would refer, but bro castleinthesky just returned from Europe not long ago, and he took many photos of the structures there and it's mainly on the 24-70mm f/2.8 lens and a 17mm tilt shift.
 

Blur Shadow

Senior Member
Sep 17, 2005
4,886
4
0
#3
I am assuming you are on FX, as your short listed lenses are all FX lenses.

I was based in Switzerland for a while, and the landscapes there are breathtaking. You will probably appreciate a wide angle lens, such as the 14-24mm, 16-35mm VR or the newest 18-35mm, if it is available before you fly.

Interiors will be another interesting thing to shoot. The f/2.8 VC is your best bet, as you can't believe how dark it can get in there.

Finally, get a tripod if you are serious about landscapes. Otherwise, streets are good too.
 

avsquare

Senior Member
Jan 26, 2012
3,306
0
0
#4
I am assuming you are on FX, as your short listed lenses are all FX lenses.

I was based in Switzerland for a while, and the landscapes there are breathtaking. You will probably appreciate a wide angle lens, such as the 14-24mm, 16-35mm VR or the newest 18-35mm, if it is available before you fly.

Interiors will be another interesting thing to shoot. The f/2.8 VC is your best bet, as you can't believe how dark it can get in there.

Finally, get a tripod if you are serious about landscapes. Otherwise, streets are good too.
His sig area says he's on D600 ;)
 

TWmilkteaTW

Senior Member
May 30, 2011
2,251
1
0
#5
Hi Expert,

I'm going on a Europe trip and struggling on the decision to buy a lens. (Currently only own AF 50mm f/1.8, new to Nikon)

1. Nikkor 28-300 f/3.5-5.6 (versatile long range of zoom, able to reach further taking detailed architecture/sculpture/cathedral/etc. It might be indoor or outdoor)

2. Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 (love wider for landscape & indoor)

3. Nikkor 24-120 f/4 or f/3.5-5.6

I do have a budget.
Personally like wider image for landscape but I think Europe has a lot of nice sculpture that is quite far away. Therefore need the range as well. Mind sharing your experience? A combination of lens is better, 28-300 or 24-120 is more than enough?
depends what u want to shoot.
Do you need tele?
If not..option 2 is good enough.
if 1 lens do all..definitely it would be choice 1.

or 2 lens. tamron 24-70 and a telephoto 3.5-5.6 lens. a F4 or F2.8 if u willing to spend more.
 

ijnek

Senior Member
Feb 4, 2008
1,771
0
36
38
Johor Bahru, Malaysia
#6
based on ur choice, i would go for the 28-300 or the 24-120 f4 if budget permits

bring along a sturdy tripod and u should b fine
 

Nov 13, 2010
249
0
0
#7
TS if you go to Europe without a wide-angle lens, you may regret it later :)

You can go the rental route if budget does not allow. For long period rental, there is good discounts.
 

avsquare

Senior Member
Jan 26, 2012
3,306
0
0
#9
TS if you go to Europe without a wide-angle lens, you may regret it later :)

You can go the rental route if budget does not allow. For long period rental, there is good discounts.
No. NEVER rent a lens for a long trip lol.

I rather you buy decent 2nd hand copy of the lens, cosmetic don't need too nice one and just go for the trip. When you're back, sell it away at the same price. If you want to sell it fast, maybe sell it $50 less or something. Of course, don't buy it at unreasonable high price, always check what's the current "market rate" first.

In this way, it's kind of "free rental" or "cheap rental". The retail cost of a lens is not cheap for a long period - imagine $30 per day, a 5 days trip is $150 and a 10 days trip is $300 dollar. Even if there's a discount if you rent for longer period, it will never win the savings by buying 2nd hand and selling it off at no loss or little loss anyways.
 

NikF601

Senior Member
Jul 26, 2010
1,541
0
36
52
CCK
#10
I will suggest 3. due to 24mm for landscape. light weight and relatively sharp if u need to zoom at 120mm. Bring along travel tripod for low light- churches and golden hour landscape
 

Kit

Senior Member
Jan 19, 2002
11,691
42
48
42
Upper Bukit Timah
Visit site
#11
Hi Expert,

I'm going on a Europe trip and struggling on the decision to buy a lens. (Currently only own AF 50mm f/1.8, new to Nikon)

1. Nikkor 28-300 f/3.5-5.6 (versatile long range of zoom, able to reach further taking detailed architecture/sculpture/cathedral/etc. It might be indoor or outdoor)

2. Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 (love wider for landscape & indoor)

3. Nikkor 24-120 f/4 or f/3.5-5.6

I do have a budget.
Personally like wider image for landscape but I think Europe has a lot of nice sculpture that is quite far away. Therefore need the range as well. Mind sharing your experience? A combination of lens is better, 28-300 or 24-120 is more than enough?
You've got to look beyond this trip. If you are just going to buy the lens for the trip, I'd suggest you rent one.

I would go with the 24-120mm f/4.
 

Cowseye

Senior Member
Mar 7, 2010
3,786
0
0
Singapore
www.ttlo-cowseye.com
#12
Kit said:
You've got to look beyond this trip. If you are just going to buy the lens for the trip, I'd suggest you rent one.

I would go with the 24-120mm f/4.
A Europe trip usually last 2 weeks or more, wouldn't it be more cost effective to buy one and sell after the trip?
 

avsquare

Senior Member
Jan 26, 2012
3,306
0
0
#13
A Europe trip usually last 2 weeks or more, wouldn't it be more cost effective to buy one and sell after the trip?
Which I suggested earlier, just buy a chop chop one 2nd hand and sell back same price later. :)
 

daredevil123

Moderator
Staff member
Oct 25, 2005
21,645
63
48
lil red dot
#14
My suggestion... get the older Nikon 18-35 AF-D or the new Nikon 18-35 (if in time), pair it with a tamron 28-75/2.8. and bring your 50/1.8 along. This will be quite a budget but extremely flexible setup. IMHO a UWA is something you have to have when traveling.
 

Last edited:
Nov 13, 2010
249
0
0
#15
avsquare said:
Which I suggested earlier, just buy a chop chop one 2nd hand and sell back same price later. :)
I agree bro, but finding a 16-35, or 17-35 is not easy in BnS....if he can secure one, that'll be the best option :)

Just don't leave Singapore without an UWA.
 

Jul 20, 2012
128
0
0
North Singapore
#16
First week of February 2013. I bought a Nikon D600 camera & Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 this two combine make the best travel mid range zoom lens. I just came back yesterday from a long vacation to Hong Kong - Macau - Taiwan - Korea & Japan. It produces excellence pictures.
 

bruno84sg

Senior Member
Jul 12, 2007
580
0
16
North
#17
Thanks for all the ideas~!!! It seems UWA is a must have huh... 24mm not wide enough?
After the suggestion from Daredevil, I was looking at
Tamron 28-85 f/2.8 + Nikon WA AF Nikkor 24mm f/2.8D Autofocus Lens
Anybody can share your picture taken by your UWA?

It seems a standard zoom range is more than enough while telephoto is not recommended for traveling. Probably due to the weight?
 

Last edited:

daredevil123

Moderator
Staff member
Oct 25, 2005
21,645
63
48
lil red dot
#18
Thanks for all the ideas~!!! It seems UWA is a must have huh... 24mm not wide enough?
After the suggestion from Daredevil, I was looking at
Tamron 28-85 f/2.8 + Nikon WA AF Nikkor 24mm f/2.8D Autofocus Lens
Anybody can share your picture taken by your UWA?

It seems a standard zoom range is more than enough while telephoto is not recommended for traveling. Probably due to the weight?
Actually, if you can carry the weight.. a telezoom is also very good to have. If I go on a photo trip, I will still carry my 70-200 along.

UWA shots during my recent trip. These pictures would not have been possible without a UWA:





 

Last edited:

avsquare

Senior Member
Jan 26, 2012
3,306
0
0
#19
Actually, if you can carry the weight.. a telezoom is also very good to have. If I go on a photo trip, I will still carry my 70-200 along.

UWA shots during my recent trip. These pictures would not have been possible without a UWA:
Agreed, personally I feel that unless you really really want to go light, just bring a UWA and a 70-200mm for the trip and it will be totally sufficient. I don't go on trips often and I want to bring back as much good memories (via photos) as possible.
 

Jun 5, 2011
192
0
0
#20
Actually, if you can carry the weight.. a telezoom is also very good to have. If I go on a photo trip, I will still carry my 70-200 along.

UWA shots during my recent trip. These pictures would not have been possible without a UWA:





very nice pictures sir, like the colors! I like the middle one the most, the one with a baby, did you use flash on it? Thanks.
 

Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom