Which Travel Zoom combo would you prefer?

[GSiGuy]

Just more of a "what are your thoughts on this?" question.

I have a prime combo for digital that i would use if i know i will be taking my time to shoot.

However, on more fast paced travels, i have been using the 18-135mm alot as my main travel zoom and it does seem to cover most situations. The majority of shots would probably be in good light and cover mostly scenery, travel portraits and some street photography. Therefore most of the time, the 18-135 stays on the camera, a 10-20 goes along too and a fast prime.

Now i am thinking i would like to have better IQ with the zooms and have thought that the max i would carry is perhaps 3 lenses. Now, if you were to select 3 lenses to travel with, which combo would you prefer?

10-20, 17-50 & 50-135?

or

12-24, 24/28-70/75 & 70-200?

 

[oyama85]

Personally I would just bring the 10-20 + 17-50.

 

[rocaway]

I'd probably have the dal 55-300 too. light and reasonable IQ

 

[felixcat8888]

My choice would be 10-20, 18-135WR and 50-200WR. You need to remember that F2.8 lenses are going to be pretty heavy to lug around on holiday. I would rather carry only 2: 18-135WR + 50-200WR.

 

[JohnTaylor]

TS- that's a good question and I'm still bringing along different combinations with each trip to work it out myself.


But if you're usually in decent outdoor light, I don't see why the 16-50mm WR and 50-200mm WR couldnt cover all your needs.

 

[gummy73]

I think maybe a 12-24 for landscape and some streets , A DA55-300.if u want may be a DAl 35 2.5mm in between. this is just my own opinion.

 

[Ahren]

Personally I would just bring the 10-20 + 17-50.

+1 for this. This has been my set-up for family holidays.

However, as getting older and carrying the camera and lens become more tiring. May even leave the 10-20 at home.

 

[pinholecam]

DA15; DA35 /2.4; FA77ltd (or 70ltd). They are just 3-4 steps in between them.


For zooms, actually
10-20 + 28-75 is practically excellent.
28mm is good and wide enough for most views with an environmental context w/o getting in any distortion.
75mm end of it does portraits and shallow DOF stuff.
Add to that, then lens can focus pretty near for small objects you will surely find in your travels.
When you need to go wider than 28mm, you NEED to go wider than 28mm, 24mm,
So in those cases, the 10-20 fits in well.
In fact, if you are in good light and have a high iso performer like Kx/Kr/K5, you can even go around with the 10-20 at 20mm.


My only dislike of the 28-75 is that its rather 'large' compared to my primes


I actually think your 18-135 fits your needs very well.
If you really need the wide end for landscapes/places, then just add a 10-20.

 

[sunnycamera]

weight is big issue when travel for fun, so I go lightest possible.

DAL 18-55 the kit lens, and a fast 50mm prime, keeping the all the setup less than 1 kg. 600g body + 200g lens + 200g lens.

 

[fengwei]

As some said above, it's better to travel light. A 18-135 plus a faster prime, anything between 28 to 50 depends on your preference, will be enough. The most import thing is to enjoy the trip, not to suffer w the extra load you carry.

Don't you see a lot guys started to use smaller mirrorless cameras for travel and daily photography

 

[Yamakasi]

for my last trip to Cebu, i bought the tamron 17-50 and FA 77..in the end, i never use FA77 at all

The tamron 17-50 with its 2.8 and the high iso capability of k-x means that i dun really need a prime even at restaurants so my choice is tamron 17-50 and 12-24 (which i have also)..because both lens are very capable walkabout lens..a 10-20 will be less useful for me cause i need the 21-24 more than the 10-12..so with either lens..i can do my walkabout without changing lens

 

[GSiGuy]

Thank you for all your suggestions. They have much insight i have not considered and one of them is 'yes' i would like to carry lighter equipment if possible...or at least not add on anymore weight to what i bring with me. My last trip i had the 18-135, 10-20 and 40Ltd on the digital side. I had a film cam & 2 lenses too. Not to mention the other accessories like flash, gorillapod, etc. Whilst i pack the tripod, it wont come with me unless i am sure i will use it.

The load wasn't a problem that way and God knows the WR of the K-5 and 18-135 was a godsend. I would even say, a necessity at my last trip.

However, what got me thinking that i may need a change (if WR not an issue) is when i recently compared a shot taken with the 18-135 with one taken with the 10-20 of the same scene, and i saw so much better detail, sharpness and contrast on shots taken by the sigma... so i thought that it might be good to explore better zooms

pinholecam, i like your 10-20, 28-75 idea. i have a DAL55-300 which might come along with little weight penalty too... so the question is 28-75 or 17-50 stays on a camera longer in your travels?

 

[Supersimon27]

If kiasu , I usually go with 8-16,17-50 and 55-300

If I roughly know what I will be expected I will go 8-16 + 35mm + 18-55 Wr (in case rain)

If weight is a consent and I travel with my boy , I go with 8-16 + 35mm

I just couldn't leave my 8-16 at home .

 

[pinholecam]

Thank you for all your suggestions. They have much insight i have not considered and one of them is 'yes' i would like to carry lighter equipment if possible...or at least not add on anymore weight to what i bring with me. My last trip i had the 18-135, 10-20 and 40Ltd on the digital side. I had a film cam & 2 lenses too. Not to mention the other accessories like flash, gorillapod, etc. Whilst i pack the tripod, it wont come with me unless i am sure i will use it.

The load wasn't a problem that way and God knows the WR of the K-5 and 18-135 was a godsend. I would even say, a necessity at my last trip.

However, what got me thinking that i may need a change (if WR not an issue) is when i recently compared a shot taken with the 18-135 with one taken with the 10-20 of the same scene, and i saw so much better detail, sharpness and contrast on shots taken by the sigma... so i thought that it might be good to explore better zooms

pinholecam, i like your 10-20, 28-75 idea. i have a DAL55-300 which might come along with little weight penalty too... so the question is 28-75 or 17-50 stays on a camera longer in your travels?

I've never had a 17-50, as I prefer primes.
I've used the 28-75 on various trips.
Its usually with family, so I tend to use wide to normal on most shots (exactly 28-75mm). If I need wide views, its to capture very large buildings or landscapes, so switching to a 10-20 is just right during those times.
Its generally personal preference.
I prefer to keep have limited elements in a photo to keep it simple.
I know some folks who like to use wide and UW more (to "take in more things"), so to them 17-28 is used more often.



I guess the usual evaluation applies, check thru your photos to see what FL you use the most.

 

[pentax]

In my recent trip, I brought along 16-45, 70-210 and 50 macro.
It turns out that 16-45 is always on the camera.
There are only 1-2 cases that I wish 70-210 and 50macro are with me instead of staying in hotel.

 

[GSiGuy]

I guess the usual evaluation applies, check thru your photos to see what FL you use the most.

In my recent trip, I brought along 16-45, 70-210 and 50 macro.
It turns out that 16-45 is always on the camera.
There are only 1-2 cases that I wish 70-210 and 50macro are with me instead of staying in hotel.

Looks like i'm gonna have to trawl thru my photos and look at FL but it does seem that for travel usage, wide end is more impt than long end...

 

[le petit prince]

Back when I still have zooms, I went to Penang and Oz a couple years back with the 50-200mm, amazingly good in good light! Other lenses were a DA21 and FA50. For telephoto lenses, I think 50-200 or 55-300 is hard to beat for casual travel.

 

[cubicon]

for my 2 trips oversea i had only brought my tamron 1750 along which i felt was good enough. had a tele that i didn't bring for either trip.

 

[GSiGuy]

Back when I still have zooms, I went to Penang and Oz a couple years back with the 50-200mm, amazingly good in good light! Other lenses were a DA21 and FA50. For telephoto lenses, I think 50-200 or 55-300 is hard to beat for casual travel.

for my 2 trips oversea i had only brought my tamron 1750 along which i felt was good enough. had a tele that i didn't bring for either trip.

Different ways to skin a cat i suppose? (no offence to cat lovers)

 

[iceshu]

May I hijack the thread because my question is along the same line?

What are your thoughts on travelling with just primes? Let's say, the DA15 and DA35 limited only?

Or would it be smarter to pair the 18-55 kit with the DA35?