p.2 #1 · Going On An International One Month Vacation With One Lens
That video is pretty accurate from my standpoint. 16-35 if you're not going to shoot portraits, 24-70 if you are. It seems like you like the wide end of things, so a 16-35 type lens might suit you better. You can take some nice single or group portraits at 35mm. I actually recently acquired the 24-50mm, and it's fantastic. My use case is for events and street/walk-around. It's very light and I don't miss the extra 20mm of reach. 24mm is generally wide enough for the composition I want. If it were me and I had to pick just one, I'd go with the 24-70 or 24-50 because I generally focus more on portraits or people. If my goal was more architecture/landscape, I'd definitely go with the 16-35. I really like some of the composition and effects you can get at the wider end. Now if I had to choose a single prime, that would be difficult.
p.2 #3 · Going On An International One Month Vacation With One Lens
Xysterz wrote:
That video is pretty accurate from my standpoint. 16-35 if you're not going to shoot portraits, 24-70 if you are. It seems like you like the wide end of things, so a 16-35 type lens might suit you better. You can take some nice single or group portraits at 35mm. I actually recently acquired the 24-50mm, and it's fantastic. My use case is for events and street/walk-around. It's very light and I don't miss the extra 20mm of reach. 24mm is generally wide enough for the composition I want. If it were me and I had to pick just one, I'd go with the 24-70 or 24-50 because I generally focus more on portraits or people. If my goal was more architecture/landscape, I'd definitely go with the 16-35. I really like some of the composition and effects you can get at the wider end. Now if I had to choose a single prime, that would be difficult....Show more →
The 24-50mm G lens is pleasantly small and with the A7Rvi, switching to APSc mode results in a bit more reach. 16-35mm is more of a challenge in that it forces the shooter to see the world differently. I haven’t used a lens longer than 90mm for a very long time. No birds at 50 meters, or Safari adventures for me. 21mm is one of my favorite lenses and I could easily use this focal length as my only lens, but 24mm is so much more forgiving, so the 24-50mm is the perfect lightweight travel lens.
p.2 #4 · Going On An International One Month Vacation With One Lens
FWIW, my preference is to be able to cover a range from “somewhat wide” to “portrait-ish long” for travel. Hence my three small primes equivalent to about 20mm, 40mm, and 75mm. (I also like to have a roughly 2:1 relationship between focal lengths.)
So for me ( but obviously not everyone) the 16-35mm zoom, while working fine in some situations, would leave me without that portrait length lens.
If you really love that wider range maybe add a small Lorine with a longer focal length?
Since travel gear is always about compromise, I can get by with the 20mm wide end rather than 16mm.
When it comes to these questions though… YMMV. A lot. ;-)
p.2 #6 · Going On An International One Month Vacation With One Lens
I've struggled with this question, and ultimately decided on an OM-1 II with the 12-40 2.8 (24-80 FFE) and the 50-150 F4 (100-300 FFE).
I have a Sony A7RV which I use with a Sony 24 1.4 GM prime and a 50 mm 1.4 prime. Fantastic resolution, dynamic range. But not much reach. I have a Sony 70-200 F4 G lens which gives me more reach and lets me do macro - but the three lenses are too much to carry around.
So I got a Sony 20-70 F4 for multi-purpose use. Very nice lens, just slight IQ and speed hit over the primes - but that and the 70-200 F4 G are still too much bulk for travel.
I tried the Sigma 20-200 and decided the lens was good for a super-zoom but IQ not up to what I'd want for a trip.
Since I like to do birding, and found the Sony A7RV with telephotos like the 200-600 too heavy for my 76-year old hands - also the A7RV is too slow for birding, and the vaunted autofocus is so-so for BIF and busy backgrounds.
So I got an OM-1 II which has fantastic bird focus, and paired it with the 50-200 2.8 lens (100-400 FFE, up to 800 FFE using the 2.0 TC which, amazingly, doesn't hurt the IQ too much. Using the 1.4 TC there's almost no hit in IQ, and it gets you to 560 FFE). Great kit, but the 50-200 2.8 is too big to carry on any trip other than a dedicated birding one.
My OM-1 II came with the 12-40 2.8 PRO lens. I recently compared images taken with it and with the Sony kit. Did the Sony 61 megapixel resolution paired with 1.4 24 & 50 mm primes give me better pictures? You betcha. BUT the differences were less than I had feared.
So I'm going with OM-1 II with 12-40 2.8 and 50-150 F4. Both lenses are small and light, compared with full-frame lenses, both very sharp. OM-1 II has the advantage of some computational tricks (built-in ND and GND "filters" along with hi-res option). The OM-1 II IS is also superb. I won't have enough reach for birding, but the kit should cover pretty much everything else.
BTW - if you have the $$, hard to beat A1 II with 20-70 F4, as others have suggested or new A7RVI. But very very expensive. If you really want more than 300 MM FFE with the OM, OM also offers an excellent 50-150 2.8, (but IMO it's too big for travel) and an inexpensive, small and light 75-300 mm which is surprisingly good (but SO small and light it's hard to hold steady)
p.2 #8 · Going On An International One Month Vacation With One Lens
The question was simple.
I saw the video, and was prepared to trash talk such a silly question, but then saw that it was a Martin Castein video, and that guy just puts out fantastic and educational talking points, so really can't whine about that.
From my standpoint, when I travel with Sony, the 20-70 is on the camera 80% of the time, and with Nikon, the 24-120 is on the camera 90% of the time. So that answers that question.
For Sony, the debate for me was always: does 20-24mm matter more or does f2.8 or f4 matter more? 20-24mm matters more to me.
For Nikon, the debate was does 70-120mm matter more or f2.8 or f4 matter more? 70-120mm matters more.
But interestingly, when I was shooting with a D800-D850, I was using the 16-35 f4 quite a lot.
p.2 #10 · Going On An International One Month Vacation With One Lens
As someone that has all sorts of lenses, from zooms, to fast primes (from 16mm to 135mm), I had this dilemma, when choosing which lens I would pair with my Zf. I could have chosen the 24-120mm which I use with my Z8 a lot, but ultimately I went with the 24-70mm f4, as it's a bit smaller, an important factor when walking around all day with a camera. That's a personal choice. For many people, the 24-120mm is a perfect travel lens.
p.2 #11 · Going On An International One Month Vacation With One Lens
It's all personal preference of course, but between a 16-35mm or 24-70(ff equiv.) I would personally choose the 16-35mm. With shorter focal lengths you can work the scene more. There are more angles, options, and creative choices than one might think. I find that the resulting photos can feel more like you are in the scene or create a more intimate experience (if that is your thing). Maybe that is a feeling you value for travel work.
You also can separate your subjects well with a wide angle just in a different way than longer focal lengths. Push up close to your subject with a wider FOV and other nearby objects start to get pushed back. This can be great with trees for example.
I sometimes find that the middle focal lengths can create a somewhat more detached or floating feeling. Like looking through a window, without being present. This isn't always true of course and these middle focal lengths have their place, but strictly for travel with one lens I would choose a somewhat wider kit.
Also I think that for a second lens to pair with the 16-35, a 70-200 (or similar) would be a great match. Sometime you want to carve something out of a scene and having a longer focal length can pair well. You also don't have any overlap which can help simplify the the mental process for choosing what lens to equip. Less analysis paralysis which I tend to suffer from.
I am a prime guy mostly. For me, my one lens kit would be my Fuji x-t5 with 18mm 1.4 wr. Its light enough for a sling bag and is flexible enough for me for landscape, architecture, and abstracts. If I had to choose only 2 lenses to bring with me somewhere, I would likely be choosing the Fuji 18mm 1.4 and the Viltrox 75mm 1.2. That way I can get my wider establishing shots and something tighter for detail and abstract work. Also if Fuji ever decides to update the optics in their 10-24mm f4 I would buy it in a heartbeat, to much smear and corner softness for my work.
p.2 #12 · Going On An International One Month Vacation With One Lens
If I had to choose ONLY one lens and since I want to walk around with something small and light I would choose a 35mm lens, in particular the 35mm Summilux (f/1.4) for everyday walk around and since Leica M lenses (especially this lens) is so small and light I might add a 50mm or 75mm for the rare occasion that I wanted something longer.
Twenty years ago I did a photography workshop in Paris with Peter Turnley. He asked us to choose one lens for the entire 10 day workshop and the then new Canon 5D, the first consumer full frame DSLR and a 35mm f/1.4 L lens. I enjoyed the workshop and one lens process and I still enjoy looking at those photos and thinking about the limitations of shooting in 2006 compared to now.
p.2 #13 · Going On An International One Month Vacation With One Lens
liggy wrote:
One camera, one lens to Asia for one month?
Easy one for me. A1 II, 20-70 F4. Love that combo.
Your images make for a compelling argument. I think that I can say the same for other posts. Clearly, we make the best of what we take, which for me is a great reason, short of safari, or jungle vacation, not to take a backpack full of lenses..
p.2 #14 · Going On An International One Month Vacation With One Lens
If I was to carry but one lens, it would probably be something like the 40mm Batis or 35mm f/1.8 FE. Though I also often walk around with just the Zeiss 55mm f/1.8. Any of them would be a viable one lens option for me.
Though it's pretty easy to either have 3 Batis lenses, or 3x Sony lenses (whatever your preference) fit into a small space. EG: Sony 20mm f/1.8 G or 28mm FE, 35mm f/1.8 FE, 85mm f/1.8 FE, or equivalent Batis lenses, though in that case, I would probably go: 18mm, 40mm, 85mm.
p.2 #15 · Going On An International One Month Vacation With One Lens
One camera, one lens? It'd have to be the S1R and Leica 24-90. High res brilliant sensor coupled with what could arguably be considered the best / one of the absolute best zooms ever made.
Yeah, it's heavy. But it's what I have brought on recent trips and I can't say I regret it.
p.2 #16 · Going On An International One Month Vacation With One Lens
RoamingScott wrote:
I'd absolutely never take just a 16-35 for a trip where I had no idea what was ahead of me.
One lens trips are what lenses like a 24-105/24-120/24-200 are made for.
I don’t think that you can ever cover all possible situations, but I do think that the new A7Rvi combined with the Sony 24-50mm f/2.8 G and Sony 70-200mm f/4.0 Macro provide coverage from almost macro to telephoto and weighs only 4.31 pounds. On top of that add a 1.4TC to extend both reach and macro capabilities. Lastly, still have respectable image when using APSc mode on the A7Rvi. I’m seriously looking at purchasing this f/4.0 zoom. I just need to find a magic lamp and a generous genie.
p.2 #17 · Going On An International One Month Vacation With One Lens
All of your gear selections and reasoning behind the selection has been quite helpful. My recent exposure to medium format digital has changed my direction and my forced move away from primes has gotten me out of my comfort zone. I don’t agree with those that suggest an equivalency of full frame and medium format digital, but there is quite a bit of overlap and the creative component is more central than the gear. I spent a couple of weeks in France many years ago with an A1 and the 24mm GM. This lens and the A7Rvi make a great high resolution, low distortion pairing that should work great as my A7R6 main travel lens. The second lens provides me with a look that differs from anything that I’ve tried. I credit Tim Devine, of these forums for my selection of this lens. I’ve followed Tim for a good while on Flickr and his use of the 50-150mm f/2.0 GM gets away from the idea that this is just a great portrait/event lens. The size and weight are a bit much, but not an issue when sitting in my MindShift Sling Bag and a necessary compromise in order to replace three high quality fast prime lenses. I think that both of these lenses push the A7R6 as close to MF as is currently possible. When traveling with my wife, she will use the A7R6 and the 24-50mm F/2.8 G lens. I’ll use my X2D2 and 20-35mm and 35-100mm XCD lenses. Right now the bank has been emptied, so will be looking for cheap flights to Asia.. do they exist these days?
