Travel Equipment

I have been traveling all over the world with the following:

Nikon D70 and D200

Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G - for those great shots

Nikkor 18-70 mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED - for the all day shots

Nikkor AF Zoom-Nikkor 28-200mm f/3.5-5.6G - for tele shots in dangerous areas

Nikon TC-17 E-2 Tele Converter

 

I am now planning another 4 month trip through places like the Middle East and

Iran, and I really want to lower the weight and size of my bag.

 

Would this be wise (or totally stupid) to replace all these lenses with the

Nikkor AF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G (the latter I still need to buy).

 

Do you think the Nikkor AF-S 18-200mm is a great replacement...or will I later

be so sorry that I left my good stuff at home. Please kindly let me know your

thoughts.

You can probably replace both 18-70 and the 28-200 with the 18-200. I'm not so sure about the 70-200! You'll probably miss it...

You get a mixture of answers.

For me I don't do action so a slow lens is fine for me, and I can use ISO up to 1600 without reservation. The VR will help as well. Some say a smaller/cheaper lens is better than a superzoom, maybe, and I do believe it but for what I do this lesser quality superzoom lens is fine by me.

 

I take a compact tripod, I am off in April so taking a D70 and a 18-35, no money for the 18-200. I may take a cheap 70-300 or such, just sold the cheap 80-200/4.5-5.6. Compact tripod will be a Feisol 3402 that I yet to get, since its direct from maker it'll never be as cheap, my Gitzo 1228 does not pack down as well, with my daypack which is all I am taking 4kg for that abouts. I like night shots. I purposely want this lens so its in my daypack and its hidden till I use it. I can still go travel in total with just a daypack. Useful when you are kicked out of hostel and need to make do till your late flight / train.

 

Not sure about the external flash though.

Some people may shoot primes but I find them a hassle when I am walking around so long each day. I do enjoy shooting wide open but I am willing to compromise that.

I would buy the 18-200mm and carry that. This would save weight so I could carry other equipment, like a flack jacket.

Peter, I just got back from New Orleans (first weekend of Mardi Gras). I use a backpack and carried a D80, a few lenses, and a monopod. My 12-24mm got some use and I used a 50mm f/1.8 for some low light shots but my workhorse was the 18-200. I never took out the big tele.

 

Obviously it depends on what you are shooting but if I had only one lens, it would have been the 18-200. Not quite wide enough for some shots but more than made up for that with the long range.

 

If I had two bodies, I would probably use the 70-200 on one and get something wider for the other. For digital, 18mm is not very wide. Another photog in New Orleans was doing this. But to keep the weight down, I opted for one body so the 18-200 was a no brainer. It really kept me from switching lenses all the time.

The 18-200 replaced much of my travel kit. It has now been reduced to the 18-200 (being used 95% of the time), sigma 30 1.4 and tamron 90 2.8 macro. I also sometimes toss in a 50 1.8

 

I don't do much wide angle (landscape, architecture) shots but if needed I set the 18-200 at 24 mm f/11.

 

I also own the 70-200 but I find it to cumbersome to carry around when traveling. I just slap on my tamron if critical sharpness is necessary.

I don't see the logic to bring two bodies and only one lens. If one of your bodies breaks, you have a backup. What happens if the only lens you have breaks? Can you easily buy another lens on the road?

 

If photography is important to you, you'll have carry some equipment. If you are only catching snapshots, bring a digicam.

I would never in a million years trade my 70-200 2.8G for an 18-200 VR. The big guy is just

too important to me, and is capable of shots and a level of quality that a super-zoom would

not be able to produce.

I will defenetly use only prime lenses

or at least I will take for shure one 50/1.8 or 1.4

but it is you decision of course

after all 3 prime lenses - as 24mm, 50mm, 85mm are much more compact than zooms like 24-200

I don't know - it also depends what is the purpose of the trip - to make photos, like photo journalist or just to go sightseen?

Dump the 28-200. Get an 18-200 VR for youf D200 and put the 18-70 on the D70 as a

backup. Sell the 18-70 when you get home. NEVER part with the3 70-200 2.8, but perhaps

leave it at home this time.

 

And keep a sharp eye on your gear in places like that.

Peter,

 

I assume the mean purpose of your trip is travel and sightseeing, so I will base my recommendations on that. Although I personally prefer to carry either a two zoom set-up or several prime lenses for most of my travels, it does seem a good idea to buy the superzoom 18-200mm if you are going to be away for 4 months. Apart from having to carry less weight, which means you will be more versatile in your approach, packing a lot of gear in the Middle East and Iran does seem a bit risky. Carrying a big camera bag and changing lenses on site can draw a lot of attention. You may get people to object to your picture taking if you show big, expensive gear. You may get people to ask you money to take their portrait, which is only a minor hassle, but you may also get robbed of part of your gear if you are not careful in crowded places like local markets.

 

I would take the D200 with 18-200mm and add a 50mm f/1.8 for those low light situations where flash is not permitted. The 50mm is so small and light you will barely know it's there. If you plan on staying in hotels that offer a safety box in your room or at reception, take your D70 as a back-up and leave it in the hotel. If your D200 should develop a problem, at most you would lose one day's shooting and you don't have to carry the extra body all the time.

For a trip like that I'd take the new Olympus SP-550 UZ Ultra Zoom and be done with it. I'm

not a mule.

 

http://www.steves-digicams.com/pr/olympus_01252007_sp550_pr.html

Would you have told Ansel Adams to leave his 8x10 view camera at home and take a point and shoot when he was traveling?

 

Dave

Dave,

 

If he was traveling in the middle east today, I think I would advise him to leave the big stuff at

home.

 

Peter mentions that he really wants to lower the weight and size of his bag. I think much of

the above advice is pretty good based on that, don't you?

Peter Steyn - I usually travel with a D200 and a 18-70 and have a great time. If the 18-200 performs just as well, it will be on my consideration list.

 

But...how are you getting a visa to Iran? I want to go there but I've heard Canadians are having troubles getting visas. Do share your secret!

"Would you have told Ansel Adams to leave his 8x10 view camera at home and take a point and shoot when he was traveling?"

 

Ansel Adams would normally drive as close as possible to his location and carry his large format camera and tripod to his final shooting point. He had a van with a custom built platform on top, where he would set up his camera and shoot from there if that was a possibility.

 

If Peter is going to the Middle East for 4 months, he'd better travel light. I based my previous recommendation on the assumption that he will be shooting travel and sightseeing pictures, mainly for his own portfolio. Now, if he plans on having his pictures published in a magazine or intends to display them in an exhibition, he would need to take more gear to assure top quality. A sturdy tripod and a good set of quality lenses would then be necessary. Travelling with a large amount of gear in countries where roads may not be what we are used to in the USA or Europe calls for a completely different mind set and a different approach.

 

Peter needs to find a balance between picture quality and convenience. Portability seems more important to me than anything else in these kinds of situations.

I would bring at the very least:

Nikon 12-24mm, 18-200mm, 70-200mm.

 

Performance of the 18-200mm falls apart at the long end, so I would fit the 70-200mm

for important images. However, if any one of these lenses break, you have a modicum of

redundancy.

 

Again, this is the minimum I would bring, given where you intend to go and the length of

your trip

Is safety or theft a concern? If yes, then, okay, bringing ONLY a do-it-all lens is justifiable.

 

If not, then I don't see any reason why you would take an 18-200mm INSTEAD OF an 18-70 and 70-200mm. IN ADDITION TO (as a backup) would be one thing, but INSTEAD OF? No way.

 

I've posted this before, but other than safety or theft concerns, why would ANYONE leave their top-notch equipment at home? What's the point of having top notch equipment?

 

KL

In the past I never would have considered a lens like the 18-200 VR. But the more I use it, the more it amazes me. Other than the usual distortions at the extremes, this is an astonishing lens.

<p>

So, to answer your question, I think the 18-200 is the perfect replacement for your use. You won't be leaving your "<i>good stuff at home"</i> if you take this lens.

<p>

If you feel you need a faster prime, add a 35/2. If you're worried about portraits with a nice, blurred background, the 18-200 does this well also (see attached photo).<div></div>

Hello Peter,

 

I just returned from Israel- Jaffa to Dead Sea and Jerusalem, and I took a 28-70 2.8, 35 F2, 50 f1.4, and an 80-200 2.8 plus 2 D2xs. This was a commercial shoot for a diamond client but the 3 pieces of glass I used were the 35 f2 (buildings and people), the 50 (low light shot in covered streets and narrow streets at ISO 200 and portraits, available light), and the 80-200 (desert landscapes, monostaries, and covert people images).

 

I never took the 28-70 out of the bag. I recommend a sturdy lightweight tripod with a quick release and possibly one of those small fold-out hand-held reflectors to put a little light on the side of a persons face (fill light...).

 

For Iran and Gaza if you go, I recommend a high-end point and shoot, that is quick to work with and put away...

 

Have a great trip but be extremely careful in Gaza, the West Bank, and in Iran if you are on an American passport. Watch out for pickpockets in the touristy areas in Jerusalem.

 

I know an excellent Israeli guide if you would like to use one. E-mail me and I will send his e-mail or check out www.jeeptour.co.il

 

Best regards,

 

FrankM

Depends on the context.

 

If you are a pro then you may get insurance and take the heavy gear with you - like a travel professional photographer.

 

If you are just a hobbyist for a 4 month holiday in the middle east and Iran it might not be the best always.

 

If you are hiking it also might not be, or if you are living at the off beaten track or living in dorms and hostel or if you are walking around 8hr each day.

 

I wouldn't take a backup camera. If you take a backup camera then I take another lens with it.

 

Had a look of your website I would say take the 2.8 zoom lens. Maybe a 18-200 VR and a 70-200 VR is the way with 2 bodies. Perhaps a 12-24 as well.

 

I go light as that is my preference how I travel, dorm style 2 or 1 night in each city etc. 6hr sleeps. I take a tripod cos thats the only way to get night shots and I stop down a consumer lens to f/8 or f/11. Some will question about my light tripod but that's the style I travel, might not be the best but a heavier tripod is just impractical for me. All I do on travel is some snapshots, some good composed shots handheld where I can and a handful of nice shot at night with my light tripod.

Wow, I am truly amazed with all the contributions...thanks so much!!

 

To answer Aaron's question: I'll pull out my other passport (South African) for the Iran visa. I still need to apply and still need to get the invitation arranged from Iran which is required to issue the visa..

 

I'm just an amateur photographer but hope to one day make some deals, i.e stock photos, magazine articles, publishing a book. I have been traveling almost non-stop since April 2005...done 40+ countries and took 40,000+ pics. The upcoming Iran and Middle East trip will also include the Balkan states, Yemen Oman, Jordan Syria, Lebanon, Turkey, Ukraine, Belarus, Moldova, Poland, etc.

 

I also own the Tokina 12-24 and what a gem! It will always be in my bag. In the past I have most always traveled with two bodies (D70/200) and the 18-70, 70-200/2.8, 28-200/3.5-5.6G. From reading the above contributions, I think I should drop the 18-70 and 28-200 and replace these two with the 18-200VR. The latter to be the workhorse and the brilliant (but heavy) 70-200/2.8 mounted on the other body and used when needed. I also think I should get the 50/1.8.

 

I always have my equipent insured so theft and damage will only be a problem on the road but will be replaced when returning home. I do agree with some opinions above, why leaving the 70-200/2.8 if you're looking for great pics! I guess in the end I wont make my bag much lighter than before....but sure I'll come home with good pics.

if you come to the Balkans - you should consider theft also in countries like Serbia, Macedonia, Bulgaria and Romania

as a citizen of one of them my advise is - keep non stop an eye on you things - money, passport and equipment, many cheap hotels are not safe, esspecially are not safe places like train stations, markets and others

hope you will get great photos and won't have problems

A 17-55 2.8 would be a good bet if you have the cash this would give you a top quality lens thta is alittle wider than 18-70 and a much better lens and then when you need more than that you ahve the 70-200 which is also a great lens. You would have two great lenses and bodys that way.