Jump to content

Lightweight Vacation Equipment


Recommended Posts

Hi All,

 

Just returned from a vacation week in the Orlando area visiting the many attractions. I took my Canon 80D plus the 18-55 f/4 kit lens as I wanted to travel light. Unfortunately, I found the 55mm focal length to be way too short for many of the sights (including animals).

 

For future trips, I’m looking for a lightweight combo to include the kit lens plus a moderate wide angle to moderate telephoto zoom (see below for my current lenses) and I’ve been looking at the Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS STM (don’t want a 3rd party lens). It’s received very good reviews. I intend to use the lens primarily outdoors so the variable aperture range shouldn’t be a problem and I think the 250mm end will be enough for my needs. I’m limited by budget and this lens fits well.

 

I noticed that perhaps 98% of the tourists used their smart phones but in order to maintain my image as a “professional” amateur, I knew I had to use “professional” equipment.:) Besides, my smart phone doesn’t have a zoom lens and I don’t intend to purchase a new one anytime soon.

 

Any suggestions or thoughts? What do you all take when on vacation and want to travel light?

 

Current lineup (all Canon lenses):

 

10-22mm f/3.5, 18-55mm f/4 STM, 24mm f/2.8 pancake STM, 50mm f/1.8 STM, 70-210mm f/4 IS, 100mm f/2.8 macro, and 400mm f/5.6.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you tried cropped digital enlargements of what you got with the 55?

I usually take a good digital point and shoot, the Wife uses it.

As for myself, the Pentax with a 40mm pancake makes for very light travel and I adjust/ crop on the PC.

Edited by Moving On
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The EFS 55-250 STM have a good reputation as a sharp, light lens. The Canon 70-300 IS is better, but it's as heavy as your 70-200 F4L IS. At the end of the day, you need to decide what you are willing to take on vacation and how much you want to carry each day. For me it's currently an M43 system and it all must fit in a small Domke satchel.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

By daylight, light, long vacation lens: Fuji 50-230(dim & OIS consumer zoom) on a venerable X-E1 (MILC with EVF). Images hold up well enough for 4K viewing . - I'd hope for a Canon EF-S counterpart to punch in the same league. (As nice as Fujis are rendering colors, I'd probably rather buy something EOS instead, these days for AF speed's sake.)

Sticking to Pentax crop SLRs I'll rotate ultra wide zoom and 135/2.8 on the 2nd body; kit zoom & 50/1.4 on the first and might pack a 2x converter if I am likely to encounter animals in broad daylight.

FF I might pack a 135/4 or go with just 90/4 and at least 35 & 21mm below.

My most basic take would be a single Pentax with Sigma 18-70/2.8-#.#.

My kit is incomplete and nothing mentioned here would be fast focusing. Traveling on my own I am happy with what I have but urged into a run & gun situation I'd prefer something else.

Yes, I am seriously(!) calling only 2 crop bodies and 4.33 moderate sized lenses "travelling light". If I (unlike a hiker) don't need to worry about ordinary baggage, I'll carry them happily, all day long.

I am too cheap to buy a tourist (single) zoom, covering the entire range. A two zooms kit and an additional unspectacular basic body seem to be cheaper, more reliable and easier to replace.

Not sure what to think about cell phone snapping. - I admit: Contemporary phones' images blow my old point and waits out of the water. - I never cared to own a capable phone camera and am quite relieved that my cameras won't ring or require me to carry silly power banks to recharge them on the go.

I'm no big fan of juggling lenses in the field but I can't afford 3 Leicas. With other systems I'd get a 2nd body for a 2nd zoom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm largely with JD . . . I shoot Nikon and I CAN get away with a my 10-24 Tamron and 80-200f2.8 with a D7100 body. But, I would likely include the 50f1.4 with it because it's so small and focuses fairly closely.

 

The sad truth is that I can't go anywhere without the 80-200 and that makes carrying more stuff too easy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds logical with a nice ring of truth JDMvW, but I have regretted taking too much and I've never regretted not taking much afterwards. Generally a fuji and a couple of lenses and a GRD.and extra batteries. All fit in a tiny Guatemalan purse I paid $5 for. Often, Just a couple of batteries in my pocket and a camera with 1 lens. Especially if I'm flying someplace.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just FTR: Before I ponder buying something light I usually sit and search specs reviews and sometimes even sample images. Buying a 55-250 gains you 605 - 390 = 215g. More than 1g of antimatter per Euro (the lens would be 183 € around here, with shipping) seems a good deal. - OTOH: Many people (myself included!) might do better starving just three or five times that weight advantage off and sticking to the regular zoom. - I wouldn't write the same about my f2.8; it never felt like a travel lens to me, but the f4 has that reputation.

Stay at home lenses I own: 90/2 (heavy old version) 24/1.8 Sigma (FF lens for crop body...) Typical "I don't mind" lenses are my Konica 35/2 or the 50/2 and 135/4 that surely are neither the lightest nor most compact in their class but neither extremely bulky nor otherwise disappointing enough to shout for light replacements.

Packing for travel is a compromise. - IDK what drives you to go leightweight. If I am ever going to fly again, I'll be unlikely to bet on cabin luggage only.

in order to maintain my image as a “professional” amateur, I knew I had to use “professional” equipment.:)
I always thought using lens hoods (once we are determined to pack real cameras) makes the difference.

At the end of the day vacations are a great chance to get your gear out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I travel to take photos, not the other way around. Do-all zoom lenses hold no interest for me. One way to decide is to look at metadata in Lightroom to see what you actually use.

 

In the old days, I carried a Leica M2 with 35, 50 and 90 mm lenses. Today, with zoom lenses, that would still cover 80% of what I am likely to shoot. I don't necessarily travel light, but I don't carry the entire kit once I leave the car. My kit includes lenses from 16 to 400 mm, mostly zooms but a few prime lenses too, a flash and a second body. From that I will choose one or two lenses, depending on the situation, to actually carry. I relied heavily on two lenses while touring Ireland this spring - a Sony 24-70/2.8 and a Sony 100-400/4.5-5.6. The 70 to 100 mm gap posed no problems.

 

More recently, I have re-acquired a taste for prime, manual lenses, and can carry 4 or 5 with little effort, in the range of 21 to 135 mm. I would pare that down for Disney World and surrounds, in the remote chance I ever return to that once steamy cow town. A single, 25 mm lens would probably suffice, as it does when just walking through urban areas. The prime kit worked well for me in the extended Seattle area this summer, including several national parks.

 

I find that I never use a macro lens on vacation, although I'm tempted to carry one, and only rarely, the flash. Next from the last would be a 16-35/4 zoom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been using the FZ1000 for some time now, and overall happy with the performance, specially in the quality of the photos at the extreme end of zoom, 400 mm (35 mm eq.). Also, the colors look quite natural straight out of the camera.

 

Untitled-819.thumb.jpg.e700e4544ae6dc0b1a8e5861667f3b7b.jpg

 

Untitled-820.thumb.jpg.b9e7d86d15af6de69a60645c87d21677.jpg

 

Untitled-822.thumb.jpg.cf366b063efbd680931c847cacef5203.jpg

Edited by Supriyo
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I'm on vacation, I travel light. That is '1' camera and '1' lens and of course a tripod. This way I have less things to worry about, less things to carry. I'm a Canon user and for years my favorite travel lens was the (below $500 28-105mm f3.5/f4 II). What I like about this lens is that it has a lot of contrast, is reasonably sharp, quiet and SMALL(it doesn't scare the locals). It can fit into a very large pants pocket or jacket pocket. Another reason I like is because it's cheap. If I lose it, or it gets stolen, I can always pick one up on eBay. The thing I don't like about it is that it is not wide enough and not long enough for certain scenes.

 

This is why I reluctantly moved up to the 24-105mm f4 for the wide end. For tripods I use the smallest Slick tripod you can carry which is the "Slick Compact 8" tripod that folds down to about 14 inches and is extremely light. It can barely hold up my 24-105mm without any help, but works fine with my 28-105mm. Believe me, you are going to need a tripod for those Night Scenes. I also carry a Mono-pod, but that's about it. Ok maybe a polarizer filter...

Edited by hjoseph7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
It used to be kind of a fun little obsession to try to find little cameras that you could have all the time in a pocket on occasions when the trip wasn't about photography in the film days. There were many possibilities then. A lot of those possibilities offered a LOT of creative control, not just a way to snap record shots. Now we all have our phones which do pretty good images, but with no real creative control and lousy ergonomics in the picture taking. Finding a camera that gives you good control over the image with good pocketability in digital seems tougher. Not sure what I'd take these days.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, full PASM set up, ok in poor light but I have low standards. Mine is an original RX100 and I carry it all the time I,m out. I love the front dials on the Rollei 35 and the closing door of the Olympus.Cute. Then I am not at the technical cutting edge, my 10 year old Blackberry proves that although this year I am proud to say I have upgraded to Windows 7. All the best Mr. Dragon, Charles.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, full PASM set up, ok in poor light but I have low standards. Mine is an original RX100 and I carry it all the time I,m out.

I've been carrying an original RX100 almost daily since I got it about 6 years ago. It's a wonderful and versatile camera with excellent low light performance by any reasonable standard. Using the self-timer and my MeFoto travel tripod, I get very good low light images of static scenes. A Toshiba Wifi SD card has solved one of my biggest issues by enabling immediate backup to my phone or tablet (with the PhotoSync app). I've used my Sony NEX-3c with 18-200 zoom for serious travel pics - the body/lens combo fits easily in a pocket in my vest, and with the pancake prime it fits in most jackets and even some pants. But over the last 2 years I've taken only the RX100 except when traveling primarily for photography. I really want a new RX100-Va but my 1st gen remains as good as new after thousands of images.

 

Here's Hong Kong harbor at midnight from the RX100 (1/13 sec, f4.5, ISO 1000):

 

hkharbor3.thumb.jpg.49b435ecdcaf5ecb375f1a8b036443a2.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well done Mr. Lynch, excellent photo and a very informative post. Delighted to find someone else satisfied with the mark one. Like you, I love this little camera and can not see enough of a reason to upgrade. They are still available new from Clifton Cameras at a bargain £329. Even the mark three is on sale for little more. I will continue to carry this everyday ,however ,not in my pants, in the English sense.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...