John Di Leo Posted September 27, 2019 Share Posted September 27, 2019 Just an observation after 2 weeks in Barcelona, Zaragosa, Madrid, Toledo, Seville. OBV ymmy. I brought (all Nikon, D810 full frame) a 24-70, 16-35, 35/1.8, 20/2.8 AI and a 55/3.5 micro. The order that they are being used is 20---by far 35 16-35 55 24-70 The narrow streets and cathedrals are made for wide angle, and I am shooting a LOT in portrait. I am surprised by the little use of my go-to 24-70. I am not shooting a lot of landscapes and that is contributory. I sure am glad I brought the 20 though. I also bought a Sony Rx 100 mk2 that has not left the camera bag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCL Posted September 28, 2019 Share Posted September 28, 2019 For years I overpacked gear which went unused during my travels. These days I cut it down to 2 lenses and figure if I can't achieve my goals with the 2 lenses I choose to take, then I don't deserve the shot! 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Di Leo Posted September 28, 2019 Author Share Posted September 28, 2019 The philosophy of what you say has validity. When I only have one or two lenses with me, it quickly happens that I start thinking in those two lenses' formats. Tonight I went out with only 20, and thinking "in 20" guides my shots. Yes, the 16-35 would have some appeal, but it also has the drawback of size and weight. Now, with only one lens, and having to rely on megapixels for cropping, means that focus MUST be critical,I have to get the best shot I can. Of course that should always be done, but it's even more critical with a lens like the 20 with its potential for distortion and for me that must be remembered. It kind of slows me down, but not significantly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dieter Schaefer Posted September 29, 2019 Share Posted September 29, 2019 24-70, 16-35, 35/1.8, 20/2.8 AI What's the reasoning behind all that redundancy? For years I overpacked gear which went unused during my travels. These days I cut it down to 2 lenses and figure if I can't achieve my goals with the 2 lenses I also tend to overpack. Depends on how and where I travel though; traveling by car from home is more forgiving in that regard than airline travel. In case of the latter, two lenses would be my minimum - usually forgoing the longer focal lengths unless I have a specific reason to take them along. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Di Leo Posted September 30, 2019 Author Share Posted September 30, 2019 re redundancy...mostly weight considerations, the 20 and the 35 weigh less than the 16-35, especially if only one is used and the other stays in wife's purse...8) We were at the AlHambra today in Granada and the 20 stayed on the whole time, as at the AlCazar in Seville. This is a bit of a business trip, shooting some antique chairs for research and for that the 16-35 was practical. Yes, there is redundancy, but with a purpose. On my motorcycle trips I take the 16-35 and the 24-70, leaving the primes at home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hapien Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 I have not yet been in actual Spain, but isle of Gran Canaria. I carried aps-c body, 28mm f/2.8, two batteries and charger. It was rather nice and fit carry-on luggage. Since then I have accquired better smart phone, maybe I will leave dedicated camera home on next visit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxthompson Posted November 13, 2019 Share Posted November 13, 2019 Hi there. I am a noob in photo thing, can you tell me are lenses for Spain the best in the world or I didn't understand it correct? Thanks o_O Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Ingold Posted November 16, 2019 Share Posted November 16, 2019 My recollection of Spain is that it is a mostly place of narrow streets and historic buildings, rather than scenic landscapes or wildlife. That translates into wide angle lenses, the wider the better. My most used lens (in 2005) was a Nikon 17-35/2.8 zoom, followed by a 24-70/2.8. Except for a handful of times, my 70-200/2.8 stayed in the case. I had only DX cameras at the time, so 17 mm was not especially wide. It was the best I could manage, though. Today, I would rely more on prime lenses, which are mostly f/2 or faster, suited to dimly lit interiors, with less distortion. Equally important, prime lenses are compact. Many places did not allow large bags, including El Escorial and the Royal Palace. I found myself limited to a single, wide zoom. Now I can fit 5 Loxia lenses, 21 to 85 mm, in a small fanny pack. Tripods are almost never allowed (sometimes for a fee), and cathedrals cast a dim view on "professional" looking gear. The Prado Museum was surprisingly liberal regarding camera bags, but not tripods, and some collections would not allow photography of any sort. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stanley_sizeler Posted March 30, 2020 Share Posted March 30, 2020 I found that the Nikon 24-120 AFD VR on my D810 worked perfectly, Raising the ISO to 800 or (rarely ) 1200 permitted any exterior or interior images. The circualr polarizer occasionally was used outside . I travel with several batteries, charge them at night, I carry a collapsible carbon fiober monopod,, utilize a quick release mounting system, and use it when I can. No problems anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now