Discussion in 'Travel' started by Andy Murphy, Oct 20, 2020.
Which lens did you choose, and what was your reasoning? The Hexar RF is not exactly "new in the box," having been last made in 2003. Compatible Leica lenses are small enough to fit several in a small fanny pack (or pockets). It's not clear why just one lens for travel would be necessary.
For general travel, it's hard to beat the flexibility of the 20-something to 100-something lenses.
For special foci, so to speak, more specialized lenses are on the camera most of the time:
e.g. a perspective-control lens for architectural photography, 100-400mm lens for wildlife, etc.
Many of us carry two bodies, one for the general purpose, the other for the specialized purpose. When you do this, however, you have to be in good shape physically.
Sony FE 24-105mm f/4 G OSS
It depends on the system you use, but my favorite - for Leica - is 35 mm Summilux f/1.4 ASPH. A great all arounder.
Ricoh GR3, 28mm focal length that crops very well up to 75mm if output to the web is all you want. It also fits in a blouse pocket and recharges through USB-C. Great ergonomics and sensor with IBIS.
Since we're re-animated again, I guess we can take a new shot at this one.
My Leica M3 favorite lens is my Summicron 5cm f/2.
Who could ask for anything more?
Modern Photography 1953-07
The Soviet copy of the East German Biotar is also claimed to be more based on this one, FWIW
I travel with my Nikon F100 or F6 with a 24mm Nikon lens. But I also carry an 85mm F1.4, That seems to cover just about everything I need.
Newest favorite travel lens...
35mm = 35-105 + 35/1.8
FF/FX = 24-105 or 24-120 + 35/1.8
APS-C/DX = 18-140 + 35/1.8 (Nikon does not make a DX 24/1.8)
m4/3 = 12-60 or 14-150 + 17/1.8
When I travel I pair the GP zoom with a fast wide, for those low light interior shots.
But in practice, I adapt to whatever I have.
When I traveled and shot with the Nikon L35AF, the fixed 35mm lens worked just fine.
Few hobby photographers are capable of making insightful or even interesting photographs worth sharing when travelling to new locations, myself included, thus whatever lens is on my iPhone is good enough for me when capturing memories.
Often I can't resist to bring a small film camera anyway, but would favour something light like a Minox 35 with a 35/2.8 lens - but that will rarely result in something worthwhile.
If going somewhere I know intimately, it is another matter. The lens choice would depend on location, for Japan I would favour a 20mm+50mm (or 28mm if I am travelling light).
Are you suggesting your photos of somewhere intimate are insightful and, therefore, worth sharing?
I would say that with a more intimate knowledge of the place and it's culture, the chances are higher that I can transcend beyond superficial and stereotypical observations, and it may result in an image worthy of printing and framing for my wall.
I’m the opposite, I like new surroundings (but not enough to print anything).
For me, printing a photo doesn’t have to do with liking the place it was shot. It has to do with liking the photo. I print photos, not locations.
As to intimacy with well-known places or newness of places, both can work for me and they’re not even mutually exclusive. I’d contend a photographer can create an intimate photo of even a very new and unfamiliar place and a fresh and spontaneous photo of even a place they’ve visited hundreds of times.
Sometimes, just changing to a different lens will help my seeing, whether it’s the “right” lens or not.
Are you familiar with Pseuds Corner?
Separate names with a comma.