Things I would do different on the next China Trip

Just got back from 8 days in China. I did a lot of advance planning Took a Lowepro Sling bag that worked great

for my D300 a;though the camera is a little heavy for tourist use. I also a 50mm f1.8 Nikkor, 24mm f2.8 Nikkor

and the 18-200 mm Nikkor. Initially I planned to also take my 18-70mm Nikkor but decided that would be more

weight and redundant.

 

Now that were are back and I'll looking at the photo results I am wishing I had left the 18-200 home and taken

the 18-70 which is smaller and considerably lighter. I didn't make use of the stronger magnificxation of the

18-200 (I've never been a tele guy). I ended up shooting a majority of my approminately 1,000 raw+jpegs with the

24mm--about 35mm in film terminology.

 

The one positive on the 18-200 was the VR which allowed me to shoot at some lower shutter speed in less than

ideal conditions. I might have been better off to go with the 16-85 VR instead of the 18-200.

 

The D300 performed flawlessly on the trip but there were times I was a little jealous of my mate's Canon A1000

P&S even knowing that most of the time my photos would be better.

Wayne-in retrospect, do you think that you would have been better off with the 18-70 (smaller and lighter) or the 16-85

(VR)? cb

I too went on a trip recently for 10 days. We stayed in London and I brought my D300 and 16-85mm zoom, as well as the Sigma 10-20mm. I used the Sigma 10-20mm only on the first day when we went to the British Museum, which allows photos to be taken inside. Most places in London do not allow photos to be taken inside (like St.Paul's or Westminster Abbey). I also brought along my Nikon 10.5mm DX fisheye lens, and the Nikon 50mm f1.8 AF-D as a backup, which I only used at the airport. I also brought my Panasonic DMC-FX35 which came in handy quite often as well as for video clips.

 

I used the 16-85mm for 90% of my photos and was glad I had it. If I were to do it again, I would leave the Sigma 10-20mm and the Nikon 50mm at home, and just brought the 16-85 and the 10.5mm fisheye. Ideally I would just bring a Nikon D60 and the small 18-70mm zoom to stay light weight but I was glad I had my D300. Rick Steves writes he has a Nikon D40 when he travels through Europe filming his TV shows and updating his guide books.

Against my ego and will, I recently went on a trip and packed a D40x and 18-135mm in a very small LowePro bag.

 

To eliminate the obvious, the photos came out great notably after some post batching for lens correction.

 

I was thankful my ego didn't get in the way this time. It was a fun trip, not a paid trip. Since then, I have the D40x and lens just packed in the same bag and it goes with me everywhere and I have dubbed it my DSLRP&S. It doesn't replace the D300s and bazookas, but has it's purpose. Nothing like traveling with a 60lb Slingbag full of every lens possible and two cam bods (a joke). However, when paid, bring on the Slingbag

 

Peace.

Charles:

 

I would have been happy with the 18-70 plus the 24mm and the 50mm (could have probably left the 50mm home, too). 70mm would have been plenty on the tele end for me and I could have got it all in my small LowePro bag and left the sling backpack home. We went to Europe last year. I had a D100 and was very pleased with the photos I shot with it and a Promaster (Tamron) 28-105 lens. It seemed much lighter and more compact that my current kit--but I'm sure this year's shots are of higher quality.

I got back last month from a trip to S.E. Asia and brought my Nikon D200 kit and a Canon G9 as a backup. It was so hot and humid there I carried the Nikon bag one day and one day only and I was wasted. the rest of the trip -8 days- I used the G9. The images were great and because it's small and silent, I got shots I never could have gotten with an SLR in my face. I felt fresher at the end of the day too. When traveling, light is right.

Hi Wayne-thanks. I spent a month in China way back in 1982-my Asahi Pentax/Kodachrome 25 days. I am planning a trip

to Shanghai for next spring and will have my Nikon D90 plus the 18-70 which I kept when I upgraded from my D70-it's a

great travel and walk around lens. regards, cb :-)

Just to show you that I have a totally different approach to things, in my recent trip to colonial Mexico, I brought a

fairly large backpack with four f2.8 zooms: 70-200, 28-70, 17-35 and 14-24, plus a 24mm/f3.5 PC-E for the

architecture and the 10.5mm fisheye, D700 and D300 bodies so that I had a backup.

I was very glad that I had f2.8 anywhere between 14mm to 200mm; it was really handy for those hand held night

shots. Of course, I also had a big Gitzo tripod with me and used that when possible.

 

Another major benefit was that my bag weighted a ton so that I felt quite safe that nobody would snatch it because it

would be very difficult to run with so much weight. :-)

 

But no, I am not recommending this approach to everybody.

Well, my "Travel Kit" consists of a D70 with the 12-24 and 18-70 Nikkors - as well as the undeservedly unappreciated Sigma 28/1.8. That pretty much covers it all, and I carry it in the Lowepro "Sideline Shooter" belt pack - no sore shoulders here :-)

 

Oh, and a rangefinder loaded with B/W film, as well :-)

 

Cheers,

 

Soeren<div></div>

Last year in China I used an 18-70 a lot. This year in the US I mainly used a 35/1.4 and a 28/3.5 PC. I did have other lenses with me, but I tend to have a maximum of three lenses, since the less I carry, the more I can move and the more I will see.

Ah, but the heavier your bag is, the longer you stay in one spot, and the more carefully you compose your pictures. On

tripod, of course. ;-)

Charles. The D90 and the 18-70mm wouls be a nice light combination--at least lighter than my D300.

 

When I'm on vacation I want the best images possible but if you take too much gear the vacation sort of turns into a job and you are a captive of your equipment.

 

The Lowepro Sling Shot 200 is a nice bag for the situation we were in. It was easy to get to lenses of acc without taking the bag off and I could rotate it around under my left arm if I felt I was in an area where additional security was needed. Since I nearly always had the camera in my hands there wasn't a whole lot in the bag to steal anyway. Still, I pretty much had to lug the bag everywhere because I don't trust hotel room locks to protect three grand worth of equipment.

Just arrived in China yesterday with 300 pounds of gear, 10 weeks of photoing ahead this winter. Horses for courses. I have some shots planned that are just not possible without the 8 large studio flashes and battery packs that I'm carrying. I paid a hefty baggage surcharge for it, but it's always been worth it. I always have a chuckle when I read about people complaining about the weight of a camera, when I've carried a D2x, Crown Graphic, and about 8 lenses every trip as well. It was all unwieldy and cumbersome to get it here, but now that the kit is reconfigured for overland travel, it rolls easily and I find that I have room in the backpack to spare. To each his own.

...oh, and Photo.net is no longer blocked by the authorities anymore here in China, like it was last winter. For now, anyway...

<i>I always have a chuckle when I read about people complaining about the weight of a camera, when I've carried a D2x, Crown Graphic, and about 8 lenses every trip as well.</i>

 

<p>Well, a Crown Graphic is a toy compared to my Toyo monorail ;-)

 

<p>The point is that it's not so much about how much one can carry or pack in the car for that matter, it's about how much can one carry and how fast and how far can one move with that gear. Fatigue is always an issue, one can't go everywhere by car, a tripod is not possible to set up everywhere and photographic scenes disappear while rummaging through the gear and fiddling with lenses and cameras. Bottom line is that there is no right answer for what is the right gear.

It's also a matter of if you are shooting for business or for pleasure. If I was making my living shooting I would have any problem with taking more, heavier and larger equipment. But this trip was for personal enjoyment .

Wayne, it also depends on what personal enjoyment is for you. My trip to Mexico was for personal enjoyment too,

and that was precisely why I needed f2.8 at 200mm as well as at 17mm, and I actually used them wide open a

number of times. To me, capturing high-quality images with good gear under various tough lighting is enjoyment, and

that was why I went to Mexico to begin with. It would have been very disappointing to me if all I had were some 18-

200mm lens. I had no problem walking up and down hills with a 30-pound backpack. And I can understand some people may consider me crazy.

 

But again, your mileage may vary.

Shun:

 

I get the feeling you are considerably younger than I am. :)

Wayne, I have mentioned many times that I bought my first Nikon in 1977, the very year they introduced AI (auto indexing). Before that I had Minolta SLRs and a Leica for a few years.

And I did not buy my first SLR when I was 3 years old. Just do the math and you can tell I am not that young. However, I take my photography very seriously.

 

One of my tour group leaders was John Shaw, yes that John Shaw. I believe he is in his mid 60's now (his books list that he was born in 1944) and he brought two D3 bodies, 17-35, 24-70 and a 70-300 f4.5-5.6 AF-S VR. He wasn't as crazy as I was, but even his wasn't a light-weight kit.

 

Incidentally I learned a lot from John Shaw, but that is for another thread.