Ideal travel setup

[ethan_kuefner1]

Hi people. I have been here before, long ago, on a now-dead address. I

created a new account with my new address and here I am. Anyway: I

need some recommendations for a good travel setup. I'm going to Hong

Kong/Thailand in June. I've got an EOS Elan 7ne and a Digital Rebel

XT, and plan to shoot with both of them. So far, I've only been using

my crappy kit lens, but I will have about 600 bucks to spend after I

shell for the 50mm f/1.8, which everybody insists I should buy. The

Rebel, in my case, will not be used for beautiful wide-angle huge

shots, that's where the Elan+film comes in. Instead, I plan to use it

for high-volume snapshotting. Now, with the $600 bucks I have, should

I expand down and up with a wide-angle and a tele prime, or just up

with a telezoom? For the telezoom, obviously, I was looking at the

70-200mm f/4l, which actually is pretty cheap, considering.

[mike_broderick]

Sounds like you know what you want. Only alternative that comes to mind for me is the 70-300 IS lens (not the DO version, but the new "regular" 70-300). The merits of it and the 70-200/4 have been discussed extensively here and in other forums.

[ken munn]

For your wide angle film shots, why not go for Canon's 28mm f2.8? Relatively cheap,

relatively good, sometimes available used at even better prices.

[dogbert]

I am not sure what you want to shoot, but the 70-200f4 is big and white and would not be my first choice for a travel lens. That is unless you want to do long distance candids, details of architechure and compressed landscapes.

 

I do a lot of travel, normally with a film and digital body. The longest lens I typically take is the 28-135 IS for a bit over $400. On film it works as a good normal zoom, and on digital is acts like a 48-200 medium telephoto.

 

The 50 f1.8 is a good portrait lens, but IMO is not very useful for travel. I would take the 35 f2.0, if taking a prime. Small, sharp, fast, cheap and versatile on both film and digital.

[mark u]

If you only have the "crappy kit lens" (28-105 f/4-5.6) for your Elan then I think you should get a wide angle that you could use on your XT as a normal zoom. The 17-40 f/4 L might be a good choice. Plan to add the 70-200 or similar later (I'd avoid the 70-300 IS USM until Canon fix the problems it has used in portrait orientation). The point is that Hong Kong has a lot of high rise buildings and narrow streets, for which the wide lens is ideal on film (94 degree horizontal angle of view at 17mm).

 

The 50 f/1.8 will give you some good low light capability on film, and makes a good portrait lens on 1.6 crop. You probably won't miss having longer reach on this trip - if desperate you could always use 105mm on the XT. I just returned from Chicago, where I went to a family wedding right by the Sears tower - I took focal lengths from 17 to 100mm to shoot film and never missed my longer lenses, but I was very glad of the wide angle.

[vorlandphotography]

Back in my Elan 7 days, I counted on the 28-135 IS as my main travel lens, and it never let me down. An amazingly good and versatile piece of glass for the money.

[yakim_peled1]

>> should I expand down and up with a wide-angle and a tele prime, or just up with a telezoom?

 

Actually you need both but that will double your budget. Consider the Tamron 17-35/2.8-4 for the wide end and Canon 70-300/4-5.6 IS or 70-200/4 for the tele end.

 

Happy shooting,

Yakim.

[m_barbu1]

<p><i>after I shell for the 50mm f/1.8, which everybody insists I should buy</i></p>

 

<p>I too bought one of these on recommendations I read. I'd like to caution you to make sure that the focal length is one you will use. I ended up selling it after owning it for a short while, because I just never used this focal length on a 1.6x crop camera.</p>

[lovcom_photo]

I've traveled extensively around the world, and have found that I used the wide end 10 times more then the long end.

 

The focal lenghts that I used the most were (full frame body):

 

24mm 20%

35mm 70%

50mm 5%

85mm 5%

 

I realize this type of thing is very subjective, however after taking dozens of trips to many parts of the US, Europe and Mexico, it seems that these percentages tend to be constant.

 

The one thing I will stress tons is to bring at least one fast prime lens, something fast (F1.8 or faster). Often flash is either not an option or not allowed.

 

One thing I learned the hard way: DON'T bring a zoom that goes out more then 105 or 135mm....it will be too cumbersome, often long and heavy, and because it is a pain you may often find the shot is not worth the lens change, nor lugging the big dog around. Again this opinion is highly subjective, so do consider that when you read my words here.

 

I think for travel, the thing to do is go the minimalist route. Take the bare necessitities. For my up coming trip to Italy, I'll be bringing he following kit:

 

Canon 35mm F1.4L (flashless wide angle for museums, concerts, exhibitions).

 

Canon 24-105 F4L (for 70% of all my shooting--a general walkabout lens).

 

Canon 85mm F1.8 (flashless long reach for museums, concerts, exhibitions).

 

I'll also bring a flash for environmental portraits, fill flash, night time dragging of shutter to get background monuments type shots).

 

None of these lenses are long, nor heavy.

 

Bring a Portable Storage Device (PSD)! This will allow you to create redundant backup of all your flash cards. Most people use a PSD to back off their images, then after formatting the card to take more. I don't like this logic as it is very vulnerable to losing images forever. Better to take advantage of the cheap 2gb cards, and buying several, then using the PSD to create a 2nd copy of each card, but never formatting any cards until the end of the trip, after the PSD is backed off to a PC and optical disks. For a long trip, with very valuable sentimental images, I think using a PSD in this way is the best "insurance".

[buck_rogers1]

Ethan,<p>

I, too, am headed to Thailand in June. I am taking my 30D with my 50 1.4, 17-40, and 70-200. I also have a 28 2.8 which I might try to sell before I go. I find that, despite is light weight, speed and sharpness, I don't really use it since I got the 17-40. <p>

I am bringing an ELAN as well both as a backup, should my brand new $1400 camera fail (knock on wood) and for any super wide angle. Incidentally, for stunning landscapes I will take multiple exposures with my 50 and stitch them together in PS.<p>

If I do sell the 28 I might pick up the 35 f/2.0 because, although it is in the same range as the 17-40, it is TWO stops faster. I that case, I would leave the 50 at home. Like previously mentioned, the 50mm is a bit limited for travel use (80mm equiv.).<p>

My two cents.<p>

<p>

See you in Bangkok!

[buck_rogers1]

Oh yeah, for storage, I have two digidrives and will also take some blank DVD's and use the extensive cybercafes in the city to burn copies of backups.

[ted_marcus1]

There is no such thing as an "ideal travel setup." Every traveler's needs will be different; budgets and available lenses may require compromise that's less than ideal.

 

Before I stopped using my Elan II in favor of a Rebel XT, my travel kit consisted of a Canon 28-105 (the good f/3.5-4.5 version) supplemented with a "crappy" Canon 22-55 for wide-angle (actually not that crappy when stopped down). At one time I also carried a 70-210 and a 50mm f/1.8 (the 1989-vintage "mark 1" version), but I found that I didn't use either of those enough to merit shlepping them. I got a new smaller camera bag that fit the Elan II and the two lenses, and found that traveling became much easier.

 

I now fill the camera bag with a Rebel XT, a Canon 28-135IS, and a Tokina 12-24. Though not the most convenient combination, I get everything from ultra-wide (20mm equivalent) to moderate tele (200mm equivalent) with two lenses and no need for film. I wouldn't want to travel with more than two lenses. But I do sometimes pack the Elan II body in my carry-on bag as an emergency backup that I hope not to need.

 

As always, your own preferences determine what equipment you need. I tend toward wide rather than long, but if you're interested in wildlife or birds (either the British or American variety) you'll obviously need a long lens. Since I don't take portraits, I really don't have much use for a 50mm prime on a 1.6 crop camera.

[images_in_light_north_west]

Pick up the latest copy of Nature Photography it has a list of what the top pro's use for light travel kits

[ethan_kuefner1]

Thanks so much everybody. Indeed, the 70-200 f/4l is probably not a good idea,

considering what I'll be doing, mainly. Yes, Dan, I'm bringing a PSD along, I made a post in

the digital forum asking for recommendations on that as well. Oh, and Ross, I went and

picked up Nature Photography at B&N downtown, what a great book.

 

So right now, the setup looks like the 17-40 f/4l and the 50 f/1.8, or if I can find a 1.4 for

cheap, I'll get that. Definately, flash will not be allowed in a lot of places, i.e. wats when I

head north, etc. See you in Bangkok, Buck.

--Ethan

[bellavance]

Same in this month's issue of Outdoor Photography.

 

Pierre