How much do you use the 90MM while traveling?

[don2]

I,m trying to lighten my kit and take just what I'll use about 95% of the time. Plan on taking 15mm V'lander, 24 mm Elmarit, 35mm micron and an extra M6 body.

 

<p>

 

Thinking about leaving the 50 mm micron, 50 mm Noct, and 90 mm APO at home. Pics will be of people, scenes. Any other suggestions?

 

<p>

 

thanks

[jackflesher]

When I travel, I use the 90 about as much as the 21/24, which is why

I have purchased the diminuitive 90TE in addition to my 90APO. But

regardless, I would not travel without a 90. My next trip is going

to be with the 21/35/90 combo only, and I am undecided as to whether

it will be the TE or APO.

 

<p>

 

:-),

[jay_.]

In urban areas I use the 90, otherwise I prefer the 135. I would not

go out without one or the other.

[fred_ouyang]

Don,

Looks like you're more of a wide-angle guy bringing 3 wide lenses

together.

When in travel, wide angle for me is especially for architecture and

interior shots. I take 21/35/50/90 with 2 M bodies most of time, 50

always mounted on one M body since I'm familiar with the coverage and

could grab a shot real fast(framing in my head). 90mm I think it

denpends on the mood, sometimes if I want to isolate interesting

subject within a crowded, congested area, I'll take my tele-elmarit

out, the same applies to the distant view and scenery. From a

distance, I can still find an interesting enough pictures to take. But

I wouldn't say it's street photography, some photog think it's ceating

using 90mm lens. :)

For 3 lenses you listed, I'll choose 50'cron.

[nicholas_wybolt]

Don,

 

<p>

 

I'm off to Arizona at the end of March and will be taking my 28 /

50 /90 (plus a lightweight tripod). Sometimes I wish that I had a

21mm or 24mm at the wide end, and a 135mm at the long end. However,

the 28 / 50 90 give me the best coverage for the subject matter that

I like to shoot.

 

<p>

 

Happy trails.

 

<p>

 

-Nick

[chris_chen4]

Nothing wrong w/your lens choice so long as it matches your shooting

style & locale. When traveling, I like to bring a simple 2 lens

combo, most often a 35/40/50 + a 85/90/100, w/about 25% of my shots

being made using the longer focal length. If I know I'll be shooting

mostly indoors, I'll go w/a 21/28/35 + 50 or just a 35/40/50. My

favorite "super-light" outfit is an M3 w/40/2 M-Rokkor & the black &

chrome or all-black Canon RF 100/3.5.

[mikep1]

I think I used my 90 once last year but I'm not sure...

 

<p>

 

Seriously, I hardly ever use it and have quit carrying it. The 50mm

is my "long" lens. So my travel kit is 24/35/50.

 

<p>

 

But it really depends on your photo style, as others have said.

[chris_chen]

I used to not carry a 90, not even a 50 when I travel. However, I

went back to Segovia, Spain (not a stretch, since I go to Spain

several times a year) and waited until dusk to get a tripod mounted

aqueduct photo that is one of my alltime favorite photos that my 35

just cannot get. I will never be w/o a 90 again. I even acquired a

50 to see if it gets much use. So, my kit, getting heavier and

heavier:

 

<p>

 

21 SA on M4 (wouldn't take the M4 except I can't find the rear lens

cap)

 

<p>

 

35/2 on M6 (main set-up, 90 goes on here for metering)

 

<p>

 

50 DR on M3 (90 goes on here for use)

 

<p>

 

If I was to take what I used 95% and truly wanted to lighten up:

 

<p>

 

M6 w/35, M3 (need back-up) w/90, Hassy SWC

[duncan1]

I've been debating getting a 90mm too. I presently shoot with a

single 35 Cron as I'm a pilot rather than photographer and can't be

fiddling about with lens changing while on the job, so to speak.

Having said that, I just ordered a 15mm Heliar to play with;.)

I've decided to leave the 90mm for a while until I can decide whether

it's really justified. When I used my Nikon system, prior to changing

to Leica M, I had and still have a 105/2,8. Did I/do I use it? Nope,

barely ever. I fear the 90mm would just lie there staring at me with

those awful $1500 eyes...;-)

 

<p>

 

-Duncan

[george_l._doolittle]

Just got back from 22 days in Vietnam...used the 90 a lot for pix of

people. Other use for buildings, landscapes very minimal. I might

add that I also have used the latest iteration of TriElmar on last two

trips abroad and love it. Saves a lot of time changing lenses and is

very versitile . It's a beautiful piece of work and really enhances

my photographic efforts.

[iván]

Hi, Don:

 

<p>

 

No matter what I use on travel, from the list of lenses you posted I

think that YOUR vision is clearly on the wider side.

 

<p>

 

I wouldn`t leave for a travel without my 90mm but I sincerely doubt

that it would be of much use for you. Not enough to justify carrying

it all the way and back, at least.

 

<p>

 

But, then again, who could know better but you . . .?

 

<p>

 

Regards

 

<p>

 

-Iván

[angus_ngtg]

This is one of those difficult to answer questions and one I've asked

myself quite often. I'm not sure what advice to give except to say I

wouldn't go anywhere without my 35 1.4 ASPH & 50 summicron. I used to

travel with a 24, 35, 90 combination and have changed that to 21 SA,

35 1.4 ASPH & 50 summicron. I find the 50 much more useful than the

90mm. Last time out I used it quite often. Good luck.

 

<p>

 

Best,

Tom

[jerry_pfile]

Don,

 

<p>

 

Vacations used to be the time when I most asked myself this question

in the past.

 

<p>

 

Over time, the choice has become prety much settled down to the 24,

35, 50, and 90. If we're going out West, I include the 135 for extra

reach in the wide open spaces.

 

<p>

 

If I plotted the images by lens use, I'm sure I'd find the the 35 and

50 ride the peak of the bell shaped curve, with the wides and the

teles somewhat on each side of the down slope

 

<p>

 

Only when I'm closer to home do I carry an extra body, and that

generally to provide for two film choices.

 

<p>

 

If my single body ever fails on vacation, guess I'll just have to

find a dealer and pick up another.

 

<p>

 

"After all honey, we can't have a vacation without pictures"!

 

<p>

 

Sneaky huh?

 

<p>

 

Jerry

[eliot]

The 90 mm is one of my favorite focal lengths - for protraits,

architecture, general travel, and landscape. For travel, I use the

90/2.8 Tel-Elmarit (thin, 4-element) because of its diminutive size

and sterling optical performance. For overall handling there's none

better. The trouble with the 90/2.0-ASPH-APO, as good a lens as it

is, is that it's the equivalent of two smaller lenses (weighs you

down), which is probably part of the reason you don't want to take

the 90 APO or Nocti with you.

[jay bee]

I noticed that the 75 lux isn't getting any play here. I don't own

anything longer than a 50 cron myself, and I'm personally debating

how long I should go from here. Thoughts?

[paul_chefurka1]

I've converged on a travel rig based around the Tri-Elmar. Other

lenses include the 35/1.4 ASPH and the CV 90/3.5 APO-Lanthar. I

don't use superwides much, but I'm thinking of adding a CV 21/4 to

the kit. The CV 90 is a real sweetheart of a lens - so far I think

it's at least the equal of the thin Tele Elmarit I had a few years

ago.

 

<p>

 

Most of my shooting is with the 3E, but I wouldn't want to be without

a 90. When I went to Belize a couple of winters ago I took the Leica

90 APO, and it was just too big to be fun. The same would go for the

Noctilux if I had one - just too much weight. The APO-Lanthar or a

thin T-E make the most sense to me for a vacation 90.

[frank_horn]

Since buying a 75mm Summilux, I have gotten the idea that Leica will,

one day, bring out a 75 Elmarit. Every Leica shooter owes himself a

very fast lens, and this new 75 'lux is mine. I wonder, though, if a

35 Lux Asph and a 75 Elmarit would not be a neat two-lens outfit.

The 75 Elmarit would be about the size of the 90 TE. Then, too, they

might bring out another 3E, but for the longer focal lengths. That

way, two 3Es would cover all of the frames of the M7, M6 & M4-P. I'm

sure the glass gurus at Solms have thought of that!

[michael_darnton1]

I like wides, and the fifty is my favorite, but I always take a 90 on

the theory that when I'm in unfamiliar territory I might want to stay

a bit farther away than I normally do.

[kens]

For travel I gotta have a 90. But the Summicron (pre- or AA) is too

heavy for my travel. I never cared for the thin TE - felt too small

for my hands and I hated that front-rim aperature ring. I've settled

on the current Elmarit with built-in hood. Seems to hit just the

right compromise of size, handling, and speed for me. Images are

superb.

[andy_piper2]

I wouldn't travel without a 90 - too many times when I want a detail or

a portrait with isolated background or just to stack up some mountains

or buildings.

 

<p>

 

But then I have a 'thin' 90 TE - which weighs and bulks less than two

full film canisters - or the 24, or the 35 or 50 'crons for that

matter.

[ray_moth]

I'm another who would rather not travel witout a 90mm: in my case an

Elmarit, somewhat more portable than the 90 APO. It sits on my M6

TTL .72 and my Tri-Elmar sits on my M6 TTL .58.