The eternal question of which camera to take along...

[steve_t.1]

<p>... on a tourist vacation trip. Soon my wife and I will be visiting relatives in the Lake Tahoe area for a few days. Photographically, there won't be an emphasis on people shots, it will be landscape and nature, views shot from the park trails, roadsides, etc.</p>

<p>Now, if I wanted to travel light, I'd pack up my Panasonic LX3 and Ultrapod II and hit the road. Or I could go great guns and pack the K20D kit (or some variation) and a tripod or monopod. (Yes, the Panny can travel along with the K20D.)</p>

<p>Summary of lenses-<br>

Pentax fisheye<br>

Sigma 10-20<br>

Sigma 18-50<br>

Tamron 18-250<br>

Pentax 35-70<br>

Pentax 50<br>

Tamron 90mm macro</p>

<p>Whittling the K20D kit down to minimal means going with the obvious lens that does it all, the 18-250 Tamron. (I think this is what Scott Kelby recommended in his latest book.) But if I did the Sigma 10-20 and the Pentax 35-70, I'm getting just about everything that normally interests me, with the effective range of 15-105mm (with a gap in there, of course). And then there's the Panny and it shoots 24-60. I normally use the LX3 for motorcycle travel and leave the big kit at home, but this is a fly-in and drive trip.</p>

<p>Traveling light along with other people means the Panasonic. Taking more time at each shot means the Pentax. So many choices.</p>

<p>Hmmm... LX3 and the K20D with the 10-20 and 35-70. That's not sounding too bad at all. Covers my bases for both light and fast and for highest possible quality and flexibility. Maybe I just talked my way through this trip. But what are your thoughts? Thanks.</p>

[jgredline]

<p>Steve, no matter what you take and don't take, you will be kicking yourself for leaving the one thing home, you should have taken. So I like what you decided on. ''LX3 and the K20D with the 10-20 and 35-70''</p>

[andrewg_ny]

<p>When you have lots of choices, it can be <em>very </em> hard to choose. 10-20 + 35-70 doesn't sound like a terrible plan. The truth is, whatever you pick you'll probably end up missing at times what you didn't bring. Perhaps look through your old shots to see how much you're likely to miss the in-between focal lengths.</p>

[rose_duclos]

<p>... Lake Tahoe is beautiful - what about that 18 - 250 for some wildlife shots? The 90 macro for some flowers and bugs? ... goodness ... I know that wide angle is good for street pics and landscapes - but, surely it's always good to have a larger lens for that other stuff that could show up in your travels... <br>

:) </p>

[les_lammers]

<p>Take me with you and I will caddy for ya! Change a lens or two also. :-)</p>

[hagar]

<p>Rose, you are no help at all! lol, Next thing you will be suggesting he buy another lens and then get Les to caddy :-)<br>

If I was just going to take 2 lenses, I'd opt for the 10-20 and the 18-250. All your bases are covered that way.</p>

[rose_duclos]

<p>nah... not a good idea, Haig - I remember reading that the 18-250 is slow... better to keep that one only for the wilderness / animal pics - and leave it bagged otherwise. No, he's wise to have two of the wider angled lenses on camera. ... still ...</p>

<p>the idea of having a caddy is a good one... and the caddy could carry extra cameras, and a heavier tripod... (heck, if you're going to shell out extra travel costs - might as well, make the guy work for his suppers. ) :D *sorry Les. *</p>

[rose_duclos]

<p>actually, you should probably also bring the fish eye... I know it's not an overly used lens - but, it could be an interesting perspective to get a bird's eye shot of the lake in 'fish eye'...<br>

:)</p>

[rose_duclos]

<p>Oh... and the stars are absolutely spectacular out there - so make sure you pack your remote for some night shots. :)</p>

[jpo3136b]

<p>35/50/135 in whatever's the equivalent of the format you're using. A good, solid, no-fuss basic kit. Add tripod and flash, and you're pretty much done.</p>

<p>I don't use a fisheye, but if you're going to use it at all, putting yourself in a great spot would be the time to break it out. Sooner or later, you're going to stand on the edge of a cliff or at an overlook someplace; if I had a fisheye, I would probably give it a pop right there.</p>

<p>If you've got something, just use the dog snot out of it.</p>

<p>Other than that, I'd say K20D and that 35 to 70mm. Add in a tripod and an off camera flash, and that'd be about it. Travel-wise, I'd say one camera, one lens for a wide/normal/telephoto, one flash, one tripod: you're covered in that format.</p>

<p>Either take a regular wide angle or the fisheye. If that fisheye is more of an ultra-wide angle (less than 170 degrees horizontal field of view; I count fisheye as 180, but don't have one or use one, so what do I know?), I'd say do the fisheye.</p>

<p>I guess my driving idea with travel photos is to stick to a contemporary version of the older 35/50/135mm groups. I like that type of basic kit, and is pretty close to what I normally use. I have other items which I'll probably keep and use occasionally just because those older 645 manual lenses and accessories may be harder to come by in the future; but, really, it's 35/50/135 [extrapolate that over to digital; maybe something like 20/35/75?]</p>

<p>I didn't mention that Panasonic solely because I have no idea what it is. So, grain of salt there.</p>

[jpo3136b]

<p>I have a blog entry up based on a recent trip; I was carrying three formats, so I was about four times heavier than you would probably want.</p>

<p>I wrote it after I ran against the grain over carry on baggage in this thread: http://www.photo.net/travel-photography-forum/00UOi9 Although, admittedly, the other guys had some sound ideas.</p>

<p>My summary is here: http://www.agxphoto.com/2009/09/packed-for-flight-some-air-travel-tips.html But, it's film and digital in three different sizes.</p>

<p>There was a week long road trip and a wetsuit involved in addition to the pair of airlifts; so, keep that in mind.</p>

<p>My number one piece of advice on the flights is: call that airlines a week in advance, and find out the specifics of the dimensions on the baggage. There's a lot of hearsay out there that seems to fall under the general heading of "carry on." If you get the wrong blend of information on that, you may have a glitch at an unwelcome time. Otherwise, Bon voyage!</p>

[mountainvisions]

<p>Take the 10-20, the 90mm macro and something in the middle. Probably 35-70 would be ideal. or if you are into panoramics, the 50mm would be ideal.</p>

<p>The macro will double as a nice tele to compress the landscapes, I have a 90mm that I love for this. The 10-20 will cover the wide end (big skys, reflections).</p>

<p>I travel a lot with the 10-20, 43, and 90mm so I'm comfortable recommending this combo. The 43 is actually a fine landscape lens, and perfect for panoramics, the 50mm would be as well, and actually I originally got a 55mm for landscape panoramics.</p>

<p>The zoom will NOT be ideal for panoramics, but if you don't take panos, then forget the 50 and go with whatever you prefer in the middle.</p>

<p>Definitely take a tripod, if you are shooting landscapes and hoping to shoot at ideal light, than a tripod is a must. SR is nifty but not a substitute, and framing and bracketing and possible HDR or at least digital GND filtration is damn near impossible without a solid tripod. Of course take the ultrapod too (never leave home without it!).</p>

[shots worth sharing]

<p>I went through the same thing before my trip to New Brunswick ( Canada--not NJ.) Since I was going to have a rental car, I felt no need to be seriously draconian about lens choices. If you're backpacking that's one thing: otherwise, I say err on the side of inclusion. It's not every day you get a chance to take photos in far-flung and visually interesting places so make sure you're ready to come back with some really good shots. I say take it all with the possible exception of the 18-50mm &/or 50mm--it'll be a lighter kit than I took to Canada.</p>

[pj_vesterback]

<p>I agree with Justin. Unless you are planning on shooting some wildlife then nothing long is necessary.<br>

Do not... I repeat DO NOT check anything valuable. I've had way too much stuff pilfered from my checked baggage. The only item that gets checked is my tripods legs. The head and all lenses come with me. I travel heavy (16-50DA*, 50-135DA*, 200DA*, 300DA*, flash and tripod head) but it all fits in a carry on bag with the exception of the legs.</p>

[markus maurer]

<p>I agree with Justin and would never travel without a macro lens.</p>

[johnw436]

<p>Lake Tahoe screams WIDE WIDE WIDE. The sprawling vistas are going to make you wish you had a 2mm lens to do them justice. In the trees it's all about details. It sounds to me like you've made a good decision already.</p>

<p> </p>

[jgredline]

<p>Steve, forget all this madness...Go out and purchase the new DA*10-600F/1.2 crazy zoom and you are good to go. ;-)</p>

[steve_t.1]

<p>Things learned today:<br>

-Call the airline. (Actually did that just after I penned this opening post.) Northwest Airlines cleared my tripod as a second carry-on (results may vary, always call first), so every bit of camera gear, and maybe an extra pair of skivvies in case they lose my check luggage, will be right above my head. So at least I'll have it all with me, whether a certain piece travels along that day will be another matter.<br>

-Caddie. Here's the chance for some lucky winner to pick up a no-expense paid trip (sorry, times are tough all over, even this trip is a financial risk for us right now, but the lodging for us is free) to Lake Tahoe and haul around my plump Lowepro camera backpack and aluminum Manfrotto tripod! Les, Rose, take your places in the starting blocks and listen for the crack of the starter's pistol. On your mark, get set, wait for it, wait for it...<br>

-Will opt for the tripod over the monopod on this trip. Yeah, it's a bit heavy but I've never complained about it (I'm tough), and with only one leg extended, why... it becomes a monopod! UltraPod II will be there, too, to serve the Panny.<br>

-I hadn't considered the 90mm macro for tele work, thanks for the reminder, Justin! Maybe the weight of the 18-250 can be left behind. Along with the 18-50.<br>

-Not mentioned, but I will purchase the insurance coverage for the rental car. Money wasted? Ha- I learned that lesson the hard way not once, but twice (vandalism one time and road rage another). And yes, keep all equipment out of site (i.e. trunk) when stored in the car (best avoided in general whenever possible).</p>

<p>And for all the rest of the ideas, tips, and advice, thanks to everyone!</p>

[pj_vesterback]

<p>Check your credit card. Every one of mine insures me for rental cars.</p>

[mountainvisions]

<p>Both my car insurance and CC insure the car, homeowners/renters/etc covers camera gear as well from theft.</p>

<p>Between all the outlets most gear should be covered without paying extra.</p>

<p>I generally take my camera equipment everywhere with me when it would be left in the car (when practical). There is a reason for this besides theft, I don't think the extreme heat of the car is good for camera lenses (aperture oils) at least older manual lenses. i also organize my stuff before parking the car (ie we pull over at a turn off, or a rest stop, or whatever) and sort out the gear putting what is coming in the bag I am taking and what is staying in the trunk. Better to do this miles from your destination than at it. If someone is bold enough to follow you, I figure there is nothing that you could have done anyway.</p>

<p>Keep in mind the trunk is not a safe, most trunks have either seat drop access or a button. in either case break window, pop trunk. Leave as little as possible in there (therefore, take as few lenses etc as you will need).</p>

<p>As Patrick said, NEVER EVER check lenses or cameras.</p>

<p>I did check my film camera on my last flight, but without any lenses, just a body cap. What a shock the baggage handlers would have pulling out the Program Plus. Make sure whatever your camera and lenses is in will fit under the seat or overhead. If the flight is full they will make you gate check bags that can't fit, so being able to slide under seat is 100% critical. I usually carryon 2 bags, my camera bag (lowepro Primus AW, honestly the best bag I have ever used, even my non photog friends and family comment on what a great bag that is), and then my suitcase/carryon. If I'm camping/hiking I have no choice but to check a big bag, and my tripod goes in there. I wrap the tripod in a towel and then a thermrest. I haven't had to try to squeeze my tripod into a carryon yet.<br>

<strong><br /> </strong><br>

<strong>One note, will TSA allow the tripod through security?</strong> Northwest said it would, but you have to battle TSA at the checkpoint. I might be a bit paranoid, but couldn't a tripod be a great weapon? I mean it is like taking a baseball bat.<br>

<br /> <br /> Having always had a checked bag I have not had to test this yet, but I'm sure it is a legitimate question to start asking.</p>

<p>Enjoy the trip. I have a few weeks to burn this year, 2 floating holidays and no dog to keep me from flying + I have a free flight. Basically, I am headed somewhere as well. I used to love flying but 9/11 really changed things, so much I didn't feel like I missed out on much the last 10 years!</p>

<p> </p>

[thomas_christensen]

<p>As some mentioned, I'd take the Fisheye as well. It can be a secret weapon when shooting grand vistas.</p>

[rose_duclos]

<p>Ah, Steve. I'd love to take another trip to Tahoe - but, I'll have to bow out for Les to go this round. Sadly to say, sometimes a person has to work. Life isn't all about vacations.<br>

Oh... if it's your first time there... you must do some shopping for Cali wines - the prices are really cheap there because of the closeness to the border - and there are some really good Cali wines. :) (cheap means half the price of what they sell for on the east coast.)<br>

Oh... and I really do think you should bring the bigger lens ... point being ... about 5 years ago when I was there visiting my friends ... they had an apartment that was part of a complex on top of a mountain... and, while there, one morning I awoke and saw a mountain lion on the top of their trash dumpster... I wasn't into cameras then. Such a shame. </p>

 

[johnw436]

<p>I mean, how much does an extra lens or two really weigh? You're not backpacking from Colorado to Tahoe. Jam those suckers in a big bag and take a smaller day bag to select the stuff you plan to use when you don't want to carry it all.</p>

[paddy_macmahon1]

<p>Less is more. Buy a 35mm prime and take only that.</p>

[danny_wong2]

<p>

<p>Often the major factor in what to bring is what you can carry comfortably. <br>

The 18-250 is not the greatest Pentax lens that I have but it is the most traveled lens. What it makes up for in IQ compared to other lenses in the focal length range is the versatility and the light weight. The second lens that I bring is the 12-24.<br>

This won't work in Lk Tahoe but in my Asian travels it was not hard to hire someone with interest in photography to act as a sherpa/guide. Be nice and friendly to them and you get exotic location and cuisine. All they want/need is money to live off and learn something about photography. </p>

</p>