Short-term Travel but Long-term Goals

[lee_vgg]

<p>Nice, I hadn't seen that one. </p>

<p>I worry some about security with a backpack. Someone can easily walk up and unzip it, I would never notice. I also have to take it off to get into it... The messenger back could still be unzipped, but it would be more difficult without catching my attention. And I can get into it without removing it. But - it will put more strain on my shoulder...</p>

<p>I also thought about the LowePro Primus AW plus a duffle bag for the clothes. But the duffle bag could become a pain while moving places. And the Primus is just a bit too large to walk around town in.</p>

[Dieter Schaefer]

<p>Your current gear selection is probably the maximum I would consider carrying in a shoulder bag - it's already on the heavy side. I am through with shoulder bags unless I carry very little and need constant access - I bought the Urbangear during a trip to Vancouver when I couldn't deal with the Lowepro Nova 5 shoulder bag anymore. Security with a backpack is certainly an issue. There is one - forgot which one though (Kata?) - that has the zippers on the side of the straps, preventing access when the pack is worn.</p>

<p>PS: that Kelty looks like a very nice bag.</p>

[lee_vgg]

<p>It is, though when you pack it full the two outer front pockets have very little room. But I love the top handle and the handles on the front. It's pretty bulky when full, but that's what I was looking for so I could drop Domke rectangular insets into it.</p>

<p>And don't think about putting a lens in the side pockets. No protection and I think the lens would be too fat, if the bag is stuffed full. </p>

[lee_vgg]

<p><strong>James,</strong></p>

<p>Any suggestions on getting to Easter Island? We will be traveling around Chile and Argentina and then over to either Auckland or Sydney. There don't seem to be too many options and all are expensive...</p>

<p>Lee</p>

[billsymmons]

<p>My main Zooms with the D700 are:<br>

Tamron 17-35mm very good<br>

Nikon 24-70mm superb<br>

Nikon 70-300mm Vr Excellent especially in the 70-200mm range<br>

I've resisted the 70-200mm because of expense and weight. The other two lenses do all the work in low light and all three are excellent in good light.</p>

[philip_tam]

<p>Yiesh, this thread is still going?</p>

<p>Lee: I would definately suggest getting a dedicated photo backpack (or photo/laptop backpack if you want to carry a computer, might be worth it to put money on the latter anyways). It's one of the best travel items I've purchased, since they're padded and they're designed to keep your stuff organized and protected. A messenger bag won't distribute the weight and it'll hurt your shoulder: not good for long walks. I do carry a shoulder camera bag with two lenses though... that isn't too bad, but only for road trips where I'm working out of a car. But when I go overseas, I'm always using the backpack.</p>

<p>It always seemed like normal backpacks with large compartments just let the lenses, filters, bodies, etc. knock around and it made it chaotic.</p>

<p>Theft: have your wife watch your back. I also picked a bag that doesn't scream "camera gear!" I think some Lowepro's might do so... Kata, Domke (perhaps), Crumpler are more low key.</p>

<p>A word of advice: Not that you were thinking this, but just in case you were - never check in your camera gear on flights. Carry it on. 1. they toss the bags around, but worse, 2. less wealthy foreign countries it's actually very common for ground crew to rifle through bags for valuable items.</p>

<p>The Kata (which I have), the straps overlap the zipper to the computer sleeve, not the camera stuff.</p>

[Jim_Tardio]

<p>Here's a link to a site with some excellent MFT travel shots:</p>

<p>http://starvingphotographer.com/</p>

<p>He also uses a Canon for bird photography but he manages to squeeze a lot of quality out his GF-1.</p>

[nicholas_fiduccia1]

<p>Hi Lee, You really should decide what your priorities are. If you are going primarily for photography, then having two DSLRs would be the way to go, along with the supporting heavy lenses. However, by the way you describe it, this seems to be a travel adventure with your wife, emphasis on travel. What I would do in your situation is take 1 SLR, either the D300S or the D90. You can take a D700, but you will limit your reach when using the 70-300 (you do want to get good pictures of penguins, right?). You will have your LX3 for backup, just in case your only DSLR malfunctions or gets stolen.</p>

<p>Now, for lenses. If you get a DX camera, I would get the 16-85 and have that on the camera in a holster case worn in front of you most of the time (even when you are carrying the backpack). This means that you do not have to take your pack off when a photo op presents itself. The 70-300 would be stored in a protective wrap inside your pack. This arrangement gives you fast access to your camera. Of course, the holster case should be big enough to hold your camera and longer lens if you think that that will be an advantage.</p>

<p>If you get a D700, I would get the 24-70 and the 70-300. You could substitute the 80-400 for the 70-300, but we are getting heavy again.</p>

<p>I would definitely take a lightweight tripod. You could also bring along a 35/1.8 too. I wouldn't get anything wider than that. If you feel you a wide view, take a pano series. Make sure you use manual and overlap the frames by 50% or so.</p>

<p>Also, I hesitate on recommending the D90 because it is not weather sealed and this camera needs to last at least 6 months. So, I think you should go with the more robust D300s. Finally, if you are at all open to other makes of cameras, I think the Pentax K7 with 16-50/2.8 and 60-250/4 lenses is the best for the adventure traveler that values small, relatively lightweight, and full weather sealing. </p>

<p>Have a great time!</p>

[jeffrey_lebowski]

<p>Lee... as much as I'd love my D700, and lug it around all day, I <em>wouldn't</em> love at all to lug it with heavy zooms...<br>

My 80-200 2.8 stays home unless I know I'll use it for something that requires F2.8 or very fast autofocus; otherwise, I carry happily a old 70-210 4-5.6, which is slow as molasses to focus (the "D" version is very quick instead), but has a very nice out of focus rendition, and weighs less than half of the other. If I had money to burn now, I'd buy a 70-300VR in a blink, as it's really light, fast focusing, and on FX with a high picture quality (DX sensors stress it).<br>

Carrying gear all day long can be <em>very</em> tiresome, especially 4kg or more; when I'm really light, and enjoying photography with no rush, I carry a 24AF-D, a 28 2.8 AI close focus (probably my best lense...), the 50 1.8 and borrow a old 100 2.8; all manual, excellent quality on my D700, they weigh in total less than a KG, and images are usually brilliant (at least technically! :-) You can substitute the 100 with a 200F4, which is said to be excellent, and F4 on DX still grants a nice subject isolation.<br>

I use fast 2.8 zooms only when I know I'll be tracking quick stuff, or rapidly changing environments in an event, for instance. But a 70-200VR seems more a zoom you'll be comfortable in having at your disposable "if and when" then a tool to carry all day long.<br>

My 2c, of course ;-) Enjoy your travel!</p>

<p>Lory</p>

[joseph_smith3]

<p>Lee, having just come back from Tanzania and having dealt with luggage issues, I just made a random check. Your Kelty bag that you listed in your post has a max of 3100 cubic inches per REI web site. KLM allows only 2902 cubic inches and 26 pounds to be carried on in economy class flights on its City Hopper flights, like between Amsterdam and Delhi, per its web site. Now it will probably be OK on that filght, but I am willing to bet that you will be on other flights with more restrictive size and weight requirements. As others have suggested, look at the ThinkTank product line of bags focusing on those bags without rollers. LL Bean has many backpacks that can be used for photo purposes. I have used LLBean bags when I have traveled to Europe, but I have carried less gear than what you are planning on taking. A good place to look at ThinkTank stuff is <a href="http://www.OutdoorPhotoGear.com">www.OutdoorPhotoGear.com</a>.<br>

Joe Smith</p>

[lee_vgg]

<p>Ironically, in Chicago boarding our flight to Delhi via Air India ,they made my wife check her small backpack because it was loaded up and over their 20 something lb limit. At the same time, I had the REI backpack on and it was more like 30 lbs, lol. I guess I can get by the restriction with two smaller bags, as long as they allow two carryons.</p>

<p>Thanks for the tip.</p>

<p> </p>

[Christopher Sperry Photogr]

<p>Lee, You might want to check out Mystery Ranch Backpacks. If you want a tough, customizable backpack that doesn't shout photographer or American tourist. Mystery Ranch has a long history in back pack design, and has one of the best frame and load support systems available.</p>

<p>I was in their store a while ago seeking a photo back pack that doesn't look like a photo back pack, with quiet colors, and with good load carrying ability. We looked at pack systems they are providing for combat photographers. While not on their web site, those systems may still be available, as they were still in further development. You may be able to incorporate some combat photographer features into one of their current models.</p>

<p>http://www.mysteryranch.com/s.nl/c.999464/sc.7/.f</p>

[roypanos]

<p>Hi Lee.<br>

Just about everything's been covered but I'll add a couple of thoughts. I've done quite a bit of travel when I was younger (currently over 60) including overland (minus the wet bits and a few borders) between England and Oz. Including places like Iran and Afghanistan which are now no longer advisable. I also own a two body system similar to what you propose (D700, D200). Plus the Big Three 2.8's and other lenses and stuff. These fit into a Lowepro Mini-Trekker, sometimes with a Manfrotto 190 tripod strapped on the side. I'm pretty fit (try to average 5 miles fast walk per day) and often have this system on my back.<br>

Now, thinking about carrying this lot round the world? Phew, no thanks.<br>

Climate's a big factor of course; the hotter it is the more it'll weigh. As someone else said, depends whether your intention is primarily photographic or not. One thing's for certain, a lot of people are going to be eyeing your gear with a view to stealing it. So it's going to be a constant burden and a constant worry too. Of course travelling with a partner helps. Particularly if they're strong!<br>

One of the Lowepro backpacks zips up on the strap side btw. <br>

On carry-on matters: temporarily transferring gear from bag to pockets reduces its weight and is completely unobjectionable from the carrier's pov; a many-pocket waistcoat helps, even if it makes you look nerdy. I usually do this transfer before the gate where it becomes an issue. Also, in a situation where the carrier refuses to let you carry on your bag (too big, too heavy - up to a point) you could always refuse to travel; it's unlikely that they'd unload the hold to take out your baggage (absolute no-no to take off with baggage but not its owner) and miss the slot (expensive). A bluff might get a result in this situation. Fortunately I've never had to try this!<br>

Have a good trip.</p>

[sebastianmoran]

<p>

 

<p>Lee -- Planning a travel kit is tough. If I were a pro and photography was the principal reason for the trip, it would be easier. But, I'm not. You're planning on carrying more weight than I do. Here's my approach:<br>

- I want excellent images from gear I can carry without getting in the way of the trip. For me, this means a DX body.<br>

- General use lens... One to keep on camera as you walk around. For me, 18-70mm kit lens on a DX body. The f/2.8 zooms are far heavier than I want to carry.<br>

- Low light... I take a fast prime, say a 35mm f/2 or a 50mm f/1.4 AFD lens. Shooting at ISO 800 or even higher, I am very pleased with available light shots indoors. Sigma 30mm f/1.4 would be a candidate. Ditto for the excellent Zeiss primes, but I prefer AF lenses for travel.<br>

- Wide... I often carry my 10.5mm full-frame fisheye in the bag.<br>

- Wildlife, telephoto. In the Everglades, shooting birds, DX body with 300mm f/4 on a tripod or monopod was excellent. On the Anhinga Trail and at Shark Valley, the physical features put you close to the birds. In any other setting, you'll want even longer reach to get wildlife. Are you really serious about wildlife? If so, pack for it (300mm min on a DX body, more for a FX body). If not, add a lightweight zoom for the occasional shot (55-200 VR or 70-300).<br>

- Macro... Great fun, but I don't do it while traveling. I just don't want to lug the 105mm Micro Nikkor. The 35mm f/2 or 50mm f/1.4 get close enough for a single flower, and that's enough for me. 55mm manual focus Micro could be an option. Or, figure out how to do the macro you want with what you have (reverse lens? stacked lenses? short ext tube?).<br>

- Camera Support... Yes, a tripod for night shots, HDRs, sunsets, or for any time you want more image quality. <br>

- Cleaning kit. If you are changing lenses on a multi-month trip, be ready to clean your sensor. <br>

- Storage for two copies of all the files you want to keep. For a short trip, I take enough camera cards and something with a hard disk. For a longer trip, a laptop and a backup hard disk, but then I erase the camera cards and re-use them. <br>

- I only take gear I know well. If in doubt, take your kit out to the park and practice on the pigeons.</p>

<p>Your budget could include more exotic gear, but are you really ready to carry it?</p>

 

</p>

[lee_vgg]

<p>Well I finally decided and placed my orders yesterday. I went with the following:</p>

<p>D300s<br>

16-85 f/3.5-5.6 VR<br>

Sigma 50 f/1.4<br>

70-200 f/2.8 VR<br>

TC-14E II<br>

TC-2E III</p>

<p>I was able to purchase everything through Bing and get 5% cash back, plus I found the D300s/70-200 combo on Adorama (through Bing) for $3,498. So after the Bing discount, that combo was $3,394. Total weight is 7.9 lbs. </p>

<p>I am going to try this kit out for a while walking around town and see how the weight feels using a messenger bag and the camera over my shoulder. For evenings where I'm inside, I can make do with the 16-35 and 50, a very light combo. I'll decide on bags closer to the trip, which is still 8 months away, though we are headed to Ireland/Scotland in August/September.</p>

<p>I really wish I could find a small 16 mm between 1.4 and 2.8. Then I could forget the 16-85, as I'm not convinced I need a mid-range zoom. Honestly though, it's remarkably small and light, so there's nothing that compares to it in terms of cost, weight, optics, and flexibility. I am tempted by the Voigtlander 20 mm f/3.5 manual focus. If I knew I would be fine with 30 mm equivalent versus 24 mm, I might be ok with just the 20 mm and 50 mm. I may yet get the 20 mm, because it's such an interesting lens, or I might splurge for the 35 f/1.8 or something in the 85-135 range. Regardless, I think the kit I bought is enough for travel and anything else would just be for interest sake.</p>

<p>I decided I didn't need two bodies and that I'd rather have telephoto to 600 mm than a wide angle beyond 24 mm. I may loose a few shots at the UWA, but I will gain a ton of shots at the telephoto, including an entirely new world of wildlife and telephoto landscapes that has never been available to me. The 70-200 will also be fantastic for portraits, along with the 50 f/1.4. I really struggled with the ISO of the D300s vs the D700, but I figured in another 2 years the D300s successor will match the D700 in ISO. I can save the cash now, get the D300s, and I easily upgrade later.</p>

<p>Thanks to everyone for their comments and suggestions. I did a complete 180 from my original plans of a D3 or D700, 9+ lbs, and $7,500-$9,000 expectations.</p>

 

[lee_vgg]

<p>Total cost for the entire kit after Bing cash back was $5,273.</p>

[lee_vgg]

<p>Been a while since this post "ended" but I figured I would update any folks who stumble upon it. Since purchasing my equipment, I've made several trips within the US and a 2-week trip to Ireland/Scotland. I'm also planning a trip in two weeks to Guatemala and I've had a chance to get to know my equipment.</p>

<p>I've revised my ideal travel / permanent use kit as follows:</p>

<p>D300s</p>

<p>70-200 is out, replaced with the Manual 135 f/2.8 AI-S. 2x teleconverter there if I need it, or could leave it.</p>

<p>Voigtlander manual 20 f/3.5, Nikon 35 f/1.8 and 50 f/1.8</p>

<p>Optional additions depending on type of travel: 80 f/1.4 (not the newest version),12-24 f/4 DX and Gitzo Traveler tripod.</p>

<p>All together a much cheaper, lighter setup. I decided the 70-200 was more than I needed. I was amazed by the quality of the 135, it was really a joy to use. Sigma was nice but too big for what it can do. The 80 f/1.4 is my new favorite lens, and it can easily be swapped for traveling with the 50 f/1.8 if weight is an issue. Went with a 12-24 DX vs 16-85 for reach. I found I really enjoy using primes and actually prefer that to zoom lenses. They force me to think more and take my time, which sounds corny but it really is true (for me at least).</p>

<p> </p>