Lenses for a trip, sorry, but the new 18-135mm...

[steve_t.1]

<p>... and it's weather resistant construction throws a whole new twist at me.</p>

<p>In early autumn of this year, maybe September/October (hopefully avoiding the midges- biting insects), my wife and I may go to Scotland. No itinerary set yet, so destinations remain unplanned, but probably doing a driving trip between multiple destinations. But, unless an experienced traveler to that area can tell me otherwise, we have to be ready for unpredictable, and unpleasant weather. Enter the new Pentax 18-135mm WR lens.</p>

<p>My current lens lineup-<br>

Sigma 10-20mm var. ap.,<br>

Sigma 18-50mm F/2.8,<br>

Pentax 55-300 var. ap.,<br>

Tamron 18-250 var. ap.,<br>

Pentax F 35-70 var. ap.,<br>

Along with the Pentax fish eye, and Pentax FA 50mm F/1.4 and F 28mm F/2.8 primes. And Tamron 90mm macro. I think that covers everything.</p>

<p>My thinking was that this would be a traveling trip that includes photography, not a photography trip, therefore pack light rather than heavy. K20D (or more likely by then the K-5, but only one body) and the Sigma 18-50 and Pentax 55-300, that's it. Or just the Tamron 18-250, but that darn "self zooming" feature kind of bugs me, and concerns me a bit for this kind of usage- I don't want to damage the extended lens as it hangs from my body if I don't lock the lens.</p>

<p>Really, I have little <em>need</em> for this new 18-135mm lens, I'm not normally out with my camera in poor weather, but this new lens would relieve any worry about being in poor weather with the camera exposed and in use. And with the 18-135, similar to the Tamron 18-250, I could do this trip as a one-lens kit. Maybe toss in the 50mm for low light/indoor stuff. My Panasonic LX3 will probably be in my pocket, too.</p>

<p>$500 for another lens. Yea, or nay. Your thoughts/ideas/impressions? (Sell the Tamron and buy the 18-135? I don't know.) Thanks.</p>

[mcmanamey]

<p>My immediate reaction: I'd counsel to get the 18-135. <br>

Frankly, wanting to travel light in a place known for iffy weather and/or sudden changes seems like the perfect excuse to get a new, WR lens!</p>

<p>As for selling the Tamron - we have the 28 - 300 "self zooming" lens also. And if I had a high quality lens that had the reach from 135 - 300ish, I'd dump it in a heart beat.<br>

When we bought it, I was loving it precisely because it had such a long throw with no need to change lenses. YAY! (Especially since we had very few lenses to share between 2 cameras).<br>

NOW... 1) I'm loving primes a whole lot more than zooms for when I really want to make it count<br>

2) I find myself unhappy w/ the IQ on the lens because I'm comparing it to the 2 DA*'s the business coughed up for (I still can't decide if I'm just pixel peeping, but I just haven't found myself to be happy with any of it's photos since we got the 16 - 55!)<br>

3) doggone it, it's HEAVY and bulky and I'll forget to either lock or unlock it. Therefore, I don't like to carry it when I'm trying to do a "1 lens, no bag" trip to somewhere w/ the camera and kids. And I don't go anywhere without at least 2 of 3 kids in tow anymore, so.....<br>

All that being said, I can bet that even if we did buy a 300mm lens, that 28 - 300 would STILL be found in 1 of our bags....</p>

[lee_w2]

<p>This may not help but for what its worth, I picked up the 18-135 and although I like it and use it for my walk around lens, its IQ at 135mm is not as sharp as the 55-300 when I tested both together. Its not bad...just not as good at its extreme end as the 55-300 in the middle. I too tired of the da18-250 self-zooming and sold it to fund the 18-135. Glad I did. But if most all your shots with the 55-300 were taken at 300 (like mine), thats your answer. You need both.</p>

[michael_kuhne]

<p>I essentially agree with both responses. Zooms are not at their very best at their longest setting, especially those with great range. Still, the new lens represents a very good all around zoom in a WR package. If you would be signed up with a group travel program, having just a one-does-all lens would be best in order to avoid lens-changing. Under those circumstances, time is of the essence as the group moves on.</p>

<p>But since you will be much more in control on your own driving trip, I would say take the Sigma 10-20mm for sure, the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8, and the Pentax 55-300mm. Then maybe a faster prime, like the 50mm f/1.4 for low light, and some portrait shots.</p>

<p>Your reasoning for the Pentax 18-135mm certainly does have merit, since you have WR bodies but no WR lens. From what I have seen, Scotland can be very drippy in terms of climate at times. The new WR lens could be advantageous for such weather conditions, and whether in Scotland or not, such a lens can be very useful in some situations where you need to go from wide to tele instantly- like your Tammy 18-250mm. With the new lens, at least you'd have a complete WR system to turn to if needed, in convenient form, now and in the future. I am about to add a DSLR superzoom to my arsenal, and have pondered getting a 18-250 for its huge range, but have now decided in favor of the new WR 18-135mm instead. Its range is akin to my old 28-200mm used on my film cameras, which is enough superzoom for me. And I want the WR! The Pentax 55-300mm can still be employed to extend range if needed.</p>

[mountainvisions]

<p>These lens questions are always tough, and the more gear you have the tougher they become, kinda why i keep selling glass off and reducing my lenses to what I really enjoy using and really use. </p>

<p>If it's really a photography trip second. Then I'd look at 2 lenses maximum. I'm weary of taking only one body, but your LX3 is plenty competent as a backup main camera if it comes down to it. </p>

<p>You could take the 10-20 and a long lens, and use the LX3 for the mid range stuff.</p>

<p>Or you could take your two best DSLR lenses and get a lot better quality from the DSLR than the LX3 which still isn't quite up to DSLR quality when printing. </p>

<p>Or you could opt for the two lenses you like most in terms of your shooting style and/or your planned subject matter.</p>

<p>Finally, you could choose based on the situation, traveling fast and in inclement weather. Both of which aren't ideal for lens changes. </p>

<p>Make a list for each of those scenarios and pack the kits and decide what feels best. </p>

<p>Not sure if you were planning on taking a small but real tripod, but I'd recommend it along with QR plates for both the DSLR and the LX3. It will make both cameras better when you need them most. </p>

 

[jgredline]

<p>Steve, I too have the "self zooming" tamron 18-250 and that is one lens I really love. I feel like I give up nothing as far as image quality goes while there is F/8 light available. Having said that, I love shooting in the rain as many of you know and I will use most anything I have to do it. Really, at times I feel like I am pushing my luck if there is such a thing. Anyway, the only reason I have not bought the 18-135 WR lens is because like Lee says, I keep reading that at 135 it is not good, but what troubles me more, is that I keep reading that it has trouble focusing in the rain. Now, I have found this to be true of the many lens I have shot out in the rain with. This tells me it is a camera problem as the rain drops will confuse it. So I have been using manual focus for my rain walks. Now since this is a problem, I am thinking the simple 18-55WR kit lens might be the better way to go for me since I rarely need anything longer than 50mm anyway. I also keep reading and seeing that the WR kit lens is quite good through its focal length. So maybe that WR kit lens should be a consideration? </p>

[personalphotos]

<p>My reply would mirror Michael's:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I would say take the Sigma 10-20mm for sure, the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8, and the Pentax 55-300mm. Then maybe a faster prime, like the 50mm f/1.4 for low light, and some portrait shots.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Don't fret about the weather unless you plan on shooting for extended periods in pouring rain. Most any lens can take drizzle and light rain. The trick is to not zoom the barrel in and out while in the rain more than you need to. There's a lightweight and easy solution for poor weather. Take a couple of plastic bags and a couple elastic bands. You've now protected your lens. I've done this many times and even used flashes in the rain this way while shooting weddings. I've never once had an issue with a lens or flash.</p>

<p>I think Michael's suggested kit makes the most sense. Trips like this may only come once in a lifetime and the last thing you want is to feel you cut the kit too small to get the shots you want. For some of the landscape and architecture you will see, the 10-20mm will be used a lot. The fast 50 will be handy indoors and combined with the k-5's high ISO ability, you will be able to shoot where a flash may not be allowed. The other 2 will cover pretty much every other need. Since you are driving, weight isn't a huge concern for much of the trip. Get a nice compact bag to put it all in for the flights. My son has the 28-300 and it's a pretty good lens in many respects. If you want to trim the kit any, sub it for the 18-50 and 55-300.</p>

[shots worth sharing]

<p>I guess it makes sense to have a WR zoom in the kit but I'd certainly want to have the FA 50mm & F 28mm with me. </p>

<p> </p>

[stemked]

<p>Doesn't it rain a LOT in Scotland? Just a thought.<br>

When I go to Europe in addition to something like the zoom lens choices you are making I generally also like to bring at least one small fast prime for working indoors. In my film days that meant either a 24mm f2.8 or 50mm f1.4 lens. The reason is simple, most museums do not allow flash and I usually want to photograph something indoors. Also these lenses are very light (my 24mm lens is a 24mm f2.8 A). I think now with a digital body I'd take a 20mm f2.8 (I have the A) or if I could afford another lens maybe the 15mm f3.5 D lens.<br>

My $0.02 anyway</p>

[steve_t.1]

<p>Sound reasoning all around, just as I expected. I'll admit to not utilizing either of those long zooms I own very much, but that doesn't mean they wouldn't be missed greatly on a trip like this. Well, the end of the range beyond the 135mm of the new WR lens, anyway. I think I need to invest some time with both my Tammy and my Pentax long zooms, establish their utility to me for such a trip.</p>

<p>I've heard the concern of the 18-135 and its drop in image quality at the 135 end. Can anyone offer the approximate point in that lens where that drop starts to happen? Does quality start to decrease above 100mm? 120? 130? If it dropped very close to the 135 end itself, then that may not be something to prevent me from buying it. A useful 18-120mm that stretches to 135mm in a pinch isn't a bad way to think of it in my mind.</p>

<p>Decisions, decisions. Thank you to everyone for your thoughts.</p>

[michael_kuhne]

<p>Steve, I tend to think of the new WR zoom as being say a pretty high-quality zoom of 18-90mm, where it may even remain around f/4.5 or so. Lee can tell us. It may be comparable to the DA 17-70 f/4 in quality, possibly even better! A lens of that range and speed in a compact WR design, also with added reach capable to 135mm, I find quite attractive. Your Tamron superzoom takes a nosedive in quality at 250mm, as expected too. </p>

<p>But we are not talking chopped liver at the extreme zoom end, either. Still good, but not a DA*50-135mm.</p>

<p>Eventually, lab tests will emerge, and more user reports so we can get some idea in advance. But I was going to get a WR version of the 18-55mm zoom lens for drippy weather use in a compact kit, and maybe a superzoom too, so this one new lens will be a better alternative for me! </p>

<p>Scotland has a much desrved reputation for its beauty. I am sure you and your wife will enjoy experiencing it!! </p>

[steve_t.1]

<p>Thank you Michael. I am admittedly a very hesitant international traveler. Well, a distance traveler to any region, domestic or otherwise. Scotland was my idea (I had to pick somewhere before it was picked for me), international travel in general is her idea. Frankly, for as wonderful a place I know it will be to see and experience, multi-day travel has never been on my top-10 list of favorite things to do. I find the preparation of, and time during to be stressful and a bit anxious, relaxing during trips does not come easy. And then it always takes me a week or so after getting home to feel in my right mind again... I need a vacation after my vacation. These are not problems my wife shares, but with over 20 years under our collective belt, it's time I gave in. She's already 3 international trips ahead of me, this will be my first. We'll probably take 7-8 days for the trip, I'll be taking 2 full weeks off work.</p>

[michael_kuhne]

<p>From what I have heard, keep a sharp eye on your equipment as you travel! Have a great time!</p>

[steve_t.1]

<p>Hence another reason to pack a small, tidy kit-- less prone to make myself conspicuous to <em>ne'er-do-wells</em> who may wish to separate me from my gear and photographic memories. And for the daily crawl, I like the idea of a small, belt mounted lens holster(s) for secondary lens(es) and keeping the camera around my neck vs. hauling all I bring with me in my backpack or sling bag.</p>

[jgredline]

<p>Well, It is raining today and looks like rain for the next few days, so I am a happy camper. So here I am wishing I had a WR lens again. :) Anyway, I got to thinking. I took two trips this past month and in both trips I took the exact same thing. K20D with two lenses. The 18-250 Tamron and FA50F/1.4. I also took my LX-5. I used my LX-5 80% of the time and really forced myself to use the K20D since I took it with me. Of course it was not raining and that would have changed allot of things. </p>

[rparmar]

<p>Steve:<br>

Travel is as much in the mind as anything. Here are a few tips you no doubt already know.</p>

<ul>

<li>Prepare well and then take every moment as it comes without sweating the details. </li>

<li>Make a list of things you'd like to do at each destination but when you get there let yourself explore and don't be bound to timetables.</li>

<li>Plan a combination of activities as opposed to too much of the same thing. No matter how amazing, the fourth museum (or church or gallery or mountain) looks much the same as the third.</li>

<li>Always give extra time between modes of transport since you <em>will</em> get delayed. </li>

<li>Spend more time in fewer places, so you can chill and soak up the ambiance. </li>

<li>Pack a couple days ahead of leaving to give yourself time to rethink. </li>

<li>Take less than you think you need since lugging around baggage is a downer. And this leaves room for treasures you may want to bring back.</li>

<li>If you buy anything heavy or bulky, think about shipping it ahead of you.</li>

<li>Keep valuables close to you at all times, not in coat pockets or handbags.</li>

<li>Budget extra for meals, snacks, entry fees etc. Then don't worry about the expense when it comes time to pay. A 10 pound ticket may seem a lot, but it might be a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity!</li>

<li>Try something new every day. </li>

</ul>

<p>As for lenses, I am happy travelling with the DA12-24 and the FA77. I never miss a shot and (almost) never wish I had any other lens. I don't see the point of a tele on holidays and certainly see no point in dragging around too much gear. Absolutely forget flash and tripods. One body.</p>

<p>Having been to Scotland a few times, I know you will have a great time! It's a fun place, full of beauty and intriguing folk.</p>

[rparmar]

<p>P.S. In your case I would be packing the Sigma 10-20 and Tamron 90mm macro, leaving all else at home. I really wouldn't worry about WR. If it's raining enough to hurt the gear it's raining too much for a good shot. And the prime will be less susceptible.</p>

[steve_t.1]

<p>Thanks for the information, Robin, I appreciate it.</p>

[shots worth sharing]

<p>Good advice, Robin--I particularly liked,</p>

<blockquote>Spend more time in fewer places, so you can chill and soak up the ambiance.</blockquote>

<p>and</p>

<blockquote>If it's raining enough to hurt the gear it's raining too much for a good shot.</blockquote>

<p>In my view, it's hard to imagine non-business travel as anything <em>but</em> a photographic expedition and a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity so I always take really good gear. Besides preserving the memories, I think having a camera in hand really enhances the travel experience: it helps me pay attention and see things more clearly. </p>

[jgredline]

<p>I concur that Robins advice is excellent. I can't tell you how often I have traveled to places for the sole reason of photography and while I come away with many pictures, I have not seen anything. Does this make sense?</p>

[rparmar]

<p>I think that this experience differs for different people. Like Dave Holland when I see with my photographic eye I pay more attention, though I would say this attention is focused on a smaller scale -- more on the detail and less on the gestalt. As a sound artist I value my appreciation of an experience through many senses, sight being only one... in some ways the "easiest" one.</p>

<p>As another down-side, photography places one outside the social milieu as an observer, and can hence have a negative affect on the dynamics of a group. There have certainly been situations where, in order to be polite and inclusive, I have needed to put my camera away.</p>

 

[steve_t.1]

<p>Javier, you make perfect sense. At some point it's like taking pictures of a fireworks show and at the end finding you missed the fireworks show. By the way, I refuse to take pictures of fireworks, the photos will never compare to the real thing, and I don't go to fireworks show for the memory of it. But that's beside the point... I will certainly be taking lots of photos, but like you, not to the point of sacrificing the quality of the overall trip. Another reason for the kit being as abbreviated as possible. I'd rather not even bring a tripod, but I did buy a second monopod last summer that is small, light, and friendly, and that will likely be the extent of major accessories to go with me.</p>

[RickW]

<p>In the UK, "if you don't like the weather, wait 5 minutes." Being prepared for changes is key.</p>

<p>Also, I =always= take a second body along on such trips. It spends most of its time in my suitcase in the hotel; but on one trip my SLR landed in a lake, and I had to make do with a disposable camera from the local drug store. Not so good.</p>

<p>Rick</p>