Nikon Kit for Traveling

[david_clark10]

I have just finished uni (in the uk) and I am planning on travelling

for 6 months to a year mainly around the US. I currently have a D1,

and F90x with a SB-22s, 28-200mm Sigma, 28-80mm f4-5.6, 80-200mm

f2.8ed & 50mm f1.8 Nikon. I intend to replace all of the kit appart

from the D1 and 80-200mm which I will keep for when I come home (they

are too bulky to take with me and are to expensive to replace at the

moment).

I would like suggestions as to what kit I should take travelling. My

budget is about £1000 / $1800 (new or used). I was personally

considering an F100 and 24-85mm GSED. I am very critical when it

comes to sharpness and have been dissappointed with my Sigma 28-200mm

(you get what you pay for I suppose). Any feedback on people who

travel frequently would be good. I don't like juggling a lot of kit;

a body, lens and flash is really all I want. Also I think the F5 is a

bit big but maybe you can prove me wrong? I originally wanted to take

my medium format as well but have been warned against this, incase it

gets stolen.

[adrian_morgan]

You shouldn't be worried about getting it stolen, as you should have full travel insurance for your gear. I just wouldn't take it without insurance.

 

As for your kit, personally speaking I'd take the 50mm f1.8 for low light, and something wide. that should do you for most of your photos. And I would probably take the F90x - don't see much point in upgrading to a F100.

[tree]

<p>I agree with Adrian: you do not need an F100 and you have a good

selection of glass. Bring the 50/1.8. I would also get a prime 24mm lense,

and a 105 macro. Those three lenses and the speedlight with the F90x will

serve you well. I think the 80-200/2.8 would be good to have along, but I

expect it's a little more than you want to carry.</p>

[p._neil_ralley]

I'm with the other two - take the F90, which is a great body, and forget the F100 and F5. You should probably think of replacing the longer end of the 28-200 with something lighter than your 80-200 but off-hand I can't recommend a lens. Buying a cheaper (but lighter) lens in the 70-200 range seems like duplicating what you have got so maybe you should think of a 135mm prime. I also second the vote for a 24mm prime, it's a great little lens.

[p._neil_ralley]

You might do well to postpone your purchase until you get over to the US. It depends where you are going to be but you should be able to get a better deal this side of the pond.

[lex_jenkins]

I'd keep that F90 and swap all the lenses except the 80-200 toward a 28-70/2.8 IF ED Nikkor. That lens would handle 75% of my casual shooting needs.

[david_clark10]

Thanks for the feedback - keep it coming.

Thing is when I get back I hope to get a D100 or maybe on the way home. The whole G lens thing is really annoying me because they won't let me control the apertures on the F90x. Don't get me wrong I like my F90 just thought it was time to change, especially as I think Nikon are slowly phasing out the aperture ring? The 50mm f1.8 is probably my favorite lens, the cheapest lens Nikon sells new now and still beats the quality of the low quality zooms. They should go back to selling the 50mm as part of the kit instead of the cheap 28-105G (it would make people think more as well!).

[jbq]

Travelling?

 

Keep the F90x, take the 50/1.8 with you, and get a 18-35 and a 80-200/4-5.6 AFD). Yes, 3 lenses, but less than 2 pounds total. Now, I don't know what you like to shoot. Your widest lens today is 28mm, so maybe you don't really want something as wide as the 18-35.

 

If you really really want to only have one lens, 24-85 AFS G ED IF. If your budget allows, you can stretch that to 35-70/2.8 D if you wan to trade a bit of zoom range for a big to sharpness, or the monstruous 28-70/2.8 AFS D (but you don't want to carry 2 pounds of glass everywhere around your neck, do you?)

 

Just my 2 cents (and your 1000 quids)

[jbq]

Don't change your F90 because "you may want a G lens later". Change it when you do get a G lens. Change it when you really need to.

[Ed_Ingold]

You don't say where you will travel, and what kind of pictures you want, so I assume you want maximum flexibility.

 

In your case, a film camera is a backup. When would you use it? With Velvia, perhaps? Wide®-angle shots? The F100 is an outstanding camera, but probably not a must in your case.

 

The Nikon 24-85/2.8-4 would be a good complement to the 80-200, and is compatible with both the D1 and N90s. Put the 50/1.8 on the backup camera. It's light, and you won't have to change lenses so often. By most accounts, the 24-85 is a good, sharp lens with minimal distortion. It's a little more expensive than the G-AF-S lens you mentioned. It's a good replacement the 28-80, with better speed and a wider low-end.

 

If you don't have a digital-compatible flash, I suggest an SB80, which is also compatible with both cameras, powerful, and uses cheap batteries. A good flash will bring out the best in the D1 for people pix.

 

How will you carry your gear? I try to keep a shoulder bag to about 20#, which I can carry all day while the spare gear stays in the hotel room. A backpack may make sense, but it's not very convenient to retrieve gear. However, With two bodies and sundries in tow, you'll be over 30#, which is a lot for a shoulder bag. Been there, done that.

[Jim_Tardio]

Take your F90x with the SB-22s and the 50/1.8. Trade your Sigma for a Nikon 28-105/3.5-4.5 AF-D.

<p>

Personally, I wouldn't even bother with the 50/1.8 now that I think about it. I always carried one for "low-light", but it was seldom the focal length I wanted. If you're shooting in low-light, you need some kind of camera support anyway...unless you want to shoot wide open...at 1.8.

<p>

The F5 doesn't make any sense for travel...it's just too much camera. I'd also most likely carry a 20/2.8.

[mikecat]

I'm with P. Neil. Buy anything new here - especially if your travels will

take you to New York City. Stop at B&H Photo (www.bhphotovideo.com).

As a rule of thumb you can look at mail order prices in the UK and change

the £ sign to a $ sign and you'll have the equivalent US mail order

price at a place like B&H. This is quite a significant savings. Prices

at other smaller, local stores in other cities will be higher, but still

probably a decent discount to UK prices.

[casimir_artmann]

I have travelled a lot with my F90x/MD10 and used primes 24, 50 and 85. I have also tested some shots with a 24-85/2.8-4.0. This lens together with 50/1.8 and a flash would problably cover 80-90% of my photo situations during travel.

 

I have a Nikon 28-80/3.5-5.6 but I'm not fond of it. Compared to primes gives the 24-85 acceptible quality. Something that 28-80 doesn't do. Of course, to have the four times higher price is reflected in the result.

 

If travelling light, I'll use FM-2, without motor and 50/1.4 or 35/2.0.

 

Regards Casi

[rolando_ruiz_lucero]

First of all you will have to forgive my poor english, because I'm from Argentina, and my english comes from what I learned in school.

Regarding your question, I can tell you my experience, I travelled around LatinAmerica for almost two years, and my gear was a F90x body, a 24-120 zoom, a 50/1.4 with a sb-26 flash. As I was backpacking I had to go light, sure sometimes I missed a longer tele or a real wide angle but 99% of the time I was fine, in the beginning of my trip I also had with me a F3hp and a 80-200/2.8 but I sent them back home because they were too heavy. About your fear of being robed my solution was to carry my equipment in a small regular looking backpack, so noone could tell I was carrying expensive equipmet in it.

You can see some of the photos I made in www.rolandoruizlucero.freeservers.com

I hope my experience was usefull to you, have a safe trip!

Ps. If you have the time, why just travelling around the US. come to LatinAmerica, it's cheaper and I belive more colorfull, I think you wont regret it.

[cameron_sawyer]

Personally, when I travel, I leave the Nikon at home, and take a Voigtlander Bessa with a 35/2.5 Pancake lens, a 50/1.5 Nokton Aspherical, and a 15mm Heliar Aspherical. Rangefinder cameras rule for travel photography. With the Pancake mounted, you can slip the Bessa in your pocket, and carry one of the other lenses in the other pocket with a couple of rolls of film.

 

If you are very particular concerning sharpness, then you will be glad to hear that these lenses are probably better than anything ever made for any SLR in the equivalent focal lengths. The Nokton is double-aspherical and is probably the sharpest fast 50 ever made, sharper even than the current Leica Summilux. It only costs $350. Plus, with a rangefinder camera, you can hand hold at least one shutter speed slower without camera shake. So figure the 50/1.5 on a RF camera is equivalent to a 50/1.0 on an SLR.

 

SLR's are great for lots of things, but their bulk really interferes with good travel photography. An SLR with a zoom is pretty hopeless. You might almost as well carry a 4x5 field camera in a backpack. You will be so occupied with humping it that you won't be able to interact with your surroundings.

[cd thacker]

Hope you guys won't mind if I jump in here. I've got some time to kill and just can't resist this question.<P>

 

I've done a bit of traveling, and, photography-wise, have tried it several ways. I'm still looking for the holy grail: a lightweight, superfast zoom with the optical quality of a prime. A 24-105 f/2.0, say, with no light-falloff and no visible distortion. Weighing in at around twenty-four ounces or less. And within my budget, of course. <P>

 

What I've ended up trying instead are the zooms currently available, all of which (unlike my dream lens) obey the laws of physics (and economics); all of which, for my money, are either too expensive, too heavy, too big, too slow, and/or, too poor optically to give satisfaction in the travel field. Still, I keep searching.<P>

 

For a single-lens solution you could compromise and choose the 35-70 f/2.8. Maybe throw a 50/1.4 or 1.8 into the bag for backup and lowlight and you'll be set. If by "set" we mean operational within that focal range.<P>

 

Or - and this is probably what I would do - you could devise a kit of primes: say, 24mm, 50mm, and 105mm. Lightweight. High-speed. Tops optically. You just have to get used to the idea of changing lenses from time to time. And to working with the focal length that's on your camera.<P>

 

Or, you could choose the "Cartier-Bresson": put a 50/1.4 on your camera and have done with it (the single-lens solution) (I've done that as well and actually felt good about it).<P>

 

And, lastly, I'd like to second the advice of Cameron Sawyer, above. What he recommends is one approach to travel shooting I haven't tried yet. Based on what I have tried, though, it sure sounds good. And what he says about the Cosina/Voigtlander gear is true. <P>

 

Also, unless you happen to be particularly interested in flash photography, I'd leave the speedlight at home. Every ounce counts and most of the time you won't really need it (unless, of course, you take one of those zooms). IMHO, of course. Happy travels.