What lenses to bring on a trip?

[brainmonster]

I've having a little trouble deciding which lenses to bring on a trip. I have a Minolta film camera, 35mm, Maxxum 70. It's pretty light, but I don't want to bring too many lenses. I also don't want to bring anything too heavy, because I'll be doing a lot of trekking. However I don't want to lose out on any good shots.

Here's what I have:
Tokina 19-35 F3.5-4.5
Minolta 50mm F1.7
Tamron 28-75 F2.8
Minolta Kit Lens 35-70 F3.5-4.5
Beercan 70-210 F3.5-4.5

To be honest, I'd love to bring all the lenses, because they are all great, but it's just not practical. I only want to bring 2 max. I'm tempted to just bring the 50mm F1.7 for simplicity and compactness. Or the 50mm and the 28-75. But I also like telezooms so the beercan 70-210 would be great too. But that's too many.

What would you bring if you could only bring maybe 2 lenses? I'll be bringing a daypack and a small carry-on size suitcase only. I'll be trekking to small villages, catches buses, going to the mountains. As you can see I can't travel too heavy. Stuff could get stolen too. I'd be nice to have a lens that can take landscapes, a lens that can do portraits, and a telephoto. But it's hard to have all those things and travel light.

 

[MattKing]

I lean toward the wider lenses, so the Tokina would be interesting.
The Tamron is probably most versatile.
I also lean toward fixed focal length lenses. My favourite small kit is a 24mm f/2.8, 35mm f/2.0 and 85mm f/2.0 trio, but those are all Olympus OM lenses, so they range from tiny to small . And at least two of them are moderately expensive.

 

[brainmonster]

I lean toward the wider lenses, so the Tokina would be interesting.
The Tamron is probably most versatile.
I also lean toward fixed focal length lenses. My favourite small kit is a 24mm f/2.8, 35mm f/2.0 and 85mm f/2.0 trio, but those are all Olympus OM lenses, so they range from tiny to small . And at least two of them are moderately expensive.

Yeah I thought the Tokina would be useful, because I could shoot some interesting landscapes. There's some beautiful landscapes in Thailand, and lots of temples, etc. that could benefit from the wide shot.

Then again, I could do that with 28-75 to, and it's more versatile, so maybe a better choice...again I can't travel too heavy though! Do you think the 19mm would be worth it over 28mm? I haven't used the Tokina much yet.

 

[1kgcoffee]

50mm only. If you had a longer prime I would take that too

 

[Alan Gales]

If I still had my Contax I would have brought my 25, 50 and 100.

Your Tamron 28-75 is close.

Henri Cartier-Bresson would probably be like 1kgcoffee and tell you to just bring the 50mm.

 

[Bill Burk]

I'd do this set:
Tokina 19-35 F3.5-4.5
Minolta 50mm F1.7
That way you can act like you limited yourself to the 50, but when you need the temple shots, you'll have the tool to pull it off.

 

[runswithsizzers]

If it were me, for that kind of travel, I'd take the Tamron 28-75 F2.8, only.

Unless it's monstrous in size and weight, in which case, I would consider the Minolta 35-70 F3.5-4.5 Kit Lens, only. But I think not having something wider than 35mm would be a problem for me.

Actually, I think my second choice woud be the Tokina 19-35 F3.5-4.5 AND the Minolta 50mm F1.7.

And if I could pick up a decent 28mm, I might be tempted to take that and the 50mm - and leave the 19-35 F3.5-4 zoom at home.

My present walkabout 35mm film kit is a 28mm f/2.8 and a 50mm f/1.7, which covers the vast majority of situations for me. And they are small, light and affordable, too.

Under no circumstances would I bring the 70-210 F3.5-4.5. Yes, without any kind of tele, I would no doubt have some brief moments of regret - but better that than the constant regret of having to carry a tele-zoom, which I rarely need.

 

[runswithsizzers]

Yeah I thought the Tokina would be useful, because I could shoot some interesting landscapes. There's some beautiful landscapes in Thailand, and lots of temples, etc. that could benefit from the wide shot.

Then again, I could do that with 28-75 to, and it's more versatile, so maybe a better choice...again I can't travel too heavy though! Do you think the 19mm would be worth it over 28mm? I haven't used the Tokina much yet.

I have never photographed any Asian temples, but if they are similar in size to the medieval churches of Europe, there will be times when 28mm is not going to be wide enough. I don't have anything wider than 28mm for film, but based on my experience with APS-C, there is a big difference between 16mm (=24mm) and 18mm (=27mm). For tightly packed medieval cities and interior shots of ancient structures, the wider (than 28mm) perspective can be quite useful.

On the other hand, when traveling, I have discovered it is a lot more pleasurable for me to carry less gear, and accept the fact that I am not going to be able to get every imaginable shot. And that's OK. For every shot I "miss" because I don't have the perfect lens for it - if I will slow down and look around a little bit, I can almost always find a pretty good shot that can be made with the limited gear I do have. So did I really "miss" anything?

 

[film_man]

Depending how you shoot I'd get the 19-35 and the 50 or the 28-75 and the 50. My current go-to kit is a 21and a 50, to give you some idea of what I like.

 

[John51]

They're all on the slow side apart from the 50mm. I'd take that for low light situations plus a monopod. There's an inexpensive add-on that screws onto a monopod to have it serve as a walking stick or trekking staff so it can earn its keep. Using the monopod, you should be able to crop to at least what a 100mm lens would give you hand held. Cropping the 50mm to 200mm might be acceptable to you, easy enough to check that before leaving.

For the 2nd lens, I'd go for the 19-35mm as it's your widest lens.

 

[Agulliver]

I don't know about the temples, but I've definitely found myself in cathedrals and churches requiring something wider than 35mm. With the kit you have, if I were looking at saving my arms and saving space I'd probably take the Tamron 28-75 and the Tokina 19-35. It sounds like you might not need the 70-210.

If you're trekking you do want to keep things light and compact.

I don't trek though I do go on walks....where I often take multiple bodies and perhaps four or five lenses....I have strong arms!

 

[guangong]

With the kit you have I would take the 50mm and 28-70 for a lightweight package. The 50 for most pictures and the zoom for when needed. When I was younger I carried a lot of stuff for a trip. Now usually take rf camera and 28 or 35, 50 and 90. Or a MF camera with one lense.
Air travel nowadays is not as pleasant as it once was. The less stuff you have to carry the better.

 

[AgX]

Tokina 19-35 F3.5-4.5
Minolta 50mm F1.7
Beercan 70-210 F3.5-4.5

would give you greatest coverage. However it is up to you and based on your photographic style to decide what is indispensable.

 

[AgX]

A approach for simplicity could be Tamron 28-75 F2.8 plus a 2x converter (if such works on that zoom).

 

[BradS]

My travel light kit includes 28/2.8, 50/1.4 and 105/2.5 and one body. The 105mm is really only for intimate portraits so if I'm not travelling with friends/family, it stays home. If I want travel very light in the city, I’ll often take just the 28mm and if hiking in the wilderness, just the 50mm or a 35mm prime (a compromise between 50 and 28).

Given your kit, I think I’d take the Minolta 50/1.7 ONLY or sell the zooms and get a Minolta 28/2.8 prime to go with the 50/1.7

 

[benjiboy]

I've having a little trouble deciding which lenses to bring on a trip. I have a Minolta film camera, 35mm, Maxxum 70. It's pretty light, but I don't want to bring too many lenses. I also don't want to bring anything too heavy, because I'll be doing a lot of trekking. However I don't want to lose out on any good shots.

Here's what I have:
Tokina 19-35 F3.5-4.5
Minolta 50mm F1.7
Tamron 28-75 F2.8
Minolta Kit Lens 35-70 F3.5-4.5
Beercan 70-210 F3.5-4.5

To be honest, I'd love to bring all the lenses, because they are all great, but it's just not practical. I only want to bring 2 max. I'm tempted to just bring the 50mm F1.7 for simplicity and compactness. Or the 50mm and the 28-75. But I also like telezooms so the beercan 70-210 would be great too. But that's too many.

What would you bring if you could only bring maybe 2 lenses? I'll be bringing a daypack and a small carry-on size suitcase only. I'll be trekking to small villages, catches buses, going to the mountains. As you can see I can't travel too heavy. Stuff could get stolen too. I'd be nice to have a lens that can take landscapes, a lens that can do portraits, and a telephoto. But it's hard to have all those things and travel light.

I sympathize with your problem, I have fifteen Canon FD lenses , of the ones you have I would take the 19-35 and the 35-70.

 

[darkosaric]

Minolta 50mm F1.7

Only this one, and that is that. No worries on which lens to mount, you have only one, it will work on day and night time.

 

[StepheKoontz]

I would pick up a 24mm prime and take that along with the 50mm. That's just me though

 

[markjwyatt]

I would pick up a 24mm prime and take that along with the 50mm. That's just me though

My current compact travel kit is a Contax iia + Voigtlander SC Skopar 21mm f4 + Zeiss Opton 50mm f2, and the Voigtlander gets by far the most use.

 

[etn]

50mm only. If you had a longer prime I would take that too

+1 on that!
either a longer prime or something like a 28mm if you want to carry a 2nd lens.

If you can’t decide, take your 28-75 2.8 zoom.

Enjoy your trip!

 

[markjwyatt]

I...
Here's what I have:
Tokina 19-35 F3.5-4.5
Minolta 50mm F1.7
Tamron 28-75 F2.8
Minolta Kit Lens 35-70 F3.5-4.5
Beercan 70-210 F3.5-4.5

...
What would you bring if you could only bring maybe 2 lenses? ...

Tokina 19-35 F3.5-4.5
Tamron 28-75 F2.8

 

[brainmonster]

Hi guys, thanks for all your input! I decide to go Henri Cartier-Bresson style and go with the 50mm 1.7 only and the Tokina 19-35. I'm surprised how many people recommended the Tokina, but I think it's a good choice for landscapes and temples.

I've had overwhelmingly people recommend I bring a wide angle...so I think I'll be doing so. The 50mm is so compact that it seems like a good choice.

Will be leaving the 28-75 at home since it's just too big. I'm tempted to bring the beercan 70-210 but I think less is more, although I like telephoto for candid portraits of random strangers (haha) I think I can achieve some results with the 50mm. And having 3 lenses will just be too much for trekking around a lot.

Thanks all for your input!

 

[MattKing]

If you have room, a relatively compact and light 2X tele-extender would allow you to use your 50mm f/1.7 normally and as a slightly reduced resolution but better close focus capability 100mm f/3.5 lens.

 

[benveniste]

Hi guys, thanks for all your input! I decide to go Henri Cartier-Bresson style and go with the 50mm 1.7 only and the Tokina 19-35. I'm surprised how many people recommended the Tokina, but I think it's a good choice for landscapes and temples.

Enjoy your trip. I'm late to the thread, but I would go with the 19-35mm and the 70-210. For over a decade, I used to travel with 24-40mm and 80-200mm lenses. I no longer own either of those lenses, but just a couple of weeks ago I (*gasp*) did the digital equivalent. using a micro-four-thirds camera with 8-18mm and 45-150mm lenses.

I look at it this way. If I have either zoom mounted, how often will I want to switch to a 50mm? If I want to limit depth of field, sure, but how often is that the case on vacation?

 

[Sirius Glass]

Like Matt I too tend towards wide lenses for traveling. In Europe I found that 28mm was generally wide enough but for places like the Greek Islands the SWC which is about equivalent the a 22mm lens was used almost exclusively followed by a lens roughly equivalent to a 28mm lens.

Wide angle lenses allow one to exclude wires, trees, cars, people, ... from view, as long as that does not introduce perspective distortions.