Comments on: Gear Up for Vacation!

By: Esa Tuunanen

Esa Tuunanen — Fri, 29 Jun 2012 20:24:43 +0000

Definitely curious how m4/3 is skipped without even mentioning it.
Sure CDAF can’t do proper focus tracking like PDAF but otherwise it works well and things like landscape don’t move that fast.

For example Lumix G 7-14mm is very travel friendly sized 14-28mm field of view UW zoom.
From 4/3 side there’s also rarer Panasonic Leica D 14-150mm which actually delivers high corner to corner quality at all aperture/focal length combinations unlike other ultra zoom lenses.

Adding standard tele zoom like Lumix G 100-300mm wouldn’t add that much weight.
Similar optical quality lenses for that range with full frame DSLR would weight lot more. Again APS-C super zooms tend to be real mediocrities with roller coaster performance along aperture/focal length combinations.

By: Roger Roehr

Roger Roehr — Wed, 27 Jun 2012 01:04:09 +0000

For a long time my only camera was Canon G11 and still enjoy it a lot for family travel. I have added a 270 ex flash with a flash dufuser cap witch make bounce flash really nice with some forward light. The other thing I got is the Canon under water housing witch is very competivly priced and not risking my SLR taking the camera to the beach. My wife also fells comfortable with this rig and it fits into two belt pouches.

By: Lester

Lester — Tue, 26 Jun 2012 09:54:18 +0000

Brilliant! I was feeling guilty that my backpack is deliberately sized so my wife can carry it, but now feel validated (wry grin). Two comments: I run the Oly OM-D system at present, having been there/done that with Canikon, and find weight really does matter (smile). And (probably ‘cos I snap away in rainy UK or rainy Thailand), weather-proofing is an issue, I could never get clear statements from Canikon blurb about their lenses on this aspect, while Olympus (and Pentax) is refreshingly up-front. For a two-lens vacation kit, I always suggest a 24-200 (equiv) and a 50 f1.4…

By: Walter Underwood

Walter Underwood — Tue, 26 Jun 2012 04:04:03 +0000

My EF-S 17-55/2.8 has been an awesome vacation lens. Still oughta be an “L”, even it if only works on the small sensors. The 70-200/4L is light enough to take with you and super sharp, but the one time I used the 70-300 DO, it struck me as a great compact vacation lens, much lighter and smaller than the 70-300L, and still a pretty good lens.

By: Rick Lobrecht

Rick Lobrecht — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 17:52:55 +0000

No mention of the Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 VR II DX as an all around vacation lens?

Sure, if you’re a pro, it’s not the best, but otherwise this lens is great for covering the whole range you might encounter on a vacation. You won’t need to bodies to capture that tan line.

By: ShooterMcGavin

ShooterMcGavin — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 17:36:01 +0000

Well… I fall into the “really wish I’d read this before I went on vacation last week.”

I went into the trip thinking, “Eh, this bag isn’t so bad to lug around…” I clearly misunderstood how much walking we were going to be doing. In town where I take my car everywhere, it’s no big deal to lug a shoulder bag with a pro body, Nikon 2.8 trinity, full size flash, 50 1.4, and maybe a 24 or 80 1.4 to boot. I would have killed for a 24-120 or 28-300 on this trip though. It would have made my back a lot happier.

By: Mark Olwick

Mark Olwick — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 17:09:45 +0000

I’ve got to agree with Chris – a micro 4/3 system makes a great lightweight travel kit! And the new Olympus OM-D E-M5 has DSLR quality.

By: Bob Panick

Bob Panick — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 17:08:14 +0000

Good article, one lens that you left out though was the 18-200 DX or 28-300 FX. I’ve been debating what to bring on my vacation to Hawaii, both civilized and wilderness on the same trip. I considered my D7000, 12-24, 24-70 and 70-200, as well as a 60 macro; vs. 12-24, 28-300 and a 60 macro. I’d love to have the faster glass but I realized I would be lugging a backpack with the 2.8 lenses vs. a much smaller messenger bag with the slower glass. So I’m going with the recommendations of the Scott’s here (Kelby and Borne) and going with the slower lighter glass.

By: Chris Nichols

Chris Nichols — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 16:16:55 +0000

To write a column about travel photography these days and not really touch on mirrorless as a major category is to miss the biggtest single development in equipment in the last 2 years. My primary photography application is travel photography and I have searched for years for just the right combination of cameras, lenses using the options discussed here. This year, canon and big sony are staying home in favor of nex 7 and OMD M5; in fact I’m busy selling big rigs and lenses to help pay for this newly discovered perfect travel category of equipment. I’d suggest a follow up article.

By: alek

alek — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 15:30:54 +0000

Good advice … and as someone who has been on a couple of Safari’s (and actually leaving for Kenya soon), I’ll echo the recommendation to bring two bodies with a telephoto lens on one and something wider on the other. Another advantage is you minimize lens changes, so reduce the chance of getting dust on the sensor. Having said that, another handy thing to consider bringing along is a Teleconverter, especially if you have something like the 70-200/2.8v2 … because during the middle of the day, you should have plenty of lights so shooting F/5.6 (140-400 with 2x TC) is quite doable at decent shutter speed and low ISO.

Lots more could be written – for instance, have extra batteries since you don’t always have access to power – maybe an idea for a future post from Roger?

Love the picture of the dude with the cell phone snapping the picture of the lion!
alek

P.S. Roger wrote that the dual setup is helpful if you see “the most ridiculous tan line/swimsuit combo on the other end of the beach (and you don’t want to get caught lookin’).” – is he going to share any of those pictures with us?!?