DSLR + Lens for travelling? What combo would you take?

[zilla]

what body/lens combination would you take with you if you were travelling to another country (urban areas - no back country, hiking, biking type stuff).

would an 18-55 lens be enough, or would an 18-105 or 18-150 be better even though it will be significantly heavier?

 

[Tang]

I'd personally go with the 18-55. I only use longer focal lengths for portraits and for most of what I shoot 55mm would be as long as I need.

That being said, I shot a good bit of my last vacation with a 35mm lens.

 

[ThePhilosopher]

If I want to capture the people of the street I'd take my 50mm and 85mm, more for urban landscapes I'd consider my 24mm and 50mm. My last vacation I used my 24mm, 80-200mm, and 15-30mm all on FF.

 

[Bevo]

I was also thinking about this and started experimenting from the other end.
To me it's what the lens can do to the final product, my 50mm won. It was able to take the close shots and detail was there if I maximized the image. For distance shots your limited but within reason you can expand and crop for a great pic.

With my 7D the 18-200 takes all the shots I need.

 

[Philligan]

If you're not planning on shooting wildlife or anything like that, I'd say stick with the 18-55. It covers you from a landscape to portrait length, which should be about all you need.

If you shoot Canon, I'd say grab the 50mm 1.8 to bring, no question. It's pretty much weightless, and it'll make a massive difference if you want to shoot in the evening or at night. If you shoot Nikon, and don't mind spending $200 or so, grab either the 50 1.8 or 35 1.8, for the same reasons. The Canon 50 1.8 is so cheap there's no question you should get it if you don't already have it.

I'm not familiar with Nikon options, but another choice you'd have for Canon is the 10-18 STM. If you're shooting urban stuff, the extra width will come in handy for architecture and tight spaces, and landscapes. Personally, I'd probably take the 10-18 over the 18-55, but I like shooting wider.

My ideal travel setup for a Canon Rebel would be the 10-18, 24 2.8 pancake, and 50 1.8. That would weigh nothing, and cover ultra wide, walk around, and portrait length shots.

 

[alfadark]

Depends where I'm travelling/what I'm expecting to see. I have only primes with the exception of a 16-35, so when I'm travelling I usually take the 16-35 for landscapes, architecture, and as a general walkaround, then I might bring my 50 1.2 or 85 1.2 if I'm planning on shooting any portraits, anything at night, concerts, etc.

 

[Promit]

I carry my Sony A77 mark II with 16-50, 11-16, and 70-200 f2.8 lenses. Yes it's goddamn heavy, but I take my vacation photos seriously. I also bring an RX10 to accommodate lightweight needs or daylight telephoto.

In a single basic lens, something like a 16-105 would be my choice. 18-135 works too but I like the wide end. Add a low light prime to taste.

 

[Khoi]

call me crazy, but either a 35mm or 50mm on a nice body would be all I need! but of course, it's all relative to what you want to shoot and most importantly, how you shoot

 

[Carcaridon]

I tend to take my 5DMIII and the kit lens, 24-105mm f/4. Seems to cover everything I need when I'm urban. On a trip to New England I took a second 5D with a 70-200mm f/2.8 to get in close to the Maine lighthouses.

 

[Joe Harvatt]

Most of the time I'd just carry 35mm 1.8 on crop sensor. 18-55 is great all rounder though.

 

[antuni]

I take the 40mm pancake on my Canon 5D3, great and compact lens.

 

[Philligan]

Necrobump!

I'll chime in with my revised choice: Leica Monochrom with a 35 Summilux.

 

[Silence2-38554]

Canon eos M2 with respective 22mm pancake lens. Or the 18-55 if you'd like some range but not quite as compact.

 

[pwsusi]

When traveling i usually bring my Canon 24-70 F2.8 and 16-35 F2.8

 

[ThePhilosopher]

Holy necro...

 

[ESPImperium]

My 70D and the EFS 18-135mm would be enough for me if I was going with just one lens, if I need more reach ill take my EFS 55-250mm, if I'm shooting more portrait and don't need the medium reach of my 135mm id go with the EFS 18-55mm kit lens.

Trying to save for a 600mm telephoto for plane spotting in the summer and cold clear winter days.

But my 135mm is pretty much my new go-to since I got it in the Amazon sale in January, its light enough for me, makes my 70D look like a beast and also has great image quality and lets loads of light into my sensor.

Next F1 race I go to ill take my 300mm again but ill take my 135mm as the 55m just dosnt get close enough. But I have a new trackside camera backpack now and will be able to take more kit to trackside as I just had a large shoulder bag previously.

 

[vansinn]

Canon EOS 80D with a 24-70/2.8 - pretty good for video too.
Sony Cybershot bridge camera, featuring a whooping 24-600mm lens, just in case you would want to shoot birds.
Samsung NX500 with two of the pretty good wide and normal pancake lenses; pretty close to pocket size.

Else, any decent DSLR with a good 35mm prime will capture most anything. You'll be amazed how flexible that lens is. And pretty sharp too

A polarizer will really help bring about deeply saturated colors in the skies and transparency in the water of the lagoon.
Do consider at least a mono pod if you go for a longer lens.

And do not, repeat, do not buy a photo gear bag. Thieves will eye those at longer focal range than even your tele lens can cover.
I use an ordinary, though strong, blahblah sports bag strapped round my waist, with some foam insert I cut and glued up to fit/support an SLR + one extra lens, a polarizer and one macro tube.

 

[ericguitar48]

i have 17-70 sigma and i love it. but like a 70-150 is really fun to play around with