Why do people ask what camera/lens to take while visiting XYZ?

[mobi1]

I often see people asking what camera/lens to take when visiting XYZ places types of threads.

Why do people need location specific systems? Do people buy gears specifically for visiting a place? :-O

Surely same camera can be used whether one is visiting Europe or Asia or whatever places on earth?

I understand there could be some places where one really needs specific gears e.g. wildlife shooting in Africa where telephotos are essential. But even then, I find changing lenses during holidays very frustrating. I tried once and never there after. Of course, everyone's need and want are different.

When I first bought my DSLR few years back, I also got an impression like if I visit somewhere I need some specific lenses. But over the years I realized less is more and I now only travel with kit lens (18-55). In fact, I no longer like lugging bulky DSLR anymore (and looking for mirrorless replacement). I did felt the need for having a wide angle lens but then realized panorama stitching by software (e.g. Hugin) does produce very good result so dropped idea of wide angle lens.

I have discovered that not having to choose which systems (camera/lens) to use is very liberating.

At one point in time, I used to laugh at people who only shot using phone cameras - this includes my wife too. But now I think I am the fool who insisted on lugging a camera bag on shoulder - which feels like carrying a stone after midday. :-|

 

[tsinsf]

Because for some the learning curve in landscape photography is too steep and they can only learn by copying how others do things. The “which lens” question has always seem crazy to me. If you have ever been on a workshop with experienced photographers, and if you get to see others work at the end, you will notice a wide variety of focal legnths used for the same “shot”.

 

[lokatz]

If you went to, say, Kruger National Park without at least a 400mm FF equivalent, or you visited Grand Canyon NP without a sufficiently wide-angle lens, I'd call you a fool.

Yes, stitching sometimes helps, but it has its limits, and you pay a price in corner distortions and other issues. If you want the shot to be right, you need the gear for it. If you don't care and just want the grab shot, use your smartphone.

 

[john Clinch]

Well you are right and wrong aren't you

Some times the questions are mad. "What lens for Europe". Well I live in Europe and I would say on balance we need the same lenses as every other continent

On the other hand I think alot of Americans coming to Europe do have a some what similar itinerary and want a some what similar set of shots. So I do hear sensible conversations about the need for an ultra wide lens while visiting Italian Architecture. Or the need for at least some reach on a river cruise. You could argue that this is all quite obvious but I think lots of people have way more time to buy and plan than actually photograph so that becomes the hobby

Good for you on simplifying your camera gear. I go in phases. I did 2 years of mainly my Sony RX100. Now I'm all excited to buy another lens for the big camera etc.

 

[Chizuka]

What is worst... asking what camera/lense to take or asking why people ask that question?

Hum!

For me, the answer is obvious. When I am at home, I can carry whatever I want especially if I go somewhere in a car. When I travel, I need to have lighter gear first because of airlines weight restriction and second because I might be walking all day with my equipment, which is something I don’t do at home. It is a matter of optimizing... having the least amount of quality gear (no smartphone for me yet) that will adress most situations one will be in, while travelling. After all, this forum is about Travel photography, and that is why people ask that question.

 

[larsbc]

I often see people asking what camera/lens to take when visiting XYZ places types of threads.

Why do people need location specific systems? Do people buy gears specifically for visiting a place? :-O

Surely same camera can be used whether one is visiting Europe or Asia or whatever places on earth?

I think for many people, especially those with physically large systems, the gear choice considerations changes when you have to carry your gear (along with everything else) onto a plane and also carry your stuff all day. Also, in some destinations, carrying a large, pro system might not be such a great idea.

When I had my Nikon system, I had some nice 2.8 zooms which I never brought traveling due to size/weight issues. For some people, it might be their first time traveling somewhere, or it's a really important trip, and suddenly they're faced with deciding what to bring or buy, and they're trying to deal with the size/weight/risk issues.

I understand there could be some places where one really needs specific gears e.g. wildlife shooting in Africa where telephotos are essential. But even then, I find changing lenses during holidays very frustrating. I tried once and never there after. Of course, everyone's need and want are different.

I'll say. I can't imagine buying an interchangeable lens camera and not changing lenses. But see, you've just mentioned another issue: maybe someone is happy to switch lenses at home but doesn't want to while traveling and now doesn't know which single lens he or she should bring.

I have discovered that not having to choose which systems (camera/lens) to use is very liberating.

True. It's also limiting, too.
But if it works for you, then it sounds like you made the right choice.

 

[KENTGA]

I'm basically a landscape photographer and I've found on a FF Canon that 16 to 105 is good for me 95% of the time. Wildlife with a tele takes up the other 5 %.

Kent

 

[Rick Knepper]

[No message]

 

[Chizuka]

 

[jhorse]

The “which lens” question has always seem crazy to me.

Hi, it is not so much the which lens (or camera) question, but such a question without giving context. For example, on the Fuji forum today there is a question: is the X-E3 good for travel. But travel for what purpose, to do what type of photography (subjects), whether it is a photo-orientated trip or a supplement to a family or business trip, etc. It is the absence of context that renders such a question somewhat pointless.

If the context is provided, then it is, I think, a fair question, especially for those less experienced as they can draw on the experience of more seasoned photographers.

 

[tpani]

I have never understood these "what lens(es)" questions. The only exceptions would be - as already pointed out - in some very specific locations, where the question would be if you need an UWA. Everything else is trivial. Go to a natural park with animals in it: you need a tele. Take photos at night or dark indoors: you need a fast prime. A valid question of course sometimes is: is a 400 mm f/4 preferable to 200 mm f/2.8. But that's not what we are talking about here.

People ask these questions because they (wrongly) believe that there is a generic answer to that question. What lenses do you need in Vietnam? You need exactly the same lenses in Vietnam as in Finland, Morocco, and New York: it completely depends on what kind of photography you do. There are people shooting birds in big cities and in deserts. There is interesting indoors to be photographed in almost all countries. The world is probably much more complex than many people think it is. You take as many lenses as you can, considering how much you think those lenses might be worth, compared to their weight.

Another reason is impatience related to an upcoming exciting trip. People want to be prepared and want to get advice: a am doing a special trip and need special advice. They might view this question very special, and maybe it is, if they have not asked it before, and if they have not noticed that dpreview forums are filled with this question.

I always take all my lenses to all trips 3 days or longer. But that's only because I have a toy camera with lenses so small than they fit in my hand luggage with all the clothes I might need on a trip up to one week long, my laptop, and stuff. other I always take all four lenses. So I don't feel the need asking anybody any questions about the lenses I might need.

 

[mfinley]

To me this is the question that defines this website, it's asked over and over again. The only thing more head scratching then the question is the 20 answers each time giving specific advice.

The answer should always be the same - take every lens you have until you're covered in range from ultra wide to ultra telephoto and everything in between. Paris is no different than Peoria. If you can't walk into your back yard and find subjects to shoot ultra wide and ultra telephoto you aren't looking hard enough.

 

[Acrill]

t now I think I am the fool who insisted on lugging a camera bag on shoulder - which feels like carrying a stone after midday. :-|

If you want to take some nice artistic shots and potentially print them at larger sizes, then its not foolish to lug around a camera bag. Its necessary to get the shots you want.

If you don't want to print or view large, and don't care about things like dynamic range, then by all means just use a phone.

If the camera bag really feels like a stone, then maybe you could pursue some lighter camera options that don't compromise on image quality compared to DSLRs.

Different cameras can be used to create images fit for different purposes. No need to look down on anyone.

 

[Akar]

I couldn't express it better.

 

[lokatz]

... The answer should always be the same - take every lens you have until you're covered in range from ultra wide to ultra telephoto and everything in between. Paris is no different than Peoria. If you can't walk into your back yard and find subjects to shoot ultra wide and ultra telephoto you aren't looking hard enough.

If your gear includes only a few lenses and one body, that's sound advice. Otherwise, it is not. Whether you hop in your car and drive to Peoria, or board an international flight to Paris, makes a big difference to someone like me, with five different cameras, several lenses, ball head and gimbal, six different camera/lens bags, etc. to choose from.

Admittedly, many people asking the question apparently did not think it through or maybe are just insecure about their general choice of equipment. When someone has real limitations, though, be they airline restrictions, risk of theft, how much their back will allow them to carry, or whatever else, the question is perfectly legitimate.

 

[mfinley]

... The answer should always be the same - take every lens you have until you're covered in range from ultra wide to ultra telephoto and everything in between. Paris is no different than Peoria. If you can't walk into your back yard and find subjects to shoot ultra wide and ultra telephoto you aren't looking hard enough.

If your gear includes only a few lenses and one body, that's sound advice.

That's exactly to what I'm referring to, it happens over and over and over again here.

I have XZY camera - I have a 12-30, a 70, a 40-200, a 135. I'm going to XYZ, should I leave the 12-30 at home? Who's been there before, what was your experience shooting there?

That's the typical question, Should I take a wide angle this or that? Of course you should, take all the lenses you should cover the focal lengths from wide to telephoto, then you are prepared for anything, Pairs is no different than Peoria. Additionally people will emphasize the city because they believe the entire city and every subject will fall into only a limited focal length range? I'm going to Istanbul, I'm going to Naples, I'm going to Barcelona. What difference does it make?

It's no different then somebody saying I'm going to XYZ golf course should I bring my 5-7 irons, or leave them home, what's other people's experience playing there?

Of course you bring them, you bring all your golf clubs, they are the tools you have to choose from depending on the shot, no different in photography.

Just go down this forums topics pages, there are at least 5 questions in 2 pages worth of topics all the same doing exactly what I am referring to. On page one right now there is this exact post

"Destination: Darjeeling region, West Bengal India

Can anyone, who has been there, impart some wisdom with regard to lenses to take along?

Gear that I am tentatively thinking of taking, are:

- Bodies: Nikon D800E & D5200 (backup)

- Lenses: 14-24, 24-70, 70-200, 85

- Travel Tripod

Wondering if I should take along the 14-24 - this is the one I'm not sure about. Plan to go to a bunch of temples, get some architecture in Kolkata, etc... I use the 24-70 for the most part, but unsure of the usefulness of the 14-24 in tight quarters (inside temples)."

Of course you take the 14-24, plus do you think you can't use that lens to photograph an elephant, what about a beetle? You sure can.

--
Thanks,
Mike
https://www.instagram.com/mikefinleyco/

 

[larsbc]

... The answer should always be the same - take every lens you have until you're covered in range from ultra wide to ultra telephoto and everything in between. Paris is no different than Peoria. If you can't walk into your back yard and find subjects to shoot ultra wide and ultra telephoto you aren't looking hard enough.

If your gear includes only a few lenses and one body, that's sound advice.

That's exactly to what I'm referring to, it happens over and over and over again here.

I have XZY camera - I have a 12-30, a 70, a 40-200, a 135. I'm going to XYZ, should I leave the 12-30 at home? Who's been there before, what was your experience shooting there?

That's the typical question, Should I take a wide angle this or that? Of course you should, take all the lenses you should cover the focal lengths from wide to telephoto, then you are prepared for anything, Pairs is no different than Peoria. Additionally people will emphasize the city because they believe the entire city and every subject will fall into only a limited focal length range? I'm going to Istanbul, I'm going to Naples, I'm going to Barcelona. What difference does it make?

It's no different then somebody saying I'm going to XYZ golf course should I bring my 5-7 irons, or leave them home, what's other people's experience playing there?

Of course you bring them, you bring all your golf clubs, they are the tools you have to choose from depending on the shot, no different in photography.

Just go down this forums topics pages, there are at least 5 questions in 2 pages worth of topics all the same doing exactly what I am referring to. On page one right now there is this exact post

"Destination: Darjeeling region, West Bengal India

Can anyone, who has been there, impart some wisdom with regard to lenses to take along?

Gear that I am tentatively thinking of taking, are:

- Bodies: Nikon D800E & D5200 (backup)

- Lenses: 14-24, 24-70, 70-200, 85

- Travel Tripod

Wondering if I should take along the 14-24 - this is the one I'm not sure about. Plan to go to a bunch of temples, get some architecture in Kolkata, etc... I use the 24-70 for the most part, but unsure of the usefulness of the 14-24 in tight quarters (inside temples)."

Of course you take the 14-24, plus do you think you can't use that lens to photograph an elephant, what about a beetle? You sure can.

Possible answers:

• The time of year that you'll be there will be incredibly hot. I would hesitate to carry the 70-200 due to its weight. Do you have a lighter/smaller consumer-grade lens that you could use instead?
• Unless you'll be shooting lots of portraits, I'd leave the 85 at home and use the 24-70 for portraits.
• There's been lots of reports of tourist thefts in that area. I suggest something less conspicuous than your D800, or at least bringing a smaller camera for use in certain areas.
• Most of the sites you're visiting don't allow tripods.
• The night time photo opportunities are amazing so bring a fast, wide angle prime.
• The airline you're flying on is extremely rigid about enforcing their carry-on regulations so make sure your total baggage is under xx kgs.

Look, I understand the frustration of seeing that question asked so many times but there are sometimes situations where "just bring the same stuff you'd use at home" doesn't apply.

 

[Schrodingers_cat]

I have discovered that not having to choose which systems (camera/lens) to use is very liberating.

At one point in time, ........ who insisted on lugging a camera bag on shoulder - which feels like carrying a stone after midday. :-|

Disclaimer: I acknowledge up front that the issue is highly subjective and YMMV. And almost certainly will.

I find myself somewhat in agreement with this point of view, with a couple of digressions. Different people, and the same people traveling differently, can have different requirements. A certain amount of choice making is required depending on individual circumstances, and once an individual realizes where there actual interest reside things may become more clear. For this reason, it's difficult to give advice to those whom you don't actually know. And on giving advice, it's perhaps relevant to state you own circumstances. Someone stated to simply take everything you own, and for me that's simply a non starter. I'd need to haul a trailer behind the airplane.

If you are in the camp to whom the trip is really just an opportunity to exercise some (or all ) of the nice gear you have collected, and you actually possess the physical ability and travel mode flexibility to do so, the argument doesn't really apply because the goals are different. Carry everything you own and rent some more while you're there, if that's the part of the trip that you enjoy.

Holding another point of view are the purists to whom the end print is everything and the gear is irrelevant. Do what's necessary to get the shot and take (only) what's necessary to do so. If you photographic goals are something like HCB, that's not very much.

And somewhere in the middle you'll find the folks who want to have a nice vacation and also enjoy photography. Careful gear selection, with an eye to minimalism, may be just the ticket if you identify with this group. Less gear can increase mobility and perhaps even generate some improvement in the images by forcing more attention on composition, lighting, and other artistic factors.

For a number of years now I've found myself moving farther and farther into the territory of the last group, with my last three overseas trips being with one body and two small primes. We fly coach with carry on luggage only to last a month or so, therefore there are also some built in weight limitations. Planning an Italy trip right now and I'm seriously considering limiting myself to one 50mm prime. In my case, I feel my images have improved and so has my enjoyment of the trip itself. (getting old is may be a factor also )

And to respond directly to the original question, perhaps the individuals in question simply haven't found which point of view they subscribe to most nearly.

--
"Good judgement is generally the result of experience. Experience, unfortunately, is generally the result of bad judgement" - attributed to a whole bunch of folks

 

[mfinley]

Look, I understand the frustration of seeing that question asked so many times but there are sometimes situations where "just bring the same stuff you'd use at home" doesn't apply.

Again.... If you're going to address my answer you should really do it in context to what I'm answering.

The answer I gave was very specific to a very specific question asked over and over again. I even copied and pasted an exact example of the question I was addressing.

 

[hypercore360]

Perhaps people ask, because they simply don't know. Doesn't mean they will take your or my advice per se, but it's more of a survey. Maybe the person asking will get an idea about some gear and will look further in to it, and if it's w/i their budget, they'll go for it. Who know...