cjlouis
New member
I am leaving mid November for a Round the World trip lasting over a year, going from Central to S. America, parts of Africa, SE Asia, and up through China. It's the trip of a lifetime and I'm definitely taking my K10D to capture it, but there tons of things to consider regarding equipment to takelike durability(from Rainforests to deserts to cities), weight-, and knowing that what I take will determine what I shoot(can't just go home and grab something else).
1st Priority = Optical Quality --> Yes, it is the photographer not the camera. Most lenses I’m looking at are quite good and people can debate all day and never agree on which lens is better. But be honest, if you were gonna spend a year on the road seeing some of the most intriguing sights of your life knowing you’d probably never see them again, there are certain lenses you’d trust over others. And you’d rather have the best quality you can afford, not just a “it’s good enough” lens. Also, I do care about being able to hang some pics on my walls one day, in whatever size I can blow them up to.
Things I want:
1) true wide-angle for landscape,
2) everyday lens of the highest quality for the bulk of my pics(30-35mm is my favorite walk around length),
3) moderate tele lens for portraits and for certain landscape shots.
4) 1 lens capable of low-light indoor shots. Not the bulk of my shots, but a must have. I will have a pocket camera for night snapshots and the like.
5) Balance of weight/size to quality. I prefer a lighter pack, but it doesn’t HAVE to be the lightest possible. A few ounces more isn't a huge deal(2lb more is)
Things I’m willing to give up
1) Action shots – don’t use much
2) Long telephoto for Wildlife – would be great for Safari’s and wildlife, but it’s just too much bulk for something that would be a small % of my shots.
3) Macro – same as above
4) Every focal length possible – More would be great, but ultimately I’d rather shoot with 1 lens that takes great photos than 20 okay lenses that slow me down
So, what’s the best route?
1) 18-250 Ultra Zoom Versatility & simplicity vs. less quality
2) All Pancake 21mm, 40mm, 70mm --- Ultra compact, but limiting(especially w/ range & low light)
3) DA* Zoom 16-50, 50-135 ----- Weather sealing and quality, but heavy, bulky, and would scare everyone if I tried to use it as portrait.
4) DA 12-24, FA 35(or 31 ), FA 77mm ----- Wide angle, Everyday lens & low light, & a less scary lens for portraits and telephoto.
5) So many more combos of zooms & Primes(DA 16-45 instead, DA 14mm as the WA, etc.)
-I’m currently thinking about heading route 4. While zooms are convenient and the DA* weatherproof, they are bulky and heavier and still don’t solve all my problems. Plus, portraits are hard enough in some foreign countries without throwing a mammoth lens in a person’s face. The 35mm is my main tool, and can be used for low-light, while the 12-24 gives me wide angle and the 21-24mm length for walk around shots a bit shorter.
-I really like the idea of the pancake lenses(particularly the length for walking around locals), but the 40mm is a bit too long for my main lens. I have been using this length recently and am sure I would get used to it, so it's still an option(as is the 43). They also seem expensive considering neither the 21mm or the 40mm are fast enough for low light. Is the optical quality much better than the good zooms of this range?
Given the nature of the trip, should I spring for the 31mm? Are the pancakes a better idea? Should I choose the DA 14mm instead of the 12-24 for WA? Is the 70 more versatile than the 77 given that it’s the only telephoto length I might take? Should I sneak a cheaper long zoom in, or is the 17-70 or DA 16-45 a better idea? I love my Pentax, it is the perfect camera and system for quality/affordability/durability/size&weight in regards to the trip I’m doing and the way I shoot. This board has helped me so much, and I’ve read so many threads over the year it’s ridiculous. Any advice would be greatly appreciated!!
1st Priority = Optical Quality --> Yes, it is the photographer not the camera. Most lenses I’m looking at are quite good and people can debate all day and never agree on which lens is better. But be honest, if you were gonna spend a year on the road seeing some of the most intriguing sights of your life knowing you’d probably never see them again, there are certain lenses you’d trust over others. And you’d rather have the best quality you can afford, not just a “it’s good enough” lens. Also, I do care about being able to hang some pics on my walls one day, in whatever size I can blow them up to.
Things I want:
1) true wide-angle for landscape,
2) everyday lens of the highest quality for the bulk of my pics(30-35mm is my favorite walk around length),
3) moderate tele lens for portraits and for certain landscape shots.
4) 1 lens capable of low-light indoor shots. Not the bulk of my shots, but a must have. I will have a pocket camera for night snapshots and the like.
5) Balance of weight/size to quality. I prefer a lighter pack, but it doesn’t HAVE to be the lightest possible. A few ounces more isn't a huge deal(2lb more is)
Things I’m willing to give up
1) Action shots – don’t use much
2) Long telephoto for Wildlife – would be great for Safari’s and wildlife, but it’s just too much bulk for something that would be a small % of my shots.
3) Macro – same as above
4) Every focal length possible – More would be great, but ultimately I’d rather shoot with 1 lens that takes great photos than 20 okay lenses that slow me down
So, what’s the best route?
1) 18-250 Ultra Zoom Versatility & simplicity vs. less quality
2) All Pancake 21mm, 40mm, 70mm --- Ultra compact, but limiting(especially w/ range & low light)
3) DA* Zoom 16-50, 50-135 ----- Weather sealing and quality, but heavy, bulky, and would scare everyone if I tried to use it as portrait.
4) DA 12-24, FA 35(or 31 ), FA 77mm ----- Wide angle, Everyday lens & low light, & a less scary lens for portraits and telephoto.
5) So many more combos of zooms & Primes(DA 16-45 instead, DA 14mm as the WA, etc.)
-I’m currently thinking about heading route 4. While zooms are convenient and the DA* weatherproof, they are bulky and heavier and still don’t solve all my problems. Plus, portraits are hard enough in some foreign countries without throwing a mammoth lens in a person’s face. The 35mm is my main tool, and can be used for low-light, while the 12-24 gives me wide angle and the 21-24mm length for walk around shots a bit shorter.
-I really like the idea of the pancake lenses(particularly the length for walking around locals), but the 40mm is a bit too long for my main lens. I have been using this length recently and am sure I would get used to it, so it's still an option(as is the 43). They also seem expensive considering neither the 21mm or the 40mm are fast enough for low light. Is the optical quality much better than the good zooms of this range?
Given the nature of the trip, should I spring for the 31mm? Are the pancakes a better idea? Should I choose the DA 14mm instead of the 12-24 for WA? Is the 70 more versatile than the 77 given that it’s the only telephoto length I might take? Should I sneak a cheaper long zoom in, or is the 17-70 or DA 16-45 a better idea? I love my Pentax, it is the perfect camera and system for quality/affordability/durability/size&weight in regards to the trip I’m doing and the way I shoot. This board has helped me so much, and I’ve read so many threads over the year it’s ridiculous. Any advice would be greatly appreciated!!
