Reveal your Travel Kit!

I took a G10 as a backup with me.
It all depends what you like to shoot. If you want to shoot people,
you'd probably take a 70-200 lens with you... For landscape
my kit seems to be the most useful.
I love shooting primes, it's just so much more convenient to shoot
with 16-35 zoom.

Why not put the 70 x 200 on the 50 body and enjoy the 1.6 extension for free?
--
My blog http://stock-photo.blogspot.com

Eos 450D Tamron 18-250mm

much lighter and smaller than my "home" gear :

40D Tamron 11-18mm canon L 17-40mm canon IS 28-135mm Canon L IS 100-400mm

A very good compromise for trekking and travelling light

For very Light my old and good panasonic FZ5

For ultra compact my excellent Fuji F30

Like others, I have variations on the kit but my standard (if shooting Canon) is:

5D with grip
15mm f/e
17-40L
24-105L
24TSE
Various Lee filters

That all fits nicely in a Slingshot 300 but is marginally too heavy and lacking in the long end.

I don't have the cash right now but I am weighing up the pros and cons of getting the big 28-300L as a one-lens solution when I really need to cut down overall weight and bulk. Far from convinced though - need to try one first.

Ed

The camera bag is a non camera bag.

I bought a regular (non camera) bag at Death Valley a few years ago.

The D200 with lens and speedlight fit great in it.

It doesn't have padding, but it doesn't look like a camera bag and doesn't bounce around and hit stuff.

Its also very small. With just a couple zipper pouches for 1 spare CF, 2 batteries, polarizer, retractable usb cable and very thin ski glove liners I put in the bag.

When I'm in a super serious mood for shooting (non travel etc)

Then I shoot my Canons and Ls.

When shooting things like a local balloon festival I take a 28-300.

When I'm shooting surfing I take a 100-400.

When I'm shooting jugglers I shoot a 17-40.

For me when I'm doing any kind of shoot I try to plan ahead for a max of 2 lenses.

I hate changing lenses.

For me I try to think what lens would cover the largest amount of my shooting for that day (80-95%) and I don't care about the 20-5% that get away.

Lots of shots get away no matter what.

I just got a 5d2 with a 24-105. If I were personally travelling with that camera I'd take the 24-105.

For me traveling with the 28-300 would be too much of a pain. I'd just take the Nikon in that case.

So my point is you might want to try to plan in advance what couple of lenses would cover most of what you want to do and forget about the small percentage of images you could have gotten if you had brought lens X.

When doing local stuff I lock my things in a Pelican hard shell case with hardened chained to the inside of my van since I don't have a trunk.

BC

My best travel kit so far is:
My Olympus E-3 +
12-60 mm SWD (comparable 24-120 mm range)
50-200 mm SWD (comparable 100-400 mm range)
50 mm / F2
This is my best travel kit so far because:

• it's light enough to take anywhere
• it's supersturdy weatherproof gear
• the IQ is simply superb
• it's small enough to fit in a very compact backpack

I forgot,

My camerabag is an insuspicious looking Kata Sensitivity V backpack (actually a laptop bag....but I do not carry a laptop at all);
well padded / small / handy / sturdy.

Currently, my bag (a Crumpler Karachi Outpost) contains a 5D Mark II with grip and 24-105mm f/4L IS, 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6, Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6, Tamron 90mm f/2.8 macro, Sigma 50mm f/1.4, Speedlite 580EX, ST-E2, RC-1, low profile 77mm B+W MRC circular polarizer and other small amenities (bulb blower, strap, lens cloth, a small Lumiquest softbox, batteries, etc.).

I've found over the years that this provides the most versatility and this is the stuff that generally goes everywhere with me. Sometimes I swap out a lens or two depending on the situation. For instance, I might swap the 100-400 with a 70-200mm f/2.8L IS if I know that I'll be shooting in low light and I need a telephoto lens, or I might switch the Sigma 50mm and 12-24 for a Canon 35mm f/1.4L and 85mm f/1.2L II if I'm going to be shooting models, or maybe I'll leave the Tamron 90mm macro and bring another flash.

--
Whoever said 'a picture is worth a thousand words' was a cheapskate.

http://www.pbase.com/dot_borg
http://www.modelmayhem.com/dotborg

Hi Jeff,

I'm thinking I'll use the 200mm f2.8 to isolate animals from the rest of the scene using depth of field to a greater degree than otherwise possible - It'll also be perfect for lower light shots that I couldn't get with the 100-400 (also looking at 50-500 - that comparison thread thats around at the moment looks good, 200 2.8 looks even better due to the lack of IS on the bigma) I saw some great shots in one of these forums along time ago where there were some zebras that were shot wide open with a 70-200 2.8 - some of the most impressive and unique safari shots i've seen so far. I'm also considering the 70-200 2.8 tamron but the one I played with had a pretty ridiculous amount of vignetting, i'm assuming the 200mm has much less.

Also considering other systems for the trip - like an Olympus E3 with 12-60 and 50-200 like someone else in this thread mentioned - I've played with them and they are very nice indeed - also thinking If I was to get the bigma then I might get it and a Pentax K20D or Sony A300 as a dedicated camera for it - that way it will have IS... shame I sold all my pentax gear - used to have a great set didn't quite compare to the 5D though...

On the subject of Pentax - the 50mm I've got is the "A" series f1.4 and I kept it after testing it against the canon 50mm 1.4 and 1.8 as well as an oly 1.4 I bought off ebay... The canon 1.4 was VERY slightly sharper than the Pentax wide open, but the others lagged behind. The Pentax was sharper at f2 and even wide open had no CA (I mean NONE - couldn't find a trace) so for those reasons I kept the pentax - I don't mind manual focus, it feels like i'm "crafting" an image, and because I usually use it at f2 or f2.8 sometimes f4 the manual aperture isn't that much of an issue (might be a pain when trying to use with a flash, but if I have the 50mm on the camera I'm usually not carrying the big heavy flash)

I think I will eventually get the 50mm sigma, but just can't justify the price difference and the results I get from the Pentax are great - I'll post one when I get back to my computer.

nolten said:

Actually two. The kit you mention for your upcoming Africa trip is
much like mine except for the 200 2.8. This is not a small lens to
add so what do you anticipate using it for? Also, I have a fleet of
Pentax screw mount lenses from my film days (28, 50, 135, 150, 300).
Do you find the Pentax 50 1.4 enough better than the Canon 1.4 to
make it worth fussing with manual everything? Cheers and thanks.
-Jeff

Click to expand...

--

If I am traveling and just bringing my stuff along 40D 70-200 f4IS 5D2 24-105f4IS. And the 35 f1.4 or 50 f1.2.

Wildlife
1Dmk3 500 f4 1.4 TC 2xTC polarized filter
100-400
16-35 f2.8
5D2
wimberly head and tripod

I have given alot of thought about the micro 4/3s system with the 70-200 lens for backcountry skiing and skiing and backpacking.

Thanks Simon. I've considered one of the fast medium telephoto primes (135 or 200) to be the next addition to my kit but I don't know if I will use it enough to justify the cost. I remember trying to frame individual zebras on my safari trip a decade or so ago. That was with a Spotmatic and 300/4 - all manual. Got some great shots on that trip but it also showed me how much electronics had improved camera technology. I missed quite a few. Now I'm trying not to look too hard at the 5D II so I can stay happy with my 5D ;-) Just kidding with that, the 5D is great and 22 MP would be overkill for me.

More importantly for me on these types of nature photography trips is trying to slow down and really think about composition. The digitals with the IS zooms are so fast and easy it is too tempting to rush. I think primes and perhaps some of the old manual lenses would help with that. I have the screw mount adaptor but haven't used it much. Thanks for re-igniting the idea of using these old lenses.

Hey Jeff,

Some photos as promised - Although quite different from Zebras these People are all quite clearly separated from the background using depth of field, you still get a good sense of their surroundings but they themselves are unquestionably the subjects of the photos - that is what I'm hoping to achieve with the 200mm 2.8. It's not the completely blurred look you get with a close focusing distance but that slight blur that still remains at greater distances when using fast lenses - for me it's this effect that makes an SLR worth carrying and is usually what alot of people mean when they say their old film camera was better than their new little P&S digital.







I started using this effect at sculpture by the sea on an overcast day with twilight fast approaching. I didn't want to carry my camera bag to, so I stuck the 50mm on and slung the 5D over my shoulder and decided to shoot wide open since I was carrying such a fast lens - just for fun really







You lose the sense of scale with that last one but it was a little bit taller than me.

When I saw the results I started to prefer the depth of field separation to the sharpness I usually strive for, granted it not suitable for every subject but I've become obsessed with it, and it's the same effect I couldn't quite put my finger on when I liked medium format film so much.

--

I earn my living with the following, whether it be on the road or closer to home:

1DsII
17-40mm zoom
15mm fish-eye
Gitzo 410 w/Arca-Swiss B1 head.

mark
http://www.markpix.com

Nice, I like the subject emphasis in the first picture and the texture of the shells in the net picture. With my film camera I used my 50 mm lens a lot. Now I use the 50/1.8 only rarely although I do play with the 35/2 occasionally. I get that effect most often with my 100-400 since the longer focal length has such a short depth of field. I love that lens but it does not have the best bokah. I should play more with my primes. Thanks for sharing. Cheers.

I was just at a bookstore last night and noticed a book by a veteran travel photographer Bob Krist by Lark photo books. I skimmed through a couple sections, his workflow while on the road and his travel equipment. He seemed way more refined. Check it out. I think it would be helpful.

Just came back from a backpack trip in Italy. Over the last few trips, I've settled down to the bare minimum:

1DsIII
Zeiss 35/2.8 Shift or EF35/1.4L or EF35/2
EF85/1.8
EF15/2.8 Fisheye (for spherical panoramas)
Monopad or Hiking pole with quick release head or Tripod

I used to take zooms like 24-105, but now find their optical quality unacceptable on 1DsIII (same situation with 5D2). Primes would give me the ultimate image quality, and once you get used to them, they are not very limiting for composition either. I can quickly switch lens between the one on the body and the one in my belt case, with rear lens caps removed. By stiching images together, I can also shoot a wider scene than what 35 or 85 naturally provides. The above combination is good for landscape, building, night scene, street, and actions. A very versatile package that is relatively light and delivers great image quality. All fit perfectly in the bottom section of a LowePro Primus AW backpack, which is not huge.

I am not going back to zooms.

Most common kit is
40D+17-55/2.8IS, 70-200/2.8IS, 580EX
HP 15in notebook
Lee GND and holder
B+W Cir Polarizer
Rocket blower, lens cleaner, charger, USB cables, Extra CF cards
Sometimes Gary Fong whaletail diffuser
All in Thinktank Urban Disgusie 50 bag

I plan to get 5DII and 24-70/2.8L to replace 40D and 17-55/2.8 IS.
--

What camera do I have? I rather you look at my photos http://www.flickr.com/photos/gavinz

I did a multi month trip around Nepal and SE Asia (including multiple treks and whatnot) carrying a 30D, 400D, 17-55 EF-S, 10-22 EF-S, and 70-300 IS, often with a 50 1.4 (I also brought my tamron 18-250, and a Canon G7 for video). Most often I would store some lenses in Bangkok. When I really wanted to take the best pictures, I had the 17-55 as my main lens. I usually kept the 10-22 on my other body. Sometimes the 70-300 IS. When I was wondering it was the 400 and the Tamron.

What I would like to take the next time I go on a trip would be the Canon 5D II (dont own), and a 60D (after they fix the ISO issues in the 50D) or 500D as my backup/crop body for reach. I will look hard at the Panasonic G2 when it comes out, and I may pick up a LX-3 for poop and giggles. My budget does not allow this so mostly I am dreaming aloud.

Although I needed the wide end a lot, I found that while the 10-22 was immensely fun, I hurt a lot on the long end. On a crop body, the 10-22 plus a 24-105 would have been perfect for me, I woulda walked around with the 24-105 on, and the 10-22 on the other.

I am a little afraid of all the distortion in the 24-105 on the 5D II... I may next time go EF-S 10-22, and 5D II plus 24-105, or 5D II plus 24-70 and 70-200 F4 IS. I will also take a good look at the new Tamron 18-270 IS. Light, IS, and great reach, a lot of my tamron photos came out great. I will defintiely keep it down to three lenses next time.

haziz said:

I just came back from a photography trip to New Mexico and have once
again demonstrated to myself that I was carrying way too much gear. I
ended up using my 5D MKII mostly with the 24-105 mm lens. The 50 mm
f1.4, 16-35 mm, and 100-400 got minimal use and the rest (70-200, 24,
35, 85, 100 Macro) none at all. My backup kit (actually E-520 and
E-420 Olympus SLRs) got little use. I may still wish to take an E-420
with the 25 mm pancake as a walkaround kit when walking about town
and not wanting to carry the big camera. I have done the same on
prior trips having a 4x5 camera, medium format, and 35 mm film and
digital on the same trip. This is my first photography trip in which
I have gone completely digital.

So try to talk me into some sense or else reveal your travel
insanity! What is your travel kit when on a photography trip, and
what is it on , lets say, a business trip with a free day? Also what
do you use for a camera bag?

Thanks.

Sincerely,

Hany.

Click to expand...

I usually take an apple and some chocolate milk.

I think that this thread has revealed that there isn't really a right or wrong way to make a travel kit. It also empasises just how diverse we all are in terms of our gear and subsequent shooting styles.

Regards,

Gareth Cooper
--
http://www.GMCPhotographics.com (weddings)
http://www.pbase.com/gazzajagman (other stuff)

'Science is what we dream of, technology is what we are stuck with' Douglas Adams