Versatility vs. weight on tour ...

Hello!

I'm very happy to be able to travel to Iceland this spring. I'm pretty unsure about what I like to bring and carry throughout the trip. I'm not by car but will travel by bus and will walk/hike a lot, but only one-day-trips, I guess. Problem is, I'm on a budget and I cannot just buy another fancy photorucksack/bag right now (gosh, how expensive some of those are!). Though I do have a relatively small bag and one rather big one. The small one would fit the essential things I want to carry: A700&VG, Tam 28-75, Sony 11-18, Minolta 17-35 and Sony 70-300 SSM. I would have to stack 2 lenses which I normally don't do, but it would fit. The bigger bag would easily have room for all of this and additionally a 90mm Tam Macro, Sony 50/1.4 and Min 28/2.0, even the Sony 58 flash would fit in, L-plate also. But this would be a real BIG pack. Especially 'cause I will definitely have my tripod (not too light 055pro) with me.

So my question is: What are you doing when it comes to decide between weight and gear you "might" want or need during the trip. I have not been out a lot lately, and when I did, I got a car, so it wasn't that much of a problem. I'm no body-builder, just of average fitness and height, so I really wonder whether its better not to carry all stuff with me and therefor be able to reach points of interest without being to exhausted.

Decisions, decisions ...

Well the answer is not easy. What are you expecting to do? Take long hikes? go for the4 small package. When goning only by bus and walk a little the big package may be the choise. But rethink what you take with you:

I would swap the VG for the flash in the smalll package. And one of the WA lenses for the macro.

When it is possible to leave some gear at the hotel in a save place (Like a save or so) you could take both the heavy gear and the small package. and onluy take the big package on trips you realy want to go photographing and you have the opportuanty to switch during the trip when you miss one item on your trips and find some other item not used...

an other approache could be: Try to mimmick at home what you will do on vacation and see what equiptment you realy ne4ed/want and take that wirth you.

StefB:

You have a lot of nice gear and you are undoubtedly in a league above me. If it were me, being quite lazy and not a pro, I would take the 58 flash, one of the 18-250 super-zooms, and your 11-18 UWA. I also carry a CP and a Raynox closeup lens for macro with the 250 zoom. It all fits in my fanny pack.
Bert

Advice depends a whole lot on what kind of photos you take. Tell us more.

--
Henry Richardson
http://www.bakubo.com

Hi,

based on your equipment the decision is really tricky and depends a lot on what type of shots you go. I was always in a similar dilemma until I decided to invest in a setup which gives me a good mix of quality, versatility with two lenses only: the 16-105 and the 70-400. This covers the whole range on APS-C from pretty wide to quite long. Perhaps some day I may add something wider and a 1,4TC for even more reach.

On a recent trip to the german Alps I left my flash at home and found the onboard flash sufficient for the rare occasione when I used a flash. I brought my monopod but I hardly used it.
--
Cheers,
Michael Fritzen

Thanks! -- I think it's a good tip to make some "test walks" with either the one or the other package. Maybe my aching shoulders would help me decide ...

Thanks for your answer. Actually I regret a little bit (only very little bit ...) to have purchased all those lenses - which is why the budget is limited now. don't have a superzoom ... I do have some close-up lenses, but they are not fitting any of the lenses I carry (55mm diameter) The "lightest" package with some reach for me would be 18-70 kit lens and beercan, close-up lenses then would fit, but actually I'm not to happy with those lenses. (kit is ok, but not for this opportunity, my beercan suffers strongly from CA) ...

Thanks for your answer! -- Well I guess most of what I do will be pretty "classic" landscapes. It's a dedicated photo-trip (landscape workshop indeed), and I really want to get some high-quality pictures - both technically and artistically. I mean within my possibilities, of course, which are limited, I think regarding the latter especially... I will print some of those big also, I think, and I'm pretty sure my next calender (2011) will cover these shots (semi-commercial work, so to say).

Maybe some portraits/candids as it happens, but I don't think that would be to much. I thought of making some close-ups from stuff / plants at the shore and maybe colored mineral structures in the volcanic areas. Birds are not of so much interest for me, but I'd try if I'm there.

Henry Richardson said:

Advice depends a whole lot on what kind of photos you take. Tell us more.

--
Henry Richardson
http://www.bakubo.com

Click to expand...

Thank you for your answer. -- The 16-80 CZ or 16-105 would be a very nice companion for the trip, but there's really no way I can afford it. :-( Well ... maybe leaving flash and VG at home, as someone suggested is quite a good idea. Right now I tend towards the small pack-solution more, maybe I can get the macro in somehow ... Think is, I really think I need the tripod, because much of the amazing shots I've seen are rather shot under some half-lit conditions. If I wouldn't carry the tripod there would be no doubt taking the big pack, but I really see my pictures getting so much better with a tripod ...

This is my tip: Bring just what you need. Forget the minolta 17-35, you already have most of this range covered by the tammy, together with the tammy you bring your UWA and tha 70-300. The gap between the UWA and the tammy is not a big problem. For saving weight forget the VG, a light tripod is nice to have, but the L plate you can do without. I would make a choice between 50 1,4 and 90mm macro, for this trip - and the fact that you want to do classic landscape, the good choice is the 50 mm, a larg apature lens is always handy to have in the evenings and for use in house. I would also consider bringing a flash. If this is still to much: forget the tripod, bring a beanbag instead, if you dont have one, just make it yourself, cost you less than a dollar.

Bring this in youre big bag, so you have extra space for little food and drink, some extra clothes an so on. This way you can stay much longer in the field, and this can make a much bigger difference for getting the real good photos than bringing a extra lens. The worst thing that can happen is that you need to go back to the hotel becaus of lack of food or youre colde, just when the light is getting great. I would spend just as much or more time on planning what can make me stay in the field as I spend time on making my mind up about the equpment.

I've been looking for a real good hikerrooksack myselfe, but I cant find a sack that are made to bring food an clothes, and then a little bit of eqipment. Most of them are made for loads of photoequpment, and then a little bit of extras. Thats not good enough for a full day hike.

Just my humble thaugts...

AF

Thanks for your thoughts. Some of them came to my mind also, I really will get some good outdoor clothing, although this is "indirect" photo equipment so to say. Your are right, it's important feeling comfortable when outside a lot.

I have a bean bag, but I think I stay with the tripod. Good tip with the "normal rucksack" I have a medium sized one which I never used for my photo gear, but maybe it really does the trick! I'll give it a try, don't know what is going to fit in right now. Thanks again!

just found another interesting item: a small bag for camera only (with lens), to fit on youre bag, but up front. This way you can have the camera within imidiate reach without having to stop to take the backpack off, and you have youre hands free. Nice! Gonna get me one of those. I think it was made by "lovepro". Not expensive, and together with a ordinary backpack, it might be the only thing you need.

AF

if you take only one lens, you will learn to see what is creatively possible with one lens only...you will still get your most-amazing-ever pictures, unless you don't, but in that case, it wouldn't make a difference...because if you can't see a great shot it doesn't matter what's in the bag

I would consider one of the Lowerpro Backpacks. I can store my A900 w/grip 24-70Z and the 70-400G,50mm 1.4, 58F flash,20flash Sony hdr-sr12 hi dev video camera in one. Plus there is room for batteries, memories stics etc. and strap in from for a small tripod and even a stretch side pocket for a water bottle. And there is a hidden pull out all weather cover. I particularly like the fact that the opening is on the side as your back so no pick pockets relieve you of some of the extra weight. LOL
This one is the Lowepro 300 flipside.

If I were to take my A700 only would substitute the 24-70z w/my 16-80Z. In this case I could cover 75mm at 1.4, 24-120, 140 to 600mm. And I would throw in my Hoodman loupe so I could look at my photos in bright light...
Good luck on your trip....
Jim in VT