What size zoom did you need for most subjects when traveling overseas

Started 7 months ago | Discussions thread
PhotoTeach2 Senior Member • Posts: 7,040
Re: What size zoom did you need for most subjects when traveling overseas

Brisn5757 wrote:

bullet1 wrote:

Brisn5757 wrote:

I started a thread called 3x and 30x zoom camera.

In this thread I'm hoping to find out what zoom lens people on trips overseas and on tours found useful that covered most subjects.

I'm thinking that a 10x zoom should cover most subjects and I'd only need a 30x zoom if I had something at a great distance to photograph and then at 30x the quality may not be that great as there can be distortion due to the hot air.

I welcome your comments thanks.

For car trips, I generally bring my two SLR bodies with one lens mounted on each, one WA zoom and another tele-zoom. I do the same for local events.

For oversea trips, I started by taking only the 5D body with the 24-105 f/4L IS lens in 2006 and got wonderful pictures.

Over the years the 5D was replaced with the 5DII and then the 6D. I started to want more detail in the buildings when 105mm is not quite enough.

So for the Turkey and Greece trip in 2013, I added a compact camera, the Panasonic FZ-100. It allows a reach of 600mm but with a very small sensor (1/2.33") the quality is not so good.

When I received the FZ-1000 as a birthday gift, I though it could be a big improvement over the FZ-100 for my future travels because of the newly famous 1" sensor. I was not disappointed.

The above two photos would not have been possible to capture with just the 24-105 lens on a full frame SLR. Bringing my 70-200 f/2.8L IS or the 100-400 f4.5-5.6L IS would add a lot of weight and potential delays around airports, IMHO. Using my lighter primes would be an option but switching lenses could lead to missed shots during a fast paced tour.

The above images show that the FZ-1000 can also be used as a WA or normal lens and it does a pretty reasonable job with it.

You'll have to decide for yourself what you want to capture during your trips to find the best focal length that you need. An equivalent SLR lens would be quite large and heavy.

-- hide signature --

Nelson Chen
http://NelsonChenPhotography.com/
100% RAW shooter with Capture One Pro V9

Thanks for including the photos bullet1.i like the sharp detail in your photos.

Brian

YES ... the above images show what is POSSIBLE with a longer lens.

I suggest that people with shorter zoom (tele's) simply DON'T KNOW that they are MISSING when they are NOT ABLE to shot tele.

I listed my situation above where I admit I used to feel the same way most other APS/FF users  feel as they deny that any smaller sensor could possibly have acceptable IQ.

It was only have I went on an Alaskan and "tried" a 1/2.3" sensor camera that I first found I took 10X as many images as I normally would have ... and was SURPRISED/AMAZED that the IQ was much BETTER THAN EXPECTED.

So that literally changed my viewpoint on smaller (1/2.3" and 1"-type) sensors.

I now feel that the 1"-type is an IDEAL "COMPROMISE" of a sensor that allows a "fixed" lens w/ acceptable zoom range.

Note that the Panasonic FZ-1000 & 2000/2500 also has a FULLY-articulating LCD and a 1/4000s FLASH SYNC for longer range SUNLIGHT fill-flash, (and the ability to darken-backgrounds w/ closer subjects).

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
tko
tko
tko
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow