Big Choice Made -- Lenses for 6 Weeks in Chile

Greg7579 said:

Teresa and I are departing for Chile tomorrow for a 6-week trip. I'm a travel photographer and I usually take at least 7 and sometimes 8 or 9 Fuji XF lenses with me. (I have 13 XF lenses.) But for this long trip, I have decided to take far fewer lenses than any trip in the past two years.

We are flying to Santiago and from there take 5 internal flights up and down that 2,800 mile-long country. We will rent a car at each airport and hit the sights:

-- Easter Island
-- Atacama Desert (base in San Pedro)
-- Lake District
-- The Carretera Austral (1200 K long gravel road in North Patagonia)
-- Island of Chiloe
-- Patagonia -- Punta Arenas, Puerto Mont and Torres del Paine

My recent Mexico trips caused a major change to my travel package. I'm off my prime kick right now -- at least for a while. The acquisition and use of the Brick has caused this. It literally replaces my 16, 23/35/50 F2s and the 56 for 95% of my travel shooting requirements. The 50-140 is so good that I will not bring the 80, 90 or even the 55-200.

The 55-200 is great to have in the bag on city walks and hikes because I constantly need the reach and the size/weight is awesome. But I have decided to use the 50-140 with the 1.4 TC instead. I can carry it, even on the long hikes with a lot of elevation gain that we plan to do -- like the famous Tower hike in Torres del Paine. It is much bigger than the 50-140, but I can carry it and the Brick anywhere I go. No problem.

So, keeping the 16 on the body of the XT-2, and the 50-140 with 1.4 TC in my little Domke F803 bag (or in the day-hiking backpack if hiking) will cover my needs and provide very high IQ from 16 all the way to 200 while I am on the move.

Now for the 10-24. That I always have. But, but I'm tempted to use the Rokinon 12 for the wide requirements, and the Brick for the rest (at 16). Leave the 10-24 at home? Probably not.

I'm taking the Rok for astro photography in the desert. The Atacama Desert has the best dark skies in the world (they say). So, I could also use it for my walking and hiking landscapes for the wide requirements. The 10-24 just gets me 10-15. The Brick does the rest. But I don't like the Rok for everyday use. I bought it for astro only. The lack of autofocus and aperture data displayed or recorded drives me nuts. But still ... I'm actually thinking of leaving the 10-24 at home and that is my bread and butter travel lens. I could make the Rok 12 work when I need to go really wide.

So, last year I took 8 lenses on my 40 day trip to Patagonia (mostly the Argentina side). This year I am taking 4 -- the Brick, 50-140 (w 1.4 TC), 10-24 and the Rokinon 12.

Or maybe only 3 (if I use the Rok instead of the 10-024 for the wide end). The big news is I am leaving the Mighty 16 at home for the first time ever. Why? Because I was wrong about how great the Brick is for three years!

Thoughts?

Click to expand...

Greg7579 said:

Bob / Jerry -- I don't understand. I think in my automatic signature block I have a double dash. I don't understand what "hide signature" is. What is it and why does it exist? What does double dash do? I'm constantly hiding my text for some weird reason.

I don't get it. And I'm a computer guy.

I admit my ignorance.

Click to expand...

Greg7579 said:

Bob / Jerry -- I don't understand. I think in my automatic signature block I have a double dash. I don't understand what "hide signature" is. What is it and why does it exist? What does double dash do? I'm constantly hiding my text for some weird reason.

I don't get it. And I'm a computer guy.

I admit my ignorance.

Click to expand...

Greg7579 said:

Marcus, for the first time ever, I'm leaving the Mighty 16 home.

Two bodies? No way I ever travel with two bodies. Knock on wood. I have never lost use of my one camera body on a trip and no way I ever walk around with two bodies. That's why God made interchaneable lenses and bodies. Only pro sports and fashion shooters need to grab two bodies fast.... No way on travel! I have never understood that.....

Greg Johnson, San Antonio, Texas
https://www.flickr.com/photos/139148982@N02/albums

Click to expand...

Jerry-astro said:

Greg7579 said:

Marcus, for the first time ever, I'm leaving the Mighty 16 home.

Two bodies? No way I ever travel with two bodies. Knock on wood. I have never lost use of my one camera body on a trip and no way I ever walk around with two bodies. That's why God made interchaneable lenses and bodies. Only pro sports and fashion shooters need to grab two bodies fast.... No way on travel! I have never understood that.....

Greg Johnson, San Antonio, Texas
https://www.flickr.com/photos/139148982@N02/albums

Click to expand...

Not entirely true, Greg. I only own one body (shhhh, don’t tell anyone) but for our trip to South Africa last year, I rented an X-T2 body and kept one camera with the 100-400 “glued” on and the other with the 18-55. I took advantage of that multiple times where lens changes were simply not practical due to dust conditions. It also enabled me to make a quick FL change when the subject distance rapidly changed (also not a rare occurrence). Also, for important trips, it’s good insurance if you have an issue with your camera.

I don’t do this for all trips, but for important ones, I’d happily do it again. When the X-T3 comes out (assuming it’s attractive enough) I will likely not trade in my X-T2 and will retain it as a second body. I may not take it on all trips, but it would definitely come on the more important ones. Obviously YMMV.

Click to expand...

Greg7579 said:

Teresa and I are departing for Chile tomorrow for a 6-week trip. I'm a travel photographer and I usually take at least 7 and sometimes 8 or 9 Fuji XF lenses with me. (I have 13 XF lenses.) But for this long trip, I have decided to take far fewer lenses than any trip in the past two years.

We are flying to Santiago and from there take 5 internal flights up and down that 2,800 mile-long country. We will rent a car at each airport and hit the sights:

-- Easter Island
-- Atacama Desert (base in San Pedro)
-- Lake District
-- The Carretera Austral (1200 K long gravel road in North Patagonia)
-- Island of Chiloe
-- Patagonia -- Punta Arenas, Puerto Mont and Torres del Paine

My recent Mexico trips caused a major change to my travel package. I'm off my prime kick right now -- at least for a while. The acquisition and use of the Brick has caused this. It literally replaces my 16, 23/35/50 F2s and the 56 for 95% of my travel shooting requirements. The 50-140 is so good that I will not bring the 80, 90 or even the 55-200.

The 55-200 is great to have in the bag on city walks and hikes because I constantly need the reach and the size/weight is awesome. But I have decided to use the 50-140 with the 1.4 TC instead. I can carry it, even on the long hikes with a lot of elevation gain that we plan to do -- like the famous Tower hike in Torres del Paine. It is much bigger than the 50-140, but I can carry it and the Brick anywhere I go. No problem.

So, keeping the 16 on the body of the XT-2, and the 50-140 with 1.4 TC in my little Domke F803 bag (or in the day-hiking backpack if hiking) will cover my needs and provide very high IQ from 16 all the way to 200 while I am on the move.

Now for the 10-24. That I always have. But, but I'm tempted to use the Rokinon 12 for the wide requirements, and the Brick for the rest (at 16). Leave the 10-24 at home? Probably not.

I'm taking the Rok for astro photography in the desert. The Atacama Desert has the best dark skies in the world (they say). So, I could also use it for my walking and hiking landscapes for the wide requirements. The 10-24 just gets me 10-15. The Brick does the rest. But I don't like the Rok for everyday use. I bought it for astro only. The lack of autofocus and aperture data displayed or recorded drives me nuts. But still ... I'm actually thinking of leaving the 10-24 at home and that is my bread and butter travel lens. I could make the Rok 12 work when I need to go really wide.

So, last year I took 8 lenses on my 40 day trip to Patagonia (mostly the Argentina side). This year I am taking 4 -- the Brick, 50-140 (w 1.4 TC), 10-24 and the Rokinon 12.

Or maybe only 3 (if I use the Rok instead of the 10-024 for the wide end). The big news is I am leaving the Mighty 16 at home for the first time ever. Why? Because I was wrong about how great the Brick is for three years!

Thoughts?

Click to expand...

Greg7579 said:

Teresa and I are departing for Chile tomorrow for a 6-week trip. I'm a travel photographer and I usually take at least 7 and sometimes 8 or 9 Fuji XF lenses with me. (I have 13 XF lenses.) But for this long trip, I have decided to take far fewer lenses than any trip in the past two years.

We are flying to Santiago and from there take 5 internal flights up and down that 2,800 mile-long country. We will rent a car at each airport and hit the sights:

-- Easter Island
-- Atacama Desert (base in San Pedro)
-- Lake District
-- The Carretera Austral (1200 K long gravel road in North Patagonia)
-- Island of Chiloe
-- Patagonia -- Punta Arenas, Puerto Mont and Torres del Paine

My recent Mexico trips caused a major change to my travel package. I'm off my prime kick right now -- at least for a while. The acquisition and use of the Brick has caused this. It literally replaces my 16, 23/35/50 F2s and the 56 for 95% of my travel shooting requirements. The 50-140 is so good that I will not bring the 80, 90 or even the 55-200.

The 55-200 is great to have in the bag on city walks and hikes because I constantly need the reach and the size/weight is awesome. But I have decided to use the 50-140 with the 1.4 TC instead. I can carry it, even on the long hikes with a lot of elevation gain that we plan to do -- like the famous Tower hike in Torres del Paine. It is much bigger than the 50-140, but I can carry it and the Brick anywhere I go. No problem.

So, keeping the 16 on the body of the XT-2, and the 50-140 with 1.4 TC in my little Domke F803 bag (or in the day-hiking backpack if hiking) will cover my needs and provide very high IQ from 16 all the way to 200 while I am on the move.

Now for the 10-24. That I always have. But, but I'm tempted to use the Rokinon 12 for the wide requirements, and the Brick for the rest (at 16). Leave the 10-24 at home? Probably not.

I'm taking the Rok for astro photography in the desert. The Atacama Desert has the best dark skies in the world (they say). So, I could also use it for my walking and hiking landscapes for the wide requirements. The 10-24 just gets me 10-15. The Brick does the rest. But I don't like the Rok for everyday use. I bought it for astro only. The lack of autofocus and aperture data displayed or recorded drives me nuts. But still ... I'm actually thinking of leaving the 10-24 at home and that is my bread and butter travel lens. I could make the Rok 12 work when I need to go really wide.

So, last year I took 8 lenses on my 40 day trip to Patagonia (mostly the Argentina side). This year I am taking 4 -- the Brick, 50-140 (w 1.4 TC), 10-24 and the Rokinon 12.

Or maybe only 3 (if I use the Rok instead of the 10-024 for the wide end). The big news is I am leaving the Mighty 16 at home for the first time ever. Why? Because I was wrong about how great the Brick is for three years!

Thoughts?

Click to expand...

Bill Ferris said:

Greg - Enjoy your adventure and help others to live vicariously through the experience by sharing your photos! Whatever lenses you choose to bring, trust that you'll apply the creativity in any situation to find and make a great composition. It's all there, in you.

The Atacama's climate delivers the highest number of clear photometric nights for observing, annually, in the world. The laminar airflow coming off the Pacific delivers routinely excellent seeing (atmospheric steadiness). The skies are as dark as dark gets - as dark as you'll find in remote areas of Arizona and other parts of the Desert Southwest US.

Being far south of the equator, you'll be treated to constellations and sights that just aren't visible from the lower 48. Are you bringing a pair of travel binoculars? Even a 10x25 mini-binocular will reveal treasures not visible to the naked eye. Omega Centauri will blow your mind. The Small Magellanic Cloud (a satellite galaxy of the Milky Way) should be a wonderful naked eye sight. The Large Magellanic Cloud (another satellite galaxy) may set before the sky gets dark enough to observe, this time of year. If you have the opportunity to get a guided tour of the night sky that includes telescope viewing, jump on it!

In any event, I wish you clear skies and a great journey.

Click to expand...

lewiedude2 said:

As an owner of the 16-55 lens for longer than you...and having read your ridicule (lasting literally years) of the lens for long enough pertaining to both its lack of OIS and its size/weight...and for having stated to you in a forum post that you can’t comment on a lens you have never tried, prompting you to purchase it...

It is now time to remove the name for it that you created as it is a negative connotation you attach to a lens that has ‘rocked’ your world.

YOU LOVE IT! And I smiled ear to ear every time you state how much you love it. Others that aren’t owners of the lens that search this forum will undoubtedly find your historical and unqualified past opinion of the lens and unfortunately impact their potential buying decision. When in reality it is one of the absolute lenses Fuji makes. Heck, the 50-140 is so much larger and heavier and no one, not even you, complains about it.

Can you please stop using your ‘B’ word for it? It actually is easier to type 16-55 than that word.

And, FWIW, I find you a terrific resource for everything photography and value your guidance and opinions very, very much...as many in this community do. Perhaps more than you really will ever know.

Anyhoo...have a great trip and a fantastic time! Be well, be safe and take tons of photos.

Cheers!

p.s. I am burying my little diatribe in this posting as I don’t think it is important to post the above on its own...and please excuse any potential feeling of disrespect. It is meant to provide as much support for the lens as possible because I think those that don’t choose to own it are really missing out.

Click to expand...