-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
An ideal 3 lens travel kit: Which ones would you choose and why?
- Thread starter jonikon
- Start date
Old Timer63
Veteran Member
Only three? spoil sport
I would have to choose my 10-24, 50 f2 and 55-200. I could crop the 24mm end of the small zoom to get poss 35 if needed and again crop the 200 end of the longer zoom to gain some length.
WhateverNickname
Veteran Member
Based on my current experience in Japan, I see few options
12/2, 16-50 (the lens kit), 90
16, 23, 56 1.4/1.2
12, 23, 50 all f/2
12/2, 16-50 (the lens kit), 90
16, 23, 56 1.4/1.2
12, 23, 50 all f/2
dv312
Veteran Member
10-24
18-135
This should cover most genres/scenes
Lightweight and all
If I do birding I'll need the 100-400 + TCs for sure
Optional: 50-140 for portraits and shallow DOF
In the future the 16-80 may replace the 18-135?
18-135
This should cover most genres/scenes
Lightweight and all
If I do birding I'll need the 100-400 + TCs for sure
Optional: 50-140 for portraits and shallow DOF
In the future the 16-80 may replace the 18-135?
Hi,
It depends what you mean by travel.....
If travel means serious hiking, my interests are landscape and nature and I take a prime kit, usually 16, 23/1.4 and 60. I add an adapted 100mm macro and an old FD 300/4L if I know I'll need them. And a tripod. I can take my time, wait for weather, wait for the right light, and indulge my hobby, so primes work. I'm hoping the planned 16/2.8 is a gem, because if it is, that will let me reduce by half a pound
If travel means flying around the planet with my kids for weeks dragging the kit everywhere - flights, hotels, restaurants, taxis, toilets, to take memories of family, cities, streets, local events, castles, temples and that sort of thing - I take my 18-55 and 50-230. On that kind of journey, I often don't get to wait for the weather, for the right light, can't go back, can't always change position, so for me, zooms are the answer. I take a Canon 250D close-up lens for close-focusing and a CPL. And an FLM table pod.
I used to take a 55-200, but although I still have it, I tend to leave it at home because of the weight. I recently bought the 50-230 as a lighter alternative and I'm surprised at the image quality. It's very good and it's lighter by enough to notice that it's lighter. The 55-200 is a whisker sharper through much of the range, but it's only incremental. And at around 200mm my 50-230 is the sharper lens.
Looking forward to the next trip......
Cheers, Rod
It depends what you mean by travel.....
If travel means serious hiking, my interests are landscape and nature and I take a prime kit, usually 16, 23/1.4 and 60. I add an adapted 100mm macro and an old FD 300/4L if I know I'll need them. And a tripod. I can take my time, wait for weather, wait for the right light, and indulge my hobby, so primes work. I'm hoping the planned 16/2.8 is a gem, because if it is, that will let me reduce by half a pound
If travel means flying around the planet with my kids for weeks dragging the kit everywhere - flights, hotels, restaurants, taxis, toilets, to take memories of family, cities, streets, local events, castles, temples and that sort of thing - I take my 18-55 and 50-230. On that kind of journey, I often don't get to wait for the weather, for the right light, can't go back, can't always change position, so for me, zooms are the answer. I take a Canon 250D close-up lens for close-focusing and a CPL. And an FLM table pod.
I used to take a 55-200, but although I still have it, I tend to leave it at home because of the weight. I recently bought the 50-230 as a lighter alternative and I'm surprised at the image quality. It's very good and it's lighter by enough to notice that it's lighter. The 55-200 is a whisker sharper through much of the range, but it's only incremental. And at around 200mm my 50-230 is the sharper lens.
Looking forward to the next trip......
Cheers, Rod
Jerry-astro
Veteran Member
Depends a lot on what I'm doing while traveling.
16-55 (most used by far), 12mm Zeiss (or 10-24 if I had it) will cover 95% or more of what I need for typical vacation photography.
100-400 (if any birding or other wildlife opportunities) along with the 1.4 TC.
Brought the 56/1.2 on the last trip and sat in the bag the entire time. Definitely won't make the cut for an upcoming trip.
CaptainNoddy
Active member
- Messages
- 68
- Reaction score
- 66
My travel kit composes of one Ultra Wide Angle, one Prime and one Telephoto:
1. UWA Lenses: XF10-24 (The XF8-16 seems too big and heavy for travelling)
2. Prime: XF23 F2 (Really personal depends on what you shoot, XF27/XF35/XF50/XF56 is good as well. I prefer the lightweight F2 small primes)
3. Telephoto: XF55-200 (Great quality, good for portrait and landscape. XF50-230 may also be an alternative)
1. UWA Lenses: XF10-24 (The XF8-16 seems too big and heavy for travelling)
2. Prime: XF23 F2 (Really personal depends on what you shoot, XF27/XF35/XF50/XF56 is good as well. I prefer the lightweight F2 small primes)
3. Telephoto: XF55-200 (Great quality, good for portrait and landscape. XF50-230 may also be an alternative)
For me it would probably be:
16 f1.4
35 f1.4
50-230
Recently I've been traveling with one camera/one lens though, in the form of the Ricoh GRII. I'm currently planning a trip to Beijing and the surrounding area, which will involve some hiking. The doubt is hitting again: should I just take the Ricoh, or go for a 2-lens Fuji kit (16+35)...
16 f1.4
35 f1.4
50-230
Recently I've been traveling with one camera/one lens though, in the form of the Ricoh GRII. I'm currently planning a trip to Beijing and the surrounding area, which will involve some hiking. The doubt is hitting again: should I just take the Ricoh, or go for a 2-lens Fuji kit (16+35)...
liggy
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 1,374
- Solutions
- 1
- Reaction score
- 1,366
Hmmmm... destination unknown?
10-24 regardless of destination.
18-135 for wr flexibility.
35 1.4 for low light/portraiture style images.
for specific trips to known places I would make substitutions depending upon the destination/nature of the trip.
My three:
18-135mm
10-24/4
23/1.4
First and foremost the 18-135.
It covers more focal lengths than any other Fuji lens. It has weather proofing. For a quick close-up, it has better magnification than any non-macro Fuji lens. I sold my Sony 24-240mm mainly due to the optical performance of this lens. Though I prefer the 18-55 for a small kit, the 18-135 gets more use due to its value as a travel lens.
The 10-24 continues to astonish me. Very sharp lens and I like that it zooms internally. Essential for my kit in cityscapes and landscapes.
And perhaps my favorite Fuji lens, the 23/1.4, is a tool for such a wide variety of shooting situations and it's fun to use for anything from night sky to street to indoor uses.
ikaika777
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 2,632
- Solutions
- 3
- Reaction score
- 1,808
The 10-24, 35 f2, and 50, f2. But then again I would be content with my X100F.
Most of the replies so far have been unique and unexpected, (by me anyway), but yours in the most unexpected combination! This post’s exercise has been more enlightening than I had hoped and it is helping me to think “outside the box” In terms of lens selection.
Also it is interesting that you are using the Ricoh GRIl. I have used my similar Nikon Coolpix A as a travel camera as well. I love the pocketable size and the IQ and the high flash sync speeds is great for using fill flash on shaded faces in bright sunshine. However it is not weather sealed, No EVF, fixed focal length, and slow unreliable AF makes it less than ideal.
Last edited:
Thanks
The way I see it, is that with this setup I'd be ready for lowlight situations, landscape, street, portraits, wildlife,... so for a 3-lens kit to an unknown destination it's perfect (for me anyway).
Got back Friday from a 10 day trip in WY, fly fishing, horseback riding into the mountains and just decompressing. I took my Pro2 and H1. Seventy percent were with the Pro2 and 35 f1.4, 25 percent with the H1 with the 50-140 attached and about 5 percent with the 18 on the Pro2. I had the 23 f1.4 with me but it didn’t make it on the camera which is not a surprise since I find that focal length in no man’s land.
So two lens I would take is the 18 and 35 f1.4. If I were going to the track in my travels I would take the 50-140 or 90. If not, I would take the 56.
Saw a grizzlie bear - got close enough to see she was wearing a collar. Saw several deer. Had to detour cross country as a bison was blocking the trail munching on grass and was not going to give it up. Then on top of a pass, a ridge line over was a large pack of wolves. Caught a few cut throat, one about 15 inches and turned them back.
i’ll post A few shots after I get them processed.
So two lens I would take is the 18 and 35 f1.4. If I were going to the track in my travels I would take the 50-140 or 90. If not, I would take the 56.
Saw a grizzlie bear - got close enough to see she was wearing a collar. Saw several deer. Had to detour cross country as a bison was blocking the trail munching on grass and was not going to give it up. Then on top of a pass, a ridge line over was a large pack of wolves. Caught a few cut throat, one about 15 inches and turned them back.
i’ll post A few shots after I get them processed.
ChrisLovesUgly
Leading Member
It's a tough call, but if I had to choose 3 (for photos):
10-24/4
23/2 (X100F)
56/1.2
If I were doing more video...
10-24/4
23/2 (WR)
18-55/2.8-4
10-24/4
23/2 (X100F)
56/1.2
If I were doing more video...
10-24/4
23/2 (WR)
18-55/2.8-4
TillmanB
Leading Member
- Messages
- 518
- Solutions
- 2
- Reaction score
- 246
I would choose the 15-140 f/2.8 and 16-55 to cover all types of photography in general. And for the street and night life, I would get a 35 f/2 prime.
And if the travel involved wildlife photography I would replace the 35mm with the XF 100-400 and bring a second body for the 15-140.
Not sure whether you meant to get responses including complete ranges e.g. a 10-24 and an 18-135 - or whether you meant primes.
I don't do zooms but have used zooms for many years so have some idea as to how they work.
Coming back to your question, I think there is merit in any classic setup, like 28, 50 and 90 or any of the Fujis.
Depending on my destination my personal setup is typically:
16/1.4 50/2 and 90/2
On my next trip to Myanmar I am expecting to take the 16/1.4 and the 56/1.2, a 2-lens setup. Jerry (moderator here) hasn't used the 56 on his last trip to Europe, I would use it all the time. What it shows you is how different people's expectations and requirements are.
Luckily Fuji caters for many different tastes.
Deed
Last edited:
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum