bhollis
Veteran Member
Z 24-120 f/4 S (occasionally supplemented with the Z 50 f/1.8 S). It's all I need.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
All-in-one zoom, which one do you use?
- Thread starter sirhawkeye64
- Start date
shuncheung
Veteran Member
Cannot speak for the OP, but I wouldn't use a 1" sensor or Nikon 1 from 2011 would have done quite well.
travelfoodphoto
Veteran Member
To each his own. I know I've seen and taken many very good photos with RX100 cameras, do well in the challenges on DPR and am quite pleased with my end results of smaller sensor/non ILC cameras.
Composition is far more important than the camera that is used, and playing games with switching lenses and carrying backpacks while traveling hasn't proved to be a positive experience for me in my many trips all over the world. I'd much rather be in the moment with the people and environment I'm in than playing with camera gear.
Enjoy your photography,
Den
Composition is far more important than the camera that is used, and playing games with switching lenses and carrying backpacks while traveling hasn't proved to be a positive experience for me in my many trips all over the world. I'd much rather be in the moment with the people and environment I'm in than playing with camera gear.
Enjoy your photography,
Den
Last edited:
Mole Delta
Well-known member
24-200 coupled with Viltox 20mm.
Now I've got the diddy Viltrox 28mm I may take that with me as well.
Now I've got the diddy Viltrox 28mm I may take that with me as well.
j_photo
Veteran Member
I guess we are in the minority.
My favorite travel cameras are the Z30 or Z50II with the 16-50 zoom. Sometimes, I might bring along a small prime. It's not that I don't have other options, like the 24-70 f/4 or the 24-120 f/4 with a Z6 or Z7. But I have no interest in carrying conspicuous, bulky gear around all day. After years of travel, I've learned that I don't need complicated gear to record great images...speaking for myself, of course.
Sometimes I just love using the Z30 with the 26 f/2.8 pancake. It's such a fun little package.
cyuill2007
Senior Member
The Z 24-120mm lens seems to be a good choice for an all-in-one zoom. The Z 24-200mm seems to be a decent choice as well.
I use no all-in-one zoom lenses at the moment. I just went on a week-long trip to Montreal. Around 75% of the photos I took were with my Z 40mm f/2 SE lens. I also had a Z 28mm f/2.8 lens and an F-mount AF-P FX 70-300mm on hand in a smallish camera bag, just in case I needed wider or longer lenses. As it turned out, the 28 got some use, whereas the 70-300 got very little use. I went on the trip with the attitude that I would focus on enjoying the experience of being in the city. Photography was a secondary consideration — getting decent photos was “icing on the cake”. Not focusing on photography made the trip much more enjoyable, IMO.
I use no all-in-one zoom lenses at the moment. I just went on a week-long trip to Montreal. Around 75% of the photos I took were with my Z 40mm f/2 SE lens. I also had a Z 28mm f/2.8 lens and an F-mount AF-P FX 70-300mm on hand in a smallish camera bag, just in case I needed wider or longer lenses. As it turned out, the 28 got some use, whereas the 70-300 got very little use. I went on the trip with the attitude that I would focus on enjoying the experience of being in the city. Photography was a secondary consideration — getting decent photos was “icing on the cake”. Not focusing on photography made the trip much more enjoyable, IMO.
shuncheung
Veteran Member
That may be your experience and that is fine, but my D5 has been to all seven continents in the world and my Z9 is getting there, only missing Europe and Australia. In a recent discussion about African safaris, I mentioned that I had Z8, Z9, 600/4 TC, 400/4.5 and 70-200/2.8 with me in Tanzania earlier this month (August 2025): https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/68389179
And in December 2023, I had Z8, Z9, 800/6.3 PF, 400/4.5 and 100-400 with me in Costa Rica: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/68402691
I certainly enjoy my photography, and you can enjoy your photography with drastically different subjects and equipment from what I use.
sirhawkeye64
Forum Pro
I should have bought an RX100 VII a year ago before they went up in price, but $1800 is overpriced for a P&S especially considering you could get a FF camera (the original Z5) and a 24-200 for the same price. Of course the Sony is small and pocketable and very travel friendly, but the RX100 cameras have become way overpriced (even the used market is still high on pretty much everything).
I would however consider a Panasonic ZS100 or ZS200 perhaps, as they are not as expensive but still decent IQ.
sirhawkeye64
Forum Pro
For many of the situations I find myself in, a 1" sensor might be a stretch (meaning, a lot of low-light shooting, and not necessarily with a tripod). A m4/3 camera with stabilization might be one idea and I had been contemplating that (something like a GX8-series body from Panasonic or even the Olympus OM10 series--I had contemplated getting something like this also as an EDC anyway).
I think though that 1" sensor cameras would be out of the question for me. M4/3 might be a maybe, APSC is a possibility (depending on the camera and lens combo). Maybe if Nikon did in fact release a Canon R7 competitor I'd consider that for travel (doesn't have to be 33MP, but just something smaller than my Zf and 24-120 but with dual card slots an stabilization; that's one thing that caught my eye with the Olympus camreas like the M10, it has stabilization in a sub $600 camera which would be helpful and almost is a bit of a wash in some respects against a 20-24MP APSC camera without it).
--
* PLEASE NOTE: I generally unsubscribe from forums/comments after a period of time has passed, so if I do not respond, that is likely the reason. *
Last edited:
j_photo
Veteran Member
+1 to that.
yardcoyote
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 18,132
- Solutions
- 14
- Reaction score
- 18,310
I don't. Hypothetically I would love the option of an all-purpose zoom, but nobody makes the 40-90 or 40-100 that would be all-purpose for the way I shoot. The thought of a 24-200 or whatever sounds like an absolute nightmare to me-- big, heavy and clumsy.
I'd rather go around the world twice with one camera and a really well chosen 50mm, or ideally a combination of a good small 40mm street lens and something nice in the 75-90mm range with a decent minimum focus distance. Put an equally small street camera under the 40, something a little bigger with more features under the longer lens. I often travel this way, and I bet the pair are smaller and lighter than a big camera with the 24-200 on it, and I have the option of leaving one at home base if the mood strikes and security permits.
I'd rather go around the world twice with one camera and a really well chosen 50mm, or ideally a combination of a good small 40mm street lens and something nice in the 75-90mm range with a decent minimum focus distance. Put an equally small street camera under the 40, something a little bigger with more features under the longer lens. I often travel this way, and I bet the pair are smaller and lighter than a big camera with the 24-200 on it, and I have the option of leaving one at home base if the mood strikes and security permits.
Ryan Schwartz
Senior Member
Agree with this. As long as you have good lighting, the RX100 will give you great results. For low light, I would move up to a larger sensor.
I do think the current MSRP of the RX100 VII is a bit on the high side now, so if you don't already have one, I would look at other options.
Last edited:
sirhawkeye64
Forum Pro
This is kind of where I'm headed with this. While some of the travel zooms may not be the sharpest they do offer convenience and to an extent, freedom from carrying around a bag or other gear.
--
* PLEASE NOTE: I generally unsubscribe from forums/comments after a period of time has passed, so if I do not respond, that is likely the reason. *
Last edited:
AlanWatson
Leading Member
The only all-in-one zoom I currently own is the 24-200, so the correct answer to the question as asked is "24-200". ;-)
However it does depend on where I'm going. If I'm hiking then I often carry the 24-200 as a single lens option. But for other destinations I prefer to have something wider than 24, and a few times found I've spent a week in a city and used only my 14-30 and CV 40, with the 24-200 spending the whole time in my bag or back in my hotel. So if I was visiting somewhere I didn't know I'd probably not bring just one lens with me, even if in practice, once I knew what I was doing, I might go out with just the one.
However it does depend on where I'm going. If I'm hiking then I often carry the 24-200 as a single lens option. But for other destinations I prefer to have something wider than 24, and a few times found I've spent a week in a city and used only my 14-30 and CV 40, with the 24-200 spending the whole time in my bag or back in my hotel. So if I was visiting somewhere I didn't know I'd probably not bring just one lens with me, even if in practice, once I knew what I was doing, I might go out with just the one.
sirhawkeye64
Forum Pro
That's the thing... some of the places I go to I've never been there and don't have the luxury of scoping them out first (I can when I'm there, but since many area overseas, I only have available what I bring with me). I might go against my own advice and just get a 24-200 and bring it, with a 24-120, 14-30 and a 40mm (luckily the 14-30 and 40mm are not that big, and neither is the 24-200 in general). While I don't like traveling with all that gear, it would probably make me feel better in some respects because I would have my bases covered (I'm just old fashioned in I like to be prepared. Obviously if something calls for a 600mm then I won't feel as bad as I don't travel with such lenses regularly but if I need a 200mm and all I have is the 24-120 that would bother me.)
Although I might do some more testing between my 24-120 and a 24-200 to see. If in the end, they are similar enough for my needs, then I'd just leave the 24-120 at home.
--
* PLEASE NOTE: I generally unsubscribe from forums/comments after a period of time has passed, so if I do not respond, that is likely the reason. *
Last edited:
JohnXTanner
Active member
- Messages
- 92
- Reaction score
- 46
I'm currently travelling with 24-120, 100-400 and TC1.4 (haven't used the last one yet). If I don't need the long reach I usually take the 14-30 and live with a maximum of 120 (cropping as necessary). But I guess it depends on what you'll be shooting.
I rarely use the 24-200 since getting the 24-120. I prefer the quality and larger aperture of the former to the extra reach of the latter.
I rarely use the 24-200 since getting the 24-120. I prefer the quality and larger aperture of the former to the extra reach of the latter.
sirhawkeye64
Forum Pro
That's kind of what I'm debating over. I mean I do plan on taking my Z8 so I would have plenty of mega pixels to crop if I took just the 24-120 and didn't bother with a 24-200 (or worse yet I just use DX crop mode and get a 19MP image, which is still not bad as that's what you'd get -- roughly -- from something like a Z50. So I mean there is that -- If I was shooting a 24MP camera I might be more concerned about the cropping....
What I'll probably do as a quick test is take my 100-400 out for a day and practice shooting various subjects at various distances at 120 and 200mm and see how things turn out (this would simulate both lenses basically and the field of view for me).
--
* PLEASE NOTE: I generally unsubscribe from forums/comments after a period of time has passed, so if I do not respond, that is likely the reason. *
Last edited:
CNorre
Forum Enthusiast
- Messages
- 385
- Reaction score
- 406
I get your point, if you're an avid and good technical photographer, you can get good images with a potato. One can easily get caught up in gear and lose (critical) moments playing with it.
I don't often change lenses while out and about, so tend to choose one lens (or two max) for an outing. I might have more with me on a trip, to change between outings, depending on what I expect to encounter. This to not disturb being in it with fiddling with gear and potentiallt loosing shots or moments (or annoying co-travelers).
It's one of the reasons why the 24-200 is a great travel companion - it sets you up for most scenarios range wise. If I'm not out for something specific, it's either that or as of now the 24-120.
Dear S…cat… speaking for myself as someone with 70+ years of mistakes to learn from, you seem like a fun guy to travel with.
My travel photos are only for myself, family, & friends; never for sale, mostly documentary, and rarely art. I want good shots, but I don’t want to worry about stuff or strain my back to achieve the last 5% of IQ. The 24-200 on a z7 works fine for most of my shots, plus a fast wide angle for indoors and evenings. Sometimes I’ll squeeze an RX100 VI into my wife’s bag for outdoors and the 24-70 F4 at high ISO for lowlight. Careful I-phone shots are sometimes good enough. I’ve never regretted leaving gear at home.
We do splurge and take taxis in cities or rent cars for the countryside; it leaves more energy and time to walk about with lighter loads. It also leaves me less cranky and more friendly.
But in the end it’s all about our individual priorities, resources, fitness and photographic aspirations. There is plenty to see with and without a lens.
My travel photos are only for myself, family, & friends; never for sale, mostly documentary, and rarely art. I want good shots, but I don’t want to worry about stuff or strain my back to achieve the last 5% of IQ. The 24-200 on a z7 works fine for most of my shots, plus a fast wide angle for indoors and evenings. Sometimes I’ll squeeze an RX100 VI into my wife’s bag for outdoors and the 24-70 F4 at high ISO for lowlight. Careful I-phone shots are sometimes good enough. I’ve never regretted leaving gear at home.
We do splurge and take taxis in cities or rent cars for the countryside; it leaves more energy and time to walk about with lighter loads. It also leaves me less cranky and more friendly.
But in the end it’s all about our individual priorities, resources, fitness and photographic aspirations. There is plenty to see with and without a lens.
Vince P
Veteran Member
It depends -
Mostly it's the 24-120 which is not just the "All in one" but it's the standard lens I am happy with, for most things, unless I need a wider aperture for some reason. It's my most used lens and the default for travel and general shooting. If I could have only one then this would be it.
If it's more casual and rural then I choose the 24-200.
For small lightweight & fun I will take the 18-140 on a DX body.
I have the 28-400 which occasionally get's an outing but it's main reason for me is to keep at hand in the cab if I am on a road trip.
I almost always have something wider and if I am travelling will at a minimum also have a small faster prime.
Last edited:
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum