XT 20 Travel set up.

I'm traveling to Portugal the first part of April with my grandson and am trying to put together my travel camera set up. I have a X100f but I've just never warmed up to that camera. So I purchased a like new XT20. So far I like its similarity to my XT3 and love its size. I tried it with each of my Fuji lenses, and it works great with all. So now I'm trying to narrow things down a bit lens wise and thought I'd get some input from the knowledgeable travelers here. I have available the 18-55 2.8-4, 16-55 2.8, a Zeiss 50 2.8 macro, 90mm f2 and Sigma 30mm 1.4.

If I take one of the zooms do I need a longer lens? Or do I need a fast lens for low light? Or just go with one zoom and call it good?

Thoughts?

If I had those lens options I’d take the 18-55 and the 30. But I’m not you 🙂

LAH50 wrote:

I'm traveling to Portugal the first part of April with my grandson and am trying to put together my travel camera set up. I have a X100f but I've just never warmed up to that camera. So I purchased a like new XT20. So far I like its similarity to my XT3 and love its size. I tried it with each of my Fuji lenses, and it works great with all. So now I'm trying to narrow things down a bit lens wise and thought I'd get some input from the knowledgeable travelers here. I have available the 18-55 2.8-4, 16-55 2.8, a Zeiss 50 2.8 macro, 90mm f2 and Sigma 30mm 1.4.

If I take one of the zooms do I need a longer lens? Or do I need a fast lens for low light? Or just go with one zoom and call it good?

Thoughts?

I very much like shooting with the 16-55 on my X-T20 (with the Meike handgrip). If I wanted to keep things simple and compact (easily fits in the petite Peak Design 3L sling bag), that’s what I’d go with. The 16-55 is greater for almost anything, day or night.

Ditto

On my last (business) trip to Spain I took X-T20 (due to small size) plus 10-24, 18-55, 55-200 and 35/1.4. To my surprise 18-55 was used hardly ever while 10-24 was my most used lens. But If I were you,I'd pick 16-55 and 90/2.

Cheers,

Artur

If lugging the 16-55 all day around does not bother you, I would definitely count on it. I would look into a 23mil 1.4 lens for night walks.

Have a great trip

"do I need..."

Only you can decide. I'd take the 16-55 and If you are into wild flowers the Zeiss.  Nothing else.  You could take the 90mm too if you use it a lot at home.  Is this a trip with photos or a trip to take photos?

I'd not worry about carrying more stuff for an extra stop of light, modern higher ISOs are so good and that sensor is just as good at high isos as the current ones.

Jeff Biscuits wrote:

If I had those lens options I’d take the 18-55 and the 30. But I’m not you 🙂

Thats what I had on my trips to Madrid and London (Fujifilm 35mm f1.4 instead of Sigma).

Was a great combo.

The 16-55 f2.8 for me would be to heavy. Than you can also use the X-T3 instead

a_c_skinner wrote:

"do I need..."

Only you can decide. I'd take the 16-55 and If you are into wild flowers the Zeiss. Nothing else. You could take the 90mm too if you use it a lot at home. Is this a trip with photos or a trip to take photos?

I'd not worry about carrying more stuff for an extra stop of light, modern higher ISOs are so good and that sensor is just as good at high isos as the current ones.

This is a trip with photos. Hence the reason I want to keep it a little on the light side.

LAH50 wrote:

I'm traveling to Portugal the first part of April with my grandson and am trying to put together my travel camera set up. I have a X100f but I've just never warmed up to that camera. So I purchased a like new XT20. So far I like its similarity to my XT3 and love its size. I tried it with each of my Fuji lenses, and it works great with all. So now I'm trying to narrow things down a bit lens wise and thought I'd get some input from the knowledgeable travelers here. I have available the 18-55 2.8-4, 16-55 2.8, a Zeiss 50 2.8 macro, 90mm f2 and Sigma 30mm 1.4.

If I take one of the zooms do I need a longer lens? Or do I need a fast lens for low light? Or just go with one zoom and call it good?

Thoughts?

I have an X-T2 and the 18-55 2.8-4, 16-55 2.8, 55-200, 35 /f2 and the 10-24 f/4. I went to Lisbon back in November. I didn't take the 16-55 since it's both heavy and no IS. I ended up taking the 18-55, 10-24, and the 55-200. I could have just taken the 18-55 and the 10-24 as I rarely used the 55-200. However, the long zoom was handy a long the river. I midly regret not taking the 35 f/2.

The 18-55 held up better than I thought and I used this and the 10-24 the most. Even at night along the streets of Lisbon.  The 16-55 is amazing, but it's heavy and attracts attention. The 10-24 was handy for a lot of architecture shots, but I only ended up using it about 20% of the time. I would strongly recommend the 18-55, 90mm f/2 and the Sigma 30 f/4. Here's some examples:

Optically, the 16-55 is better than the 18-55, but the addition of IS on the lens came in handy in the dark.

Ryan-