Travelling system?

[knodel]

It's not a "this or that" question but a "what".

What is your lightweight kit for travelling? What do you take when going up a mountain? Do you miss your macro or birds chances?

 

[dav1dz]

Here is my kit when I go on hikes.

14-150, 9-18.

I don't really go hiking at night so the fast lenses stay at home.

Traveling and hiking are two different kits for me though. Everything comes when I travel.

 

[rklepper]

I have not been up a mountain with it, but I have my E-M5, Panasonic 12-35 and Panasonic 35-100. So far that is my traveling kit. If I am going to shoot birds I will take something longer and probably not my m4/3 kit. At least not until it includes something that makes sense to shoot birds with.

 

[~tc~]

The following has been around the world with me multiple times:
G3
8FE
20/1.7
12-35/2.8 (used to be the Leica D 14-50/2.8-3.5)
45/2.8
45-200

If I wanted to go lighter/smaller, the 45/2.8 and 20/1.7 would stay home - as good as they are!

 

[Ned]

For going up a mountain (where my primary focus would be on the sport and not the photograpahy) I would most likely take my tiniest little travel kit, a Mini with Konica Hexanon 50mm f/1.4 and Konica Hexanon 85mm f/1.8. Very light, with decent coverage and speed. It all fits into this little shoulder bag, including my pipe, tobacco, lighter, cellphone data cable, wall charger, skull candies (earphones with hands-free microphone), USB flash drives, two spare batteries, etc. Because this is the bag I carry with me everywhere on a daily basis. It's that small.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

If I need to expand on that kit with more reach and macro, then I can add a small little bag with a Zuiko Digital 35mm/3.5 macro as well as a Hexanon 2x teleconverter (which makes the 85mm a 170mm/3.5, but I tend not to trust any teleconverters but my digital-spec Zuikos).

Or, if I can handle a bit of a bigger kit (with more focus on the photography than the sport) then I'll bring my intermediate bag with a Mini, Zuiko Digital 25mm/2.8, Zuiko 50mm/1.4, Zeiss 135mm/2.8, and Zuiko Digital EC-14 teleconverter. The EC-14 will get me up to 200mm/4 reach on the Zeiss. I could also swap out the 135mm/2.8 with a 200mm/4, which would give me a 280mm/5.6 with the teleconverter. If I need macro I can easily add the Zuiko Digital 35mm/3.5 macro. Normally I carry this kit with an FL-36R flash, flash bracket, and a diffuser almost as large as the flash. If I remove all this I can add the 200mm/4 and 35mm macro without any extra bags (otherwise I have little lens pouches for both of the above). This all fits in a small leather satchel...

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[Luckypenguin]

I was putting together my Micro 4/3 kit ready for travelling the other day and did a quick weight comparison with my previous DSLR setup, which amongst other things I carried up Mt Kinabalu in Borneo (+ 4000m). For the same weight as my old DSLR gear (Canon 50D + 3 zooms and 1 prime) I can take my entire Micro 4/3 kit consisting of two larger bodies (E-M5 and GH1), 3 zooms, 4 primes, and add my Canon G1X as well for good measure. Depending on the destination and what I think I might need I'd be prepared to take it all.

 

[twokatmew]

Ned, what I'd that bag in the first pic? Looks like something I might be interested in. :smile:

--
Sent from my phone. Please pardon my brevity!

 

[tomas]

For Travel, Not for Sports, Backpacking, etc.

My current travel kit :

12-35

35-100

7-14

25

2 EM5 bodies

I also take the 75 if the trip involves performances in low light.

I don't need a long telephoto very often when traveling. I do have the 45-175 and would take that if a particular trip included wildlife shots. It's a good lens but not as sharp as the others in my list I'm waiting to see if any of the upcoming long lenses from Olympus and Panasonic have the same quality as those in my current travel kit.

 

[jime]

My travel kit is:

P14-45
P20
P45-200
PL1
Kenko macro tubes
Close-up lenses
3 extra batteries and charger
All this fits in my Passport sling with room to spare. I also have a Tenba mini messenger when I want to take my 13" MacBook Pro.

My big problem is that I lust for an E-M5 and O75 so keep buying lottery tickets.

Sent from my iPad using Mu-43 App

 

[mattia]

Hiking and photography go hand in hand for me; if it's worth walking around in, it's worth taking pictures of. My minimalist hiking/travel kit (I usually backpack while traveling): E-M5, 2 spare batteries, charger, 7-14, 12-35, 20/1.7, 45/1.8. If I'm going somewhere with wildlife (not a birder, don't particularly care unless they're particularly big or interesting) the 100-300 tags along.

 

[ill_dawg]

My minimalist travelling kit is currently:

om-d with horizontal grip and 2 extra batteries + charger
samyang 7.5/3.5
pana 20/1.7
oly 45/1.8
gorillapod and/or nissin di466 if I think I'll need them

Recently, though, I've been thinking about investing in the 35-100 and taking just that and the fisheye or the 12-50.

 

[994]

The beauty of m43 is my whole kit goes!

EPL5
P14
P25 (or maybe O17/1.8 now, or both)
P100-300

Sometimes it'll just be the EPL5 w/P100-300 on a sling strap + 1 prime in my pocket.

new add: 15mm lens cap lens, but it's so light weight, it's basically an accessory.

It all fits in a Domke 5xb.

 

[Anthon]

Ned, what I'd that bag in the first pic? Looks like something I might be interested in. :smile:

--
Sent from my phone. Please pardon my brevity!

Lowepro Streamline 100

I have one in black and it's perfect for daily carrying

Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2

 

[tradesmith45]

Knodel

Your email to me asked the following:
"I like nature photos, especially wildlife, and I want to learn to do some macro.

So I would need:

A tele lens (i don't know if a 300mm -I read pentax- or a 200 with teleconverter)
A macro
A shorter lens

(I don't care much about wide angle now, I can use my pointandshoot or the kit lens). I care especially about animals and I want to learn macro... so I would also need a strobe.

I'd like them to be legacy primes. I can't spend much now but I'll wait if needed. I want to get a nice setup.

I am going for a new setup. I thought first in micro four thirds as I like the 2x crop factor. Then I found out about nikon 1 and I like that 2.7 crop factor. But I know that this goes against quality with the smaller sensor. But is that quality loss that much? I know these are new cameras with much advanced technology than what I'm used to (Olympus E1). I want really nice quality. I can add more weight if that is necesary.

Something very important for me is to be lightweight and not very bulky. I have had some opportunities to travel to very nice places and all must fit in my backpack, including clothes and sleeping tent. But when I'm at those places I can't think about missing the opportunity to get nice pictures. "

Sounds like your priorities are:
1. light & compact
2. image quality
3. wildlife
4. macro
5. landscape photography seems to be a lower priority

IMHO finding & getting close to wildlife is a bigger challenge than having the right photo gear. Trying to solve the "getting close problem" w/ a super tele creates several problems if your goals are to create esthetic or inspiring images of critters.

If your travel goal is to cover some distance especially with someone, your options for locating & getting close will be more limited unless you companion is also interested in doing the same.

Is carrying & using a camouflage smock & being stationary for long periods an option during your travels/backpacking?

If you'd like to shoot dragon fly, frogs or other small active critters, macro can have many of the same challenges as wildlife. Flowers are much easier.

IMHO wildlife photography puts a premium on accurate fast auto focus & very effective IS. My experience is limited to all manual film SLRs & the Olympus OMD w/ several lenses. While the OMD has vastly better IQ, it is not the best choice for active wildlife. The AF fails in many situations & the IS has limited effectiveness for focal lengths over about 150mm. None the less, I've gotten many pleasing images but I have to work very hard to get them & miss a lot. I manual focus & use a pod most of the time. My success rate w/ the OMD is only a little better than w/ the old manual SLR.

From limited experience trying one, an APS-C DSLR w/ in lens IS would provide a higher success rate for moving critters than any of the current mirrorless gear. But as you know everything gets much bigger & heavier.

As for gear, on a recent trip with 3 others, I used the OMD w/ the O75-300mm 75%, P45mm macro 20% & O9-18mm 5%. 95% of the time w/ the O75-300mm it was at 300mm. Used either a monopod or tripod 80% of the time.

When I got back I bought the Kenko extension tubes to use w/ my O40-150mm to shoot moving small critters; the P45mm has too short a working distance.

There is a ton for you to learn here about critters, getting close, about your photo goals & about the practicalities of your travel choices. You might consider buying a good super zoom point & shoot (Can SX50 is an example), attending photo workshops, going on some Audubon birding field trips, finding a mentor, reading some good books on the craft plus using the superzoom compact on a few trips to find out what works for you. Then you'll be in a much better position to make good choices about what gear to buy for you.

Best regards!

 

[Ned]

Lowepro Streamline 100

I have one in black and it's perfect for daily carrying

Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2

Well, to be precise mine is actually a different brand labeled simply as "Aero Sport", which you probably won't be able to find in any mass stores. However, it is definitely the closest thing to the Lowepro Streamline 100 I've found that's not actually the Lowepro Streamline 100. So yes, if you want a bag like mine the Streamline is the place to go! I'd be using the Streamline myself if I didn't find this one, but I like supporting small manufacturers.

 

[mring1]

E-M5 with RRS grip, 12-50 and 40-150 in a Mountainsmith Swift FX fanny pack. Two extra batteries, water and rain shell. My 14-54 Mk I will fit in the pack but not gracefully, and my copy of the 12-50 is very good from 12-25 mm, stopped down 1/2 stop. Changing lenses in the middle of a trail is always a roll of the dice, so I use a good lens, and accept that it's not a great lens. It works for me.

 

[kevinparis]

I am contemplating a trip to tokyo.... thinking along the lines of OMD with 17/1.8, 25/1.4 and 75/1.8.... probably will throw in the 14mm as it takes up so little space.

That should cover all my needs

K

 

[brianb032]

I'm a bit on the crazy side. I usually just grab a body and whatever normal prime I have at the moment; which is usually the 20mm. I've had the 7-14mm, but I feel a bit uneasy traveling with such an expensive lens. Maybe I'll pick up a 9-18 someday to cover the wide end.

 

[mattia]

I'm a bit on the crazy side. I usually just grab a body and whatever normal prime I have at the moment; which is usually the 20mm. I've had the 7-14mm, but I feel a bit uneasy traveling with such an expensive lens. Maybe I'll pick up a 9-18 someday to cover the wide end.

Seriously, that's what insurance is for. Why own it if you don't dare take it out to play?

 

[Kiwi Paul]

My hiking up a mountain kit is......RX100!!
Small, lightweight, pocketable and great IQ.

Paul