go to content go to search box go to global site navigation

Thorn Tree Forum

Your choice: 1 Camera Body, 2 Lenses:

Replies: 16 - Last Post: Oct 9, 2012 5:28 AM Last Post By: TravelinBri

jump to
← Back to topic list

TravelinBri

TravelinBri avatar

Sep 25, 2012 7:48 PM
Posts:  187

Your choice: 1 Camera Body, 2 Lenses:

If you could travel to some of the most beautiful and culturally rich countries in the world and take only one camera body and two lenses, which would you take and why?
-TBri

wix99

wix99 avatar

Sep 25, 2012 8:00 PM
Posts:  62

1

Probably a general purpose zoom, something like 18-135mm, plus a prime lens for low light and better quality photos.

zoltan

zoltan avatar

Sep 25, 2012 8:18 PM
Posts:  800

2

The body for DSLR tends to be one of either Canon or Nikon. They're the two top models preferred by the majority.

If you're talking only two lenses, then you'd want to make sure that you have the best of wide & telephoto. Probably zooms for both. Something like a 17-85mm and a 70-200mm.

You'd want to ensure that the lenses you have are around f2.4

Your budget would also have a bearing on what lenses you can afford to purchase. Canon /Nikon brand lenses will be more expensive than after-market (eg. Sigma; Tamron; Tokina; etc) and generally will give you a better quality image.

tools4fools

tools4fools avatar

Sep 25, 2012 10:49 PM
Posts:  1,694

3

I still would take 3 lenses. There is no reason why I could not take 3 lenses...

16-35mm F4 wide angle/general purpose
70-200 f2.8 telephoto
and
28mm 1.8 for low light.
+++++

0o0

0o0 avatar

Sep 26, 2012 3:34 AM
Posts:  29

4

If you have to ask this sort of question, then perhaps a camera with interchangeable lens is not the right setup for you? A power/travel zoom camera would perhaps be a better option?

nwdiver

nwdiver avatar

Sep 26, 2012 2:53 PM
Posts:  244

5

Three levels
High
Leica M9-P body, Leica 50mm f/0.95 Noctilux-M and Tri-Elmar-M 16-18-21mm f/4 Aspherical Lens because I’m rich and quality is everything over cost ;) and I would add the 135mm f/3.4 APO Telyt M for an extra $3500.

Good
D600 because it is very good camera and a Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II with a Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.4 a third lens would be the Nikkor 24m f/2.8. I use this system with 5-6 more lenses choices.

Tiny and maybe my new system for travel.
Olympus OM-D E-M5 M. Zuiko Digital ED 14-150mm f/4.0-5.6 and M. Zuiko Digital ED 75mm f/1.8 a but since they are so small I would put in a M. Zuiko Digital 17mm f/2.8.

Street shots and portraits are my style, these systems lack long telephoto of wildlife.

rockrug

rockrug avatar

Sep 26, 2012 3:23 PM
Posts:  84

6

I would travel with exactly what I currently use: a Canon 5D paired with a 24-105L (or maybe the 24-70L, but that darn thing is a brick!) and a 50mm prime. I choose the 5D because it's a full frame camera and I would never go back to a crop body. My only complaint about the 5DmkI was that it wasn't weather sealed. Canon has taken care of that with the mkIII. As for lenses, I used to carry something longer, but I rarely used it. I prefer to be closer to my subjects, and the 24-105 gives me just enough length and plenty on the wide end (but not too much to distort). The 50mm prime is a beautiful lens, with great DOF. I find it to be a wonderful low light portrait lens, esp wide open.

Brian

TravelinBri

TravelinBri avatar

Sep 27, 2012 1:51 AM
Posts:  187

7

Some great answers. I love the options that multiple lenses provide. I like a wide - normal prime for street shooting and low light, a portrait lens, a long zoom (primarily for landscapes) an UWA (primarily for landscapes), and I love shooting macro. However, what I really love it having only a few lenses and making due with those choices I have. Therefore I would much rather have 2-4 lenses and 2 bodies rather than the 2-3 bodies with 5-9 lenses I have sometimes carried. I recently sold my 5DII (originally traveling with the 17-40L, 24-105L, 135L, and 50/1.4, which I eventually narrowed down to the 24-105 w/50) with the idea of starting fresh, and am currently only carrying an Olympus E-P3 (w/7-14, 14-45, 45-200, and 20/1.7) - which for me is a temporary holdover - and I am wondering how to cover most of this with fewer lenses and how people come to make the choices they do. I prefer quality over ease of use, so for instance, I'd rather have a good 24-70 or 35/1.4 than a superzoom, and when I am actually out, I never mind missing some photos because I don't have the right lens, but I do think about the perfect travel set up lots.
Anyway, would love to hear more answers, and what the thinking is behind the answers. Thanks!
-TBri

Chisa

Chisa avatar

Sep 27, 2012 6:37 AM
Posts:  27

8

I find taking more than two lenses too heavy for me generally anyway, so usually go with:

Canon 7D
16-35mm f2.8L or 24-70mm f2.8
50mm f1.8 (so light and small it barely counts really)

My wide-angle is actually not super wide on my crop body camera, so at the wider end it does nicely for landscapes and at the other end it's passable for everyday use. The 24-70mm is heavier but gives a bit more zoom so sometimes go with that. The 50mm is small and light enough it's easy to just chuck in there and comes in handy. I don't usually have a need for anything with more zoom than the 70mm on the 7D, and if things are too far or it's too dark for my lenses I just put away the camera and try to enjoy it with my eyes :) Just a hobbyist though, so don't need to worry so much about missing shots!

Petrus

Petrus avatar

Sep 30, 2012 12:03 PM
Posts:  1,157

9

If weight and size do not matter, Nikon D800 with 24-70mm f:2.8 and 70-200mm f:2.8 Nikkors. At the moment the best picture quality of any DSLR. For some weight savings take 28mm f.1.8 and 85mm f:1.4 instead.

For something more compact Fujifilm X-Pro1 with 18mm f:2 and 60mm f:2.4 macro. Best APS-C sized camera at the moment. Does not scream "photographer" (except to those who know about these things).

re: #5: Leica might have "quality", but not picture quality. Sensor is badly outdated, pure crap at high ISO, and has bad moire problems. Actually the X-Pro1 makes considerably better pictures, and the 35mm and 60mm Fuji lenses are as good as Leica glass. At 1/5:th of the price, both body and lenses.

Stickman

Stickman avatar

Sep 30, 2012 4:34 PM
Posts:  31

10

Canon 5D3 and 70-200 2.8L II + 24-70 2.8L II.

TravelinBri

TravelinBri avatar

Sep 30, 2012 7:10 PM
Posts:  187

11

Yes, this would be a great combo Stickman (or the D800E, 24-70/2.8, 70-200/2.8II), but it would give you very little room for stealth shooting in places where whipping a big camera out isn't the greatest move... I also might err (on the Canon side) towards the 16-35/2.8 and 70-200 2.8II...
-TBri

WorldTravelDude

WorldTravelDude avatar

Oct 7, 2012 11:38 PM
Posts:  57

12

1 lens, two cameras:

I carry a Nikon with a 50mm prime lens. Great all-around shooter. Instead of zoom I've been stitching photos together for cool panoramas as well. The camera size and weight is great, and the low-light shooting is spectacular.

Instead of a second lens, I carry a Canon S90. It comes out when I need the zoom, etc. Yes it's a bit of a step down in quality but having a great pocket camera makes up for it. Canon's sunset feature makes amazing sunset shots too (I'm a softy for sunset ;)

TravelinBri

TravelinBri avatar

Oct 8, 2012 7:30 AM
Posts:  187

13

Interesting... are you shooting the 50 an FX body, a DX body, a film body? I do think 50 is a great all around focal length - one of the reasons I am actually considering the Sony RX-1 (but only if it ends up being the perfect implementation of the idea) despite it being a fixed FL (35 in this case). I also believe in 2 bodies at all times, whether two ILCs or 1 ILC and 1 compact...

TravelinBri

TravelinBri avatar

Oct 8, 2012 6:35 PM
Posts:  187

14

Nice Petrus, have you found any significant issues shooting foliage in Jpeg form (watercolor effect)?
← Back to topic list
ADVERTISEMENT

In our shop

See all shop products

Hotels & Hostels

See all hotels & hostels