Best combo for travel. What would you choose?

One of those times where ~200-250 for the Samyang 14mm 2.8 is a no-brainer, huh?

4YRIONY wrote in post #17662852
I carried a 5D3 with 2 zoom lens to China. It was way too heavy and cumbersome. When I got back to the USA I picked up an SL1 for my travel needs.

Some people want to travel with their latest acquisitions because they are excited about them.

Some people want to travel with their biggest gear because it gives them the best quality.

Some people pick gear to impress the other tourists.

Some people pick the lightest camera and lens to save weight.

It is tough to pick gear for a stranger going on a trip, because we don't know the person's objectives or shooting styles well enough, and we don't know the hidden agendas.

But basically I'm with 4YRIONY. I went to China too, three times, on business. I took my XSi (EOS 450D) and 18-55mm lens, very capable and very light weight. If I were to go again, I would take my SL1, which is even lighter, and the kit lens it came with, which is even better. On some trips, depending on the destination and type of trip, I would just take a high quality P&S.

But it is really up to the traveller to figure out what gear to take and how much to drag along for the perceived photographic rewards.

If I were to go to SE asia again, I wouldnt have a problem with a 50F1.2 + 135F2. When I go again next year, I'll probably bring a 12mm prime, 40/50 1.4 or faster, and 100mm+ F2. I understand there may be huge differences in FL, but I can definitely make it work. Have been to SE asia probably 5-6 times in the past 10 years, everytime I've brought a DSLR, it's not that heavy if you keep the lens count down.

I think my last trip, I had the tamron 24-70F2.8 VC, super versatile with the fairly fast aperture and VC, along with the 50L. I used both a good bit, but never together in one outing, too heavy! The humidity will kill you so keep the weight down.

When I travel in such a way that I'm walking long distances or dealing with actual luggage situations, my go-to travel kit is my 5D3 + 24-105L. That covers like, 98% of what I'd like to shoot on travel, and the other 2% isn't worth the weight or hassle. For me that lens and body are unbeatable.

When I travel with my car and RV-trailer then I just bring everything but the kitchen sink. And yes, that means I've got the Sigma 120-300 Sport with me, which is nobody's idea of a travel lens. But It can sit in the car and so who cares?

MalVeauX wrote in post #17649793
Travel where? Purpose of the travel (photography purpose or is this a vacation)? What are you wanting to even photograph on this travel?

This says it all. There is travel where even a RX100 would be too much and there is travel where five bodies and an EF 1200mm f/5.6l usm, 200-400L, and 600mm prime wouldn't be a burden. Month long car trip and backpack trip are very different. Cruise in Alaska and a cruise in the Mediterranean will yield wildly different kits.

If I were to pick a single travel kit, for all travel situations, everywhere, it would probably be something in the range of a 70d or 7Dii (depending on your needs) and a 18-135 and a 10-18. That'll cover 90% of the globe for less weight and cost than a FF and 24-105L and give you more than twice the range.

4YRIONY wrote in post #17662852
I carried a 5D3 with 2 zoom lens to China. It was way too heavy and cumbersome. When I got back to the USA I picked up an SL1 for my travel needs.

I guess it's a matter of perspective. After lugging 1D bodies around since 2003, my 5D3 and 7D2 are my compact kit. Couple them with small primes like the pancakes, or in the case of the 7D2, with an 18-135mm STM, and it's all featherweight to me.

This past July we visited a small island off the coast Maine. Daily hikes up into the hills, and along rocky shores, often scrambling on all fours. 7D2 with 100-400mm and 5D3 with either 17-40mm or 40mm pancake, all day for those hikes was perfectly comfortable for me. I was happy to not be lugging a 1D4.

If at any time I felt I was over-packed for the situation, I would have left more behind the ext day, but I never did. Even after two days of no birds at all,. I would still carry the 100-400mm just in case.

Archibald wrote in post #17665389
Some people want to travel with their latest acquisitions because they are excited about them.

Some people want to travel with their biggest gear because it gives them the best quality.

Some people pick gear to impress the other tourists.

Some people pick the lightest camera and lens to save weight.

It is tough to pick gear for a stranger going on a trip, because we don't know the person's objectives or shooting styles well enough, and we don't know the hidden agendas.

Indeed, and for most (those not worried about status or impression) it would be about trying get the balance of image quality, preparedness for unforeseen situations and opportunity, vs. portability,. that is what I face every time I walk out the door with a camera. I can be a little ridiculous myself and often over pack for my needs, but when i don't do that very thing I find myself invariably under-packed and wishing for that item I left behind to save weight.

Just returned from Maryland where I packed my "portable" biding landscape kit.
7D2, 100-400mm, lots of cards and some batteries, Xti IR conversion and 10-22mm and both pancakes.

Considered putting my smallest tripod in the checked bag, and forgot the 1.4x T-Con.

Ended up not shooting at all with the Xti, but twice really NEEDED the tripod, and often really wished I had the 1.4x (which would have been the easiest thing to include with the pancakes, in fact I thought it was in there with them)

Anyway, it's always a little hit or miss.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #17674999
I guess it's a matter of perspective. After lugging 1D bodies around since 2003, my 5D3 and 7D2 are my compact kit. Couple them with small primes like the pancakes, or in the case of the 7D2, with an 18-135mm STM, and it's all featherweight to me.

If you are anything in life like your avatar, I can only understand, respect and envy you!

I just got back from a trip to Europe (Prage, Vienna, Switzerland). After previously travelling with a lot of kit I went with the trusty 5D3 + 24-105 combo and it worked well.

In addition my wife carried the EOS-M3 with 11-22mm (18-35 Full frame) and it was surprisingly good. I think the 11-22 EF-M was pretty close to my 17-40 f/4, but really light and still put out 24 megapixel. It also saved changing lenses. I also took the 50 f/1.4 but didn't use it much.

The 24-105 has been a real trooper for travel on full frame for a mix of scenery, city and people with less distortion than ultra wide. For general city photos I think it's worth going with something wider eg 16-18mm capacity as well.

I just got back from a trip to the small towns of Belgium and the Rhine (Germany)
and I took quite a bit of my kit
bad idea for me.

I took more than a couple kilos of equipment with me
and I found that for the majority of the time I used the 16-35 IS - say...maybe 75% of the time
the 24-105 about 20% of the time
and just for kicks the 8-15, and the 70-200 (i used the distance to get some details on the gothic churches/cathedrals and a few landscape ones), but if I was forced to go as light as possible
no doubt that the 16-35 was the top lens.

Anyway, YMMV obviously depending on where you go, what you shoot, style, etc etc etc