Nepal > India > Sri Lanka : gear?

Planning a backpacking trip for 3 weeks Nepal > India > Sri Lanka

Using a 5DmkII-
Currently I'm running with 3 lens in my bag:
24-70L
70-200 2.8L IS
50 1.8

I'm kind of concerned with the size/weight of the 70-200 for the potential payoff. I"m sure I'll have the 24-70 on the camera 90% of the time.

Question - would I be better off leaving the 70-200 at home and maybe picking up a wider sub-24mm range lens instead?

what would you take?
I"m tempted to just throw the 5DmII with the 24-70L in the bag and just forget the rest of the gear at home. Just work with that combo the whole time. Will I regret not having something with me?

Ya, some people say the 24mm wide on a FF is wide, but not wide enough for some extremely small spaces.
Anyone been to India that can attest to the need for an extremely wide angle?

Hi - I am also going to India for 3 weeks over Christmas so thought I would chip in. I haven't quite decided on gear, but I think I'll be travelling light with:

- 40D
- 24-105
- 10-22

I was also tossing up whether to take a 70-200, but I think I will leave it behind. The only time I can see myself using it would be for closely-cropped portraits etc. I like using a long focal length so I don't have to get right into a stranger's face, but most of the time I find the 24-105 to give me plenty of reach and the 70-200 gets left in my bag.

I think I would struggle with 70mm as my longest focal length, but I guess it all comes down to your personal style

Take all the lenses you think you might need. You can always leave the heavy ones in the hotel safe on day excursions where you want to travel lighter.

I just got back from 3 weeks in India. And i'll say we used the 70-200 more than any other lens. Many times you'll want to get a shot, but you can't be so close to people for various reasons. That's if you want to shoot people. If you are doing mostly scenery, then i'd leave the 70-200 at home. But for people.. it's very useful. I haven't processed any photos yet, we have client photos to work on first. But i'll post some up in the next month.

justdmbobbo wrote in post #9140561
Ya, some people say the 24mm wide on a FF is wide, but not wide enough for some extremely small spaces.
Anyone been to India that can attest to the need for an extremely wide angle?

If you are visiting major forts or even just the Taj it's useful. We used the 14 2.8L many times to get the full effect. I'll be posting photos within a month. But when visiting several sites, wide angles are hugely useful.

I think it's safe to say in general, but especially in India, you'd want a mix of zoom and WA. People are just as interesting as major attractions. Especially if you visit some of the Jain temples like Ranakpur, you wouldn't want to be without a WA lens.

The Taj, when you first walk in is far enough that you 'could' get by with just a 70-200, but that's just one angle of an amazing place. You'd be kicking yourself for not having a WA to get different shots.

Also, if you are visiting the mid to south, Goa and Kerela, again, WA plays a big role in getting the beaches and backwaters.

So to summerize, i wouldn't be without either in India. You don't have to worry about getting robbed, India is pretty damned safe. Unless you are in Mumbai at 1am in some hood area. Stay in decent hotels and you have nothing to worry about. We've been there a couple times now and love it each time.

Btw, if you have a lot of gear, i highly recommend the Pelican 1540 case. No matter which airlines you take, Jet Airways, Kingfisher, Indigo, and no matter which aircraft, Boeing 737, Atr42/72 the 1540 fits and gets on all airlines no problems. We carried, (2) 5D MKII's, 70-200, (2)24-70, 14 2.8, 85 1.2, 580EXII, and a Colorspace UDMA and extra batteries. Looks small, but fits quite a bit. We never check in our camera gear so it stays with us at all times. And this is the biggest case you can bring on a plane that will actually fit in all overhead storage.

If you have any questions, feel free to shoot me a PM as i've been to Kolkata, Delhi, Agra, all of Rajasthan, Goa and Kerela and have gone for the sole purpose of photography.

was doing some more thinking last night about primes.

What about if I convince myself that I can make due on a FF only having 24mm being the widest I can get.
And instead of taking the 70-200 2.8L, I leave it home and pick up a 135L instead for my street candids.

So the bag would be:
24-70L for landscapes, tight spaces, etc.
135L for any reach and street photography (loving what people are doing with this lens as far as "people" go)
50 1.8 emergency or no-weight situations

this also might force me to get more creative and move my feet.
Thoughts?

For my second trip to India I was satisfied with a Sigma 17-70 on a 30D for "wider" shots, so I'd imagine that your 24-70 on the 5D II will be fine. You'll definitely want to take the 70-200, it's a no-brainer, but quite frankly both times I brought my 50 1.8 it never even went on the camera. YMMV.

But I feel I must say... only 3 weeks for Nepal AND India AND Sri Lanka??? That's some VERY optimistic rushing around. It's hard to say this without sounding like a bit of a prat,I don't mean it that way honest, but after 4 trips to India I can't imagine spending less than 2 weeks at a dead bare minimum in that country alone. I wish you luck.

paintedlotus wrote in post #9221156
But I feel I must say... only 3 weeks for Nepal AND India AND Sri Lanka??? That's some VERY optimistic rushing around. It's hard to say this without sounding like a bit of a prat,I don't mean it that way honest, but after 4 trips to India I can't imagine spending less than 2 weeks at a dead bare minimum in that country alone. I wish you luck.

Agreed. India is very big and diverse depending on the areas visited. Rajasthan is hugely different than Kerela. One is desert-like and dry and dusty. The other insanely humid and wet.

Well, I finally got around to editing all my photos from Nepal and India.
Thanks for all the suggestions and help

just kept with the following setup in the bag:
5DmkII
24-70L
70-200 2.8L IS (w/ 1.4 Tele-extention)
50 1.8 - (never took out of the bag-only took for emergencies)

Here's a sample of just a few from India alone - See my site in the signature for both huge India and Nepal galleries.

1

#2 -
I just saw those guys last week! That kid has quite a voice. I'm guessing you were shooting the early morning yoga?

C_Riv wrote in post #9889170
#2 -
I just saw those guys last week! That kid has quite a voice. I'm guessing you were shooting the early morning yoga?

Yes indeed, it was probably 7-8am or so when I shot that.
Got up and got to the river to watch all the morning ceremonies at 5am or so.

India is one of those travel places where you really do need a range of lens. The people and the places are an array of colour. When traveling it really comes down to a photographic convenience vs weight. Seeing as you are back packing weight is your over riding factor. If I was you I would seriously consider investing in a 70-200 f4 (you can always sell it when you come home), take the brick (or better still buy a 24-105 for the saving in weight), and one light fast UWA (24 or 35) for temples etc.