[RoxnDox]

Soooo, next week I and my wife and a goodly part of my camera collection will be hopping on a plane to go visit Niagara Falls and take our first real vacation in years... Splurging on a room overlooking the Canuckian side, going to do the usual touristy things involving boats and lots & lots of airborne water , plus we have a side trip up to Old Fort Niagara to go see the lighthouse up there. According to the foliage forecasts and reports, the colors should still be good on the trees in the area. Not spectacular, but good. Just a short stay, 10/21-25... If the weather cooperates, I even have the ephemeris showing sunrise over the Falls from our hotel.

If it were just me, I'd probably do nothing but take pictures. In the interest of marital bliss and continuing breathing , that will have to be cut back some... My plan is to take my little waterproof WG10 along, for shooting in the worst conditions (Maid of the Mist, Cave of the Winds under the falls). Also my Olympus XZ-1 because it's compact and takes much better images than the WG... Finally, my (brand spanking new) K-50, with the 18-135 WR as the primary lens, plus the polarizer for it. Taking a couple of rain sleeves along too, so I'll likely take the K-50 wrapped up in one of those for the wet tours.

My question is, do you folks who live out in that part of the country think it would be worth the space to bring along my DA 12-24 for shooting leaves and the lighthouse (especially since we get a tour of the interior of the tower)? I'm also thinking about a more compact travel tripod, but that's a maybe. We're not planning on doing "leaf tours", but around town and going up to the lighthouse will give opportunity I hope.

Thoughts?

Jim

[UncleVanya]

I have visited that area a few times. YES. take the 12-24. The lake and river areas are worth the weight.

Also if you are going to be in the area try the waterfront in the village of Lewiston on the US side. Nice area. The town is cute and the 12-24 is likely a good lens there too.

[aremmes]

I just returned from Niagara Falls on Sunday. The entire time that I was there I only used the kit 18-55 WR lens and didn't feel the need for a wider lens, however I did not seek scenes where extra width would prove useful or necessary. I did wish I had a slightly longer zoom in some cases but those I could deal with through cropping. I didn't bring a rain sleeve for the water works, which the camera and lens handled as intended. I do wish I had brought an ND filter and tripod to take long-exposure shots of the falls, though.

I do have to question the idea of carrying three cameras around for leisure, though, not to mention multiple lenses. I did carry my camera bag around but would've been much more comfortable leaving it in the car or in the hotel room, specially considering that I didn't change lenses while at the park. On the other hand, it's packed full of dessicant, so the camera went straight into the bag after each bird bath.

[RoxnDox]

Thanks both (and great shots - love #2!)

Most of the time I would not be toting all 3 cameras around. The WG10 only for the really wet tours. Both it and the Oly are quite compact so it wouldn't be a problem to tuck one into bag or even a pocket. I'm used to wandering around with the bag - more important, my wife is used to me doing it and lets me get away with it

I may just carry the camera around with the 18-135 most of the time, and bring out the 12-24 for our side trip up to the lighthouse, or for a bit of foliage/falls playtime outside of our 'wandering on foot' time. I do think I'll bring it along on hte trip.


Jim