[Antifreez]

12-24 is one of my favorites for any type of travel, as well. Usually I bring that one and the DA*50-135. The gap never bothered me but now that I have the FA 43 I'm sure it'll fit somewhere in the bag!

Can you suggest a travel bag if I were to get the DA12-24 and travel with it + the 55-300? I'm curious what you use when you travel with the DA12-24 + *50-135.

[twitch]

I fit a K-x, DA*50-135, DA 12-24, DA40 and a flash into a Crumpler 5MDH. It's a good fit, though the hood of the 12-24 is an awkward fit as it ends up kind of balanced on top of the gear under the lid. The 12-24 is small but the hood is a PITA.

[sterretje]

Can you live with only the DA40 as your general purpose lens? If so, gaps are not a real issue as your other lenses become specialist lenses.

I shoot with the FA31Ltd as my main lens and it will only be swapped if I have a special need. I recently acquired the DFA100WR as a lens to be able to pull things a bit closer. Some (most?) will say that the gap between 31mm and 100mm is big, but I don't experience it that way because I consider it a specialist lens.
I haven't had a need for wider yet although I have been thinking about it to complete the setup.

[Antifreez]

I fit a K-x, DA*50-135, DA 12-24, DA40 and a flash into a Crumpler 5MDH. It's a good fit, though the hood of the 12-24 is an awkward fit as it ends up kind of balanced on top of the gear under the lid. The 12-24 is small but the hood is a PITA.

I just checked out this bag and I like it. Maybe it's wishful thinking, but it doesn't scream-out "camera bag" to me. Anyway, thanks. This is useful since that combo of gear is roughly the size I'd be dealing with.

I was just going to ask you what PITA meant when I figured it out. The context helped

[Antifreez]

Can you live with only the DA40 as your general purpose lens? If so, gaps are not a real issue as your other lenses become specialist lenses.

I shoot with the FA31Ltd as my main lens and it will only be swapped if I have a special need. I recently acquired the DFA100WR as a lens to be able to pull things a bit closer. Some (most?) will say that the gap between 31mm and 100mm is big, but I don't experience it that way because I consider it a specialist lens.
I haven't had a need for wider yet although I have been thinking about it to complete the setup.

Y'know it almost does. I think it's an interesting question but the 40 is just too narrow for an all-purpose for me. It's my fastest lens and works well for my daughter indoors, but when I'm out and about, I often shoot wide or long.

[K206]

My vote is for the DA 15. Personally, I like to travel small and light, and the DA 15 and other limited primes allow you to do exactly that.

What do you like about the DA 40? If size and weight is part of the equation, then the DA 15 may be for you (I love it). Check out the DA 15 Controls My Mind thread for what it can do. Also, I have traveled with the 15 and 35/40 combo and not found the gap to be a problem.

But if size and weight are of no importance, then the 12-24 is certainly more versatile and wider (and the extra 3mm would make a big difference).

[Antifreez]

My vote is for the DA 15. Personally, I like to travel small and light, and the DA 15 and other limited primes allow you to do exactly that.

What do you like about the DA 40? If size and weight is part of the equation, then the DA 15 may be for you (I love it). Check out the DA 15 Controls My Mind thread for what it can do. Also, I have traveled with the 15 and 35/40 combo and not found the gap to be a problem.

But if size and weight are of no importance, then the 12-24 is certainly more versatile and wider (and the extra 3mm would make a big difference).

This is something I have and will continue to think long & hard about. I do like my DA 40 for those reasons.

Someone on another thread pointed out that, given the difference between each mm on the wide end are so much greater than the differences on the long end, having a zoom for the WA is more useful. This seems logical to me. Zooming from 12-24 is such a huge range compared to zooming from 50-62 for example. Then again, people swear by the DA 15 and I always find it interesting when people say they use it as a "walkabout" lens. I have seen the DA 15 Controls My Mind thread many times and it always sways me in that corner. I'll have to continue to weigh it out.

Thanks for your vote.

[gnaztee]

Antifreez, what camera body are you using? I may have missed it, but don't see it in the thread. I only ask because whatever you choose to do re: lenses, if you have one of the weather-sealed bodies you might want to spend an extra $100 and throw in the 18-55 WR in case it rains or gets real dusty.

Additionally, I think the 12-24/prime/55-300 combo is a good one. I like to travel more with primes, so the 12-24 is for car trips and the 15 for plane trips. Altogether, I'll go 15/21/43/70, and a 50-200 WR with a K-7. I don't expect to use the 50-200 much, but it gives me a weather option, and length if I need it (which I usually don't when I city travel).

I did a 2-week US East Coast trip a couple of years ago with just the 12-24/35/70 and didn't feel like I missed anything except a couple of deer in Shenandoah, so I think what you seem to have decided on will work well. For that kit I used a Crumpler 4mdh. You'd need a 5mdh. Or, if you want a more versatile bag, look into a Timbuk2 messenger. You can get a photo version, or a regular and buy a Domke padded insert. Then the bag can be used as a non-photo when you want (this is what I have, except I use the padded insert from a Kata dr67i).

One more thing, it's nice to talk to a NW shooter! I was born and raised in Kelso, and graduated from WWU. Enjoy your trips!


Edit/Add: As per Bobe416 suggestion below, I think a small tripod is a great idea and I recommend a Joby Gorollapod SLR Zoom with a ball head (can strap to the side of a 5mdh).

[Bobe416]

Hi antifreez - If I was in your shoes, I would go with the DA40 as my go to lens and back it up with a zoom (18-135, 18-200 0r 18-250). In many cases with the DA40 you will be able to get the framing you want by either moving closer or farther from the target. If you can't get the framing then you will need to do a lens change (which for me is always a pain). I would also look into a small light tripod that could be used for long exposures and shots with you in it.

I think the main criteria for the kit will be size, weight and minimizing lens changes. The smaller and lighter the better.

[Lowell Goudge]

It's funny but in reading all the responses, it seems to be split about 50-50 with people recommending either the 12-24OR people not really going beyond the OP's present range of 18mm.

I really don't get this because the OP has commented that many of his shots are at the 18mm end, suggesting he wants much wider.

I would strongly recommend either the sigma 10-20 or pentax 12-24.

The OP wants wide, why recommend staying where he is at 18mm.

I don't get it.

I shoot in cities with 2 lenses, the sigma 10-20 and the tamron 28-75. I only take longer glass if I know I am going to be out in the country, as city shots don't really need much more than 75mm.

When travelling my 10-20 is about 70% of the shots, and 60% of those are at 10mm

[Antifreez]

Antifreez, what camera body are you using? I may have missed it, but don't see it in the thread. I only ask because whatever you choose to do re: lenses, if you have one of the weather-sealed bodies you might want to spend an extra $100 and throw in the 18-55 WR in case it rains or gets real dusty.

Additionally, I think the 12-24/prime/55-300 combo is a good one. I like to travel more with primes, so the 12-24 is for car trips and the 15 for plane trips. Altogether, I'll go 15/21/43/70, and a 50-200 WR with a K-7. I don't expect to use the 50-200 much, but it gives me a weather option, and length if I need it (which I usually don't when I city travel).

I did a 2-week US East Coast trip a couple of years ago with just the 12-24/35/70 and didn't feel like I missed anything except a couple of deer in Shenandoah, so I think what you seem to have decided on will work well. For that kit I used a Crumpler 4mdh. You'd need a 5mdh. Or, if you want a more versatile bag, look into a Timbuk2 messenger. You can get a photo version, or a regular and buy a Domke padded insert. Then the bag can be used as a non-photo when you want (this is what I have, except I use the padded insert from a Kata dr67i).

One more thing, it's nice to talk to a NW shooter! I was born and raised in Kelso, and graduated from WWU. Enjoy your trips!


Edit/Add: As per Bobe416 suggestion below, I think a small tripod is a great idea and I recommend a Joby Gorollapod SLR Zoom with a ball head (can strap to the side of a 5mdh).

Yeah likewise, it's great to see fellow Washingtonians on here! Thanks for all your input. I've got a lot of research to do regarding bags and you've given me a lot to go on.

Regarding WR, I use a Kx but haven't ruled out WR lenses because I'd eventually like to upgrade to a WR body (probably in 2 yrs).

I'm like you in that I don't think I'd need to go beyond about 70-ish when touring a city. That's why I was thinking maybe I could handle the size of one zoom (12-24) and then eventually only add the DA 40 and FA 77 (when I have it). Having the image quality in the 15/21/43/70 combo you have would be great, and I've thought a lot about a prime-only kit, but I just feel I'd be switching all the time (particularly between 15 and 21). Do you find this frustrating at all? I know a lot of people go this route and are very happy with it.

I like the idea of the Gorillapod too. This might be an option to hold me over before investing more into a tripod.

[Antifreez]

Hi antifreez - If I was in your shoes, I would go with the DA40 as my go to lens and back it up with a zoom (18-135, 18-200 0r 18-250). In many cases with the DA40 you will be able to get the framing you want by either moving closer or farther from the target. If you can't get the framing then you will need to do a lens change (which for me is always a pain). I would also look into a small light tripod that could be used for long exposures and shots with you in it.

I think the main criteria for the kit will be size, weight and minimizing lens changes. The smaller and lighter the better.

Yeah the all-in-one is tempting. Especially with the WR of the new 18-135. Like I mentioned above though, I don't feel the images are going to be as great with the all-in-ones vs. a high quality specialty zoom or prime. In this digital age, I have volumes of pictures and feel like drowning at times trying to manage them. I'd rather miss some shot-opportunities in order to (hopefully) get some real stunning images from the ltd's, etc.

There's also the lack of the wider angles that I feel I'd use a lot in travel.

[gnaztee]

Yeah likewise, it's great to see fellow Washingtonians on here! Thanks for all your input. I've got a lot of research to do regarding bags and you've given me a lot to go on.

Regarding WR, I use a Kx but haven't ruled out WR lenses because I'd eventually like to upgrade to a WR body (probably in 2 yrs).

I'm like you in that I don't think I'd need to go beyond about 70-ish when touring a city. That's why I was thinking maybe I could handle the size of one zoom (12-24) and then eventually only add the DA 40 and FA 77 (when I have it). Having the image quality in the 15/21/43/70 combo you have would be great, and I've thought a lot about a prime-only kit, but I just feel I'd be switching all the time (particularly between 15 and 21). Do you find this frustrating at all? I know a lot of people go this route and are very happy with it.

I like the idea of the Gorillapod too. This might be an option to hold me over before investing more into a tripod.

I don't find it frustrating, but I used to (when I thought I had to capture every opportunity I saw!). Since you mentioned you weren't worried about trying to get every shot, I think you could handle it. Personally, when I'm walking around a city I just don't like the size of a zoom on my camera (this is not an issue for some, and the 12-24 isn't big, just big relative to the Ltds, which I'm now used to).

I typically have the DA 21 on the camera, as I think that's a great "do-everything" length for city walking and shooting on the go. Then, if I see something I have to photograph and I need another length, I'll throw on one of the others, maybe pull out the Joby. The 12-24 would serve the same purpose as having the 15/21 (more convenient), but I just don't like walking around with that size. However, I LOVE the 12-24 and use it all the time when I'm doing landscape or travelling by car and bulk isn't an issue.

Oh, and on the IQ difference between 15/21 and 12-24, the primes have a bit more uniqueness in their rendering, but sharpness/contrast is equalled by the zoom. So I wouldn't worry about losing IQ by going with the zoom.

[Antifreez]

It's funny but in reading all the responses, it seems to be split about 50-50 with people recommending either the 12-24OR people not really going beyond the OP's present range of 18mm.

I really don't get this because the OP has commented that many of his shots are at the 18mm end, suggesting he wants much wider.

I would strongly recommend either the sigma 10-20 or pentax 12-24.

The OP wants wide, why recommend staying where he is at 18mm.

I don't get it.

I shoot in cities with 2 lenses, the sigma 10-20 and the tamron 28-75. I only take longer glass if I know I am going to be out in the country, as city shots don't really need much more than 75mm.

When travelling my 10-20 is about 70% of the shots, and 60% of those are at 10mm

That lens combination would be perfect for me in covering the range I need in just 2 (great) lenses. If I didn't already have the DA 40 I might think about the Tammy in addition to a DA12-24. I'd just hate to cancel out the only lens I currently have outside of my kit. The DA 40 would still have its place because of its size and how special the images are, but in reality I don't think it would get a lot of use anymore. There's also the size issue again of the 2 zooms vs. ltd's which I need to contemplate.

[Antifreez]

I don't find it frustrating, but I used to (when I thought I had to capture every opportunity I saw!). Since you mentioned you weren't worried about trying to get every shot, I think you could handle it. Personally, when I'm walking around a city I just don't like the size of a zoom on my camera (this is not an issue for some, and the 12-24 isn't big, just big relative to the Ltds, which I'm now used to).

I typically have the DA 21 on the camera, as I think that's a great "do-everything" length for city walking and shooting on the go. Then, if I see something I have to photograph and I need another length, I'll throw on one of the others, maybe pull out the Joby. The 12-24 would serve the same purpose as having the 15/21 (more convenient), but I just don't like walking around with that size. However, I LOVE the 12-24 and use it all the time when I'm doing landscape or travelling by car and bulk isn't an issue.

Oh, and on the IQ difference between 15/21 and 12-24, the primes have a bit more uniqueness in their rendering, but sharpness/contrast is equalled by the zoom. So I wouldn't worry about losing IQ by going with the zoom.

I know what you mean about ANY zoom feeling big after getting used to a Ltd. mounted on your camera. It had to be pointed out to me above that neither the 12-24 or 55-300 are really that big relative to a lot of others.

This is my first DSLR and I've only taken a couple trips with my current set up. I know I'll have to figure out what works for me but until then I like to hear how others approach their travels.

Beyong size and prime vs. zooms, there are the intangibles you mention like rendering and it makes these decisions all that much harder. Time to go back to PPG and look through more images.

One question for you though, if you're on a road trip and see something you'd shoot at 15mm, do you grab your 12-24 or DA 15?