LBA Advice wanted

gokenin · 02-05-2008, 01:15 PM

I was wondering what you people think about this? I currently have the following lens for pentax 10-17, 16-45 tamron 28-75 and the tamron 70-300di along with a 28 and 43 prime lens. My question and my current LBA fix is do I get a megaZoom 18-250 lens for vacations and carry the primes for night shots or take my existing lens regiment on vacation? So would you take 3 maybe 4 lenses with you one mega and three primes or would you take 4 lenses and maybe one prime?

GaryML · 02-05-2008, 01:53 PM

Originally posted by gokenin

I was wondering what you people think about this? I currently have the following lens for pentax 10-17, 16-45 tamron 28-75 and the tamron 70-300di along with a 28 and 43 prime lens. My question and my current LBA fix is do I get a megaZoom 18-250 lens for vacations and carry the primes for night shots or take my existing lens regiment on vacation? So would you take 3 maybe 4 lenses with you one mega and three primes or would you take 4 lenses and maybe one prime?

Super-zooms are popular for those who want a one-lens-fits-all solution for every photographic need. I understand the appeal, but ...

I have no interest in using a super-zoom. They are not wide enough on the wide end. They are too slow on the long end. Too much distortion and not enough resolution across the board. But I do like to travel light, so I will often take just two lenses or three max:

For digital, I usually carry a wide-angle to normal zoom, a long lens, and perhaps an ultra-wide. At present, I carry a 17-55mm f2.8, a 70-200mm f2.8 or 105mm f2.8 Micro (but not both), and sometimes an ultrawide zoom(12-24mm f4). With your kit, I'd take the DA 16-45mm f4 and the Tamron 70-300mm. You might throw in the 43mm (presumably the FA 43mm f1.9 Limited) or the 28mm for low-light use, depending on which focal length you think will be better.

With my film camera, I have just primes and they are all pretty small and light. I can carry all five lenses and still not exceed the weight of the digital kit with two heavy lenses. But I will sometimes take just two or three lenses when I want to travel light: a SMC-A 28mm f2 and a SMC-A 100mm f4 Macro, and for a third lens the SMC 50mm f1.2. This gives me a lightweight, compact kit that covers most needs with better speed and image quality as compared to a super-zoom.

Chako · 02-05-2008, 05:29 PM

A super zoom has its place. Not sure why a lot of people thumb their nose at it. It is just another tool in a photographer's bag.

If you value traveling light, and not changing lenses in a dusty environment, then the super zoom does have its appeals. However, it does have some issues. Vigneting at the wide end and it is slow at the long end. The 18-250 does have fantastic optics going for it however. It is a popular lens...just don't make it your only lens.

It all depends on your situation, what you wish to photography, and how light you wish to travel. Small primes are very light, and are much faster, but you have to change them in the field (possible dust issues maybe), they are slightly more inconvenient to use out in the field.

Only you can decide if either route is the way for you to go.

SpecialK · 02-05-2008, 06:36 PM

To me, vacations are sort of one reason to have a camera. To limit the photo ops by leaving some lenses behind seems counterproductive.

That said, I would not take the 28-75 or the primes. Take a 6" mini tripod which you use to can brace against a wall, post or table if needed. With just the other three lenses you have wide, normal, and tele covered, plus the fisheye for fun.

gokenin · 02-05-2008, 08:04 PM

Originally posted by SpecialK

To me, vacations are sort of one reason to have a camera. To limit the photo ops by leaving some lenses behind seems counterproductive.

That said, I would not take the 28-75 or the primes. Take a 6" mini tripod which you use to can brace against a wall, post or table if needed. With just the other three lenses you have wide, normal, and tele covered, plus the fisheye for fun.

why would you not take the 28-75? am actually thinking that it more than likely be the four zooms they all offer diffrent picture taking venues and the 43 ltd is a fast lens and good at night from the pics i have taken so far but so is the 28-75 at 2.8

SpecialK · 02-05-2008, 09:24 PM

Originally posted by gokenin

why would you not take the 28-75? am actually thinking that it more than likely be the four zooms they all offer diffrent picture taking venues and the 43 ltd is a fast lens and good at night from the pics i have taken so far but so is the 28-75 at 2.8

Because the 16-45 covers much of the wider range, and the short end if the longer tele matches the long end of the 28-75. The gap is not that much. I suppose it depends on what type of shots you like, as always.

joele · 02-05-2008, 09:39 PM

Originally posted by Chako

Small primes are very light, and are much faster, but you have to change them in the field (possible dust issues maybe)

True, though super zooms can also introduce dust problems as they tend to suck in a lot of dust when they zoom in and out.. Though changing lenses still can be difficult in some situations..

I much prefer to carry all my primes with me especially on holiday. Though that said I am buying a Sigma 17-70 for a walkaround lens, sometimes it just isn't possible to carry more than the camera and one lens..

02-05-2008, 01:15 PM	#1
gokenin Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: lowell,ma Posts: 1,899	LBA Advice wanted I was wondering what you people think about this? I currently have the following lens for pentax 10-17, 16-45 tamron 28-75 and the tamron 70-300di along with a 28 and 43 prime lens. My question and my current LBA fix is do I get a megaZoom 18-250 lens for vacations and carry the primes for night shots or take my existing lens regiment on vacation? So would you take 3 maybe 4 lenses with you one mega and three primes or would you take 4 lenses and maybe one prime?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
macro advice wanted for low apertures (e.g. f/22)	noou	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	18	09-13-2010 08:19 AM
Advice wanted: Fashion/Portrait (amateur)	jaieger	Photographic Technique	4	08-25-2010 06:41 AM
Photomatix Light for Windows- Advice wanted.	jpzk	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	19	01-30-2010 07:12 PM
Wanted: Advice about scratched lens	JML	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	05-28-2008 01:56 PM
wanted: advice on flash options for K20?	Douglas_of_Sweden	Pentax DSLR Discussion	5	04-13-2008 03:36 PM

02-05-2008, 01:53 PM	#2
GaryML Inactive Account Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: San Diego, California Posts: 441	Originally posted by gokenin I was wondering what you people think about this? I currently have the following lens for pentax 10-17, 16-45 tamron 28-75 and the tamron 70-300di along with a 28 and 43 prime lens. My question and my current LBA fix is do I get a megaZoom 18-250 lens for vacations and carry the primes for night shots or take my existing lens regiment on vacation? So would you take 3 maybe 4 lenses with you one mega and three primes or would you take 4 lenses and maybe one prime? Super-zooms are popular for those who want a one-lens-fits-all solution for every photographic need. I understand the appeal, but ... I have no interest in using a super-zoom. They are not wide enough on the wide end. They are too slow on the long end. Too much distortion and not enough resolution across the board. But I do like to travel light, so I will often take just two lenses or three max: For digital, I usually carry a wide-angle to normal zoom, a long lens, and perhaps an ultra-wide. At present, I carry a 17-55mm f2.8, a 70-200mm f2.8 or 105mm f2.8 Micro (but not both), and sometimes an ultrawide zoom(12-24mm f4). With your kit, I'd take the DA 16-45mm f4 and the Tamron 70-300mm. You might throw in the 43mm (presumably the FA 43mm f1.9 Limited) or the 28mm for low-light use, depending on which focal length you think will be better. With my film camera, I have just primes and they are all pretty small and light. I can carry all five lenses and still not exceed the weight of the digital kit with two heavy lenses. But I will sometimes take just two or three lenses when I want to travel light: a SMC-A 28mm f2 and a SMC-A 100mm f4 Macro, and for a third lens the SMC 50mm f1.2. This gives me a lightweight, compact kit that covers most needs with better speed and image quality as compared to a super-zoom.

02-05-2008, 05:29 PM	#3
Chako Inactive Account Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Sault Ste Marie, Ont, Canada. Posts: 563	A super zoom has its place. Not sure why a lot of people thumb their nose at it. It is just another tool in a photographer's bag. If you value traveling light, and not changing lenses in a dusty environment, then the super zoom does have its appeals. However, it does have some issues. Vigneting at the wide end and it is slow at the long end. The 18-250 does have fantastic optics going for it however. It is a popular lens...just don't make it your only lens. It all depends on your situation, what you wish to photography, and how light you wish to travel. Small primes are very light, and are much faster, but you have to change them in the field (possible dust issues maybe), they are slightly more inconvenient to use out in the field. Only you can decide if either route is the way for you to go.

02-05-2008, 06:36 PM	#4
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,482	To me, vacations are sort of one reason to have a camera. To limit the photo ops by leaving some lenses behind seems counterproductive. That said, I would not take the 28-75 or the primes. Take a 6" mini tripod which you use to can brace against a wall, post or table if needed. With just the other three lenses you have wide, normal, and tele covered, plus the fisheye for fun.

02-05-2008, 08:04 PM	#5
gokenin Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: lowell,ma Posts: 1,899 Original Poster	Originally posted by SpecialK To me, vacations are sort of one reason to have a camera. To limit the photo ops by leaving some lenses behind seems counterproductive. That said, I would not take the 28-75 or the primes. Take a 6" mini tripod which you use to can brace against a wall, post or table if needed. With just the other three lenses you have wide, normal, and tele covered, plus the fisheye for fun. why would you not take the 28-75? am actually thinking that it more than likely be the four zooms they all offer diffrent picture taking venues and the 43 ltd is a fast lens and good at night from the pics i have taken so far but so is the 28-75 at 2.8

02-05-2008, 09:24 PM	#6
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,482	Originally posted by gokenin why would you not take the 28-75? am actually thinking that it more than likely be the four zooms they all offer diffrent picture taking venues and the 43 ltd is a fast lens and good at night from the pics i have taken so far but so is the 28-75 at 2.8 Because the 16-45 covers much of the wider range, and the short end if the longer tele matches the long end of the 28-75. The gap is not that much. I suppose it depends on what type of shots you like, as always.

02-05-2008, 09:39 PM	#7
joele Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Melbourne, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,308	Originally posted by Chako Small primes are very light, and are much faster, but you have to change them in the field (possible dust issues maybe) True, though super zooms can also introduce dust problems as they tend to suck in a lot of dust when they zoom in and out.. Though changing lenses still can be difficult in some situations.. I much prefer to carry all my primes with me especially on holiday. Though that said I am buying a Sigma 17-70 for a walkaround lens, sometimes it just isn't possible to carry more than the camera and one lens..