[SpecialK]

I usually recommend the 12-24 for city travel, but a 17-70 will help with some details with family and portraits, and is about 1/2 the price (used).

[NZUnicorn]

If your 18-55 gives good enough results for you, I would take that and a DA35. Still very light weight, and gives you an option for low light and for sharper images on some days.

If the 18-55 is not really as good as you want, and especially if it is the old model, then an upgrade to a 17-70 might be your best option.

[Eric Auer]

Please take a lens on your trip.

[mrNewt]

I'd say go with your best/sharpest lens.
You can zoom in/zoom out by walking .

[treetop flyer]

Great discussion from all. Thanks!!

[Unsinkable II]

Of my lenses, I'd take the 18-135 without even thinking twice.

I took a whole host of lenses with me to Australia in July, and the 18-135 only came off (for the Sigma 8-16) when I shooting in a lit cave system. It surprised me that I used it as much.

[rob_k20d]

Maybe the 18-55 for landscapes, stopped down a bit it's not that bad. Then in addition consider the DA 40mm XS, it's cheap, light, very small and will you give some prime lens quality IQ when you want it. It's pretty much the size of an oversized body cap...

I'd agree with this. It is not clear why you need to limit yourself to just one lens - especially when the 40mm XS is so small.

[treetop flyer]

I'd agree with this. It is not clear why you need to limit yourself to just one lens - especially when the 40mm XS is so small.

I'm willing to take a second lens, however I'm REALLY trying to keep my kit as small as possible (I have enough to carry around with the baby stuff!). I agree, the 40mm XS is tiny...I just don't own it!

I'm considering taking the kit lens for the wide angle requirements and perhaps a DA35mm f/2.4 (a lens I'd wanted to buy & try anyways) for a primary, walk around & family/people lens.

Thoughts?

Plan B is to rent a 16-50 f/2.8 & be done with it...

[mrNewt]

you can always rent the 40mm XS as well ...

[Unsinkable II]

Or just buy a Tamron 17-50. I'd take it over the Pentax 16-50 and it is a lot cheaper.

[mrNewt]

Or just send me the ticket and I'll go there to take pictures for you ... free of charge .

[treetop flyer]

Or just send me the ticket and I'll go there to take pictures for you ... free of charge .

Haha!

[kh1234567890]

There is nothing wrong with the kit 18-55 except that it is a bit slow. Definitely take that. The DA35 f/2.4 might not be a bad bet either. Of course there will be times when you'll wish you had a telephoto and your Vivitar is not exactly the lightest thing to drag around. Perhaps a second-hand DA 50-200 ?

[abacus07]

If you're only taking one lens then it has to the kit lens. It's more important that you cover the focal range than getting the sharpest photos at one focal length while missing countless others on a family trip. I might throw the M50 or DA35 in the bag because both are small and you could spend a day shooting the prime.

[rob_k20d]

I'm willing to take a second lens, however I'm REALLY trying to keep my kit as small as possible (I have enough to carry around with the baby stuff!). I agree, the 40mm XS is tiny...I just don't own it!

I'm considering taking the kit lens for the wide angle requirements and perhaps a DA35mm f/2.4 (a lens I'd wanted to buy & try anyways) for a primary, walk around & family/people lens.

I realised you don't own it, but I thought that you were asking for suggestions of lenses you might buy - such as the DA 35, 2.4.

I have that lens too, and can certainly recommend it. But if keeping your kit as small as possible is important, I'd go for the 40mm instead - so that you can take the kit lens and the prime. And the XS version isn't that much more expensive than the 35mm.