[frogoutofwater]

I am thrilled that Mr frogoutofwater and I will be escaping the polar vortex for 8 warm days in Puerto Vallarta. I'm trying to decide which lenses to bring on this trip. (It helps that Mr frogoutofwater also shoots Pentax, so we can share some lenses.)

This is partly a family vacation (catching up with my dad, stepmother and sister) and partly a photography-oriented trip. We'd like to do some street photography for example. I also will be spending a fair bit of time volunteering for one of the local dog/cat rescue groups - a couple of photo shoots at the shelter plus a couple of short shoots at their local adoption drives. And we might head out to botanical gardens or something similar to photograph some fauna. And it would nice to do some portraits of my family - I think they'd like to have those. You can see from that description that mostly what I like to photograph are animals, people and flora - in that order.

I know that the practical, minimalist answer would be to take the kit I took to Borneo last year: the WR 18-135 and 55-300, plus one fast lens (maybe the 77mm f/1.8). Mr frogoutofwater will probably stick with his superzoom and the fast 50.

But now I have so many more lenses - I'm spoiled for choice and I kind of want to play with my new toys (and practise using flash) The new toys are: 200mm f/2.8, 1.4 teleconverter, 50mm f/2.8 macro and 35mm f/2.8 macro. We also have the Tamron 90mm macro and the Sigma 17-70 f.2.8-4. I'd love to put the 200mm lens through its paces - and it was a Christmas gift from my dad, so he might like to see it. But it's a fairly big, fairly heavy and very expensive lens. So I'm thinking I'd carry the following in my bag to/from Mexico (I won't carry all of these lenses all the time on expeditions - will probably carry one zoom, one prime and the converter at any one time)):

• the 18-135 and 55-300 are my go-to walk-around lenses so I'l definitely pack those
• the teleconverter would add some flexibility to the primes
• the 35mm would be a good street photography lens, it has close-up and macro capabilities and I could combine it with the teleconverter for a short, pretty fast portrait lens.
• if there's room for the 77mm, I'll probably throw that in, too (combining it with the teleconverter and shooting at a distance might produce some nice portraits)
• flash + Fstoppers flashdisc

I will (sob) leave the 200mm at home. I'll try to talk Mr frogoutofwater into bringing either the 50mm macro or the Tamron 90mm macro instead of the plastic fantastic, since that will open up more options for close-up work (and the 90mm macro is a good portrait lens as well).

Suggestions - alternatives? Something I should leave behind?

[Rimfiredude]

Now that I bought a Q, my packing may change. I would take my K5, 16 Zenitar, 17-70 Sigma, 50 f2 Ricoh, 105 Vivitar Macro, 70-210 Pentax F and the Q with the 02 lens. I hope I can get all that in my little Tamrac backpack. Maybe I will have to carry the K5 on my shoulder.

[jrpower10]

I don't have the Tamron 90 macro, but when I'm heading to gardens my FA 100 macro is in the bag. It also works for short tele and I've done portraits with it, but it's unforgiving to any blemishes. The 77 with the teconverter is an interesting idea. Might have to try that out myself.

[mwilky55]

Seems you have a lot of focal range covered with your two zooms. I second the idea of the 35 with macro, or the 50. Good focal ranges and the macro capability would come in very handy. Might be all you need, though a good wide angle (like the DA 15) might be useful depending upon how good your 18-135 is at the short end. I suspect you'll have some great sunsets and big vistas.

O, and have a great time. We'll try not to let the polar vortex leave until after you return

[Eder]

Well most of pics will be landscapes and portraits, since you are traveling with people, so if I were you i would pick the 77 which is a master piece and your widest lens. And that would be all. Your main lens would be the wide since you will be at restaurants and crowded places so some times there is not lots of space to be between your subject and the camera, besides will be lots of people passing on the streets and things like that.

A fish eye would be grate to have, a fish eye and the 77 would do the work easily and with quality, specially the pentax fish, you can zoom it to 17mm and you get a rectilinear picture and as long as you zoom out you get that spherical effect which on the sea looks great.

[frogoutofwater]

Seems you have a lot of focal range covered with your two zooms. I second the idea of the 35 with macro, or the 50. Good focal ranges and the macro capability would come in very handy. Might be all you need, though a good wide angle (like the DA 15) might be useful depending upon how good your 18-135 is at the short end. I suspect you'll have some great sunsets and big vistas.

O, and have a great time. We'll try not to let the polar vortex leave until after you return

I forgot the 15mm. We have it but I've hardly ever used it. I'm not much of a landscape photographer - of more interest theoretically to Mr frogoutofwater (who is a mountain climber). We definitely will take it (and probably wrestle to see who gets to use it) when we go to Iceland this year. But for me I'll probably stick to the wide end of my 18-135 for this trip.

And it is too kind of you to offer to keep the polar vortex around, but no thanks ...

I've been living away from my home country for so long (10 years), I think the protective cold-resistant coating I received when I was born in Canada has worn off ...

[LensBeginner]

I would have liked a wider night-time lens if I were you... a 77mm can be a little too long in narrow alleys and urban environments in general...
I normally use the 50mm f/1.7, but something along the lines of the 31mm f/1.8 (or even wider, why not?) would be the optimum.
I routinely shoot the 50mm at ISO1600, f/2 (you can't really use it wide open, it's a blurry mess), around 1/10s so yes, speed is a concern at night.

[wtlwdwgn]

I would take the two kit lenses, the TC, and something from 24 to 35mm and f/1.4 to f/2 for indoors. The DA 35mm f/2.8 Limited could be okay in that role at higher ISOs but an FA 31mm f/1.8 would be even better. Less is more when traveling. Less to carry, less changing lenses, less weight, and less to worry about. Enjoy your trip.

[Sandy Hancock]

I would leave the 55-300 behind and take the 90 macro, the DA*200 (it's not *that* big!) and 1.4xTC
I would leave the 18-135 behind and take the Sigma 17-70
I could not consider going anywhere without the FA77

Four lenses, all pretty fast with excellent IQ covering 17mm to 280mm. Boom.

[mecrox]

A very helpful thread as we are off to Madeira at the end of the month to escape the winter and I have been thinking the same thing: what to take?

Last year, I took the DA 15mm, 21mm, 35mm and 70mm. All worked very well but obviously a bit of lens changing. The DA 35mm f2.8 is not a fast focuser because of its long throw and can hunt for focus quite a bit so it's not a great lens for quick-shooting on the street even though it's a great lens for plenty of other things. I usually use the DA 21mm for this anyway. Still, quality images all round with this combination and only one filter size too.

This year I am mulling over taking a zoom, perhaps the new 16-85mm. Taking a long lens on travel is a new idea for me but I'm tempted by the idea of a DA 200mm simply because it's different.

I've made several trips over the past few years taking only 3-4 of the DA prime lenses and have never felt deprived. They really are great travel lenses if you're prepared for lens changing. And when travelling, wide to standard focal lengths are often the thing for me: landscapes, narrow old streets, some close-ups, courtyards, people, flowers, et al. - 15mm to 70mm on APS-C covers all of this really. Throw in a K-S1 (which I don't have) and one would have a very small kit of excellent quality, perhaps. I might also look at getting a travel tripod like the Manfrotto Be Free too.

[formercanuck]

I've been to Puerto Vallarta a couple of times.

1. It will most likely be humid
2. Depending on what you do, you will want something flexible at least - landscape (from boat?) and zoom some scenery - arches. Some may be from a distance some may be up close.
3. The streets/roads can be dusty - depending on the rain. I don't think its the rainy season... that's typically fall.

Easy recommendation to start: DA 18-135mm WR ( or 18-55mm WR) at least. Take a wide/fast prime, but you'll probably spend most of the time with a wide angle. If the 16-85mm WR is out, it may be worth a shot.
For the 'downtown' and port (they have a WalMart now ) - somethink in the range of 14-28mm would do well.
I guess if depends on what you do during the day/evening.

If you want to try something unique - take a bus trip to Punta de Mita. You will get away from the tour sales, and find a nice / clean / quiet beach. Its ben + 10 years since I've been to that spot... but its next to the 4 Seasons and St. Regis . There are a lot of boat trips that go to places south of Puerto Vallarta - great days in the sun, all the tequila you can drink. Some even have night shows/dinner combo.

Its pretty much 2 cities...
The 'newer' city to the north of the cruise ship terminal (new Hotels/condos/WalMart/shopping mall)
The 'older' city to the south of the cruise ship terminal (older hotels/condos/timeshares down until you hit the shopping district - 'Senor Frogs') - most of the shopping tourist stuff ends at the 'river'.
If you have a condo - groceries are (were) cheap - at places like Mega. I'm sure that its changed

[UncleVanya]

I worry about gear left behind being stolen. I would take the DA 18-135, the 35mm plastic fantastic, a 1.4x tc, and the 90mm Tamron... But I'd second guess myself for not having the 15 and 200 and 77... Lol.

[formercanuck]

Puerto Vallarta is a pretty decent place, but I agree with your opinion on that.

While PV isn't Ensenada or Tijuana, it also isn't Maui or Grand Cayman. I'd be most likely to bring a WR and some plastic fantastic gear.

[frogoutofwater]

A very helpful thread as we are off to Madeira at the end of the month to escape the winter and I have been thinking the same thing: what to take?

Last year, I took the DA 15mm, 21mm, 35mm and 70mm. All worked very well but obviously a bit of lens changing. The DA 35mm f2.8 is not a fast focuser because of its long throw and can hunt for focus quite a bit so it's not a great lens for quick-shooting on the street even though it's a great lens for plenty of other things. I usually use the DA 21mm for this anyway. Still, quality images all round with this combination and only one filter size too.

This year I am mulling over taking a zoom, perhaps the new 16-85mm. Taking a long lens on travel is a new idea for me but I'm tempted by the idea of a DA 200mm simply because it's different.

I've made several trips over the past few years taking only 3-4 of the DA prime lenses and have never felt deprived. They really are great travel lenses if you're prepared for lens changing. And when travelling, wide to standard focal lengths are often the thing for me: landscapes, narrow old streets, some close-ups, courtyards, people, flowers, et al. - 15mm to 70mm on APS-C covers all of this really. Throw in a K-S1 (which I don't have) and one would have a very small kit of excellent quality, perhaps. I might also look at getting a travel tripod like the Manfrotto Be Free too.

Last year, I had very good results photographing in Borneo mostly with a couple of zooms (the WR 18-135 and 55-300). I brought the 77 1.8 but didn't use it often. I had better results with the pair of zooms than Mr frogoutofwater did with his super-zoom. I like not having to deal with lens changes and because a lot of what I photograph is animals or people (dynamic situations), if I have to stop and change a lens I miss the shot. I've also had good success with a 2-zoom plus prime combo for all-day excursions at the Catskill Animal Sanctuary (where I volunteer as a photographer) and on a documentary photography workshop.

There are very few landscapes in my favourite photos - it's not something that interests me very much. So I don't think I'll concentrate my photographic resources at the wide end. (And I'm not about to buy any new lenses for this trip - even I think I've got enough for now. ) However, I had overlooked the possibility of photographing people in the street (or similar scenes) at dusk, so a somewhat faster zoom might be a good idea. So I think I'll bring the Sigma 17-70 instead of the Pentax 18-135 - the Sigma also has a shorter focusing distance (22cm vs 40cm) and an extra mm at the wide end. Accordingly, I think I'll revise my camera bag as follows.

My camera bag:

• K-3
• Sigma 17-70
• Pentax WR 55-300
• Pentax 50mm macro 2.8
• Pentax 1.4 Teleconverter
• Pentax 77mm 1.8
• Pentax AF 360FGZ II flash + Fstoppers flash disc + cable
• Sony RX100 III (back-up)

Mr frogoutofwater's camera bag

• K-5II
• Sigma 18-250
• DA 15mm
• Tamron 90mm macro

[formercanuck]

Sounds like fun - enjoy your trip.