[Ishpuini]

Hello all,

I'm looking for some help to determine which of my lenses to take on a 3 week trip to Japan. I generally have a good idea what to take on my trips, but for Japan I'm not sure.

First the trip. We're going in October/November, and it's our first time to Japan, so we'll be doing some of the highlights, which includes a lot of cities, i.e. Tokyo, Kyoto, Hiroshima. However, we'll also try to include as much nature as possible. On one hand the famous gardens of Kanazawa, Okayama and Takamatsu, and on the other hand a few excursions to more rural areas such as Kamikochi (Japanese Alps), Koyasan, Sandankyo (near Hiroshima), Kibi plain, Naoshima... Well that should be enough to give you an idea.

Lenses (APS-C): without going into detail what I could take, most will be determined by the decision whether long glass might be useful or not on this trip. I have both the DFA150-450 and the FA*300. The former is reserved for dedicated wildlife trips, i.e. not this trip for which it would be overkill. The FA*300 doesn't take that much space however, so I'm considering taking this one along. My question is whether I will have use for it? What is the chance of seeing wildlife on this trip (that includes birds in the gardens) that would require 300mm?

Thing is, if the FA*300 can stay at home, this will free some space in the bag for a prime or two... I'm thinking the DA35/2.8 macro or the FA50/2.8 macro (for flowers and plant details in the gardens), or perhaps my DA10-17 fisheye for a different point-of-view from time to time.

Thanks in advance for your pointers!!

grtz, Wim

PS: standard kit will probably consist of Sigma 8-16, DA*16-50 & DA*50-135.

[Mike L]

I'm currently considering the same thing for a trip to Japan in December. This won't be my first time and I won't be covering as much ground as you.

I think your standard kit will cover almost everything. If your not going with wildlife in mind, I'd leave the FA*300 at home and take the DA35 macro (I prefer this over the FA50 because it is more compact and perhaps more versatile). Though the fisheye could add an interesting perspective to the cityscapes.

I'll definitely be taking my Sigma 8-16 and DA*16-50 to cover the cityscapes and landscapes. I'm also planning a visit to the snow monkeys at Yudanaka so I'm tossing up between the DA50-200 which is versatile and smaller or the F*300 better IQ and more reach.

[Sandy Hancock]

We're steaming away from Fukuoka on a cruise ship as I type. My kit on this trip is for the K-1 (DFA15-30, FA31, DA*55, FA77, DFA100WR, DA*300), but I reckon your chosen three lens kit is pretty close to perfect for a crop system.

If weight and space are not an issue, adding the FA*300 would be brilliant - I have used my DA*300 a lot already on this trip, but I'm mainly here to see my daughter perform on the ship. The prime's combination of quality and speed has given me results which my 55-300 could not even approach.

I wouldn't take both the 8-16 and 10-17. I had both for a while but opted to keep just the fisheye - at 10mm it is wider than the Sigma at 8mm, even when de-fished, and it is more flare resistant. The Sigma is a very fine lens though.

[victormeldrew]

If I was going to Japan, I would be thinking more about how many new lenses to bring back with me!

[Ishpuini]

If I was going to Japan, I would be thinking more about how many new lenses to bring back with me!

LOL! That would have been true enough for me as well a few years ago. However, there's little to nothing missing in my current lens collection...

I might check out some glass for my Q though, if any can be found... For now I only have the 01 standard prime.

---------- Post added 08-08-17 at 13:42 ----------

We're steaming away from Fukuoka on a cruise ship as I type. My kit on this trip is for the K-1 (DFA15-30, FA31, DA*55, FA77, DFA100WR, DA*300), but I reckon your chosen three lens kit is pretty close to perfect for a crop system.

Great kit!! I was actually considering an all prime kit at some point. On the wide end my three wide Samyangs would be great (10/2.8, 16/2 & 24/1.4), complemented by the three FA ltds and the Samyang 135/2 for the tele work. However, I might have to act quick in some of the crowded places, so I've reluctantly decided on zooms after all... The primes will remain my preferred kit for short "local" trips in Europe.

If weight and space are not an issue, adding the FA*300 would be brilliant - I have used my DA*300 a lot already on this trip, but I'm mainly here to see my daughter perform on the ship. The prime's combination of quality and speed has given me results which my 55-300 could not even approach.

Doesn't seem to be similar to what I will be shooting. We will see some dance performances, but in relatively small venues where the DA*50-135 should suffice IMHO.

I wouldn't take both the 8-16 and 10-17. I had both for a while but opted to keep just the fisheye - at 10mm it is wider than the Sigma at 8mm, even when de-fished, and it is more flare resistant. The Sigma is a very fine lens though.

I see what you mean. Both lenses are very different to me though. For eye level photography I prefer a rectilinear UWA, and the Sigma is very nice optically. BTW, I tend to avoid the extreme wide end because distortions get too extreme for my taste most of the time.

The fact that I'm considering taking the DA10-17 may sound strange when I tell you I'm not much of a fan of the fisheye effect. OTOH, fisheye looks much more natural to me when shooting 90° up or down and I can imagine doing some straight-up photography in Tokyo. Another application might be the modern art and architecture on Naoshima.

Tx for your thoughts!!

Wim

---------- Post added 08-08-17 at 13:52 ----------

I'm currently considering the same thing for a trip to Japan in December. This won't be my first time and I won't be covering as much ground as you.

You're right, our current planning does seem very full, but we're in Japan for about 3,5 weeks.

I think your standard kit will cover almost everything. If your not going with wildlife in mind, I'd leave the FA*300 at home and take the DA35 macro (I prefer this over the FA50 because it is more compact and perhaps more versatile). Though the fisheye could add an interesting perspective to the cityscapes.

That's what I was considering the DA10-17 for. The DA35/2.8 could indeed double for a compact standard, for which the FA50/2.8's FoV is a bit too strict. Actually, I often take my camera with me for an evening stroll, and having just a prime on the camera makes for a more comfortable setup hanging onto my shoulder. I do prefer my standard prime a tad wider (around 24mm). My favourite lens at that FL is the Samyang 24/1.4, but that's a tank... I might dig up my DA21/3.2 and throw that in the bag as well though.
Come to think of it: DA10-17 + DA21 + DA35 macro should still take less space than the FA*300/4.5...

I'll definitely be taking my Sigma 8-16 and DA*16-50 to cover the cityscapes and landscapes. I'm also planning a visit to the snow monkeys at Yudanaka so I'm tossing up between the DA50-200 which is versatile and smaller or the F*300 better IQ and more reach.

We're giving the snow monkeys a miss. Couldn't fit that into that planning of ours... From what I've seen, I'm sure 200mm might suffice to get good shots, though 300mm could yield some really great close-ups.

Tx!!

Wim

[VoiceOfReason]

In your shoes I'd take the standard kit you have and then add the 300 in for long stuff.

[wed7]

8-16, 50-135 or the 21/43 combo

[Aristophanes]

The question should be: Which lenses to purchase in Japan?

;->

[Theov39]

Make sure you take a wide angle lens. Space can be tight in Japan both inside and outside. The Sigma 8-16 would cover that nicely.

Unless you have a very specific purpose in mind I would probably leave the 300 prime at home. I have a DA*300 but only take it out for wildlife trips.

I have just bought a Pentax 55-300 PLM and that might be worth picking up in Japan. It is compact, light, very quiet and provides 300 mm just in case you need it. If you get that you can leave the heavier 50-135 lens at home.

Your standard kit seems to cover most eventualities but even though I have the Pentax DA 12-24 zoom lens I like using the Pentax DA 21 for travel just because it is so small and compact and perfect for street photography.

[krazykat]

I might check out some glass for my Q though, if any can be found... For now I only have the 01 standard prime.

Lenses for the Q are easy to find 2nd-hand in Japan. Curiously the 02 zoom often seems to sell for more than the 06.

[nickthetasmaniac]

PS: standard kit will probably consist of Sigma 8-16, DA*16-50 & DA*50-135.

Done!

For general travel I can't imagine many instances where you're going to feel limited by that kit. Unless you have very specific needs, I find it's almost always more enjoyable to keep travel kit simple and just enjoy being there...

Do you really want to spend your first time in japan thinking about whether a shot would be better with a fisheye or rectalinear wide angle?

[Ishpuini]

8-16, 50-135 or the 21/43 combo

Good suggestion! The DA21+FA43 is indeed a duo that I've used before as a compact standard set. Both are typically lenses that I throw into my bag to fill the last remaining space...

---------- Post added 09-08-17 at 08:36 ----------

The question should be: Which lenses to purchase in Japan? ;->

As I wrote before: too many lenses already. But I've said that many times and ended up adding glass anyway.

---------- Post added 09-08-17 at 08:44 ----------

Make sure you take a wide angle lens. Space can be tight in Japan both inside and outside. The Sigma 8-16 would cover that nicely.

Unless you have a very specific purpose in mind I would probably leave the 300 prime at home. I have a DA*300 but only take it out for wildlife trips.

I love wildlife, esp since that can make a nice change in a series of pictures that would otherwise be too much of the same. Even a sparrow in a temple yard can be very refreshing. But perhaps a TC on the DA*50-135 can get me close enough for birds used to having people around.

I have just bought a Pentax 55-300 PLM and that might be worth picking up in Japan. It is compact, light, very quiet and provides 300 mm just in case you need it. If you get that you can leave the heavier 50-135 lens at home.

Good idea, but I love the 50-135 too much to leave it at home.

Your standard kit seems to cover most eventualities but even though I have the Pentax DA 12-24 zoom lens I like using the Pentax DA 21 for travel just because it is so small and compact and perfect for street photography.

Another vote for the DA21 then... To think that I don't use it that much anymore since I got the DA20-40. In fact that purchase turned the DA21 from my favourite street photography lens to my least used limited...

---------- Post added 09-08-17 at 08:46 ----------

Lenses for the Q are easy to find 2nd-hand in Japan. Curiously the 02 zoom often seems to sell for more than the 06.

Indeed, I was thinking the same. Esp since Pentax always said the Q was a success in Japan more than in the rest of the world. If I find the time...

---------- Post added 09-08-17 at 08:53 ----------

Done!

For general travel I can't imagine many instances where you're going to feel limited by that kit. Unless you have very specific needs, I find it's almost always more enjoyable to keep travel kit simple and just enjoy being there...

I know. But it's also fun to take out a prime lens and look for angles and compositions. We do travel on our own, so we're only limited in time by the schedule we impose upon ourselves.

Do you really want to spend your first time in japan thinking about whether a shot would be better with a fisheye or rectalinear wide angle?

Yes I do... Actually, I've been photographing for so long that I look around with a "photographic" eye, even when I do not have a camera on me. I know both lenses well enough to know instantly which one would suit me best. Also, changing lenses is something I do fairly quick (I shoot primes most of the time, except on multi-week trips). But I see your point!

Tx all!!

[Pentaxke]

Hi Wim, what i had in Japan was the 20-40 and one of the first days I purchased the 15 LTD. With these 2 lenses I got 95% covered. So you should be good to go.

That said, in Kamikochi I missed some tele as there was birdlife. Now, as with all birds I think an FA* 300 is on the short side. If you bring the FA* then you will also need the teleconverter. Apart from birds I didn't see much wildlife (nothing actually - also not on other places.)

If I were you I would leave the DA* 16-50 at home and take the 20-40 LTD since it is more compact, which should make some space for either 35 LTD or 50 macro. And the FA* 300 + Tammy TC. Not sure if that will all fit in the Peak Design...

[Ishpuini]

Hi Wim, what i had in Japan was the 20-40 and one of the first days I purchased the 15 LTD. With these 2 lenses I got 95% covered. So you should be good to go.

Hey Marc, indeed, I expect the 16-50 range to cover most of my shots. Which is why I'll probably take it to avoid changing lenses too much in the bustle and hustle of Japan city life.

That said, in Kamikochi I missed some tele as there was birdlife. Now, as with all birds I think an FA* 300 is on the short side. If you bring the FA* then you will also need the teleconverter. Apart from birds I didn't see much wildlife (nothing actually - also not on other places.)

Most of the time I manage with the FA*300, albeit that I do crop significantly. Fortunately the K-3II's 24MP amply allows for that. Actually, the FA*300 got me some great bird shots in Nicaragua last November. Still not sure I'm willing to take it for a handful of shots though.

If I were you I would leave the DA* 16-50 at home and take the 20-40 LTD since it is more compact, which should make some space for either 35 LTD or 50 macro. And the FA* 300 + Tammy TC.

Hmm, that's the choice I make most of the time, i.e. 20-40 plus a wider prime (mostly the Samyang 16/2). For UWA I prefer the Samyang 10/2.8. However, the DA*16-50/2.8 is better sealed against the elements and covers a wider angle, which I have found practical on long travel. Also, it has a 77mm filter size, which is the size of all my filters. Since I intend to do quite a bit of long exposures, that's an important point too. Unfortunately the Sigma 8-16 doesn't take filters, so I would need to add the Samyang 16/2 to have the 16mm FoV with filters (=my favourite FoV).

Not sure if that will all fit in the Peak Design...

You would be surprised. I tested yesterday when I was cleaning lenses for an upcoming weekend trip. The Everyday Backpack 20L (still my pre-production review sample looking as new as ever after about 10 months of daily use) easily takes the FA*300/4.5, Sigma 8-16 and DA*50-135/2.8 (in that order bottom up), leaving enough room along the latter two to hold the K-3II with the DA*16-50/2.8. That leaves the entire top compartment free. With the camera out of the bag I could even add two lenses in the space thus freed up (those lenses could be in an expanded top during transfers). So that brings the DA10-17 and the DA35/2.8 macro back into the picture, even with the FA*300 in the bag...

Tx for your thoughts!

Wim

[Jonathan Mac]

I recently went on a trip to Japan and used my DA limited lenses for almost everything. The vast majority of my shots were taken with the DA 35mm and the 21mm, with a bit of use of the 70 and 15 and for two days almost everything was shot with the 18-55 WR because it rained all day.

Using primes was enjoyable and produced great quality images (as always with the DA ltds) but did require a lot of swapping. A DA 20-40mm would maybe have been ideal but I don't have that and it's a very expensive lens for what it offers. I had some old primes with me too (M 50/1.7, A 28/2.8 and M 120/2.8) because I also shot film but I rarely used those on the K3 and after a few days the 120mm stayed at home because it wasn't getting enough use to merit carrying it all day.

As with everything, what you need will depend on your shooting style and preferences (and maybe the weather) much more than on where you're going.