[MaineNative]

I have both the DA 16-85 and the 18-135. The 16-85 lives on my K-5 because I do landscapes and like the extra 2 mm and because I think it is slightly sharper. However, the 18-135 is a slightly smaller/lighter lens and gives you a little extra magnification on the long end. I often take a telephoto zoom on trips but in the end I never use it; I just do the best I can with the 18-135 or 26-85.

I would also go with the 35 mm. It is a good field of view for general purpose use and it isn’t too big. I like having a small lens for taking my camera with me going to dinner or something just in case something catches my eye. If my intent is going out to take pictures, then I take the longer lens or maybe a small camera bag.

I haven’t seen it mentioned, but I also take my DA 10-17 for one specific purpose: for taking pictures inside churches or other indoor locations where you want to get the majesty of a whole room, even if there is some distotion. Only a very wide angle can do it and the 10-17 doesn’t add much weight.

[Sandy Hancock]

Are there any reasons I should consider the DA 18-135 over the DA 16-85? Are the extra telephoto 50 mm on the DA 18-135 useful for anything versus the extra wide 2 mm on the DA 16-85?

The DA18-135 is much smaller and lighter. Even if the long end isn't its strength, it is infinitely better than the DA16-85 from 86-135mm . Buy a used DA15 Limited with the money saved to get really wide and a bit of pixie dust.

Is the difference between 15/16 mm and 18 mm really that big? I’ve heard that on the wide end a few mm makes a big difference, but I haven’t seen it for myself. How is it while shooting?

18mm is wide (28mm FF equivalent), while 15mm is ultra-wide (=22mm). Noticeable difference. The quality of the images (especially the starbursts and flare resistance) from the DA15 is something you can't match with a zoom.

Would you recommend upgrading to the DA 35 Limited if I really like 35 mm?

From what I have seen, the Plastic Fantastic has nicer rendering of both subject and background, as well as being a little faster (and lighter). I have the DA35 Limited and while it is great close up, I would say it's more tradesman-like at longer range. I depends what you want to get out of it.

[pres589]

I'm impressed at how spartan some of you are with your travel kits.

I've made four overseas trips over the last six years, and I haven't managed to take less than six lenses on any occasion. The choices have changed over the years and the anticipated needs of the trip, but the kit always manages to fill my bag and weigh about the carry-on limit. A couple of times there has been one lens which didn't get much use, but I couldn't imagine making a "life event" journey with just a superzoom and one prime.

Of significance, one trip was just me (for a conference), and the other three have just been me and my wife. I can imagine that wrangling a full family may have changed things....

At this point, out of the lenses I own, I think I could make a fantastic crop-body travel lens group with the following;
DA 15
DA 18-135
Sigma 28 EX

The ultra-wide, the do-all/weather resistant zoom, and the fast normal. What else do I need on a vacation? A table-top tripod and my K-5 II! That's it.

[Sandy Hancock]

The ultra-wide, the do-all/weather resistant zoom, and the fast normal. What else do I need on a vacation? A table-top tripod and my K-5 II! That's it.

That's pretty much what I'm recommending to the OP....

[pakinjapan]

@pakinjapan:
I would love to go during the cherry blossom season, but unfortunately, I can't. That's a nice picture, by the way! Followed on IG. I’ll check out your website, there’s a lot of good information to go through. When do the farmers burn their farm? I want to go to winter or summer Comiket depending on when I’m going – would you have any recommendations for it?

Comiket:
I have never been to Comiket, but from looking at their (very primitive) official site. It looks like the event usually takes place at Tokyo Big Sight which is on Odaiba island very close to Toyota largest showroom in Japan and the live size Gundam statue. You want to go see the Gundam if you go to an exhibition like Comiket.


My recommendation: go there via train from Shimbashi station and make sure you sit at the first seat of the first or last seat of the last car. Because you can get this type of shot, from inside the train. Many people will want that sits; you just have be fast but also be in the line! Wait for the next train if you are not the first guy in the line.
see map: Google Maps

After the exhibition, walk to Tokyota Showroom then Miraikan science museum then the live site Gundam which is in front of Drive City department store and Odaiba front which is next to Fuji TV for sunset photo, and last, you can walk across the Rainbow Bridge back to Tokyo. Rainbow bridge’s gate open 9 am to 9 pm in the summer / 10 am to 6 pm in the winter.
see map: Google Maps
Then from "Shibaura-futō Station", you can take a train back to Shimbashi station and walk around Simbashi station for night street photography. This station is interesting. when you look up, it is a lot of modern, glass windows skyscrapers but when walking at street level, it is a lot of old fashion Japanese small bar.
The famous Nakagin building is also in this neighborhood.
If you still have energy left, you can walk from Shimbashi to Ginza and Yurakucho. A lot more things to see, do and photography there.

If you go there during December weekends, you might want to skip the walk on the bridge but wait for the firework show.

Singapore:
I went there during September. But from what I know (asking the local), the smoke comes at the end of a farming cycle in Indonesia which I have no idea when and or how many time a year. I know that the Indonesian government does their best to stop the farmer from doing that. Not sure if it gets any better now. You might want to keep checking the news before you reserve a ticket.

Instagram:
I am not sure which one is your account. Could you private message me over there or let me know your username. I will follow back if I am not done it already.

One more point I want to make, If you come to Tokyo / Japan,
Summer here is bad! It hot and humid. While Singapore is also hot and humid, but it always rains over there when it gets too hot. In Tokyo, it can go on for week or month. It is very much like Bangkok's summer. well...Not as bad as Bangkok but close! I have never been a fan of Summer anywhere, by the way.

[Jonathan Mac]

I would say that you need a WR lens (and a bag with a good rain cover). Last year in Japan I had a couple of days on which I'd have taken almost zero photos without the 18-55mm WR and I've since bought the 16-85mm (which would have been much, much better).

For travelling light with what you have I'd say:

- 18-55mm for use in poor weather (or 24-70mm if you're happy to carry a much larger and heavier lens). Don't rely on a simple kit lens as your main lens - image quality will disappoint.
- 18-250 for general use (but upgrade to 18-135mm or 16-85mm if you're willing to spend).
- 35mm f/2.4 for low light, shallow depth of field and better results than the 18-55 or 18-250 can provide. The 35mm limited is better and if AF fine-tuning is spot on then it's superb at all distances, including infinity for landscapes. Definitely a worthy upgrade.

Ideally I'd say replace the 18-250 with something better that combines WR capabilities, such as the 18-135mm or 16-85mm. Then take just that plus the 35mm. I think if you take a sub-par lens you'll be sorry that you sacrificed image quality and photographic enjoyment for convenience.

When I went to Japan I decided to take the gear I wanted to use to maximise the enjoyment and quality: the DA limiteds were my main lenses and I'm happy I did it. Although changing lenses was a bit of a pain sometimes, the high quality primes provided me with great pictures from what has probably been my best overseas trip ever, and that to me is priceless. I mainly used the 35mm and 21mm though the 15mm and 70mm saw some use, as did the few lenses I took for use on film (M 50/1.7 and A 28/2.8).

As someone else mentioned, there's often a lot going on in the cities after dark and having a lens that's at least f/2.8 and can be used wide open is useful. Especially in Japan there's a lot of artificial light in cities after dark and a good normal prime or zoom can capture it without a tripod.

The only other time I've been to Asia (Vietnam and Cambodia) was seven years ago and I had no good primes and the Tamron 17-50/2.8 was my main lens. Again, WR was essential at times.

As with all such posts there are some that say you need as wide as possible for shooting cities and I don't agree with this at all. Super-wides can be handy but for a more natural feel of what it was like to be there, something less extreme is better. I rarely go wider than 18mm and 21mm is fine in almost all situations. As for telephoto, after a few days in Japan I left my longest lens (the M 120mm f/2.8) in the AirBnB apartment as I used it so rarely. 70mm was long enough.

[timb64]

My experience was that the 16-85 is only slightly bigger/heavier than the 18-135 and that the extra 2mm at the wide end was more useful to me.Often in tight spaces,where there are crowds or your back is against an obstruction there's no opportunity to step back to get a wider view.

[Sandy Hancock]

My experience was that the 16-85 is only slightly bigger/heavier than the 18-135

488g vs 405g is 20% heavier

78mm x 94mm (449ml) vs 73mm x 76mm (318ml) is 40% more volume

72mm filter vs 62mm

I'd say that's quite a bit. It's also 50% more expensive.

But from what I have read and seen, there's no doubt it is a better lens optically. Whether the extra width is more important than extra length depends on shooting style and what other lenses are available.

Anyway, it looks like the original poster is pretty much decided.

[timb64]

488g vs 405g is 20% heavier

78mm x 94mm (449ml) vs 73mm x 76mm (318ml) is 40% more volume

72mm filter vs 62mm

I'd say that's quite a bit. It's also 50% more expensive.

But from what I have read and seen, there's no doubt it is a better lens optically. Whether the extra width is more important than extra length depends on shooting style and what other lenses are available.

Anyway, it looks like the original poster is pretty much decided.

Some perspective.Whilst a figure of 20% sounds significant,80g odd weight difference equates to about two small chocolate bars!

On the one hand (Post #28) you mention that your kit "always manages to fill my bag and weigh about the carry-on limit."...and the next you're quibbling over the extra weight of a small orange!

The OP has, and is considering taking,their own 18-250 which sits mid way between the16-85 and 18-135 in size and weight,so again the very small increase would barely be noticeable.

The OP didn't seem phased by the price differential.

[UncleVanya]

Whatever is decided by the OP I think it will be a fun and interesting trip so I hope to see photos from it.

[Jonathan Mac]

I always struggle with what to take on trips so it's good to get other opinions and points of view.

[Nayu]

@Sandy Hancock and @MaineNative:
After looking at the FOV comparison for the ultrawide shootout then looking at more pictures taken with ultrawide lenses, I see the difference for sure. Interiors and indoors shooting (forgot about this) would be my use case for ultrawide lenses.

@Jonathan Mac:
I’m a pixel peeper, so you’re right that I’d probably regret not bringing something better than a kit lens. Even if I’m only going to post scaled down versions, I do spend a lot of time staring at details while post processing.

Also, you mentioned that you rarely used your 120 mm. What *did* require the 120mm?

@pakinjapan:
Japan:
Thanks for helping me plan out a day or two of my trip . I’ll keep all of that in mind when working on the schedule for my trip. I am also not a fan of summer – hot and humid weather is the bane of my existence.
Singapore:
I’ll make sure to check on the farm burning.


This is my plan with my current gear:

1. DA 18-250 as the daytime general-purpose lens + wide angle
2. D-FA 24-70 as the low light general-purpose lens + weather resistance
3. DA 35 because I’ll probably miss it if I don’t have it

A variation for this setup would be the DA 18-55 WR as the lightweight WR lens if the D-FA 24-70 is too heavy, in which case the DA 35 would become the low light lens.

If I have some extra money () then I’ll get the DA 16-85 to replace the 18-250. At that point, I might as well remove the 24-70 since it’s a subset of the 16-85 and the 16-85 seems to be pretty good in terms of IQ already.

The DA 15 and especially the DA 21 are interesting -- I'll keep looking into them. I’ll be testing the DA 18-55, DA 18-250, and D-FA 24-70 some more while keeping in mind my goal of using them in Asia to see if I’d be willing to give up 18-24 mm to use my D-FA 24-70 or if the 70-250mm range of the DA 18-250 is necessary for me. I guess I could also fix this problem by getting a K-1 ii, in which case my only choice would be the D-FA 24-70

A few side questions:
• My DA 18-55 WR is wobbly (got it used for $40 off eBay a while back because I didn't have a WR lens). When I change focus ring directions, I can see the image shift through my viewfinder. Does it sound like WR is compromised? IQ is most likely affected right?
• My DA 18-250 feels a little “sandy” when I zoom in and out. Is there any way to get whatever’s in there out?

Thanks again everyone.

[UncleVanya]

This is my plan with my current gear:

1. DA 18-250 as the daytime general-purpose lens + wide angle
2. D-FA 24-70 as the low light general-purpose lens + weather resistance
3. DA 35 because I’ll probably miss it if I don’t have it

A few side questions:
• My DA 18-55 WR is wobbly (got it used for $40 off eBay a while back because I didn't have a WR lens). When I change focus ring directions, I can see the image shift through my viewfinder. Does it sound like WR is compromised? IQ is most likely affected right?
• My DA 18-250 feels a little “sandy” when I zoom in and out. Is there any way to get whatever’s in there out?

Seems a bit heavier than originally conceived of. I would put it in the bag you plan to take and walk around for a day or two in your town when you think you have your kit choices nailed down. Then if it is too heavy adjust. I suggest you try a lighter loaded bag even if it doesn't seem to heavy and see which one you prefer carrying. In a city I do like having a longer lens but I would consider a 1" superzoom like a Panasonic to augment my DSLR for that. Then I would carry just the 50, 35, and 18-55 WR... (using your gear not mine).

However since you mention the issues with your 18-55 - that does sound like something is wrong. The 18-250 may need a CLA or a DIY attempt at it if you feel up to it. If you have to replace the 18-55 WR you might try to find an 18-50 WR or an 18-135 or 16-85 on a deal.

[Sandy Hancock]

Carrying two overlapping zooms seems crazy to me. The DFA24-70 will get you most places, with better IQ and weather sealing. I doubt you'd miss the extra half stop of the DA35/2.4

24 is wide-ish on crop, but the DA15 still looks like something in your near future.

How much shooting do you do at the telephoto end? A second hand DA55-300 would serve you much better than any of your current options. Especially the HD WR version.

[MaineNative]

I have the DA 21 and love it. The IQ is good and the color is great. I usually take it on travel because it is small. I always take it in my bag for landscape shots. However, I would not use it for a walk-around lens because the FOV is so large that something interesting in the middle of your shot will be really small in you final picture. That is why I would go for a 35 for the walk-around. (I also use the 21 mm for stitching panoramas.)