[Maishy]

Hi all

I am the proud owner of a K3 (which is a great camera) but I am in a bit of a quandry about which gear to take on an upcoming trip to Europe.

Basically the itinerary is this

Fly into Paris from Australia and spend 5 days in paris, then fly to Bergen in Norway for a couple of days then onto a cruise ship which takes us to London via the Arctic circle, Shetland, the Orkneys, Edinburgh then London. Then a few days in London then a smal group coach tour through the UK to Edinburgh. A few days in Edinburgh to do the Tattoo and then of to Liverpool to visit friends for a couple of days.
Then its on the Dusseldorf visiting another friend for a few days, taking in Trier, Munster then back to Paris by rail for about 10 days.

I am thinking of taking the following:
My K3 (obviously)
My 18-55 WR lens
My nifty 50MM prime
I am 2 minds about taking my Sigma 70-300. On a trip to Japan last year I took my 18-55 and my Sigma 18-200. The larger lens hardly got used.
I am also thinking of taking my Manfrotto Monopod which I have used in the past as walking support a couple of months following my knee replacement when we visited Kakadu National Park in the Northern Territory.

I dont want to be too overwhelmed by gear. Should I just take the Camera and the 18-55 and the 50mm prime.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated. I was thinking of taking the 70-300 to take advantage of any opportunity that might crop up in the Fiorjds in Norway.

As I said any held gratefully accepted.

[Snafu711]

Hello Maishy,

your itinerary contains a huge variety of potential pictures, from large buildings to landscapes to distant scenes/details/animals.

For me this calls for a broad range of focal lengths, from quite wide to serious tele. One could even see this trip as a good reason to buy an additional lens ... .

So bringing the 18-55 plus the 70-300 would be a no-brainer for me. Or, if taking pictures is not that important on this trip and you want to go light, only the 18-200. On my last (river) cruise I took a lot of pictures with my tele lens, that‘s why I suggest you do not leave it at home. YMMV, though.

Alex

[Maishy]

Hello Maishy,

your itinerary contains a huge variety of potential pictures, from large buildings to landscapes to distant scenes/details/animals.

For me this calls for a broad range of focal lengths, from quite wide to serious tele. One could even see this trip as a good reason to buy an additional lens ... .

So bringing the 18-55 plus the 70-300 would be a no-brainer for me. Or, if taking pictures is not that important on this trip and you want to go light, only the 18-200. On my last (river) cruise I took a lot of pictures with my tele lens, that‘s why I suggest you do not leave it at home. YMMV, though.

Alex

Thanks for that. I am definitely leaning towards taking the longer zoom

[ffking]

I always work on the basis that a small amount of extra weight is less likely to be a long term annoyance than not being able to take a shot I want -within limits - so I'd definitely take the telezoom

[Maishy]

I always work on the basis that a small amount of extra weight is less likely to be a long term annoyance than not being able to take a shot I want -within limits - so I'd definitely take the telezoom

Thanks for that

[johnha]

I'd probably take the 70-300. Mine is a bit soft after 200mm but it's a compact and fairly light Tele with good range (you may not need the full length with the K-3).

I'd definitely take something longer than the short zoom, if not the Sigma then a manual prime somewhere between 135, 150 or 200 - or perhaps a 70-150 or 80-200 M zooms (but the Sigma covers these very well).

[Jonathan Mac]

If it were me, I'd want either a high quality fast zoom such as a 17-50mm f/2.8 (both Sigma and Tamron versions are very good) or a set of high quality primes (like the 21mm, 35mm and 70mm DA limiteds).

As for something longer, swap the 18-55mm for an 18-135mm WR and that way you've got longer focal lengths covered and a better WR lens to boot.

Of course, if you don't have any of these then it would require buying them and you may not want to spend money.

As for a 70-300mm, I used to have the DA 55-300mm and it went on only two trips. While it was handy occasionally, it didn't get enough use to justify the weight and space so it stayed behind after that and I eventually sold it due to lack of use. I bought a WR 50-200 and even though it's optically not as good, it's much smaller and lighter (cheaper too) so it's easier to pack and if I don't use it much then it doesn't bother me.

[roberrl]

As I read this post I'm on a ship cruising the coast of Norway. I've used my 55-300 pretty often to pick out details on shore as we pass. So far it's had as much use as my 18-55. YMMV

[Igor123]

Something not mentioned yet is that since you'll be going to a lot of cities too, here in Europe the most interesting older parts have very narrow streets and everything is crammed into a small area, so looking at focal lengths you seem to have the upper bit covered ok, but if possible I'd get something wider than 18mm too (also great for landscapes in Norway etc).

(You wont be going to Venice, and perhaps that's an extreme example, but my 12-24 barely left my camera while there, and a lot of the pics were closer to 12 than 24...)

[aslyfox]

how good are you at hitting a single focus point ?

What would be your targets ( ? ) birds, marine life, seals ???

I have found that, within limits, cropping into a photo taken by a good lens can compensate for the lack of focal length.

however, if I was making the trip, I would take the telephoto as well as the other lenses you mentioned: 18-55 WR lens and 50MM prime

I would also be seeing if I could pick up a wider lens, perhaps an " experienced " SMC Pentax-DA 15mm F4 ED AL Limited

[ warning, once you get one limited, you may want more ]

have fun on your trip

[victormeldrew]

GRIII, wallet, passport. No need for a bag.

[sbh]

What kind of images are you mostly interested in? If you think about your trip, what do you see?

[Maishy]

I'd probably take the 70-300. Mine is a bit soft after 200mm but it's a compact and fairly light Tele with good range (you may not need the full length with the K-3).

I'd definitely take something longer than the short zoom, if not the Sigma then a manual prime somewhere between 135, 150 or 200 - or perhaps a 70-150 or 80-200 M zooms (but the Sigma covers these very well).

thanks

---------- Post added 05-15-2019 at 02:09 PM ----------

how good are you at hitting a single focus point ?

What would be your targets ( ? ) birds, marine life, seals ???

I have found that, within limits, cropping into a photo taken by a good lens can compensate for the lack of focal length.

however, if I was making the trip, I would take the telephoto as well as the other lenses you mentioned: 18-55 WR lens and 50MM prime

I would also be seeing if I could pick up a wider lens, perhaps an " experienced " SMC Pentax-DA 15mm F4 ED AL Limited

[ warning, once you get one limited, you may want more ]

have fun on your trip

Thanks

---------- Post added 05-15-2019 at 02:10 PM ----------

As I read this post I'm on a ship cruising the coast of Norway. I've used my 55-300 pretty often to pick out details on shore as we pass. So far it's had as much use as my 18-55. YMMV

thanks

---------- Post added 05-15-2019 at 02:11 PM ----------

Something not mentioned yet is that since you'll be going to a lot of cities too, here in Europe the most interesting older parts have very narrow streets and everything is crammed into a small area, so looking at focal lengths you seem to have the upper bit covered ok, but if possible I'd get something wider than 18mm too (also great for landscapes in Norway etc).

(You wont be going to Venice, and perhaps that's an extreme example, but my 12-24 barely left my camera while there, and a lot of the pics were closer to 12 than 24...)

thanks

[Sandy Hancock]

As far a fjords go, I recently went through Milford Sound on a cruise ship, and didn't use anything longer than my DFA28-105 (on the KP). I also packed my 55-300, but I only used it for the theatrical shows on the ship, in which my daughter was performing.

Like Igor123, something considerably wider than 18mm would be a much higher priority - I took the DFA15-30 for the K-1, but there are several excellent options for crop cameras - the DA15 and even the DA10-17 fisheye take up very little room.

[Maishy]

As far a fjords go, I recently went through Milford Sound on a cruise ship, and didn't use anything longer than my DFA28-105 (on the KP). I also packed my 55-300, but I only used it for the theatrical shows on the ship, in which my daughter was performing.

Like Igor123, something considerably wider than 18mm would be a much higher priority - I took the DFA15-30 for the K-1, but there are several excellent options for crop cameras - the DA15 and even the DA10-17 fisheye take up very little room.

Thanks