Enjoy! Looking forward to seeing the snaps.
> On 19 Jan 2020, at 09:20, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
>
> https://youtu.be/qya4yJ4UjRk
>
> Sailing on our Caribbean cruise today. My camera kit for this trip is an
> iPhone 8 Plus, a couple of Moment accessory lenses, a Polaroid SX-70, and a
> Peak
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Bruce Dayton
Sent: 08 September, 2007 6:02 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Travel Kit Digital
Hmmm...not having been to Europe, but have talked to several
photographers who have, wide
A wide is definitely good ... The DA21 took approximately half of the
photos I made last year, with the remainder about evenly split
between the 35 and 77.
Godfrey
On Sep 8, 2007, at 9:02 AM, Bruce Dayton wrote:
Hmmm...not having been to Europe, but have talked to several
photographers
Combination 4. looks best to me. You'll be a bit limited if you want
to take available light interior shots, so you'll probably need some
sort of camera support.
--
Bob
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Charles Wilson
Sent: 08
I have one recommendation. Think wider.
On my recent Canada/USA holiday I visited many locations, indoors
out, that could have done with a wider FL. As a result I took an
obscene number of hand held pano sequences for stitching.
I took with me the FA 50 f1.4, FA 77Ltd., FA 31mm Ltd, F 1.7x AF
On Sat, 8 Sep 2007 17:13:33 +0800, David Savage wrote
I have one recommendation. Think wider.
On my recent Canada/USA holiday I visited many locations, indoors
out, that could have done with a wider FL. As a result I took an
obscene number of hand held pano sequences for stitching.
I
6 Weeks? Gotta take a laptop and download/backup pictures.
Regards, Bob S.
On 9/8/07, Charles Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear All,
Next year I will be travelling around Europe and England for 6 Weeks. I was
wondering if any one has any suggestions regarding travel kits to take for
my
On 9/8/07, Bob Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
6 Weeks? Gotta take a laptop and download/backup pictures.
Spending a bit more, but saving weight, you should be able to just
get shops to copy them to CD or DVD. Being paranoid and in Asia,
I always have two copies made at two different shops
Definitely the 16-45. You'll need the wide end. I just came back from
6 weeks abroad, and I shot 95% of my shots with the 20-35. I would
personally lean toward the second kit so I would have some faster
lenses but the 70 is so small why not take it too? If you think speed
is not an issue, go
On Sep 8, 2007, at 1:27 AM, Charles Wilson wrote:
Next year I will be travelling around Europe and England for 6
Weeks. I was
wondering if any one has any suggestions regarding travel kits to
take for
my ist D. I would like it to be light.
I have thought about the following
Hmmm...not having been to Europe, but have talked to several
photographers who have, wide is much more important than long there.
So your first kit doesn't seem to have enough wide IMO. If you were
to change it to 14/2.8 or 21/3.2 instead of the 24, that might be
worth considering.
How about the
To echo other comments you've received, wider is better for such a trip.
The 14mm is bulky and relatively heavy but worth its weight many times.
So, alternate kits:
1. DA14 , DA21 , FA43 , DA70 or FA77
2. DA14 , DA16-45 or DA*16-50 , DA21 , DA70 or FA77
3. DA12-24 , DA40 or FA43 ,
Depends alot on what you photograph.
# 3 would be my choice, based solely on the range covered among the choices
you listed.
Kenneth Waller
http://tinyurl.com/272u2f
- Original Message -
From: Charles Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pdml@pdml.net
Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2007 4:27
On Sep 8, 2007, at 8:13 PM, Charles Wilson wrote:
After listening to everyone's advice I am leaning this way for my
travel
kit. Remember I want it to be light.
DA14/2.8 Tamron XR-DI 28-75/2.8 FA43 Pentax 1.7 Teleconverter
Two heavy, largish lenses. One lightweight fast lens.
DA14
Thanks to all for your responses.
Wow! If a little question like mine can stir up
emotions imagine what a bigger question or a statement
claiming something or another can do?
Anyway, the lenses I mentioned are exactly what I own
and what I will be bringing. I will be home-based for
my trip so
Okay it's just nonsense. The writer of the original message had asked if
we thought his lens selection was correct FOR HIM. Like most of us, he
probably can't afford the ultra fast glass. Those are the lenses he
owns. His choice was correct. They are not too slow to produce great pictures.
Bob
Steve Desjardins wrote:
It's certainly not nonsense to prefer faster lenses, however.
Of course it's not. I prefer them as well. In fact, everyone prefers
them, unless they're brain dead. However, it was nonsense to tell the
questioner that his lenses were too slow.
Paul Stenquist
Hi,
speaking for myself, I would not bother with the zoom. The primes
other than the 50 are too slow, although the focal lengths are good. I
would also have a non-macro 100mm or 85mm as well as, or instead of,
the macro because macro lenses take a long time to turn through the
full focus range.
In reference to a travel kit that includes:
28mm f/3.5
50mm f/1.4
105mm f/2.8 macro
200mm f/4
Bob Walkden wrote:
The primes other than the 50 are too slow, although the focal lengths aregood.
Pretentious nonsense. For the majority of situations, these lenses are
fast enough. Most
On 25 Oct 2002 at 20:26, Paul Stenquist wrote:
Pretentious nonsense. For the majority of situations, these lenses are
fast enough. Most of us can't afford ultra-fast glass. In any case, how
often does one shoot in extremely low light with a 200? And the SMC
200/4 is an excellent lens. When
I would also have a non-macro 100mm or 85mm as well as, or instead
of, the macro because macro lenses take a long time to turn
through the full focus range.
...and most macros don't have as nice bokeh as do regular primes.
Fred
...and most macros don't have as nice bokeh as do regular primes.
My FA100/2.8 seems ok.
regards,
Alan Chan
_
Internet access plans that fit your lifestyle -- join MSN.
http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/default.asp
But Fred, the FA100/2.8 macro has quite nice bokeh:
True.
Its problem is its weight.
Also true.
Btw, although I do not have one, I think the Tamron 90/2.8 macro has lovely
bokeh, too.
Sigma and Tokina's macro's do not have particularly nice bokeh from what
I've seen.
The Tamron 90 is a
On Thursday, October 24, 2002, at 11:23 AM, Francis Alviar wrote:
Would you be happy with the following lenses for a
travel kit?
4 are primes and 1 is a zoom
28mm f/3.5
50mm f/1.4
105mm f/2.8 macro
200mm f/4
45-125mm f/4
Couple that with 2 bodies.
Any lens you would leave home? Any
I'd leave the zoom at home (too heavy, not so useful focal range, and
despite the fact that it's said to be very good lens, it's a zoom and you've
got all the focal lenghts you really need in the primes you list), and would
put the 50mm on one body and the 105mm on the other. Hope this sentence is
-Original Message-
From: Francis Alviar [mailto:alviar629030;yahoo.com]
Would you be happy with the following lenses for a
travel kit?
4 are primes and 1 is a zoom
28mm f/3.5
50mm f/1.4
105mm f/2.8 macro
200mm f/4
45-125mm f/4
Couple that with 2 bodies.
Any lens you
No problem at all... Although, I would leave the zoom behind. I have one and
like it, but it is too long to fit my travel kit.
Bob
- Original Message -
From: Francis Alviar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Travel Kit
Would you be happy with the following lenses for a
travel kit?
4 are
If there will be plenty of time to switch lenses, I'd leave the zoom at
home. Otherwise, take the zoom and leave the 50 100. I would carry as few
equipments as I could.
regards,
Alan Chan
Would you be happy with the following lenses for a
travel kit?
4 are primes and 1 is a zoom
28mm f/3.5
28 matches
Mail list logo
