Bryan - my own recent experience was as follows: I had one week in a new place (had been there before, but not as a tourist). Including a wedding and associated gatherings of people. I anticipated city scenes, museums, etc.; little countryside landscape. (If it matters, I was in LA, South Bay area.)
I took my MZ-S plus 28-105 4-5.6 power zoom and a small bag full of primes: 20 /4.0, 24/2.0, 30 /2.8, and 50 /2.8 Macro. I also had a "new" Spotmatic SPII with 55 /1.8 I wanted to play with. The only times I wanted to use the zoom, it was too dark to use it. In retrospect, I shoulda left the 20mm and the zoom home, taken instead an 85 and a 135. Or a 100. The 50mm was a hard call. I am inclined to take my /1.4 for use in lower light situations, but I wanted some macro capability along and didn't want to double up on focal lengths. I could have gone with a 100 macro, but my A/2.8 is a bit bulky and too dear, I sold my 100 /4 . . . so I used my 24 /2.0 for low light. Throughout, the 30mm was the most used. The 24mm was a close second - it has the advantage of auto focus which is good if you are holding a camera overhead pointed in the general direction of a raucous dance floor. Stan > From: Bryan Carter Vyhmeister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2002 13:59:53 -0700 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: For Travel, Limiteds Limiting? > > I am going to Turkey for a "Middle East Study Tour" having to do with > archaeology in August. I am taking my MZ-S with BG-10 and possibly a > second MZ-S with BG-10 (depending on finances). I am wondering if taking > the 31mm f/1.8 Limited, 43mm f/1.9 Limited, and 77mm f/1.8 Limited prime > lenses would be adequate for most situations. (I will most likely also > take a 200mm or 80-200mm or something of that sort and maybe the A 15mm > f/3.5.) > > I am wondering about experience of people traveling with prime lenses > versus zoom lenses. I have no intention of starting the zoom versus > prime debate. I like zooms and primes both so that is not the issue. I > know that zoom lenses are more convenient but slower. I have the 24-90mm > f/3.5-4.5 zoom lens but it seems a little slow for taking ISO 100 films > in lower light. The question is strictly about adequate focal lengths! > > Because this is a tour and not a photographic trip I realize that I may > not have the time I would really like to get the picture just the way I > envision it. I would appreciate comments from people who have traveled > with primes. > > I suppose while I am at it, if any of you feel the urge to comment on > what equipment you take on trips, that would be most appreciated. Most > travel lists give suggestions of 24mm or 28mm, 50mm, 85mm or 105mm, and > 80-200mm or 200mm. I am also interested in comments about what you > would take as far as accessories. I will be taking the AF-360FGZ with > off-camera cord. Basically, what's in your bag? Thank you for your time. > > Bryan > - > This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, > go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to > visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
