Bryan Carter Vyhmeister
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 5:00 PM
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
-
Bryan,
I was fortunate to have used all three Limited lenses at Grandfather
Mountain. My usual carry around lenses include the 77, 50, 24, and 135.
The Limited lenses are a beauty to use and provide an excellent rendition of
the scene.
Whenever I am touring I find the 24 to be my most used lens along with the
77. Before I got it my 28 was used quite often. So, I can see how using a
31 and a 77 would fit well in a lens package. The 43 would allow the normal
view so you could forego a 50mm. The faster apertures works well for me
since I don't often use a flash.
I would think that the 31 would work well with getting wide archaeological
shots. Along those lines the 77 or a 100 would be nice to have for close up
shots of details. I have worked on a few digs and have visited many 'ruin'
sites and feel the normal fov would be used more so when taking shots of
people.
Whenever I travel I tend to have a camera over each shoulder with different
speed film. The two most used lenses are on them and I find that I have
gotten quite good at changing out lenses. For this reason I do not have a
need for a zoom lens and also the fact that as fast as my glass is the
comparable zooms would be more than I wish to spend for as little use as I
would give them. I usually shoot 100 speed film.
Just my experience,
Cesar
Panama City, Florida
P.S. Usually in my bag are a couple of spare cameras too.
-
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 .
