Peter, The focal range you mention works out well. The 135 would probably not get used as much, in my opinion. I tend to carry the longer focal lengths but find their use is minimal in my case.
I would rather use the faster primes over the zoom. This way you still have the ability to close the lens down and not be forced to shoot it wide open if the lighting gets poor. I can see the use for flash especially in the interiors. But then again with the zoom you would again be shooting wide open. So this again shows my preference for prime lenses. I really do not see a need for a winder. Mine gets used very little as a matter of fact. It is also less obtrusive without the winder. Experience-wise I have used a similar kit when travelling abroad to visit new places or an archaeological dig or two. My two cents, Cesar Panama City, Florida -----Original Message----- From: Peter Smekal Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2002 11:21 AM Let's suppose you were preparing for an anthropological field trip to Greece. Besides observations and interviews you'd also like to do some photo-documentation (people, houses, interiors, decorations, landscapes) but travel really light at the same time. You're taking an LX and a tripod. The question is what lenses would you take. 1) a "classic" set of old primes (24/2.8; 50/ 1.4 M; 85/2.0 M and maybe 135/3.5 M) or 2) the one zoom you own (35-105/3.5 A) or 3) some other combination from the previous? Flash or winder? Peter Smekal Uppsala, Sweden [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - 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 .
