A set of lenses for around the world travel.

[Rocky]

I have been travelling to every continent with the following setup:
40D (20D replacement), 17-40mm, 28-135 IS (35-135 replacement), 17-55  IS kit lens, 8X25 binocular, SD870 IS,  lens hood, filters etc. All fit in a Nove 3 (AW) bag. 17-40 is my main lens. 17-55 is for low light in museum. 28-135 is for just in case I need a long lens. The binocular is an indespensable tool for shows, interior of old churches or temple, distant subjects,  etc.

[neuroanatomist]

40D (20D replacement), 17-40mm, 17-55 IS kit lens...  17-40 is my main lens. 17-55 is for low light in museum.

I would not recommend carrying both the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and the 17-40mm f/4L. I don't even understand why?  On a crop body, the 17-55mm is better in every way - sharper, faster, longer tele end, has IS.  The sole advantage of the 17-40mm is weather sealing, but that only matters with a sealed body, which the 40D isn't.

But...maybe you meant the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS kit lens?

[ghosh9691]

I just came back from a trip to India and now I am on another trip to Florida with my family. All I have is my 5D Mk II coupled with the 24-105mm f/4L and the 50mm f/1.4. I have found that at least with my style of photography, I have not needed any other lens. The 24-105 works well during the day and and night in well lit areas. When the light drops, out comes the 50mm and coupled with bi-pedal zoom, I have not really needed another focal length at night :-).

My point is that for travel, I prefer traveling light - not too much gear makes photography interesting :-). I am not that great a photographer, so take my advice with a pinch of salt...

My Flickr stream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/prabalghoshphotography/

[briansquibb]

I would not recommend carrying both the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and the 17-40mm f/4L.

+1 there would be no benefit in taking these 2

[katwil]

katwil do you have any example shots from the 18-270 (at the extremes that aren't great)? I'm curious as to how bad is bad.
also interesting that you own and had L glass and chose for that tamron indtead.

cheers

Well, I've attempted to add a couple samples, but the file sizes are too large to add as attachments.  To be more specific about the issues with the Tamron, I'll state that autofocus is a substantial issue around 250 - 270 mm, and the quality of shots with low lighting leaves much to be desired.

As far as the Tamron vs. L glass: I had hoped to do more with my 24-105L, but on a crop body that's 38 mm on the low end.  What's the point of taking a picture of the Great Pyramid with the top cut off?

I tend to take about 100-120 pictures a day on vacation, then cull about 80% of those out and use Lightroom 3 to post-process the rest.  Some things, like focus, can't be adjusted, but many things can.

As I stated in my original post, with the 5D II, the 24-105L works fine.  The 70-200L f/4 IS is not too heavy to drag around with it.  I'd probably throw in my 50 mm f1.4 for low light.

Hope this helps.

[razorite]

hey i dont have an answer to your original question but i want to tell you that that 8-16 works on a 5d its just that at the wider focal lengths i.e 8mm you will get a thick black frame around the image, but for the most part it works

[Rocky]

40D (20D replacement), 17-40mm, 17-55 IS kit lens...  17-40 is my main lens. 17-55 is for low light in museum.

I would not recommend carrying both the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and the 17-40mm f/4L. I don't even understand why?  On a crop body, the 17-55mm is better in every way - sharper, faster, longer tele end, has IS.  The sole advantage of the 17-40mm is weather sealing, but that only matters with a sealed body, which the 40D isn't.

But...maybe you meant the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS kit lens?

Neuro, You are abolutely right. My typo. What I really mean is the Cheap and Very Light 18-55,f 3.5 t0 5.6 kit lens. Since my 17-40 does not have IS so the kit lens become very useful inside the museum. I did not buy the 17-40 for weather proof. I bought it for the focal length that I would use the most. It was bought with the 20D before the 17-55mm f 2.8 exists. Thanks for pointing out my mistake. For someone starting out fresh. definitely the 17-55mm f 2.8 is a better choice than the 17-40 f4.

[Halfrack]

Start with thinking about how safe you'll be in your travels, and how much 'pain' you'd have to loose your new toys.  Before you jump to FF, consider what impact you'd have to replace the 70-200 - if you take a 5DII or wait for a 5DIII it will find every possible issue with your existing glass.  Reconsider on the 7D.

I'd carry a wide (17-55/2.8 or 17-40/4), 50/1.4, and (70-200/2.8 or 70-300L)

[RayS2121]

Lot of good suggestions here... so I will not add to the equipment suggestions... but I will add one thing I've come to realize from recent travel in Asia. There are times you just wish you have a photographic instrument that doesn't announce itself. I had a long white zoom hanging off a pro body and it is rather intrusive.  So, after the first day I switched to an older, much smaller crop body with an almost pancake like EF24 f/2.8. It was close to normal range on the crop sensor and I just zoomed with my feet when needed. Much easier traversing the crowds, the shoppers and capturing candid moments.

I realized just in time that nothing says tourist with a long barrel on your shooter and moments are less candid when your camera itself is a subject in the scene. Have a great trip wherever you are headed:)

P.S. What I really would have liked is a Leica M9...but alas I was told I have no more kidneys left to sell for equipment

[00Q]

Thanks everyone for their replies. Lots of different suggestions. I have summed up what my current plan is based on everyone's suggestions so far:

I'll keep the 450D as it is pretty cheap and I wont get much money for it. For the lenses:

I will keep my:

Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 OS
Sigma 8-16mm f/4.5-5.6

Buy back:
Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 L ( MkI, I assume I wont be able to get the MkII version in Febuary )
Canon 50mm f/1.4

and add a x2 extender in there for wildlife. Yes, I will be shooting everything from landscape, to wildlife to portraits. ( Im going across central and s america for the 3rd time! but first time as a photographer)

And If I have the extra cash I will bite the bullet and get the 5D MkII. This way I will have a back up 450D. Will add in there a netbook and external harddrive.

I see myself burning a hole in my credit card. Ouch! 

[EchoLocation]

I spent last year backpacking around Asia. i'm in alright shape and 30 and I can tell you that the gear you are talking about is going to be VERY heavy to backpack with unless you are literally bringing nothing else. I had a T2i and a 24-105, along with the 18-55(i bought the 24-105 halfway through the trip in HK.) The 24mm was simply not wide enough for me on the crop body. I later bought the 10-22 but then sold it and my T2i for a 5DC. now i'm living in china. I have a 5D, the 24-105 and a 50 1.4 Sigma. I think this is a pretty good combo. I'd like to have a 70-200 2.8 II, but it's too big and heavy for me to lug around the world.  I had a netbook with me, and it sucked for viewing pictures and was worthless for editing. I'd suggest 2 hard drives of 1TB minimum. Ideal would be a 13" Macbook Pro, a 5DII, 24-70 2.8 and one other lens of your choice, with a flash(i have the 270ex and rarely use it.) This is extremely heavy already and is a lot of gear to worry about on long bus rides, train rides, etc. I'm struggling with this situation myself now and can't decide exactly which way to go. Thinking of swapping the 24-105 for the 24-70, but i'm waiting for a replacement to come out...... I really want a 17-40 II as well, so we will see, I had a copy of it, but it just wasn't sharp at all.
Good Luck

[Kane]

I've been on a trip for the past couple of weeks and was conflicted about what camera set up I wanted to bring. I really wanted an M9 and a 50 f2 but couldn't pull the trigger. I also considered a 5d mark ii because I have L lenses already and the price is great right now but ended up leaving with just my 7d, 50 1.2 and 24-70. With this combo I've been able to do everything I wanted. The only problem is weight. With two lenses I always have the dead weight of the second lens so I usually pick one and leave the other at the hotel. Also it is heavy carrying that camera around all day (especially at the great wall) so the M9 dream stays alive.

[willrobb]

If I were to travel the world for 6 months, I think I would sell everything and buy a 5DII + 24-105L kit and add a 50mm f/1.4 for low light work. Paired with decent glass, FF is the way to go if you want the best possible IQ to capture those priceless moments.

One important thing you should consider is the storage of your photos, especially if you are shooting RAW. You should see that your laptop has a big enough hard drive with enough empty space to hold all those photos you will take for 6 months. You can also store them in an external drive of course.

I would take ONE MORE external drive as backup, which is probably more important than having an extra lens. You could eventually also store them with online services or on your website but whatever you do, you have to have a backup!!!!

Last but not least, I would replace the tripod with a carbon version which would be much lighter for travel.

Don't forget to enjoy your time and try to also watch the world only with your eyes, not always through the viewfinder

Have fun!

+1

Some very good advice here, especially regarding the back up drive. For 6 months you will be needing a lot of memory.

I think the full frame option will be great for your travels as well, the 5DmkII would be great, but the 5D classic would also be an option. I used it for a lot of travel work and loved it.

With the FF body you'dhave to get rid of your current UW Sigma, but if you kept your 70-200 Sigma, got back a 24-70 and got the other wide Sigma suggested above you'd have all your travel photo bases covered.

[Caps18]

I would take the 5Dm2 and the 24-70mm (with flash & tripod) if you want to go light.

The problem with these Cameras is that most of the weight I carry is camera gear and not food, water, or tent/sleeping bag.

I carry the 5Dm2 with 16-35, and an 85mm, which is also a good combination along with a carbon fiber tripod that is a little too big...
But I have a 300 f/4 & 1.4x for wildlife that works well.  I would take it if I were biking around the world, but not on hikes.

[bobthebrick]

+1 for the 5d classic. Great camera, not quite as good in ISO performance as the mk ii, but still miles better than your 450d, and still capaable of taking AMAZING images. That way, you save money for glass and an external hdd (VERY important), and won't have buyers remorse when the mk iii comes out. Plus you'll have the cash to upgrade

For lenses, you seem to be pretty sorted. I'd take the:
Canon 24-70L
Canon 50 1.4
Sigma 70-200 OS
are probably the best choices for you. If it was me, I'd replace the 50 with a nice macro lens and add the 16-35L, as I take a ridiculous amount of wide landscape shots, and love all the interesting flowers and assorted stuff you find overseas.

For an external hdd, you probably want at least 500gb, and it needs to be USB powered. The Acer 640GB portable one is good and cheap.

Lastly, I'd take a couple of large memory cards, and two or three batteries. I'd replace the tripod for the trip with a Kathmandu travel tripod. A ripoff if it's not on sale, it's really lightweight and compact, but it isn't the sturdiest of beasts, and I'm yet to try it with a 5d. A monopod could also be useful; you'd take it more places, but you wouldn't be able to have the really long exposures, which is probably pretty important.

Anyway, that's my two cents (or maybe buck fifty by the time this post is finished). Listen to everyone's opinions, and remember you're buying gear for yourself, not all of us. It needs to be the right weight, focal lengths, blahdy bladhy blah for YOUR style of shooting.

Have a great trip, and belated Merry Christmas