Best lens for a vacation -- can only choose one

[neuroanatomist]

i would go for the 18-135 f4-5.6 is stm

For the OP, that would be just a good as taking a Nikon lens for his 5DIII.

 

[sanj]

To my mind, this is not a question of the best lens but of the best camera. If you are not going to change lenses and want a general purpose lens, then don't take a DSLR but take a Powershot with the appropriate zoom. I travel now with the G3 X, which gives 24-600mm. The quality is superb all the way through.

+1 I think this is the best advice. Since serious photography is not the intention of the trip, the IQ of full frame DSLR is not required. The G3x or similar will fit the bill perfectly. IMHO.

 

[TK]

For me it would be the 35mm.

If I have to shoot with only one lens it would be a fast 35mm lens. I own the 5D3 + 35mm f2 IS combo. It's not weather-sealed but IQ is great, it's fast and the IS is very helpful when needed.

This is my most used combo at the moment (for both work and play...)

 

[privatebydesign]

I have travelled extensively with a 1Ds MkIII and a 24-70, I am currently traveling Central America and don't have my go to lens, I brought the 35 f2.0 IS instead and am loving it. I am getting shots with the IS prime I couldn't get with the zoom (obviously that works both ways so is entirely dependent on how and what you shoot). If I want wider I just shoot two shots and will stitch, and whilst it might not be advertised as 'weattherproof', an entirely subjective and non standardized marketing speak, certainly I have used my 35 in very wet conditions and it is working flawlessly.

Whilst I'd happily buy a 1.4 L, at this point, Id far rather have the IS along with the smaller size and weight than the stop of speed and the loss of dof that would force on me. I am getting good shots handheld at 1/4 second, something I have never been able to do with a faster heavier lens.

Oh, and shooting a prime really forces you to think about your composition much more! After shooting the 24-70 for many years the differences in the strengths of the lenses is remarkable, it certainly adds an enjoyable twist to the photography.

 

[FTb-n]

Interesting that people would take an f/4 zoom. I can't see the lens as versatile or anything like that. Especailly in the 24 mm end, the f/4 is really difficult to use due to too much DOF. In fact, I would most likely not use the 24 mm end of such a zoom. I have the 24-105L and the 24 mm shots always end up disappointing me. Going out with a FF body and just a f/4 zoom sounds somewhat retarded to me. It gets dark in the evenings too doesn't it? But each to their own I suppose.

I would most like take a 35 mm prime as boring as it may sound. It is somewhat wide but still not so wide that people get too distorted near the corners.

I find it interesting that so many dismiss the 24-105.

For most of my shooting, I live above ISO 3200 with the 24-70 f2.8 and the 70-200 f2.8 -- most often wide open. I love these lenses for their focus response, sharp wide open IQ, and the subject separation that the shallow DOF offers. But, for my vacation shots, I tend to need more DOF. Many shots include my wife and kids who are not always the same distance from the sensor. The f4 gives me some additional DOF cushion for grab shots. My copy of this lens has never disappointing me. Looking at past photos taken at or near 24mm, it's tough for me to tell whether they were shot with the 24-105 or the 24-70 without pixel peeping or side-by-side comparisons. (Lightroom does a good job correcting for lens distortions). Yes, I know that I can stop the faster lens down to 4.0, but the extra reach and the IS makes the 24-105 more versatile for me. As for exposure speed, in most travel situations, the high ISO benefits of the 5D3 makes the f4.0 quite usable and the IS is an added plus if the subject allows for slow shutter speeds. I actually like a little controlled blur and this is where the 24-105 shines.

Incidentally, I echo the raves about the 35 f2.0 IS and often rely on this lens for slow shutter speed shots of "players on the move". But, I want more range when I travel.

A side note, I also have a G16 for times when I want to "travel light". But, more often than not, I still grab the 5D3/24-105 combo. I know this body much better and don't miss the shots that I sometimes miss with the G16. Plus, the FF sensor can be more forgiving and can give me more room to crop an image.

 

[sanj]

Interesting that people would take an f/4 zoom. I can't see the lens as versatile or anything like that. Especailly in the 24 mm end, the f/4 is really difficult to use due to too much DOF. In fact, I would most likely not use the 24 mm end of such a zoom. I have the 24-105L and the 24 mm shots always end up disappointing me. Going out with a FF body and just a f/4 zoom sounds somewhat retarded to me. It gets dark in the evenings too doesn't it? But each to their own I suppose.

I would most like take a 35 mm prime as boring as it may sound. It is somewhat wide but still not so wide that people get too distorted near the corners.

I find it interesting that so many dismiss the 24-105.

For most of my shooting, I live above ISO 3200 with the 24-70 f2.8 and the 70-200 f2.8 -- most often wide open. I love these lenses for their focus response, sharp wide open IQ, and the subject separation that the shallow DOF offers. But, for my vacation shots, I tend to need more DOF. Many shots include my wife and kids who are not always the same distance from the sensor. The f4 gives me some additional DOF cushion for grab shots. My copy of this lens has never disappointing me. Looking at past photos taken at or near 24mm, it's tough for me to tell whether they were shot with the 24-105 or the 24-70 without pixel peeping or side-by-side comparisons. (Lightroom does a good job correcting for lens distortions). Yes, I know that I can stop the faster lens down to 4.0, but the extra reach and the IS makes the 24-105 more versatile for me. As for exposure speed, in most travel situations, the high ISO benefits of the 5D3 makes the f4.0 quite usable and the IS is an added plus if the subject allows for slow shutter speeds. I actually like a little controlled blur and this is where the 24-105 shines.

Incidentally, I echo the raves about the 35 f2.0 IS and often rely on this lens for slow shutter speed shots of "players on the move". But, I want more range when I travel.

A side note, I also have a G16 for times when I want to "travel light". But, more often than not, I still grab the 5D3/24-105 combo. I know this body much better and don't miss the shots that I sometimes miss with the G16. Plus, the FF sensor can be more forgiving and can give me more room to crop an image.

24-105 is my favorite travel lens. That and 35f2 IS if I am traveling light. If I have more room then add 70-200 f4 or 2.8 depending upon how much low light tele shooting I intend.

 

[ahsanford]

Yep. I am a fan of the 35mm f/2 IS USM as an everyday low profile walkaround. I own the 28mm f/2.8 IS and love its small size but would love something quicker, so the 35 f/2 IS makes perfect sense.

But that's a 'when I get back' sort of lens. For this trip, as stated before, weather sealing is not optional.

So I am now waffling between:

• Rent a 35 F/1.4L II -- This or 28mm is probably my fav single FL for a prime. Can tackle environmental portraits, a good chunk of landscape vistas, general walkaround, etc.
  
  
  
• Rent a 24 f/1.4L II or possibly bring my 16-35 f/4L IS -- I'd go with this if I felt like there would be a higher percentage of landscape work. (TBD, we haven't made all of our plans yet.)
  
  
  
• Bring my 24-70 f/4L IS -- This is my fallback if nothing else lines up. I still would prefer this over the added stop and added sharpness of the 24-70 f/2.8L II as the macro mode is killer for trips. I'll use that mode 4-5 times in a week of shooting, but I always net a keeper with it.

Great thread, all. Very much appreciate your perspectives and insights.

- A

 

[andarx]

Whenever I decide to take a DSLR on vacation, I take 24-105mm. To me it's the most practical choice, it covers the basic needs. Sometimes 105mm is not enough, but that doesn't happen often.

 

[FramerMCB]

All,

I'm off on a vaca before too long and thought I'd forego the usual bag full of gear for a simpler setup. I plan to travel with only one lens on my camera.

But if you only had to choose one lens for your camera for a week long trip, what would it be? I'm game to rent, so let's keep everything on the table.

Personal Considerations:

1) I'll bring my trusty 5D3.

2) Generally, on vaca, I'll keep it to touristy endeavors -- I shoot landscapes, candids, and occasional architecture and macro. I am not a birder, and I have no desire to lug a long tele around where we'll be.

3) I usually have to stick and move to keep up with my significant other, so dedicated, composed work is usually not on the table. I may stash my travel Gitzo tripod / ball head / L plate and ND grads, but I haven't made up my mind yet. If I did, I'd probably only get 1-2 chances to use it all week.

4) My destination is off the grid & tropical. It's absolutely going to rain where we're going, so a weather sealed lens is a must.

5) I'd prefer a not carry a super showy piece of kit like an Otus or white L lens. I'm unlikely to shoot street where we're going, but still, I don't want to go waving a howitzer around.

6) I'd prefer an AF lens. Without a proper focusing screen option on the 5D3, I'd just waste a large aperture Zeiss rental by stopping everything down to avoid missing the focus.

Personally, I'm leaning towards renting the new 35L II, but I am not married to the idea. The occasional macro + weather sealing + general range makes the 24-70 F/4L IS a very safe call, but again, I'm game to hear alternatives.

Advice appreciated, thx.

- A

My two cents: (which others may have already suggested) Either Tamron's 24-70mm f/2.8 VC (a great lens and has some weather sealing) or the Canon (latest) version [24-70mm f/2.8 II] (no VC(IS) but great autofocus), or the newer 24-70mm f/4 Canon - also has good macro capability. Or the Sigma Art Series 24-105mm f/4 or Canon's own 24-105mm f/4 - the Sigma one is much newer and heavier/better build, and a little sharper and better performance at 24-35mm, especially in the corners, but is not weather sealed to my knowledge. Good luck.

 

[FTb-n]

Bring my 24-70 f/4L IS -- This is my fallback if nothing else lines up. I still would prefer this over the added stop and added sharpness of the 24-70 f/2.8L II as the macro mode is killer for trips. I'll use that mode 4-5 times in a week of shooting, but I always net a keeper with it.

First advice is to treat bodies and lenses like tools, to remove the "emotional" attachment that we might have for a favorite tool, and pick the ones that best match the need. This makes a lot of sense when "covering" an event or shooting for a client. But, it sometimes counters the artistic element that drives each of us.

At this point in my "career", I am most fascinated by looking at the world through the perspectives offered by my 70-200 zoom. Macro work and wide angle images can be quite compelling, but I have little interest in exploring these roads -- for now.

Ask yourself, "why bring a camera?" Do you want to fully document the vacation for posterity sake, so you can relive it with family and friends when you return? Or, do you want to take advantage of the locales that you visit to bring home prize photos?

Both are legitimate reasons and I find myself wanting to document everything -- which may take away some of the experience of the vacation. If this is the motivation, one often makes concessions on capturing the prizes. Devoting time to quality "snapshots" is ok when triggering memories down the road is the intention. You can get by with potentially inferior lenses that are more general purpose. But, you may also lose out on some photo-ops for prize photos because you didn't want to miss an event that "needed to be documented."

In hindsight, I've not regretted documenting past vacations, but I treasure the wall hanging prize photos the most. It's ok to skip documenting the entire vacation and just go for the prize photos that your vacation venues might offer. If this is your intention, then stick with the 24-70 f4 IS and it's macro mode for it seems to offer the view of the world that currently interests you the most. See what you can capture from this perspective and enjoy the ride.

 

[ahsanford]

Bring my 24-70 f/4L IS -- This is my fallback if nothing else lines up. I still would prefer this over the added stop and added sharpness of the 24-70 f/2.8L II as the macro mode is killer for trips. I'll use that mode 4-5 times in a week of shooting, but I always net a keeper with it.

First advice is to treat bodies and lenses like tools, to remove the "emotional" attachment that we might have for a favorite tool...

[truncated]

Awesome post -- you raise a fair question about immortalizing one moment vs. chronicling the trip as a tourist. Excellent insights.

I almost always lean to the latter on vacations, but I also have framed some 6 MP shots from my old 300D that I absolutely cherish as lifelong keepers (technical limitations of a bygone tech era be damned, I love what I love).

In fairness, I'm in a unique boat that my favorite FLs to shoot also happen to be great 'vacation cataloging' FLs, somewhere between 24-35 mm FF -- great for walkabout, landscape, environmental portraits, street, etc. Also, longer glass requires longer distance from the target, which kind of breaks up the value of a vaca with a significant other. We typically aren't more than 20 feet apart for 95% of our travels -- so a 70-200 (as much as I love mine) would hardly get used.

So the gear selection depends heavily on whether it's a getaway vaca with a significant other versus a solo jaunt through a place you've never been.

- A

 

[FTb-n]

Bring my 24-70 f/4L IS -- This is my fallback if nothing else lines up. I still would prefer this over the added stop and added sharpness of the 24-70 f/2.8L II as the macro mode is killer for trips. I'll use that mode 4-5 times in a week of shooting, but I always net a keeper with it.

First advice is to treat bodies and lenses like tools, to remove the "emotional" attachment that we might have for a favorite tool...

[truncated]

Awesome post -- you raise a fair question about immortalizing one moment vs. chronicling the trip as a tourist. Excellent insights.

I almost always lean to the latter on vacations, but I also have framed some 6 MP shots from my old 300D that I absolutely cherish as lifelong keepers (technical limitations of a bygone tech era be damned, I love what I love).

In fairness, I'm in a unique boat that my favorite FLs to shoot also happen to be great 'vacation cataloging' FLs, somewhere between 24-35 mm FF -- great for walkabout, landscape, environmental portraits, street, etc. Also, longer glass requires longer distance from the target, which kind of breaks up the value of a vaca with a significant other. We typically aren't more than 20 feet apart for 95% of our travels -- so a 70-200 (as much as I love mine) would hardly get used.

So the gear selection depends heavily on whether it's a getaway vaca with a significant other versus a solo jaunt through a place you've never been.

- A

As a sidebar, some 20 years ago I started shooting "where's Waldo" photos of my wife. This started at Disney World. I'd drop back to get a scenic shot of something at the park and make sure my wife is visible in the crowd. Sometimes she's posing, sometimes it's more candid. Today, I still try to get these shots with my wife and kids.

 

[quod]

As an aside to your last post, and given your interest in a 35 f/2, have you considered renting a small mirrorless with a 28-35mm fixed lens? I ask because whenever I shoot my Fuji X100S, I spend a lot less time fussing with my shots than when I shoot with my 5D3 and I feel like I am more present in the moment. On the plus side, mirrorless offerings are generally on the small side too, which is great for travel. If this option intrigues you, make sure you bring one with an EVF.

 

[candc]

When I go on trips i take a 70d with sigma 8-16 (landscapes) 18-35 (fellow travelers) and tamron 150-600 (birds). So if your not into birds then just an uwa and a nice little portrait lens (its hardly any trouble taking a small 50). If you insist on just one and a ff body then a good 24-xxx

 

[ahsanford]

As an aside to your last post, and given your interest in a 35 f/2, have you considered renting a small mirrorless with a 28-35mm fixed lens? I ask because whenever I shoot my Fuji X100S, I spend a lot less time fussing with my shots than when I shoot with my 5D3 and I feel like I am more present in the moment. On the plus side, mirrorless offerings are generally on the small side too, which is great for travel. If this option intrigues you, make sure you bring one with an EVF.

I'm sure I'd love a walkaround fixed lens rig, but with all I've invested in my FF SLR collection, I use vacations as batting practice to try out new FF lenses. Nope, it needs to be something I can bolt on my 5D3.

Thanks,
A

 

[privatebydesign]

Yep. I am a fan of the 35mm f/2 IS USM as an everyday low profile walkaround. I own the 28mm f/2.8 IS and love its small size but would love something quicker, so the 35 f/2 IS makes perfect sense.

But that's a 'when I get back' sort of lens. For this trip, as stated before, weather sealing is not optional.

So I am now waffling between:

• Rent a 35 F/1.4L II -- This or 28mm is probably my fav single FL for a prime. Can tackle environmental portraits, a good chunk of landscape vistas, general walkaround, etc.
  
  
  
• Rent a 24 f/1.4L II or possibly bring my 16-35 f/4L IS -- I'd go with this if I felt like there would be a higher percentage of landscape work. (TBD, we haven't made all of our plans yet.)
  
  
  
• Bring my 24-70 f/4L IS -- This is my fallback if nothing else lines up. I still would prefer this over the added stop and added sharpness of the 24-70 f/2.8L II as the macro mode is killer for trips. I'll use that mode 4-5 times in a week of shooting, but I always net a keeper with it.

Great thread, all. Very much appreciate your perspectives and insights.

- A

"Weathersealing" is a bullshit marketing term that does not align with any national or international standard, in many cases on lenses it means nothing more than a small piece of tape over a screw hole. I have been using my 35 f2IS in the rains that recently hit Mexico (I got it before it got there) without a hint of an issue.

We all set ourselves criteria, sometimes it is well founded and sometimes it ends up being entirely arbitrary, I know very few people who are as cavalier with their gear in a working environment as myself and I don't treat my 35 any different from all the L series lenses I own, it hangs by my side on a Black Rapid strap through rain and shine, bus journey and mountain trail. If you want an L for the sake of it, go for it, if you want a lens that will do the job look no further than the one you already own.

 

[gregorywood]

Have you considered taking the 24-70 f/2.8 and getting a macro extension tube for those times when you want to shoot macro? It's small and weighs almost nothing. That seems like the best of both worlds from my perspective - a wide aperture zoom, with weatherproofing, with a reasonable focal length, plus macro.

If it were me, and I've actually done this when I travel light - I decide either between the 16-35mm f/4 + 50mm f/1.8 STM combo...OR...the 24-105mm f/4 + 35mm f/2 IS combo. The determining factor is my environment and photo opportunities.

The 24-70mm f/4 is an odd lens in my opinion. You give up a significant amount of reach and gain macro mode, though it's not actually "full macro".

I'd like to try the single lens PRIME solution on my next lightweight trip.

Greg

 

[Al Chemist]

In my opinion, there are two types of trips for a photographer. A photography trip by yourself or other photographers or a trip with family/ friends who have little patience for watching you fiddle with cameras. A word of caution...don't mix up the two. Many of us have experienced that.

When on the first type of trip, carry whatever you can!

When on the second type of trip, carry your 5D3 with a zoom. In my opinion, the 24-105 covers everything you want to do and offers a reasonable range of focal lengths. The photos you take are going to be spontaneous and you will not have time to change lenses. A small second camera like the mighty "M" is a good backup and with the adaptor will also work great with the 24-105 if the need arises and you can leave it in your room without worrying too much. Go light and bond with your significant other and most of all, enjoy the adventure!

 

[ahsanford]

The 24-70mm f/4 is an odd lens in my opinion. You give up a significant amount of reach and gain macro mode, though it's not actually "full macro".

Respectfully disagree. People lose their minds with glee when a new version of a non-macro lens now has a 0.30x max mag when it used to have a 0.23 max mag.

This one is a 0.70x max mag. I honestly feel like I break through that 'min focusing distance barrier' just like I do with my 100L at 1:1 -- it feels like another photography world to capture images.

Keep in mind, I'm not even a regular macro shooter, what a killer trick to have up it's sleeve! No additional lens required, no tubes required, AF still works, etc. It's astonishing.

YMMV with it, of course. It's not intended for serious macro work on rails or for focus stacking, and the working distance at 0.7x is comically small to the point that the lens often shades the subject. But I find it incredibly rewarding to have that functionality when I need it, especially when I travel and am space/gear constrained.

- A

 

[verysimplejason]

Just my 2 cents... for vacation, I always bring my 24-105L together with 6d. The extra 30mm at the long end most of the time was enough. I also bring my old G11 with waterproof casing if it's a vacation near the sea. With it, I can take pictures I can only dream if I'm just using my dslr.