Best lens for a vacation -- can only choose one

[ahsanford]

Great feedback, all. Very sound and thoughtful advice.

I'm clearly torn between a 24-70 and a fast wide prime.

Someone brought up other gear, and here's where my head is (percentage likely to bring):

• CPL/UV = 100%
  
• Lens hood = 100%
  
• Flash = 90% likely to tuck in the uber tiny 90EX (I almost never use a flash)
  
• Tripod / ball head / grads = 25% (If I want a personal day to shoot on this trip, it's coming.)
  
• Charger = 0% 2 full strength 5D3 batteries will last me a week -- I'll only take 200-300 shots, I don't shoot astro, etc.
  
• 2nd lens = 0% I want to be brave / clever / adaptable on this trip

I'll leave the tinier compulsories (micro fiber, backup memory card, raincover, dessicant, BR strap, etc.) off this list, but they'll probably find a way into my bag as well.

- A

 

[Shane1.4]

For me it would be the 35mm.

 

[sdsr]

But with this trip, I'm strongly leaning towards a tiny bag -- body + lens + blackrapid strap + possibly my ubersmall 90EX for emergency lighting (I use a flash once a week on a vacation, honestly, it's not what I do).

If you want small and rainproof/resistant, and don't mind foregoing FF, you might want to consider something different from what's been mentioned so far - rent an Olympus OMD EM 1 or 5II (Ming Thein ran the former under a shower for ten minutes, switched on all the time, and it emerged unscathed) and one or two Olympus 2.8 zooms.

 

[TeT]

FF 24 105 L

Crop efs 18 135 STM

if you can only take one...

 

[neuroanatomist]

2nd lens = 0% I want to be brave / clever / adaptable on this trip

To me, that says 35/1.4L II. A 24-70/105 would be more cautious / safe / versatile.

Another consideration is the uniqueness of the trip. I'd be more open to the creative 'push' of bringing just one prime lens if I had the safety net of having previously visited or knowing I'd likely visit that destination again.

 

[cpsico]

Great feedback, all. Very sound and thoughtful advice.

I'm clearly torn between a 24-70 and a fast wide prime.

Someone brought up other gear, and here's where my head is (percentage likely to bring):

• CPL/UV = 100%
  
• Lens hood = 100%
  
• Flash = 90% likely to tuck in the uber tiny 90EX (I almost never use a flash)
  
• Tripod / ball head / grads = 25% (If I want a personal day to shoot on this trip, it's coming.)
  
• Charger = 0% 2 full strength 5D3 batteries will last me a week -- I'll only take 200-300 shots, I don't shoot astro, etc.
  
• 2nd lens = 0% I want to be brave / clever / adaptable on this trip

I'll leave the tinier compulsories (micro fiber, backup memory card, raincover, dessicant, BR strap, etc.) off this list, but they'll probably find a way into my bag as well.

- A

The 24-70 II is pure awesome, but there is really something magical about the 35 1.4 II.

 

[scottkinfw]

I love my 34-70 2.8 II, your f4L should be great. Remember, you won't get everything you want with just one lens.

Have a great time.

sek

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

 

[scottkinfw]

If you want to try something new and improved, why not rent the new 11-24 f4L- gets outstanding reviews.

sek

Usually in these types of situations, I wuss out and go with the 24-70 f/2.8 II (never tried the f/4 IS), but I'd kick myself for not bringing at least one other lens especially if it's for more than a day.

Like Neuro, the M + lenses is an option (esp. if DSLRs aren't allowed), but it's slow AF and processing lag drives me crazy. I used it at a hockey game a few weeks ago just because DSLRs aren't allowed, and I missed a lot of shots. For P&S, it's a valid choice.

But if you are considering rentals and would relax some other requirements, I would consider
Sigma 24-35 f/2 + Canon 50 f/1.8 STM (yeah, they're not that weather-resistant so it's a fair-weather kit).
I'd be fun to try something new and still cover a decent focal length range. f/2 is good for indoor ambients most of the time. And the 50 f/1.8 is small enough to "count" as a fraction that is rounded down. :

Yeah. Deep down, I think I'd like a new toy to play with / new viewpoint to appreciate, even if it's just a rental. So the 24-70 f/4L IS is perfect for saying yes to the most needs, but I'd like to try something new.

In my head, I'm thinking wide + fast + prime, but I certainly could be talked down.

- A

 

[cpsico]

I would say the 35L 1.4II can do everything, but is nearly as big as the 24-70. Its crazy sharp, extremely accurate in focus and wonderful contrast and color, oh and can shoot at 1.4 and get great shots.

 

[FTb-n]

Tough decision. As previously mentioned, the location and venues will dictate the logical choice. For me, the "safe" all purpose full frame lens is the 24-105 f4L IS. The 24-70 is a better choice for action and low-light indoor events -- and when every bit of IQ matters. But, as a tourist, I think the extra 35mm reach and the IS makes the 24-105 more versatile. One shot I'm more likely to take when traveling is moving water, such as streams and waterfalls. The IS makes it possible for hand held, slow shutter, motion blur of the moving water.

However, what type of shots interest you the most? It's very difficult for me to leave the house without both the 24-70 and the 70-200 f2.8 II. But, the vast majority of my shots are with the 70-200. Granted, I shoot a lot of candids and sports, but I tend to gravitate towards this focal range for most subjects.

The 24-70/105 short zoom may be the logical choice, but I would be tempted to leverage the venues of vacation locales to capture images with the focal range that works best for me at home and take the 5D3 with the 70-200 plus a 40 2.8 pancake for landscapes and close quarters work. Ok, technically this is two lenses, but just think of the 40 as a fat body cap.

 

[geekpower]

i'd go for the 35. while the 24-70 obviously has more versatility in length, if your wife is anything like mine, you wont have time to properly frame your shots anyway, so the shallow dof of the 35 will actually be much more useful for subject isolation and making imperfect framing disappear into bokeh land.

 

[unfocused]

FF 24 105 L

Crop efs 18 135 STM

if you can only take one...

+1, although I would lean toward the the 15-85mm EF-S. I usually take two lenses everywhere: the 24-105 and the 70-300 L. They cover 99% of shooting situations when traveling and aren't that cumbersome.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I tried doing a couple of trips with my 35. I could get about 60% of the shots I wanted, missed the others. I found that my 24-105 was a safer bet for when I needed wider or longer focal lengths.

It does matter where you are going and how much you have invested in the trip. For a expensive trip, I'd take a second lens as a backup, and my G1X as a second camera.

Certainly, 24mm is not always wide enough, and 35mm is often not long enough. A 17-85 FF lens would be really nice for vacations, but we have to do with what's available. I have a really old Tokina 17mm f/3.5 prime that I keep in my bag just in case wider than 24mm is needed. Then, I feel ok with my 24-70mmL.

 

[Cheekysascha]

For me I'd take the 24-70 F2.8 II, it's what I used exclusively for both of my last trips to London and Hamburg it's such a good versatile lens that works for almost anything you could want to take pictures off on a touristy trip.

However like so many others said having a good bag is also important, I usually take my Langly Alpha pro with my which can hold up to a 1dx with a 24-70 and a second fast prime lens and has enough room for clothes that can last a weekend. Also bonus is that it doesn't look like a camera bag so no problems with thief's.

 

[drob]

24-105 F4 is a hearty lens. Great zoom range for an L lens. I still, to this day, say if Canon would make a 24-105 F2.8 it would sell like hotcakes.

Just a side note about vacation... I recently picked up a Samsung NX500 mirrorless (plus a 18-55 lens) from the event in Seattle and took it with me to Disney world. Carrying around something so small and light with excellent image quality was outstanding. No need to lug around my 6D and 24-105L.

After my experience with the mirrorless Samsung at Disney, I can see that Canon is missing out in the enthusiast/advanced mirrorless market...but after seeing so many Rebels there, I can see that it would gut their beginner DSLR market.

 

[Dick]

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.

 

[Ivan Muller]

35mmf2 IS, be brave and just go for 'less is more'

 

[Hjalmarg1]

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.

 

[Daan Stam]

i would go for the 18-135 f4-5.6 is stm but i don't know if it fits on full frame i use it for almost everything you wil miss the f2,8 but fo the rest it is pretty much as good as the 24-70 you do see the difference but it is pretty good

 

[quod]

I would take the 24-70/2.8 II or 24-105/4. I have both. They are weather sealed. If it were me, I would take the 24-105 and not worry about sand, weather, etc.