Dan,
On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 18:03:26 -0600
"Daniel Mitchell" <danmitchell@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Fairly soon, I'll be leaving Auckland, and need to trim stuff down
> --
> current plans for travel kit:
>
> OM2S, 24/2, 65-200/4, 35-70/3.5-4.5, 50/1.4, and XA, generic zoom
> point+shoot for my wife as pocketable cameras for wandering around,
> ultrapod, slik compact tripod, cable release.
My travel-dogma goes roughly like this, after way too many
experiences of lugging along a stuffed back I never get to use:
two camerabodies, three lenses
of which one of the bodies is a designated hotel-backup, unless I
*know* that I will need to shoot both b/w and slides. I also almost
always end up carrying only two of the lenses, leaving the third at
the hotel for "those moments" where I know I will need it.
It's tuff, being a zuikoholic and wanting to bring it all, but it
does allow me to enjoy the traveling a bit more.
In your case, I'd just simply skip the zoom 35-70 and possibly the 50
-- the remaining 65-200 is "close enough" to the 50, I think. But,
hey, you may have specific plans for your travels, calling for e.g.
the /1.4 (indoor, in caves, at night, or some such thing).
>
> Things I'm not bringing; 55/2.8 macro lens, 17/3.5 super-wide,
> 500/8,
> flash, filters, spare OM10 body. I've used all of those on the trip
> so far, but at this point I need to trim weight down, and, looking
> at the lenses I've used _often_, it's the four above. Filters I'm
> sure are great, and they don't weigh much, but in practise I just
> never think to use them..
>
Think "circular polarizer". I never leave home without one. Try to
coordinate you lens-setup such that they all take the same
filter-size.
> That's still quite a lot -- any suggestions for further trimming?
I'd say toss the 35-70, the 50 and the XA, leaving you with one body,
two lenses.
> It's
> probably the 50/1.4 that'd be the next one to go; while I've found
> it really useful for taking shots inside where there's less light
> and I can't set up tripods or the like, I've used the 35-70 a lot
> more often as a walkaround lens, and that way there's no obvious
> duplication.
>
> The alternative is to ditch the 35-70 in favour of the 50/1.4 and
> learn to
> zoom with my feet.. In some ways, I like that as a reasonably fast
> three lens kit, but the flexibility for tweaking cropping in the
> viewfinder with the 35-70 is nice, too.
>
It's sorta hard to know what to advice, when not knowing what you
intend on doing. If you are going bird-watching, for example, leaving
the 500 at home is probably a wrong choise :)
My generic travel kit is typically: 24/2, 55/1.2, 135/2.8 (or, when
weight/size really is an issue: 24/2.8, 85/2, 135/3.5), and I tend to
use the 135mm only sparsely. I prefer primes, in general, but that's
probably just a matter of habit.
If I go "city-walking", the kit is often simply the 28-48/4 and
nothing more.
> Maybe I should just take all four, suffer a month of extra weight,
> and post
> whichever one I haven't used back home separately..
>
For how long will you be going? Look at it this way: your
four-lens-kit would only just weight the same as the body (no
optics), were you using a C*n*n Wunderbrick :) And lugging a lot of
gear around makes for good physical exercise too :)
--thomas
> -- dan
>
>
> < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
> < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
> < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
>
>
--
------------------------------------------------
Thomas Heide Clausen
Civilingeniør i Datateknik (cand.polyt)
M.Sc in Computer Engineering
E-Mail: T.Clausen@xxxxxxxxxxxx
WWW: http://voop.free.fr/
------------------------------------------------
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|