Three or four lenses on a long trip?

[Harpomatic]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi, this is my first post. I would appreciate some advice: I'm about to leave for almost a month, going to Bolivia for a leisure trip. I won't be alone, so it's not a trip focusing on photography, but I will definitely use my camera as much as possible.

I have a passion for street and documentary style, a little portrait, environmental and not, but I definitely don't disdain landscape!

I use a M240: first of all, I'm a 50mm man - that will be the main lens for me. I'm still trying to decide which between the Nokton 50mm 1.2 or the Planar ZM 50mm f2 - lightness or speed? I might go for speed, that Nokton is not that big at all! And a pleasure to use. The other lens I already decided about is the Biogon 21mm f2 ZM, great wide angle; that will definitely be in my bag.

Two doubts: 90mm Tele-Elmarit thin or 135mm Tele-Elmar? if I go light, will I miss the reach? I really enjoy shooting both, and both don't see use too often. But I don't mind a little more weight if necessary.

Second doubt: should I take my 35mm? I have a wonderful Biogon 35mm f2 ZM but I fear it would see almost no use...although I think i interiors it might be more useful than the 50mm when shooting people!

What are your thoughts?

 

Thanks in advance!!

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[jmahto]

Welcome.

90mm is more useful than 135 IMHO. If you need 135 then it is just a crop away and you still get 12mp file which can print easily to A3 size.

i guess you are covered for the rest (normal and wider). For whatever is worth, my travel combo is 15mm (CV VII, light and for those dramatic shots), 28mm (regular use environment), 50mm (one person plus little environment), 90mm for reach. If I need to pair down then 28 and 90 is sufficient. (Note that it is different than my lightweight hiking setup, which is 15 and 40mm plus option 90mm). 

Edited December 11, 2018 by jmahto

[helged]

For such a trip, as most of the M-based trips I do, I would go for 21+50+90mm (in my case 21SEM, 50APO, 90Macro or 90Elmarit-M, latest version). I would not bother with the 135mm. As a possible 4th lens, I would bring a 28mm rather than a 35mm, but that's just me/my preferences... 

I can not comment on your two 50mm lenses; but I would pick the one with most 'character'. The latter point is an argument against 50APO, since this is an optically (close to) perfect lens.

[Narsuitus]

11 hours ago, Harpomatic said:

...I'm a 50mm man - that will be the main lens for me

As a 35mm man, I would take the 35 flanked by a 21 and a 90.

However, if I were a 50mm man, I would take the 50 f/1.2 for the speed and flank it with the 21 and the 90.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

21/35/90 by Narsuitus, on Flickr

Edited December 11, 2018 by Narsuitus

[lukedavidkellett]

Hey there,
Hope you enjoy your trip. 
Well I'll be helpful or confuse you even more. 

I'd take the 50mm and the 35mm only. 

Reasons are: 

1. If you're a 50mm guy you see the world in short telephoto and therefore anything wider is wide. 
2. 21mm is a 1-5% use lens. The 35mm can cover most of what it does within reason. 
3. having your 90mm and 135mm will confuse you in certain situations when a 50mm will do fine. Move your feet those times you need to. 

Travel light shoot the 50mm 60-70% of the time and shoot the 35mm 40-30% of the other. It'll make for easier decisions and also a more well rounded 'reportage story' from your travels.   

[Ko.Fe.]

Last thing I want on long trip is to constantly change four lenses on camera which is missing dust removal from sensor function.

 

[jdlaing]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

One lens. Three focal lengths. MATE.

or............

Two lenses. Six focal lengths. WATE/MATE.

[Harpomatic]

3 hours ago, lukedavidkellett said:

Hey there,
Hope you enjoy your trip. 
Well I'll be helpful or confuse you even more. 

I'd take the 50mm and the 35mm only. 

Reasons are: 

1. If you're a 50mm guy you see the world in short telephoto and therefore anything wider is wide. 
2. 21mm is a 1-5% use lens. The 35mm can cover most of what it does within reason. 
3. having your 90mm and 135mm will confuse you in certain situations when a 50mm will do fine. Move your feet those times you need to. 

Travel light shoot the 50mm 60-70% of the time and shoot the 35mm 40-30% of the other. It'll make for easier decisions and also a more well rounded 'reportage story' from your travels.   

You make a great point there: i think that would probably be the best bet - but Bolivia has very large expanses of...nothingness! Salt flats for example, where I thought a bit of compression and isolation can help at times as well as taking in the big picture. Probably the 135mm for those rare uses could come in handy and Cover that missing 5%, and do the rest as you say.

 

1 hour ago, Ko.Fe. said:

Last thing I want on long trip is to constantly change four lenses on camera which is missing dust removal from sensor function.

 

I hear you: I’m never without my rocket blower and sensor swabs when on a trip, but you’re right. Minimising lens changes is the right thing to do, reinforcing lukedavidkellett’s opinion!

8 hours ago, jmahto said:

Welcome.

90mm is more useful than 135 IMHO. If you need 135 then it is just a crop away and you still get 12mp file which can print easily to A3 size.

i guess you are covered for the rest (normal and wider). For whatever is worth, my travel combo is 15mm (CV VII, light and for those dramatic shots), 28mm (regular use environment), 50mm (one person plus little environment), 90mm for reach. If I need to pair down then 28 and 90 is sufficient. (Note that it is different than my lightweight hiking setup, which is 15 and 40mm plus option 90mm). 

I appreciate what you say, but at that point almost the same can be said for cropping my 50mm to longer (maybe not all the way to 90mm though!). But it’s definitely a good point!

[Harpomatic]

9 minutes ago, jdlaing said:

One lens. Three focal lengths. MATE.

or............

Two lenses. Six focal lengths. WATE/MATE.

Four words: way out of budget! 😅

[Harpomatic]

4 hours ago, helged said:

For such a trip, as most of the M-based trips I do, I would go for 21+50+90mm (in my case 21SEM, 50APO, 90Macro or 90Elmarit-M, latest version). I would not bother with the 135mm. As a possible 4th lens, I would bring a 28mm rather than a 35mm, but that's just me/my preferences... 

I can not comment on your two 50mm lenses; but I would pick the one with most 'character'. The latter point is an argument against 50APO, since this is an optically (close to) perfect lens.

About character: I think the Nokton is wonderful, mor character than the Zeiss. That’s a good point!

 

3 hours ago, Narsuitus said:

As a 35mm man, I would take the 35 flanked by a 21 and a 90.

However, if I were a 50mm man, I would take the 50 f/1.2 for the speed and flank it with the 21 and the 90.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

21/35/90 by Narsuitus, on Flickr

Man that’s a hefty (and beautiful) kit! 

That was my first approach...but that 35! I might miss it! 🤓

[albertknappmd]

I usually go with the 18, 50 and 90 lenses.

covers everything and ever contingency.

Albert 😏

[a.noctilux]

Story first, just to say that the compromise must be weighted in each trip.

- very long time ago, when we were younger, my wife and I carried about 20kg of photo gears (lenses, bodies, tripod, films, etc.)

it was good time to explore the world and we are always astonishing while viewing our old slides, happy to have done that, but never again

- then came the more "lighter traveling time",  but was always to cut down to only Leica M (no more SLR), so film and digital for a while

- to make story short, now that we are used to travel lighter, we choose with care what to carry and what to use andmost  important for us

" what that can be taken for the day's photo " that can be very different from what to take for the trip.

I think that this would not help much ...

each lens can be missed in a trip but also can be a weight for "good photography" (for example I use to carry Noctilux 50mm and/or Summilux 75mm = less and less use now)

Summarit-M lenses and LTM are now our prefered lenses over MATE, xx_lux, etc.

 

My goto...

Lovely light combo of old LTM lenses + modern monochrom sensor 😵

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

35 Summaron/50/90 Elmars

three with same "old character" that please me in results second to none

[jdlaing]

2 hours ago, Harpomatic said:

Four words: way out of budget! 😅

One way to look at it is $7,000.00 for two lenses with six focal lengths as opposed to six lenses at an average of $3,500.00 rack.

Plus all the space and weight.

[spydrxx]

In many years of personal experience, when I took a bunch of lenses I found that I generally used 1 or 2 but not the others. In your case, I think you should build your own experience based database. Since you already own the 4 lenses, take all 4...that way you won't be disappointed by not having what you consider to be the "right" lens on hand. They don't take up much room or weight, so that excuse doesn't work. When your trip is finished and you're home reviewing your "keepers", you'll be better able to determine for future trips which lenses are essential. I went for many years taking only a 35mm, then expanded to include a 135 (rarely actually used) or a 90 (only occasionally used). I always preferred a 35 to a 50, so that took care of that focal length. 24 & 15 were too wide for me. My last long hiking trip in Peru I switched to a cropped DSLR and 24-120 zoom, which really did the trick for me. The point is that each location, type of pictures taken, and knowledge of each lens' capabilities and nuances really determines what to take. If you're questioninh it, take all you think you might use and learn from the experience...not somebody else

s vision.

[Jean-Michel]

Or get a second body. I believe more  interchanging bodies rather than interchanging lenses. Now that I am in my digital period, I carry an M9 and MP; 35 and 50 Summicrons, plus a WATE and a 90 Macro-Elmar. All fit in a rather compact Thinktank 30i

Edited December 11, 2018 by Jean-Michel

[adan]

My old Leitz M4-P brochure has some hints in the back for desirable lens combinations. Including what Leitz called "the long bridge across focal lengths": - 21/50/135

That more or less comports with my own experience, which is, that I don't like carrying focal lengths that compete for my attention (too similar in view). Choosing between a 28 and a 21 or 24 or a 35 gets in the way of good pictures. (Having to choose between 16-18-21>28-35-50, all f/4, strikes me as madness )

On my last overseas excursion (London/Paris) I took 21/35/90/135. And found that I ended up cropping most of the 90 shots to nearly 135 anyway (either inability to change location fast enough, or the looseness of the M9's 90mm viewfinder lines (got more than I saw)). So I now stick with a "modified long bridge" - 21/35/135. There is nothing those lenses can't handle between them. But I won't argue with you (or Leitz) if you prefer "50" in the middle instead.

21/35/135 makes a nice "Josef Albers" spacing pattern, as well.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[pico]

10, 35, 75 for me.

[OR120]

I've had a working/photo shoot - trip to Bolivia. Flew into La Paz on a C5 Galaxy -pilots brought me up front for the overview and landing. I ended up in Trinidad. You are in for some fun times. Be careful with the Mate De Coca. Many women in this country do not like to be photographed. I know you said your a 50 guy -- but I would take 21, 35 and 75 or 90 (up to you). Travel light you don't want to be carrying around a lot of gear. If this were a working shoot that might be different but for pleasure I would travel light - stay with your most comfortable lens - don't miss moments. Have a great time!! You are in for a real adventure. Wild times.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[TomB_tx]

For decades my travel kit was 35 f2, 50 f2, and 90 T.E.(v1). On film most shots were 50. On digital 35 is most used, so I often simply take it - but now a Summarit 2.5, or for low light a Nokton 1.4.  Instead of looking for the lens FL to fit a shot, I look for the shot to fit the FL I have.

For a full travel kit now I added a 21 f4 VC Skopar - inexpensive and small to tuck away for when needed.

However, on a study tour (historical geography) of Israel a few years back I had to backpack light and didn't want the hassle of changing lenses, so took a superzoom small sensor Panasonic.  Others were constantly changing lenses, while I just shot. The simplicity was perfect, and I've used the pictures for lectures ever since. It was the right tool for the occasion.

 

[adan]

3 minutes ago, TomB_tx said:

Instead of looking for the lens FL to fit a shot, I look for the shot to fit the FL I have.

👍