What to take to the Scanavian countries

[pic-pop]

I have the falling lenses. Zeiss Batice 85, Zeiss 18-35 zoom, Zeiss 24-70 zoom, Zeiss 55 1.8 and the Sony 70-300. I do not want to carry heavy gear and am trying to decide what to leave home. Your help would be appreciated

Jerry

[martys]

what are you expecting to be shooting?

[pic-pop]

Landscapes, architicure, people and the Fiords

[martys]

Take the 16-35, 55 and 85. Leave the long and mid zooms home, lighten your load. If you have a small flash take that as well.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Zé De Boni]

I do not want to carry heavy gear ...    ...Your help would be appreciated

Jerry

Well, if you need my help, I can carry your bag. Just send me a ticket!  I used to take more lenses than this and 2 or 3 bodies on my trips (Amount)!!! + a tripod !!!!!!! Cables, filters... With the lighter Emount system I take even more, same weight!

Seriously, I would avoid redundancy. So, just leave the 24-70 home. The 16-35 and the 50 are enough from wide to normal. Take the 70-300. For landscape, architecture and even people there are always nice subjects for long teles. And although the 85 FL is already covered by the zoom, the Batis may be useful in many situations. But that depends not only on your subjects as much as in the way you work, how much time you dedicate to each shot. Hence, it is so much personal. Anyway, it would be more important to carry two bodies, where the second could be APSC (A6000 or 6300). So you will have a backup,  need less lens change and be ready for different settings. 

And if you carry one full frame and one APSC bodies, then your lenses will have two ranges each. You may explore different combinations with this set of lenses and bodies. The 50mm works a short as a fast short tele on the A6xxx and so you may leave the 85 home.

Enjoy your trip!

[pic-pop]

Thank you for your help. The decision now seems to be taking the 85 or the 70 to 300 as my third lens. I am leaning towards the 85 in order to save the ticket money for bringing Ze De Boni along.

[Guest all8]

18-35 + 55 + 70-300, both the wide and the tele will be useful in the Fjords.

[Reinhold_1]

I have traveled a lot in Norway and can only agree with the council of "timde".

You will need the WW for the fjords and the Tele taking pictures of animals.

An example of WW-Photography I have just set in the Forum:

http://www.sonyalphaforum.com/topic/4816-stave-church-norway/

Two tips for the travel: Don´t forget a raincover for your gear and polarizing filter (for rainbows)!

[joshinthecity]

This seems easy to me.

18-35 for things.

55 for people.

 

done 

 

j.

[pic-pop]

Thank you Reinhold

I will be looking into a lens cover and will be taking my 70 to 300. Do you see any need for the 24-70

[isrararrafi]

Having visited Norway recently I would say something wide would be the most useful, 18-35 in this case. But also take the zoom lens 70-300 for zooming in to the fjords and waterfalls once in a while. Norway is heavenly.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

[steve of stonehenge]

I think my travel kit going forward will be:

• Batis 25
• Sony 55
• Batis 85

I probably will not even take a tripod or filters.  A lighter load is important to me these days...it makes walking around more enjoyable.

 

I have become adept at taking hand-held shots and stitching them together in software.  This way you do not need an ultra wide lens.  Would show an example but the 1000KB photo limitation is a show stopper.

[Guest all8]

I used a 28mm last year (adapted elmarit), along with a 50mm and a 70-200. This year, the 21 & 50, probably/perhaps the 25 and most likely the 70-200 because its a 4 in one lens ... there are some shots that need the tele zoom, you can't really get any closer.

 

 

28mm elmarit ... would have been better with Batis 25, or pretty much anything actually ...

 

 

200mm

 

[Guest all8]

and this one where getting closer was also not an option ...  wild place.

 

147mm

 

 

this is the small river I took the above shot across, well you don't see the river, its under several meters of "rotten" snow in a valley where avalanches are happening several times an hour.

 

200mm

 

[Reinhold_1]

To pic-pop:

 

I would not take the 24-70 mm.

Justification: The focal lengths up to 35 mm are covered by the WW-Zoom. 70mm you have even with the telephoto zoom.

Take the 1.8 / 55 mm with you, because of the relatively high aperture and lower weight (about 290 g vs. 450 g).

 

[martys]

here's a good video on travel lens choices, worth 10 min to watch.  if you you're trying to light and lean, this has good recommendations on focal length. Ignore that it's all Leica stuff, it can be any brand.  

 

[pic-pop]

Thanks I watched it was very interesting

[pic-pop]

Thank you all for your help as I leave tomorrow. I will be taking my 16-35, 24-70, 551.8 and my 70-300. 

[ronak1003]

I used a 28mm last year (adapted elmarit), along with a 50mm and a 70-200. This year, the 21 & 50, probably/perhaps the 25 and most likely the 70-200 because its a 4 in one lens ... there are some shots that need the tele zoom, you can't really get any closer.

 

 

28mm elmarit ... would have been better with Batis 25, or pretty much anything actually ...

walkabout-266.jpg

 

200mm

walkabout-267.jpg

@Timde 

 

Hey Timde.. great pictures. You mentioned it'd have been better had you carried along any lens other than the Leica Elmarit 28mm. I'm a canon shooter & am about to ditch my canon system for Sony mirrorless. I was thinking of buying leica lenses & my choice of lens are Elmarit 28mm, Summarit 50mm & Summarit 90mm. 

 

I couldnt find much data & reviews on the elmarit & summarit lenses so am still looking for info. If you dont mind would you tell me why you'd recommend any other lens (zeiss batis, loxia, etc) over the elmarit?

 

 

Cheers