Have you been to Machu Picchu in Peru? Which lens?

[mdwsta4]

I'm heading to Peru for the first time next month. During my time there I'll be hiking Machu Picchu and was hoping to get some feedback from anyone that has been there before. What focal lengths are ideal? I have 35mm and 50mm, but was thinking about picking up a 28mm for that little bit extra width as I would guess wider is better than longer there.

Any pointers for the trip would be greatly appreciated!


Thanks!
M

 

[Dante_Stella]

There is a huge RFF thread on this... somewhere.

I took a GA645 (~35mm) and an X100 (~35mm), and that generally worked.

Actually, that is a good lens for the entire "normal" Peru trip. I usually take something wider but didn't. If you hit Huayna Picchu, depending on the season, you might want to take a small and light camera that can be bagged in case of rain. The trail can get crazy.

Below is MP and some other Peru vistas with the 35mm FOV (all GA645):

Altiplano

Altiplano

Cuzco

Sacred Valley

Dante

 

[Dante_Stella]

Don't get hung up on wides. They are far less critical than you think, and 28mm to 35mm difference is not very meaningful for Peru.

Also, don't use a polarizer with film in the mountains. You might be unpleasantly surprised on film. Bracket a lot. Take as many contrast filters as you want; they are light, and you may not ever come back. Your X100T will come in handy.

Dante

 

[CMur12]

I went there in 1973 armed only with an Olympus 35RC compact RF camera (42mm f2.8 lens) and it seemed to cover the experience quite well.

- Murray

 

[mdwsta4]

Dante, thank you for the info. Your images are fantastic! I hope I could come away with something even a fraction as good as those. Thank you for sharing.

I'm debating if I only want to bring the x100 and not the MP to cut down on the weight I have to carry. Figured it will probably rain at some point and was going to bring some zip lock bags with holes cut out for a ghetto weather covering.

Don't get hung up on wides. They are far less critical than you think, and 28mm to 35mm difference is not very meaningful for Peru.

Also, don't use a polarizer with film in the mountains. You might be unpleasantly surprised on film. Bracket a lot. Take as many contrast filters as you want; they are light, and you may not ever come back. Your X100T will come in handy.

Dante

 

[okcomputer]

SWC 🙂

swc132 by adnan76, on Flickr

 

[ktmrider]

There is a thread in the travel forum on Peru and Machu Picchu. I took an M2 and X100 and don't remember using the M2 much at all. Honestly, the 35mm fov is perfect.

Last fall, I hiked 100 miles in Scotland and 80 miles on the Camino de Santiago in Spain with an M9 and 21/35/90. The lenses were small and light but I cursed the weight wishing I had taken the X100 instead, especially since the 35 C Biogon lived on the M9 for 90 percent of the photos.

I am headed to Guatemala in a few weeks to study Spanish for a month. The weekend are free and I think I will be taking just the X100 as lots of people have reported problems with theft and robbery so the M9 stays home.

If you like the 35mm FOV, then keep it simple and just take the X100.

 

[DaveTheWalker]

Looks like I agree with most posters here. 35mm and 50mm should cover it all nicely. No need for extra wide (you'll just lose the details in the wider landscape). If you don't mind the weight, a slightly longer lens might be nice to pick out some details from a distance. Weather is frequently pretty nasty up there, and fog is very likely! Don't get too upset if the place is totally invisible when you arrive; just wait a couple of hours and it'll all become clear again...hopefully ;o)

 

[mfogiel]

I think that visiting Machu Picchu without the Telyt 1600 on a Visoflex would be meaningless.http://www.apotelyt.com/photo-lens/leica-most-expensive-lens
On the other hand, think if you could visit it without a camera, but with your eyes wide open.

 

[jarski]

...visit it without a camera, but with your eyes wide open.

this is daring (for a photo nut 🙄), but worth to consider. take binoculars instead of camera?

 

[johannielscom]

No mountain in sight where I live, but I still want a Hasselblad SWC...

😀

 

[Bob Michaels]

I've hiked to Machu Picchu and still continue to recommend bringing whatever lenses work for you everywhere else.

The one photo I was not interested in was a recreation of the classic shot that everyone else has done.

 

[jcb4718]

Bob makes a valid point. If a 35mm focal length works for street scenes at home it will work equally well for street scenes in Peru etc. etc. As Dante shows with his excellent Machu Picchu photo, the classic shot only needs a 35mm FOV. I've hiked all over the Inca heartland, always with a 24mm and a 50mm lens...in the Andes the wide angle lens did come in useful, both for landscapes and for 'putting people in the scene'. High up there is a lot of contrast so fill in flash might also be useful.

 

[DominikDUK]

Bob is right use what you always use and what you are accustomed to. There is no worse place to test a lens than a once in a lifetime trip.

 

[mdwsta4]

Brief update to this thread. I ended up going with just the X100T and the Fuji Instax printer. I printed off nearly 20 images of locals in Lima, Cusco, and people I met along the trail. I love that little printer! If only Fuji would make a 'wide' version.

Anyway, I haven't edited any of the images from the trip yet with the exception of this one. 5-stitch pano at the end of the trail as we arrived at Machu Picchu.

Which version do you prefer?

 

[Finglas]

Well that is a viewpoint of MP that you don't normally see - so well done for doing something different - I am biased of course so I prefer the colour photo you took.
Some of the details are lost in the deep blacks of the monochrome photo.

By the way when I was there in 2008 - I just had a Nikon FE and 50mm f1.8 and like you I stayed clear of the normal typical shots we usually see - the 50mm forced me to think differently but was also liberating too. The earlier poster who said don't take the camera just look at it with your eyes or binoculars I think has a valid point.

Again well done, I hope you really like Peru.

John

 

[bushwick1234]

That has not directly a connection with the type of camera/lens but the camera/lens itself: "Travelers in Cuzco and Lima should beware of pickpockets and backpack-slashers on crowded streets, and black-market money-changers trying to pass counterfeit U.S. currency." (L.A.Times, February 19, 1995. CHRISTOPHER REYNOLDS. Times Travel Writer). Don't get confused with the date of publication, things are worse now. 🙁

 

[Pioneer]

I carried my Super Isolette on my only trip to MP and Cuzco. I don't usually worry too much about these things, especially while I am photographing, but I think the SI's 75mm Solinar is the equivalent of a 40mm lens on a 35mm camera.

 

[mdwsta4]

Thank you John! Oddly enough, MP wasn't the highlight of the trek for me. There were two other archeological sights along the trail, one of which I had all to myself for nearly two hours. Those were my favorite part of the trail. Machu Picchu and the top of Huayna Picchu were just icing on the cake.

Well that is a viewpoint of MP that you don't normally see - so well done for doing something different - I am biased of course so I prefer the colour photo you took.
Some of the details are lost in the deep blacks of the monochrome photo.

By the way when I was there in 2008 - I just had a Nikon FE and 50mm f1.8 and like you I stayed clear of the normal typical shots we usually see - the 50mm forced me to think differently but was also liberating too. The earlier poster who said don't take the camera just look at it with your eyes or binoculars I think has a valid point.

Again well done, I hope you really like Peru.

John

You hear that from nearly every country in the world and it's something I've never had a problem with. Not once did I feel threatened for my camera, phone, money, or personal safety. That's wondering through the city during the day, alleyways at night, etc. I hardly think things are worse now when comparing an article from 1995. If anything, things are better now because tourism in Peru has grown exponentially in the past two decades.

That has not directly a connection with the type of camera/lens but the camera/lens itself: "Travelers in Cuzco and Lima should beware of pickpockets and backpack-slashers on crowded streets, and black-market money-changers trying to pass counterfeit U.S. currency." (L.A.Times, February 19, 1995. CHRISTOPHER REYNOLDS. Times Travel Writer). Don't get confused with the date of publication, things are worse now. 🙁

 

[CMur12]

That's a really nice shot, Matt. Both versions have great lighting and atmosphere, but I prefer the color, as it is much easier to discern the details of the scene. In shades of gray, I don't see everything that I do in the color version.

- Murray