If you could travel with just one focal length or lens, what would it be?

[Ray Kilby]

35mm

 

[boojum]

All the arguments for the various focal lengths aside, I have to decide on the basis of what lenses I have. And I have some nice 50's. I am basing all of these choices on M bodies. For the M body I'd lean on the SBS which I have and then the FLB which is on order and will be here at the end of September I am told. I hope so. The Cooke Amotal (2", an effective 50mm) has its own charm. The '42 CZJ is nice and the clunky but effective 35mm CV Ultron, the old one, is sweet.

So if I had to choose one focal length it would be 50mm and the soon to be here Omnar FLB in that focal length. Chris at Skyllaney has just crafted such a wonderful lens that it calls out to be in front of an M body. That's my choice.

As for M body, on a trip I'd favor the M240 as I have come to like the colors and it has that huge battery. It will function as an effective SLR and can shoot movies! What's not to like? Just as that 35mm Ultron is underappreciated so, too, is the M240. And these two work very well together, too.

 

[wlewisiii]

All the arguments for the various focal lengths aside, I have to decide on the basis of what lenses I have. And I have some nice 50's. I am basing all of these choices on M bodies. For the M body I'd lean on the SBS which I have and then the FLB which is on order and will be here at the end of September I am told. I hope so. The Cooke Amotal (2", an effective 50mm) has its own charm. The '42 CZJ is nice and the clunky but effective 35mm CV Ultron, the old one, is sweet.

So if I had to choose one focal length it would be 50mm and the soon to be here Omnar FLB in that focal length. Chris at Skyllaney has just crafted such a wonderful lens that it calls out to be in front of an M body. That's my choice.

As for M body, on a trip I'd favor the M240 as I have come to like the colors and it has that huge battery. It will function as an effective SLR and can shoot movies! What's not to like? Just as that 35mm Ultron is underappreciated so, too, is the M240. And these two work very well together, too.

I must admit, I feel I was fortunate that I was able to get my M 240 when I had my inheritance. It is underappreciated but Sonnar_Brian pointed me at it and, as has always been the case, his advice was right on the money...

Now if only I can decide what to take on my trip LOLOLOLOLO!

 

[boojum]

I must admit, I feel I was fortunate that I was able to get my M 240 when I had my inheritance. It is underappreciated but Sonnar_Brian pointed me at it and, as has always been the case, his advice was right on the money...

Now if only I can decide what to take on my trip LOLOLOLOLO!

Get a bigger camera bag and take them all. ;o)

 

[Ken Ford]

In a week, I'm going on a road trip across Wisconsin, Indiana, Ohio (to the USAF Museum in Dayton) then down to Memphis before driving back to Wisconsin over a couple of days via back roads.

I'm still waffling on exactly what I'm going to take with me except for my Rolleiflex Automat - THAT's an easy choice 🙂

But after that? Leica M 240? Lens or Lenses?
Pentax K3? Pentax PZ-1p? Which lenses?

The closer I get, the less certain I am. 🤣

I was in Tampa the other week for a quick trip - my best friends were getting married. It wasn’t a photo trip but I wanted more than a phone and I didn’t want to be loaded down. It was on the beach so some form of weather protection was needed.

I ended up taking my X100VI which worked out well.

 

[Archiver]

In a week, I'm going on a road trip across Wisconsin, Indiana, Ohio (to the USAF Museum in Dayton) then down to Memphis before driving back to Wisconsin over a couple of days via back roads.

I'm still waffling on exactly what I'm going to take with me except for my Rolleiflex Automat - THAT's an easy choice 🙂

But after that? Leica M 240? Lens or Lenses?
Pentax K3? Pentax PZ-1p? Which lenses?

The closer I get, the less certain I am. 🤣

Each year's journal contains an ongoing travel gear rumination. If there's an upcoming trip or event, you can be sure that I'll write endlessly about this gear and that gear right up until it happens. And the gear lineup might change many, many times before I go. I look at old trips, the cameras I took and the results I achieved, then think about what a future trip might require. It's one of the delights of being an obsessive gearhead.

In your case, I'd think about it like this: a road trip means you can bring a bit more than on a plane, but not so much that you have to leave some behind. Take a kit that you can comfortably carry in a shoulder bag or secure, discreet backpack.

The USAF museum potentially means exploiting wide angles to capture wingspans, and the ability to get close to see engine and fuselage details. For this, I'd take the K3 with a standard zoom if you have one, and/or a good wide and a fast 35 or 50.

 

[Prest_400]

This is what I mean by a 21mm "portrait". It's not exactly the traditional definition, but ...

Current thinking for me is that a fast 35 could work as a single prime for travel, but I'd have to complement it with a compact like the Panasonic LX10. Just thinking out loud.

I have actually thought that as a RF medium format user, I have been exposed to a wider field of view of 35-40mm equivalent (Fuji 6x9's) and by dad have veered towards environmental portraiture.
Haven't scrolled back to my first contribution in the thread, but likewise have found a 35-40mm quite a good field of view. Sometimes for travel and scenics it does not feel wide enough.

Recently got a P645n with 35mm (aha, 21mm equivalent) which in Girl math makes me happy that is very cheap and versatile compared to a Hasselblad SWC with A16. Never been an ultrawide user but it actually does not feel overwhelmingly wide. I am considering to travel with it. For size contraints might leave the zoom behind. This last paragraph is so un-RF 😱😀
And another un-RF FL is having a 70-200mm. My m43 has one equivalent attached basically permanently, it is great for mountainscapes and I keep coming back to a camera club member advice that "mountains might feel like you want wide, but they are often far and a telephoto really works well" which felt very real advice when I was in and around Norwegian Fjords.

The 1" sensor P&S are IMO almost everything I would need and want for agile digital travel. My RX100 bit the dust and I resist buying another, sadly feels an update for compacts would be really welcome. It might sound stupid, but USB-C charging is really a great feature that I did not expect to be that good in my EM1.3 and felt I was paying 200€ just for it.

 

[wlewisiii]

Each year's journal contains an ongoing travel gear rumination. If there's an upcoming trip or event, you can be sure that I'll write endlessly about this gear and that gear right up until it happens. And the gear lineup might change many, many times before I go. I look at old trips, the cameras I took and the results I achieved, then think about what a future trip might require. It's one of the delights of being an obsessive gearhead.

In your case, I'd think about it like this: a road trip means you can bring a bit more than on a plane, but not so much that you have to leave some behind. Take a kit that you can comfortably carry in a shoulder bag or secure, discreet backpack.

The USAF museum potentially means exploiting wide angles to capture wingspans, and the ability to get close to see engine and fuselage details. For this, I'd take the K3 with a standard zoom if you have one, and/or a good wide and a fast 35 or 50.

Yeah, the K3 is probably my best all around kit:
APS-C with 15/4, 20-40 zoom, 70/2.4 (all limited), DAL (aka cheap 😉 ) 55-300, FA 35/2 & FA 50/1.4

The other thing I'm seriously pondering is that I have a nearly full set of Nikkor RF lenses, an Amedeo Adapter and my Leica M 240 to use them digitally. CV 21, 28, 35. Multiple 50s 😀 105 & 135. I really really love my uncoated collapsible Sonnar 50/2 that is adapted to Nikon standard.

The real problem with taking too much is that something just won't get used anyway and is at risk of loss, breakage or theft.

So one or the other and the Rollei for film.

 

[Archiver]

Yeah, the K3 is probably my best all around kit:
APS-C with 15/4, 20-40 zoom, 70/2.4 (all limited), DAL (aka cheap 😉 ) 55-300, FA 35/2 & FA 50/1.4

Sounds like a good kit. In my case, I would slim that down even further to 15/4 to cover wide angle, 20-40 as general purpose zoom, and either the 35/2 or 50/1.4 for low light.

The other thing I'm seriously pondering is that I have a nearly full set of Nikkor RF lenses, an Amedeo Adapter and my Leica M 240 to use them digitally. CV 21, 28, 35. Multiple 50s 😀 105 & 135. I really really love my uncoated collapsible Sonnar 50/2 that is adapted to Nikon standard.

This also sounds like a good kit, just as versatile as the K3 kit. The difference is that the K3 kit gives you the convenience of a zoom lens, which may or may not be important to you. I've traveled mostly with primes for many years now, but every now and again I travel with a zoom and am reminded of how fun and handy it is. It also comes back to how much you enjoy RF shooting vs DSLR shooting, and what kind of results you prefer. The M240 has a unique sensor and look, but the K3 produces gorgeous colours, too.

In the mid 2000s, I traveled with a guy who had an entry-mid level Nikon DSLR and one of those all-purpose zoom lenses, probably a 18-300 or similar. I was really surprised and impressed with the range and quality of images that he was capturing with it, everything from windsurfing close ups to landscapes. I was using a Canon G7 at the time, no slouch, but not the same level of image quality as an aps-c DSLR. I mention this because in later years, I traveled with the M9 and a few primes, and while the image themselves were incredible, I sometimes missed shots because I had the wrong focal length, and cropping only goes so far.

 

[wlewisiii]

I packed up my bag tonight with the Leica, my CV 21/4, Kobalux 28/3.5, Super Rokkor 50/2 on the camera, Elmar 90/4 for Leica mount lenses and the put my Nikkor 35/2.5 & 105/2.5 along with the adapted Zeiss Sonnar 50/2 in there. Compact, lots of very different looks depending on what I want to do.

Tempting. Very tempting.

 

[boojum]

If not packing an M body the A7M III with the Sony 24 - 240 zoom just about covers it. It's a good camera, a "git 'er done" machine that does well, shoots fast, has good color and image and sometimes makes me wonder why I was not happy with just it. It is the most flexible and reliable camera I have.

Very fast and capable autofocus, IBIS, Auto ISO and Auto WB, it is a very good P&S. The 24 - 240 zoom range just about covers everything and is good optical quality. IIRC all of this album was shot with it on my old A7M II. La Ferté-Alais Air Museum This album also: Giverny

 

[Archiver]

If not packing an M body the A7M III with the Sony 24 - 240 zoom just about covers it. It's a good camera, a "git 'er done" machine that does well, shoots fast, has good color and image and sometimes makes me wonder why I was not happy with just it. It is the most flexible and reliable camera I have.

Very fast and capable autofocus, IBIS, Auto ISO and Auto WB, it is a very good P&S. The 24 - 240 zoom range just about covers everything and is good optical quality. IIRC all of this album was shot with it on my old A7M II. La Ferté-Alais Air Museum

Back in the day, I did a huge road trip with the 5D Mark II with the 24-105L, 35L, Sigma DP1 aps-c compact and the Canon G10 compact. The 5D covered so much with the 24-105, it was awesome. Today, I could get a 28-200 for L mount, or use the Panasonic 24-105 with similar versatility as before.

 

[38Deardorff]

35mm on the M or 28mm on the lllg

 

[phranklee]

40mm Sony G, 26 Nikkor ơn APS Z (~40e), 40mm VC SLii on SLR

 

[Archiver]

40mm Sony G, 26 Nikkor ơn APS Z (~40e), 40mm VC SLii on SLR

Interesting choices. I have the 40mm SL II as well, funnily it is decent/okay on the 5D Mark II, but excellent on a mirrorless camera with a current sensor. Lenses like this and Voigtlander's 28mm f2.8 SL II make me think that it is very possible for them to make high quality pancake lenses for mirrorless cameras, they just haven't done it yet. Now a combination of 28 and 40 pancakes on a mirrorless camera? Oh wait, NIkon has that...

 

[Peter_S]

35 or 40mm. 35 mm was my go-to (shaped by using the Contax T3 for just about anything), but I find 40 mm neat. 40 mm can be as versatile as they can be a bit boring.