Benjamin Marks
Veteran
I am going to be in Tokyo for two weeks next month. I have almost as much fun putting together a kit for a trip, as I do actually going. Yeah . . . bit of a photo nut.
There are three camera choices before me, IQ is excellent in all three:
1) Leica M9/21-35-50-90. Pros: compact; cons: no IBIS, battery life marginal.
2) Nikon D3/21-50-105. Pros: great battery life; cons: heavy, no IBIS
3) Pentax K1/24-70(zoom), 50 (or 31/40/77). Pros: IBIS, better high ISO; cons: no ultrawide.
The Pentax is the new toy -- the files are huge, larger than I need, in fact. But the IQ is astounding -- equal or better to what medium format could give me in the 90's. ISO's up to 3200 are perfectly usable, and it will be winter in Japan -- plenty of darkness. But I don't really have an ultrawide for it, and like to travel with one when I am visiting somewhere new. Also, I am still learning the camera and occasionally have to reset it to factory settings when I don't know how to engage a particular function.
The Leica is probably the sweet spot for file size and quality, although the high ISO usability tops out at 1600. I have a couple of batteries, and can address battery life that way.
The Nikon is the old warhorse. Utterly dependable. I have a full selection of lenses -- no compromises on lens choice. It is heavy, but the battery will go for days. File sizes and resolution are moderate, by today's standards.
So: I'd frame the question this way -- which would you choose? The lenses you feel you need, or the IQ the "latest and greatest" will surely provide?
[Edit: the smart move is no doubt to go with an Oly m 3/4 and a couple of lenses. Smarter (and kinder) for aging back . . .I always overpack, this is a habitual error of mine.] :0
There are three camera choices before me, IQ is excellent in all three:
1) Leica M9/21-35-50-90. Pros: compact; cons: no IBIS, battery life marginal.
2) Nikon D3/21-50-105. Pros: great battery life; cons: heavy, no IBIS
3) Pentax K1/24-70(zoom), 50 (or 31/40/77). Pros: IBIS, better high ISO; cons: no ultrawide.
The Pentax is the new toy -- the files are huge, larger than I need, in fact. But the IQ is astounding -- equal or better to what medium format could give me in the 90's. ISO's up to 3200 are perfectly usable, and it will be winter in Japan -- plenty of darkness. But I don't really have an ultrawide for it, and like to travel with one when I am visiting somewhere new. Also, I am still learning the camera and occasionally have to reset it to factory settings when I don't know how to engage a particular function.
The Leica is probably the sweet spot for file size and quality, although the high ISO usability tops out at 1600. I have a couple of batteries, and can address battery life that way.
The Nikon is the old warhorse. Utterly dependable. I have a full selection of lenses -- no compromises on lens choice. It is heavy, but the battery will go for days. File sizes and resolution are moderate, by today's standards.
So: I'd frame the question this way -- which would you choose? The lenses you feel you need, or the IQ the "latest and greatest" will surely provide?
[Edit: the smart move is no doubt to go with an Oly m 3/4 and a couple of lenses. Smarter (and kinder) for aging back . . .I always overpack, this is a habitual error of mine.] :0
ptpdprinter
Veteran
Leica M9 and lenses. It's the smallest and lightest of the choices. I'd probably leave the 50mm at home.
Dogman
Veteran
I'll agree with ptpdprinter. Except I would leave the 90mm at home.
D
Deleted member 65559
Guest
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Are you into static objects at f8 under low light?
This is the only reason I could find to be abscessed with IBIS.
Personally I quit on DSLR for trips years ago. Too big.
Last time I took digital on trip it was M-E with 28 and 40. Largest aperture was f2. No issues with low light.
This is the only reason I could find to be abscessed with IBIS.
Personally I quit on DSLR for trips years ago. Too big.
Last time I took digital on trip it was M-E with 28 and 40. Largest aperture was f2. No issues with low light.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
M9 with either 21/50 or 35/90 or 50/90 lens pairs would be enough for me. I find it very rare that I get much value out of carrying a third lens these days.
On my holiday trip to Ireland and the Isle of Man last year I had the M-D + 35/50 with me, and the 50 made 90% of my photos. I should have carried the 90 on that trip as the longer focal length would have enabled a few photos that I passed on because I'd have to crop too much.
Add a small tabletop tripod to accommodate the limited high ISO capability and lack of image stabilization in the M9. That makes it easy to hold the camera up against something or down on something for a good stable shot.
G
On my holiday trip to Ireland and the Isle of Man last year I had the M-D + 35/50 with me, and the 50 made 90% of my photos. I should have carried the 90 on that trip as the longer focal length would have enabled a few photos that I passed on because I'd have to crop too much.
Add a small tabletop tripod to accommodate the limited high ISO capability and lack of image stabilization in the M9. That makes it easy to hold the camera up against something or down on something for a good stable shot.
G
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
Ah, but I will be traveling with my family, which means more portraits than I would take on a pure tourist jaunt. Particularly with the M9's low-light capabilities, a fast 50 or 35 is a godsend. Still, there are other choices.
Maybe the M9 with lenses, and small Oly m /4/3 as a backup, with an M-adapter. Monopod for low light.
I could go:
21/2.8 Biogon
35/1.2 Nockton (the M9 wears this v.1 beauty most of the time anyway)
50/1.4 Summilux or 75/2 Summicron
or for smallest kit:
15 Heliar
35 Biogon
90 Elmarit
Maybe the M9 with lenses, and small Oly m /4/3 as a backup, with an M-adapter. Monopod for low light.
I could go:
21/2.8 Biogon
35/1.2 Nockton (the M9 wears this v.1 beauty most of the time anyway)
50/1.4 Summilux or 75/2 Summicron
or for smallest kit:
15 Heliar
35 Biogon
90 Elmarit
willie_901
Veteran
I vote for the K-1. Of course, if you typically prefer to use a wider angle of view than the Pentax kit allows, then the M9 would be good.
The K-1 is much smaller and weighs about 25% less than the D3. Would it be that hard to become sufficiently familiar with the K-1
The M9 is much lighter than the K-1. But you mention anticipating plenty of low light situations which is a handicap for the M9.
I think the D3 is just too big and heavy to lug round for two weeks.
The K-1 is much smaller and weighs about 25% less than the D3. Would it be that hard to become sufficiently familiar with the K-1
The M9 is much lighter than the K-1. But you mention anticipating plenty of low light situations which is a handicap for the M9.
I think the D3 is just too big and heavy to lug round for two weeks.
David Hughes
David Hughes
When I go traveling I often notice little details and photogrph them and that's why I'd suggest a 90mm in the line up.
Regards, David
Regards, David
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Yes, on my trip with M-E I was in company of three daughters. 40/2 and 28 5.6 did it all for me. Portraits on the fly and street photography.
Two batteries for from 10am to 8pm 200+ per day pictures. One memory card, no backup cameras, but iPhone.
It worked as one wide lens for enough light, one fast lens for low light. I had smallest lenses and it was convenient.
One 35 1.2 is enough.
Two batteries for from 10am to 8pm 200+ per day pictures. One memory card, no backup cameras, but iPhone.
It worked as one wide lens for enough light, one fast lens for low light. I had smallest lenses and it was convenient.
One 35 1.2 is enough.
benlees
Well-known
I vote for the K-1, as it's new to you. A wide for it would be ideal, however.
I prefer to travel light- meaning one lens. Worrying about the photos you could have got is just part of the fun.
I prefer to travel light- meaning one lens. Worrying about the photos you could have got is just part of the fun.
Beemermark
Veteran
M9, 21 & 50.
I have too many cameras and always end up taking way too many. End up using the M9 and 50mm for 90% of my subjects. I've tried to force myself to take pictures with the 90 and just can't do it. If you do like the 90 then take the 35 & 90.
I have too many cameras and always end up taking way too many. End up using the M9 and 50mm for 90% of my subjects. I've tried to force myself to take pictures with the 90 and just can't do it. If you do like the 90 then take the 35 & 90.
retinax
Well-known
Over two lenses for me means over one body. Changing lenses is a pain, especially if you're traveling with family and can't take forever to get the shot. I suggest you take the Pentax or the M9 plus the m4/3, and have them share one of the lenses which will serve as the long one on the m4/3.
Or one body and max. two lenses.
Or one body and max. two lenses.
The Pentax and the zoom only.
DanskDynamit
Well-known
I never understood this kind of posts..
airfrogusmc
Veteran
M9 and the 35 is what i would take. This is my usual travel kit.
Larry Cloetta
Veteran
Odd man out, but having had everything except the K1, I’d take the D3 if nailing every shot was important to me. The metering on the M9 is a joke in comparison. No one needs ibis, and the “too heavy” thing that constantly pops up here always astounds me. And I’m old.
But if the photography is just a sideline, and your focus (argh) is on the travel not the pictures, just take the M9 and the 35 like someone else suggested. You’ll get every memory you need.
That means you leave the K1 here, and I’d like to use it while you are away, because it yields the best files.
But if the photography is just a sideline, and your focus (argh) is on the travel not the pictures, just take the M9 and the 35 like someone else suggested. You’ll get every memory you need.
That means you leave the K1 here, and I’d like to use it while you are away, because it yields the best files.
aizan
Veteran
going off of your gallery, i’d just take the pentax with the zoom, and maybe the leica with the 35mm.
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
Well everyone has a point of view, and those points of view are interesting to me, which is why I asked the question. There is always the chance that an argument made here, or an approach that someone takes to their own work, will be useful. So I ask.
Mute-on
Well-known
In my three trips to Tokyo I’ve only ever taken Leica Ms with a combination of two lenses selected from 28, 35 and 50.
I’d go with 35 and 50, given your choices. Add one of the 21 or 90 if you desperately want a third option, but that will be the 10% lens.
We tend to do a lot of walking in Japan, so you will need comfy shoes that provide excellent support, and a backpack for your camera(s) and additional lens(es).
You will love Tokyo. Have a great trip!
Cheers
J
I’d go with 35 and 50, given your choices. Add one of the 21 or 90 if you desperately want a third option, but that will be the 10% lens.
We tend to do a lot of walking in Japan, so you will need comfy shoes that provide excellent support, and a backpack for your camera(s) and additional lens(es).
You will love Tokyo. Have a great trip!
Cheers
J