p.2 #2 · Lightweight Kit: Full Frame + Small Lenses or APS-C for travel?
nineblade wrote:
Yeah, my normal travel set up is a Z7II with the 24-120 and a few other lenses, but I find it glued to the camera like 70% of the time. Sometimes I do think it's overkill.
So I have considered getting a 24-70 like someone had mentioned above, but it seems like losing a lot of range just for chopping a bit of bulk.
You have a lot of megapickles to crop from. Just sayin.
p.2 #3 · Lightweight Kit: Full Frame + Small Lenses or APS-C for travel?
Max Power wrote:
You have a lot of megapickles to crop from. Just sayin.
Yeah, and when I use the 24-120, I kiss the darn thing for having the 70-120 range and the ability to crop. I don't often feel like I need much beyond 120.
p.2 #4 · Lightweight Kit: Full Frame + Small Lenses or APS-C for travel?
olegkin wrote:
If you don’t have a specific shot or location in mind that requires a special lens, just take the 24–120/4 and leave the rest at home. I’ve never ended up using the compact primes I packed when I also had a zoom. Of course, if you’re into macro, birding, or whatever else you enjoy shooting on vacation, the recommendation might be different
Yeah, I'd say during travel, I spend 70% of the time with the 24-120 glued on, 20% with the 24 1.8, and everything else is scattered. So I think I can cover a lot of territory with those two lenses.
I would bring a 14-30 with me, and be to lazy to even mount it. I'd just skip the shot opportunity.
p.2 #5 · Lightweight Kit: Full Frame + Small Lenses or APS-C for travel?
Yeah, I'm in the Sony ecosystem.
So my thoughts are:
Nikon Zf (a pretty heavy brick) with some light lenses (40 f2, 24-70 f4 maybe, or the 24-50, etc.)
Fuji X-T5 or X-T50 with the usual range of lenses. I loath this one because I am not in the Fuji system at all.
Sony A7CII: I have some Sony lenses, and they are perfect for an A7C. 20-70, 20 1.8 prime. I could add a 40mm 2.5 but that seems like it's not necessary. You're not gaining a whole lot from f4 to f2.5, just a little over a stop to carry 1 lens, and it's a fricking $750 lens. The other weird thing is I have an A7R4, and I don't think the A7CII saves that much bulk. It's the main reason I haven't gotten it.
Someone mentioned the A6*** series. I have a A6500 with a set of lenses, 24 1.8, 16-50, 10-20, 55-200 etc. It's definitely lightweight, I just never, for some reason, feel too drawn to the camera. I might actually sell all the Sony APSC stuff to get some cash for one of the options above.
p.2 #6 · Lightweight Kit: Full Frame + Small Lenses or APS-C for travel?
I upgraded from Fuji XF to Nikon Z and have been enjoying the ability to capture scenes as my eye sees them. With the Fuji, I would spend 3x the time wrestling with highlight compensation as anything with sunlight would blow out constantly, and the colors were generally a bit flat. The one+ stop less dynamic range is very noticeable in the smaller sensor. With the Z and a good prime attached, I barely need to adjust the files to get the colors and contrast to my liking. The larger grip on the Z5 fits my hand well and makes the weight manageable.
My most used lens on vacation is a Voigtlander 35/1.7 Ultron. Solid all-around, and it's literally brass. I carry wider and longer lenses but the 35 tends to stay on the body.
p.2 #7 · Lightweight Kit: Full Frame + Small Lenses or APS-C for travel?
nineblade wrote:
Yeah, I'm in the Sony ecosystem.
So my thoughts are:
Nikon Zf (a pretty heavy brick) with some light lenses (40 f2, 24-70 f4 maybe, or the 24-50, etc.)
Fuji X-T5 or X-T50 with the usual range of lenses. I loath this one because I am not in the Fuji system at all.
Sony A7CII: I have some Sony lenses, and they are perfect for an A7C. 20-70, 20 1.8 prime. I could add a 40mm 2.5 but that seems like it's not necessary. You're not gaining a whole lot from f4 to f2.5, just a little over a stop to carry 1 lens, and it's a fricking $750 lens. The other weird thing is I have an A7R4, and I don't think the A7CII saves that much bulk. It's the main reason I haven't gotten it.
Someone mentioned the A6*** series. I have a A6500 with a set of lenses, 24 1.8, 16-50, 10-20, 55-200 etc. It's definitely lightweight, I just never, for some reason, feel too drawn to the camera. I might actually sell all the Sony APSC stuff to get some cash for one of the options above....Show more →
The Zf only makes sense if you are drawn to how it looks and operates. It’s not a small or light camera (esp compared to the Z7ii).
Agree that Fuji doesn’t make sense given your already operating two and a half systems.
The Nikon 24-50mm is pretty meh. Not sure it’s worth the size and weight saving.. I’d rather put your APS-C 16-50mm on the A7R4 and combine it with a FF prime (e.g TTartisan 40mm f2, if you think the Sony 40mm is too expensive). Not sure how much size and weight saving there is with the 16-50 vs your 20-70 though..
p.2 #8 · Lightweight Kit: Full Frame + Small Lenses or APS-C for travel?
asdfghreturns wrote:
I upgraded from Fuji XF to Nikon Z and have been enjoying the ability to capture scenes as my eye sees them. With the Fuji, I would spend 3x the time wrestling with highlight compensation as anything with sunlight would blow out constantly, and the colors were generally a bit flat. The one+ stop less dynamic range is very noticeable in the smaller sensor. With the Z and a good prime attached, I barely need to adjust the files to get the colors and contrast to my liking. The larger grip on the Z5 fits my hand well and makes the weight manageable.
My most used lens on vacation is a Voigtlander 35/1.7 Ultron. Solid all-around, and it's literally brass. I carry wider and longer lenses but the 35 tends to stay on the body....Show more →
Ahh, yeah, that's good info, thanks. Yeah with no familiarity with Fuji, I think that was one of my bigger fears. Sony FF sensors are nice to work with.
p.2 #9 · Lightweight Kit: Full Frame + Small Lenses or APS-C for travel?
fjablo wrote:
The Zf only makes sense if you are drawn to how it looks and operates. It’s not a small or light camera (esp compared to the Z7ii).
Agree that Fuji doesn’t make sense given your already operating two and a half systems.
The Nikon 24-50mm is pretty meh. Not sure it’s worth the size and weight saving.. I’d rather put your APS-C 16-50mm on the A7R4 and combine it with a FF prime (e.g TTartisan 40mm f2, if you think the Sony 40mm is too expensive). Not sure how much size and weight saving there is with the 16-50 vs your 20-70 though.. ...Show more →
I do like how the Zf looks, but as I'm playing with it now (just received it) it's mostly looks (lol). But I suppose I'll go out and take some pictures before I jump to conclusions. I do like some quicker access to ISO and/or shutter speed, but I just don't know how much quicker it will be versus regular dials.
p.2 #10 · Lightweight Kit: Full Frame + Small Lenses or APS-C for travel?
nineblade wrote:
I do like how the Zf looks, but as I'm playing with it now (just received it) it's mostly looks (lol). But I suppose I'll go out and take some pictures before I jump to conclusions. I do like some quicker access to ISO and/or shutter speed, but I just don't know how much quicker it will be versus regular dials.
Not sure if it’s quicker at all tbh. In situations when I need to adjust my shutter speed quickly, I often set the shutter speed dial to 1/3 stop and use rear dial instead.. but using the brass dials certainly feels nicer.
I can recommend setting the autofocus to auto area AF-C as standard and then setting up the AF-ON button to override that with 3D tracking. Makes for a good mix of speed and control imo.
