p.2 #1 · do i REALLY need to take the 16-35/4 for landscapes?
jmmaher wrote:
Just out of curiosity - when was the last time anyone who has responded has had a modern body fail on a trip? (Not talking about pro jobs here). I have stopped carrying a backup body in recent years as my experience is that bodies rarely fail in use. My iPhone does do double duty just in case as would something like an RX100 variation that would double as light weight go out to dinner option.
I know this was not what was asked but I believe the issue was traveling light.
My Fuji X-T3 crapped out temporarily in 2019 after being caught in heavy rain on Madeira. Luckily it came back to life after a while.
Agree that failures are extremely rare but it also sucks hard if you‘re on a trip and your only proper camera dies for some reason.
I also dropped my Nikon D700 + tripod off a 2-3m ledge in Lofoten (or rather the wind did). The camera survived miraculously but the tripod did not.. I would have had another camera body with me but had to drive 2h to buy a replacement tripod :/
p.2 #2 · do i REALLY need to take the 16-35/4 for landscapes?
jmmaher wrote:
Just out of curiosity - when was the last time anyone who has responded has had a modern body fail on a trip? (Not talking about pro jobs here). I have stopped carrying a backup body in recent years as my experience is that bodies rarely fail in use. My iPhone does do double duty just in case as would something like an RX100 variation that would double as light weight go out to dinner option.
I know this was not what was asked but I believe the issue was traveling light.
Fair point. I'm still using my 2018 Z6 and Z7 which never failed in 2o or so trips over the years - mountains, cities, glaciers, zodiacs. If I'm headed to a destination I've been to before - or photography isn't the main point of the trip, I won't bother with a back-up and, as you, use my iPhone. I've used an RX100 as my only camera on some city trips where I just don't want to be that old grey haired guy with the camera.
p.2 #3 · do i REALLY need to take the 16-35/4 for landscapes?
I have just been to Vietnam and Cambodia 18 months ago. I have also been to Japan, Thailand, Singapore, Myanmar, China in the SE Asia region over the past 20 years.
When I was in Vietnam and Cambodia last year, it was the first time I have used a Z24-120 f4 lens for my travels and it did about 90% of my photos and I also took the Z14-30 f4 and Z180-600 on my Z8. As a travel lens, the Z24-120 f4 is the perfect focal length range but I sometimes missed the 24-70 f2.8 for its 2.8 ability for those shallower DOF shots - an additional 35 f1.8 or 50 f1.8 or 85 f1.8 might have been an idea. I basically didn't use the 180-600, it was taken "just in case" I went to an area where there were birds or animals, but it was a silly thing to consider as I really knew there was not going to be an opportunity. A last-minute brain explosion inclusion packed just before we left. It was a 2 couple "guided" tour, and we went with another close friend couple. It wasn't what you could call a photographic tour as I was the only photographer and so artistic and creative photos were not always possible. I had a very bad back for the first week and this also hampered my photographic endeavors.
The 14-30 was very handy in some situations, especially at Angkor Wat. If I went again, I would take a fast prime like a 50 f1.8 or 85 f1.8 just for the portraits of Monks that you can get. For general landscapes, you probably don't need the 16-35 f4, but it depends on how artistic and creative you want to get with your photographs. If you have the time for creativity, then it can be a good addition, if not it will only be used sparingly.
I missed a few things in Vietnam that I wish I had remembered to go to see some partly due to my bad back. Don't forget to see the incense village in Quang Phu Cau - look up the incense village and see the type of photos you can get. I am really kicking myself for forgetting to go see it and getting photos.
I highly recommend Angkor Wat if you can get to see it. The largest religious building in the world. However, Siam Reap, where it is located, can get very hot AND humid! It was around 40Deg C (104Deg F) and 90% humidity when we were there! The hotel pool was warmer than the temperature, hotter than bath! I joked to my wife, if she came across a cool spot in the pool, it was where I had taken a pee! (definitely joking of course!). However, Angkor Wat was definitely worth the heat. Get one of those neck coolers "coths" and soak it in cool water before you go out and replenish it as you go, it helps.
I loved both Vietnam and Cambodia and there are lots of great things to photograph.
Ha Long Bay in Vietnam is very nice, do an overnight boat tour. Do not miss Hoi An. Unfortunately for me it was less a photographic tour, and more a travelogue tour and we only had two weeks total. For most of my daily outings, I just took the Z8 + 24-120 around my neck and the 14-30 f4 in a bum bag with a dry washcloth wrapped around it. If I went there again, it would be the Z14-30, Z24-120 a 50 f1.8 or 85 f1.8 and/or/instead the Z70-200 f2.8 and maybe the 1.4x TC. My photos here: https://pbase.com/lance_b/vietnam_2024
p.2 #4 · do i REALLY need to take the 16-35/4 for landscapes?
jmmaher wrote:
Just out of curiosity - when was the last time anyone who has responded has had a modern body fail on a trip? (Not talking about pro jobs here). I have stopped carrying a backup body in recent years as my experience is that bodies rarely fail in use. My iPhone does do double duty just in case as would something like an RX100 variation that would double as light weight go out to dinner option.
I know this was not what was asked but I believe the issue was traveling light.
It will definitely happen if I take only one camera with me
On my first Antarctica trip, I dropped my D810 down a stairway in the boat and broke the mounting on the body
Luckily I had my D500 and A7r iii as well.
Personally I never consider my phone as a backup though.
p.2 #5 · do i REALLY need to take the 16-35/4 for landscapes?
robfilms wrote:
my question (finally!): do i REALLY need to take the 16-35/4 for landscapes or will 24mm suffice?
If / when you find a scene that benefits from more than 24mm, take multiple images and stitch. Three portrait shots stitched together with about 20% overlap gives you a very wide angle lens. And stitched images don't add any weight or bulk to your travel gear
p.2 #6 · do i REALLY need to take the 16-35/4 for landscapes?
jmmaher wrote:
Just out of curiosity - when was the last time anyone who has responded has had a modern body fail on a trip? (Not talking about pro jobs here). I have stopped carrying a backup body in recent years as my experience is that bodies rarely fail in use. My iPhone does do double duty just in case as would something like an RX100 variation that would double as light weight go out to dinner option.
I know this was not what was asked but I believe the issue was traveling light.
A few years ago, I swapped lenses on the first day of a trip in a pollen-filled environment. I obviously didn’t realize it at the time. The sensor got covered in pollen that was visible in most of the pictures and the camera became unusable for a few days until I got a wet cleaning kit.
p.2 #7 · do i REALLY need to take the 16-35/4 for landscapes?
My vote for a compact travel with Nikon would be one z camera + z24-70/4 + 35/1.4 (or 28/2.8 or 40/2), unless you have in mind something specific to photograph there that requires different lens.
p.2 #11 · do i REALLY need to take the 16-35/4 for landscapes?
There is always one correct answer to the question "do I need lens X".
1) You never "need" any particular lens.
2) Sometimes it is helpful to have a lens if it fits your shooting style
3) To answer #2 Download Exposureplot or a similar program https://www.vandel.nl/exposureplot.html
4) Run it on your library
5) Look at the histogram
If more than 25% of your images are below 24mm then you "need" the 16-35.
p.2 #12 · do i REALLY need to take the 16-35/4 for landscapes?
24-70 over 24-120?
olegkin wrote:
My vote for a compact travel with Nikon would be one z camera + z24-70/4 + 35/1.4 (or 28/2.8 or 40/2), unless you have in mind something specific to photograph there that requires different lens.
p.2 #14 · do i REALLY need to take the 16-35/4 for landscapes?
Sounds like an awesome trip. I think you are all set in terms of gear. I would even skip the backup camera, just use your phone as a backup. At 71, with no checked luggage on a multi-week trip, there is no way I'd carry a backup. Z camera, 24-120/4 and 40/2. Done.
p.2 #15 · do i REALLY need to take the 16-35/4 for landscapes?
coyotecai wrote:
24-70 over 24-120?
Either one works, but since we’re talking compact travel, size wins over range as long as it’s still versatile. The 24–120/4 is my go-to for random trips when I don't know what I will shoot, and every time I use it I wish it was a bit smaller.
