I always found that primes make you think harder about a photo you're about to take. As a result the % of keepers taken with prime lenses is much higher for me. I cannot claim that it's a universal rule, but plenty of well known photographers shared the same observation, so at least I'm not alone.
And since one of your requrements is the ability to shoot in low light, the second piece of advice is to consider manual focus lenses for travel. AF adds bulk and weight, and not even needed for most situations, especially with gorgeous focus assist capabilities of modern mirrorless cameras. Besides, in true low light situations AF may hunt or miss anyway. The f/1.2 or f/1.4 Voigtlanders are wonderful for walking around at night.
Beautiful photo! Thank you for sharing it. On your first point--agreed. I used to only shooting with primes. Then the flexibility of zoom took over especially when I shoot for clients, and the 70-200 2.8 became my fav lens. That said, I do miss my primes.
I wasn't thinking about manual focus for low lights but that sounds like a great idea. Now I'm rethinking my strategies...so many options
Beautiful. I do prefer to shoot aurora with a bit more details of the foreground--will that be limited by f4? I have not done any astro besides using my phone so asking
This is done by my iPhone 16 pro. Had to do some post processing to bring out the aurora.
I don’t think F4 versus F2.8 is going to make any difference for foreground personally. Especially on a modern Sony body which has good ISO performance.
Truebeam wrote:
I've been there once. Planning for my next trip. That said, I don't know how often I'd go to Iceland (yet). Looks like I can't really get away from a longer range lens. Can you recommend a compact light weight tripod for travel--obviously solid enough that won't flip easily with any wind. Wind can be pretty strong in Iceland. Thank you for your advice.
I just use inexpensive lightweight tripods that I got for not much at a garage sale, so you might solicit higher quality tripod options. Not as concerned with checking them though
I photographed aurora here recently using one though, lightweight tripod but it was calm out and 30 sec exposure, youre not going to have much trouble imo, using a light lens . MLU can help. You'd probably need more stability if its windy though
I’m travelling currently with 16-35 GM2, 50 1.2 GM and 85 1.4 GM2, and depending on the day I carry one or two lenses. Most used has been the 50mm. I could have easily lived with 35mm GM and 85mm GM, and missed May be 5-7% of my wide angle shots. But we’re in a city, for your kind of photos you’ve posted, 16-35 is a great lens.
I left 28-70 f2 GM and 50-150 f2 GM at home, as also a couple of other primes.
Tarekith wrote:
I don’t think F4 versus F2.8 is going to make any difference for foreground personally. Especially on a modern Sony body which has good ISO performance.
Theoretically I agree! I've been watching some YouTube videos about Aurora lately. Seems it moves fast so long exposures will not be able to catch the shape or movement but rather a "green bulb". Seems aperture does matter. They all exclusively use f2.8 or lower.
I posted this in a different thread but it belongs here too.
Small and fast manual focus primes have been my main travel lenses for the last year. I always bring a fast AF lens along as well just in case. We spent 9 days in Paris this year and I used the tiny Thypoch 28/1.4 about 70% of the time and used the Sony 50/1.4 GM to photograph the paintings and other art in museums. The Sony 20/1.8 and CV 10 also made a few appearances.
On our recent trip to Hawaii, I again used a small Thypoch manual focus lens about 70% of the time - the 35/1.4. The CV 21/1.4, TTArtisans 75/2, and the Viltrox 14/4 filled out the rest of my images (I brought the 70-200GM II just for a whale watching tour).
With small and fast primes on vacation, I carry two lenses with me in a sling bag. One lens on the camera and one in the bag. I like to mix and match something different each day. For instance, I’ll have the 35/1.4 on as my main lens but bring either the 75mm or 21mm or 14mm. Whatever my fancy is that morning. The next day will be different. I may decide to use the 21/1.4 as my main lens and bring along the 50/1.4 to match it. It makes things easy, relatively light, and loads of fun. Far more fun for me than a zoom.
sandy27000 wrote:
I’m travelling currently with 16-35 GM2, 50 1.2 GM and 85 1.4 GM2, and depending on the day I carry one or two lenses. Most used has been the 50mm. I could have easily lived with 35mm GM and 85mm GM, and missed May be 5-7% of my wide angle shots. But we’re in a city, for your kind of photos you’ve posted, 16-35 is a great lens.
I left 28-70 f2 GM and 50-150 f2 GM at home, as also a couple of other primes.
Thank you! This is very helpful! I"m almost convinced with 16-35 GM. Looking for recommendation for long lens to pair with 16-35. 135 isn't a whole lot lighter than 70-200 GM, which I already have.
mudlake wrote:
I posted this in a different thread but it belongs here too.
Small and fast manual focus primes have been my main travel lenses for the last year. I always bring a fast AF lens along as well just in case. We spent 9 days in Paris this year and I used the tiny Thypoch 28/1.4 about 70% of the time and used the Sony 50/1.4 GM to photograph the paintings and other art in museums. The Sony 20/1.8 and CV 10 also made a few appearances.
On our recent trip to Hawaii, I again used a small Thypoch manual focus lens about 70% of the time - the 35/1.4. The CV 21/1.4, TTArtisans 75/2, and the Viltrox 14/4 filled out the rest of my images (I brought the 70-200GM II just for a whale watching tour).
With small and fast primes on vacation, I carry two lenses with me in a sling bag. One lens on the camera and one in the bag. I like to mix and match something different each day. For instance, I’ll have the 35/1.4 on as my main lens but bring either the 75mm or 21mm or 14mm. Whatever my fancy is that morning. The next day will be different. I may decide to use the 21/1.4 as my main lens and bring along the 50/1.4 to match it. It makes things easy, relatively light, and loads of fun. Far more fun for me than a zoom....Show more →
Great tips. Thanks for sharing your experience. I don't know any of the manual focus prime lens you mentioned. Will look into them. Curious to see your images in Paris and Hawaii.
Truebeam wrote:
Great tips. Thanks for sharing your experience. I don't know any of the manual focus prime lens you mentioned. Will look into them. Curious to see your images in Paris and Hawaii.
Truebeam wrote:
A big part for all my trips (mostly solo trips) is taking photographs (more creative work than casual shots). Mostly interested in landscapes, street, and occasional self portraits (streets or landscape as backdrop). Prefer simple/minimum set up. Next trip: Iceland. I have a Sony A7 CII (bought for traveling purpose). Which one(s) of the following Sony GMs should I get?
Sony 16-35/2.8
Sony 24-70/2.8
Sony 50/1.4, 80/1.4, 35/1.4
I do like to shoot in low light. Want fast FS.
Ideally I'd prefer just one zoom. If not, one zoom plus one prime. What are your thoughts/experiences? Would love to see your sample traveling photos. If you could indicate what lens you used for your photos, and what focal lengths that'd be great. Many thanks in advance!
P.S Doesn't have to be Sony GMs...Added a few photos I took in Iceland by my phone so to give you some idea what kind of landscapes I like. Phone images are far from ideal but welcome critiques.
Hate the big watermarks--wasn't intentional but hard to get what I like on my phone. Also would like to know if I can downsize the images so they won't take up the whole screen. ...Show more →
Looking at your lovely photographs, I would say that you like the range that is covered by the 24-70 GM II, a very fine lens that is useful for travel but for much else besides. It is bigger than some of the alternatives, but it is a very fine lens that covers a lot of the most prime photographic territory. I might also bring something like the Voigtlander 40mm 1.2 (manual focus) for low light and an alternative rendering. After you've spent a lot of money on those, the next lens I would get and bring is the 16-35 GM II, another great and very useful lens.
Alternatively to the lenses you asked about, I would urge you to consider the Sony 16-25 and 24-50 f/2.8 G lenses. These are excellent lenses and are rather small and thus travel-friendly. You could supplement these with the Voigtlander 40/1.2 and the TTArtisan 75/2.0. You could get all four of these for fairly close to the price of the 24-70 GM II.
chiron wrote:
Looking at your lovely photographs, I would say that you like the range that is covered by the 24-70 GM II, a very fine lens that is useful for travel but for much else besides. It is bigger than some of the alternatives, but it is a very fine lens that covers a lot of the most prime photographic territory. I might also bring something like the Voigtlander 40mm 1.2 (manual focus) for low light and an alternative rendering. After you've spent a lot of money on those, the next lens I would get and bring is the 16-35 GM II, another great and very useful lens.
Alternatively to the lenses you asked about, I would urge you to consider the Sony 16-25 and 24-50 f/2.8 G lenses. These are excellent lenses and are rather small and thus travel-friendly. You could supplement these with the Voigtlander 40/1.2 and the TTArtisan 75/2.0. You could get all four of these for fairly close to the price of the 24-70 GM II.
Thanks for your compliments on my phone photos :-) ! Used to carry my Nikon all the time but been lazy lately, plus my Nikon system is quite heavy. I'd got all of them if I had the $$$ :-). Now I'm mainly trying to decide between a good zoom or a couple primes such as 24 or 35. You are probably right, I like to shoot in 20-70 range. Thought about 28-70 f4 but not having the 24 range is a little deal breaker for me. Lately been looking into 24-105 f4, pair with a fast wide prime; or a 16-35 f2.8 pair with a tele prime. Decisions decisions decisions.
The GM 24/1.4 is fairly light and small and takes beautiful pictures. It is also close to the typical main lens of most phones. With a little cropping it covers the applications of a 35mm too. Then maybe a Tamron 28-200 to be able to frame landscape details without long extra walks?
)