Craig Gillette
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.1 #11 · Deciding whether to lighten my travel kit from Z63 to Z50ii | |
njofoto wrote:
Please help me think through this. I usually travel with Z63 and 24-120, 14-30 and maybe a prime. It can be lot for me to carry on and around.
I'm going to drive the PCH soon, with much of the time spent in Big Sur. I mainly focus on landscapes when traveling. This trip also provides a whale watching opportunity, and time in the Monterey Aquarium. We will fly out, then drive.
We will be walking around a lot. Weight has always mattered to me, and that keeps getting more important. I usually have my camera on a strap and ready to use. My SO does NOT enjoy slowing down for my photography, so I don't change lenses often.
This trip will offer a lot of F8-F11 daylight photography, but also sunrise, golden hour and some possible dark sky.
My other option is taking my Z50ii (I haven't used it much yet), 12-28DX and 28-400 (or 24-200, or 24-120). Can also take the Nikon prime 40/2 or 24/1.7 DX.
The Z50ii with 12-28 and 28-400 is a Thom suggested kit and makes sense in terms of travel size and weight. I'm just reluctant because I worry I will have the opportunity to get some great images I'd like to blow up for my wall. Have you used this kit and done that? Am I worried for nothing? I'm not planning to sell images, just enjoy them myself. ...Show more →
I happen to be a Sony user but it seems kind of like all of a sudden (well maybe a couple of years) and we've both got several wide range travel zooms, making choices "interesting." We've got some different opportunities with Sony. I live in Southern California and have found my 28-200 gets almost all of my travel use. The 28-400 Nikon intrigues me because there are times and opportunities when I want something between my xx-200 and the 200-600. Now that might be current aps-c 70-350 or the Tamron 50-300. The 28-400 is bigger than several of them but smaller than the 50-400. I think the 28-400 might be too hefty for a casual city walk around, maybe too much "just in case" past 200mm.
And Monterey, Big Sur and Highway 1 down to the San Luis Obispo area is one of those want more than 200mm areas. So, some thoughts.
I did a whale watch out of Morro Bay with the 200-600 on a smaller boat, not the smallest boats but not one of the largest steadiest. It varies trip to trip, day to day. 400mm is maybe not as long as the 200-600 but that was a big beast to try to move quickly and balance with.
The whole "Big Sur" route from Carmel has a lot offer. Driving south, you are on the ocean side.
When you come out of the more mountainous section, Rocky Point, you hit the Hearst San Simeon ranch lands. Hearst Castle, withe possibility of seeing cattle, zebras (not recently for me) and the elk herds. There's an elephant seal rookery area at Piedras Blancas and the acticity there is seasonal and when a lot happening, another one of those 400mm wow spots. Cambrai is a quirky artsy little community and Morro Bay has long beaches, the rock, bay and estuary for marine mammals. Otters are usually out near the base of Morro Rock in the bay, rafting a pretty close kelp bed, mornings, especially. Nice eats from "The Galley" which is very nice seafodd, right on the embarcadero overlooking the bay to Morro Rock and a very nice evening/sunset view. Tognazzini's Dockside Too! is a very informal waterfront spot with local musicians, people are allowed to accompany their dogs, if they (the people) behave.
Around Fisherman's Wharf and out along the walk/drive to the Aquarium and Pacific Grove, including Carmel and Point Lobos, lots of rocky beaches and opportunities for seals, sea lions and otters and sea birds, often in close, too. Perhaps longer focal lengths could be useful but I'm past the strolling with a 200-600.
|
