For Mr. Ditto, above, I have posted quite a few relevant responses in this thread, and I’ll share more as appropriate. And you? ;-)
In short, my idea is that finding the right combination of gear size (e.g. portability) and potential image quality (in the broadest sense) for travel photography is a pretty personal thing. A starting principal is taht you can’t get the very best image quality and flexibility (e.g. lens variety) from the smallest possible systems — and that systems providing ultimate image quality and flexibility can be rather large and can weight you down. (I can see several readers shaking their heads and muttering , “Duh.” :-)
For me the balance has led me to a small APS-C system with three small prime lenses for most travel. While I could produce higher image quality (and larger prints) from my FF system and heavy bag of lenses, that doesn’t fit my style of travel or travel photography… and I can reliably do 20” x 30” prints from this travel gear.
Often, too much gear can actually impede your photography, oddly enough.
But YMMV. Some people are happy with a smartphone. Some cart a miniMF camera with a bag full of lenses.
It is important to ask yourself what you’ll do with the photographs, and the answer to that can help you be realistic about the camera (and lens) selection. It is also worth asking what role the photography plays in your travel. Do you travel primarily to photograph? Or is the travel itself your main goal, with the photography leaning a bit toward being only part of the experience?
gdanmitchell wrote:
It is important to ask yourself what you’ll do with the photographs, and the answer to that can help you be realistic about the camera (and lens) selection. It is also worth asking what role the photography plays in your travel. Do you travel primarily to photograph? Or is the travel itself your main goal, with the photography leaning a bit toward being only part of the experience?
I feel that is the key factor. I travel for photos or not for photos. I'm not going to compromise by taking less or lesser equipment and trying to combine it with other purposes, like not mixing business with pleasure. As a younger person I once tried to take photos on a "family" trip. What a diaster that was! I got few useful photos and it created interpersonal stress. Never again.
gdanmitchell wrote:
Often, too much gear can actually impede your photography, oddly enough.
This is what I've encountered a few times! Years ago when I was shooting film, I took a Mamiya 645 on a family trip to Disney! It was less than ideal to say the least!
Fast forward fairly recently, similar thing happened to me again. I took my R6II with an RF 24-105mm f4.0L and RF 16-28mm f2.8 STM as my primary camera on first-time trip to Japan. I wanted the best IQ I could get from the equipment I own. It was a painful experience. A year or so prior to that trip, I did the same on a 3 week trip to Spain. I was traveling with two elderly family members, and I wanted to make sure I had the best IQ possible, especially for indoor shots, so I took my R6IIwith RF16-28mmf2.8STM and RF 24-240mmf4-6.3 (this was prior to buying my RF 24-105mmf4.0L), plus an R7 as backup with a Tamron 11-20mm f2.8 RDX. Lugging that equipment around Spain was also a painful experience.
My only APS-C camera was my R7, which I sold because of the infamous back focusing issue. That was not a lightweight camera either.
I've owned multiple cameras of different brands and format sizes throughout the years. I've always been on the hunt for the perfect travel camera.
I recently (last week actually) purchased three lenses to use on my Sony A7iv and A7c (Sony 35mm f1.4 GM, Sony 50mm f1.8, and Sony 85mm f1.8). My objective is to use these as my new travel cameras (for wide angle shots I'll be bringing along my Tamron 17-28mm f2.8).