mas24 Loc: Southern CA

A friend who owns a Sony a6000 with two lenses, the 16-50mm and the 55-210mm, took a trip to England a couple of years ago and said they was sufficient enough, because he didn't want to lug around a lot of camera gear. One lady on this forum, who owns a Nikon full frame camera, stated that when she travels abroad, her Nikon 20mm prime wide angle lens never leaves her camera body. And she traveled several countries. If you're doing wildlife, a lens such as a 100-400mm or 200-500mm is necessary. A wide angle lens would be necessary for landscapes. Is it necessary to take most or all of your lenses on a trip. What focal ranges do you prefer going on any trip. Or is just one only zoom lens sufficient? Home or abroad.

tinplater Loc: Scottsdale, AZ

Obviously depends upon where you are traveling... a safari or sporting event would be different than a river cruise in Europe. When in doubt and limited to one camera I take my Sony RX10m3 24-600mm range. If I want highest quality for general travel I take Sony A7rII plus 24-70 2.8, Zeiss 50mm 1.4, and 28 2.0. I do not enjoy lugging lenses around when walking, so the 24-70 gets by far the most service.

OviedoPhotos

Depends on how you travel. On a car trip I take two bodies and three lenses. A prime 50mm mounted on the d600, and a 28-300 all purpose zoom on a d800. Then I have available a 80-200 f2.8. My son takes a 10-24 on his d3300.

When I travel by plane we take a Sony a6000 and a3000 with one lens each. We prefer carry on bags so we give up versatility for weight savings. I recently bought a sony rx10 and that will be on my next trip which is by air.

Two batteries for each camera along with a SD card for each day.

erinjay64

You can get by with one long zoom lens (18-270mm, or such)...if you are shooting mainly snapshots which will be emailed, or printed at 3x5 inch, or 5x7 inch. If you want to print much larger, or you want to win photo contests, or sell to magazines, that won't be such a good lens. The more zoom power you have, the fuzzier your photos will be. You will get sharper images from a zoom which is 3X (three power), or less....where the top mm focal length is three times, or less, the smallest one. A 35-70mm zoom is 2X, so it will give better images than will a 70-300mm lens (4.28X). A 30-300mm lens is 10X, so it will not be so great for serious photos....once in a lifetime trips abroad, weddings, publication, or such. What sort of photos you want to shoot, and why you want to shoot them, will determine what lens is best. For serious photos, I use a series of Prime lenses...single focal length items...a 35mm lens, and a 90mm lens, and a 250mm lens, and such. The bother of bulk, and weight, is made up for by the increased image quality. If you are too weak to carry several lenses, and are shooting less serious things, go with a super zoom (18-270mm, or such). Your situation may be different form another photographer's so your best lens may differ, too.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

Recently I have found my 24-70mm to be quite useful. However, when I used the 28-300mm, it pretty much never came off the camera (when I just had the D7000). The only time it did was when I used my 10-24mm. When I got my D800, I put the 28-300mm on it and the 10-24mm on the D7000. This combination works great on vacations. The new 24-70 is nice, too.

Bill_de Loc: US

Look at the pictures your friend took and see what you think. That will give you better insight than asking what others use, unless they show you the results. You could take advice from somebody who praises a lens or lenses but couldn't take a picture to save their life.

At the very least if read something here that sounds good, take a look at what that individual posts. Some will be great while others maybe not so much.

--

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

If you learn to stitch panoramas, you don't need to bring a "wide lens for landscape" - a simple wide to short tele will be all you need, like an 18 to 70 or 135 - and if you understand how to shoot wildlife, you can absolutely be happy with a 300 F4, and a 1.4TC for those more difficult and more distant subjects. A "single covers it all" lens does not do a great job at most focal lengths, and they are usually poorest at the long end. One exception are lenses that are intended for full frame which typically have bad corners and edges - these will work pretty well on a crop body. The awful Nikon 28-300 actually does ok on a D500, D7200 etc.

Spirit Vision Photography Loc: Behind a Camera.

When I travel, not knowing what I may encounter, I bring along a 20-40, 24-135 and a 70-210 lenses. If I am traveling very quickly and lightly, I find that the 24-135 glass will cover just about everything.

SVP

(Download)

Bill_de Loc: US

Might be helpful to know if they are mounted on a ff or crop sensor camera. The fov would be quite different.

--

asiafish Loc: Bakersfield, CA

I just got back from 2 1/2 week vacation in the U.K. There was a lot of street photography, some landscape photography and the usual travel stuff. I don't shoot wildlife at all.

I bought two cameras with me, my Leica M-D rangefinder and my Leica X-E compact. The X-E mainly sat in my suitcase as a backup, and came out once for an evening stroll when I just didn't want to carry my real camera with me, but its APS-C sensor and 24mm f/2.8 (36mm equivalent on full-frame) was more than adequate for some great street photography that evening.

For the Leica M-D, I brought three lenses, though could have done just as well with two, or even one. I used the 28mm f/2 for about 50% of my photography, the 50mm f/0.95 for about 35% and the 35mm f/1.4 for about 15%. This tells me that I could easily have left the 35mm lens at home (I almost did) and not really missed it, but also that I could easily have brought ONLY the 35mm lens and left behind both the 28 and 50mm lenses at home and done just as well.

Having the assortment gave me more versatility, and this was important as I didn't even carry everything with me except for when moving from city to city. For walking I never went out with more than one camera and one lens, and while there were moments where a different lens would have been better, never did fail to get some "must have" shot because I had the wrong lens. What helped was knowing what I was doing each day. On the Thames river cruise, I brought the 50mm both for the increased subject isolation at distance that its f/0.95 aperture (ND filter required) made possible as well as for its longer reach. When touring castles or the magnificent Roman ruins at Hadrian's Wall, it was always the 28mm that was my first choice. For casual wandering by day, again the 28mm, and at night the faster 35mm (or faster still 50mm when I wanted to capture some London nightlife).

I will be heading to Korea in June and will likely bring only the 35mm (last time I took only a 50mm) and then to Japan in October when I'll likely leave the 35mm at home and take just the 28mm and 50mm, and maybe, just maybe stash the 90mm f/2.8 in the bag, but only if we plan to stay somewhere with a view of Mt. Fuji.

So, I guess my philosophy for travel is that less is more. I don't even own a zoom lens and honestly see no need for one.

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

The same like always, when you're not on vacation!! No really, it does not matter if you are on vacation or not. You probably not going to change your shooting style, or change to shoot the things you are normally interested in, so it's all the same!! Think about what you are going to see and what you are most likely like to shoot and then take whatever lenses you feel will suffice!! It's all very simple!

JPL

Nothing is necessary. It is a matter of options and choices what you take with you. If you take just one lens, say 18-55 kit lens you can always take panorama shots or 2-3 shots when you need wider lens and stitch them together. And when you need to zoom in you could start with getting closer to your subject. There is no single formula that tells you what you need when travelling. But what many people do is to use a bridge camera as travel camera.

MtnMan Loc: ID

In order:
No
For air trips not involving wildlife my Sigma 17-50 on the D5300 f2.8 does the job. Or more recently my GM5 with 12-32. If wildlife (e.g. Africa) lug the 200-500 and D800.
Sometimes.
Travel by auto I take multiple cameras and lenses. When cruising National Parks with wildlife I take D5300 with 200-500 and D800 with 16-35. Walking around I take Panasonic GM 5 (Micro 4/3) with 12-32, and if I expect critters 45-200.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

On my trips I take a 18-200 and a 50.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

Everyone travels and shoots differently.
A pro also shoots very differently than a novice.
If you are on safari, you'll have to balance size with sensible portability.
On my last vacation I took a 100-400, the first time I've ever had it on a plane and used it one day I knew I might get some bird shots.
Otherwise I usually take a 70-200 but rarely use it. It's the first one I leave home if travel involves a plane.
My MOST used travel lenses are my 24-105 and 50 1.4 on a FF, but I don't shoot macro.
I also almost always take a flash(my camera doesn't have one) but rarely use it! Good luck
SS