Indiana Loc: Huntington, Indiana

Returned from two week trip to Ireland and Scotland with my Nikon 850 and 24-120 lens. Left my 16-35 at home and should have brought it. Was concerned with extra weight. Photo coverage was adequate with the 24-120, but could have been lots better with the wide angle 16-35. Next trip I will take both and just deal with the weight and lens change. Great trip with my adult son. Lots of photo ops everywhere.

Orphoto Loc: Oregon

Um....what sort of a discussion were you hoping to generate?

rmorrison1116 Loc: Near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania

Maybe a discussion on lenses, or a lighter travel camera?!

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

Last week, I attended the annual convention of the history and modelling association for a well-known former US railroad. It was three days of excursions, primarily for photography, and three days of meetings. The excursions involved travel via rail and bus, and the pace was very fast. Most of us carried one camera, and I didn't see anyone ever change lenses.

I carried a D500 or a D850 each day, each with a Nikkor 24-120mm f/4 like you took on your trip. The interesting discovery was that either camera served just fine. I only wished I'd had the D850 instead of the D500 the day that we spent time in Kansas City Union Station. I'd have liked to have the wider view of the full frame camera, but I was able to adapt my shooting and do just fine anyway. The Union Pacific depot in Topeka was too wide even for 24mm on the full frame camera, but a quick panorama fixed that.

If I'd been in my own car, having my 14-24mm f/2.8 would have been nice, but I'm really glad I wasn't having to keep up with it on the bus. There weren't any situations in which 120mm wasn't long enough. A couple of the folks had 28-300mm lenses of various heritages, even on a D850, but I never saw a situation to use a lens anywhere as close to that long, and I was really glad not to be hauling such a beast around.

Gatorcoach Loc: New Jersey

How many critical pictures were missed between 16-24mm using your lens at 24mm??

ELNikkor

I don't think you missed that much without the extra 8mm. I travelled out west in 2020 with the 24-120 on my D750. My 20mm stayed in the bag for all but one photo of a rainbow. Also, I used the 24-120 for a great hand-held pan-stitch 180 degree shot of the Columbia River Gorge. You could have used the same technique for any wider-than-24 shots you needed in Ireland/Scotland.

zug55 Loc: Naivasha, Kenya, and Austin, Texas

This ties into the long-standing discussion about the perfect travel lens. I still think that I would take a standard zoom if I could only take one lens. My preferred travel lens is the Sony 24-105mm--close to your 24-120mm. (A 24-70mm would work too.) I also include a Zeiss Batis 18mm prime in my travel kit--a great lens, but I do not use it all that often. I have taken the Sony 24-105 to Ireland twice--including earlier this year--and never wished for a wider lens. Obviously, the preferred focal length is a somewhat personal choice, but would agree with others that you did not miss that much by not having a wider lens.

bobmcculloch Loc: NYC, NY

Last trip we took to Maine, May this year, we traveled by car and I took most of my lenses, used 10-18 almost exclusively on my T8i, could have let the rest home.
BTW in the process of posting them on Flickr and FAA now if your interested

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

None. At KCUPT, I simply replanned my shot, walked a few steps, and got exactly what I wanted. At the Topeka Union Pacific station, it took less than a minute to take 5 shots to be stitched into a panorama. Even with a wider lens, at least a 3 shot panorama would have been required.

jbk224 Loc: Long Island, NY

Actually an excellent post by the OP.
How many discussions have there been here regarding what lens(es) to carry for a particular trip? (Rhetorical ?!)
This is the OP's observation from an actual recent experience.
Any post (after your post) that questions the true value of his post is completely off base.

Thank you to the OP for your personal observation and conclusion.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Learn the hard way.
That is why we have various lenses to get the right composition or even the shot.
Yes it weighs a little more but if only one lens is desired then just use your cell phone.
At a minimum I always bring my 10-18, 24-105 and 100-400. And all three seem to get used pretty equally.
I easily fit them in a quite small Domke canvas bag.
Yes there is weight, but I am not flying to the moon where weight could be an issue.
Hope you had fun and learned as well to bring a small range of lenses if you really want to take advantage of the D850.

ronpier Loc: Poland Ohio

I shoot DX and have a Tamron 17-50 2.8 that handles most of my travel needs. FOV is 25-75. Images are sharp with great colors in all of my Nikons.

GeneinChi Loc: Chicago, IL

This is always an interesting topic. A short time ago I posted a similar question regarding taking only one lens on a trip. I got many wonderful we’ll thought out responses. I solved my on question by borrowing a friends Sony rx10 if for my trip,to Scotland in the fall. I’m currently trying to figure out the mind boggling menu system with the help of Alexander White’s instruction book. In the end, it’s whatever works for you is the best lens for what you want to accomplish on your photographic journey.

joehel2 Loc: Cherry Hill, NJ

I found that when I carried the 17 - 35 with the my D cameras over the years, i.e. D800, 810, 850, my photos were usually shot @ 28mm, except for Aurora ops when I shot at 17mm. For general travel photography, the 24 - 70, f2.8, doesn’t leave my D850.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Good to know. So many people ask about travel lenses. It's good to hear from someone with experience.

I'm going to visit a friend for a couple of days, and I'm bringing my little Fuji with a small wide angle lens.