tomad wrote:
Chuck it all and buy a Sony RX10 IV. It will cover nearly everything on your list in a smaller, lighter package than nearly any body and lens combo listed.
I have this camera. Costs a Fortune!
Take second body, just in case
The 18-105 should cover all you will need. On a trip to France I took an 18-140. I used the 140 only a few times.
niteman3d
Loc: South Central Pennsylvania, USA
There are a lot of suggestions available, but I know that a one-lens solution can take a lot of the hassle out of travel photography. Here's a chance to make a minor adjustment in your kit and maybe find a new favorite lens for a minimum out-of-pocket. KEH has a couple of Tamron 16-300s for about $350 US. If they give you a couple hundred for your 70-300 (depending on which 70-300 you have) you could fill your need with minimum sacrifice.
bsprague wrote:
Consider a "travel camera" like a Sony RX100iv.
Thanks for the suggestion, but this is going to be a quite expensive vacation, much more than we usually spend.
A new camera isn’t in the cards..
Out of your collection I would go with the D7000 and the 18-105, That is how that package was kitted and for good reason. It is light weight and matched in format. For travel and street photography it should work out very well. Don't stress on it it's a travel trip not a photo assignment, enjoy the trip and locations and bring home some nice photos.
Joel Stuart wrote:
Hi Everyone,
I am going on a European cruise mid 2024 and would love your opinions about what to take with me. I want only one lens and body. Here's what I have...
Nikon D700 and D7000
Lenses:
* Tokina 100 2.8
* Nikon 35-70 1.28D
* Tokina 17-35 F4 FX
* Nikon 50 1.8D
* Nikon 18-105 kit
* Tamron 70-300
If I were to take one body and one lens, what would be your choices and why?
Thank you
Joel
Having recently made a similar decision on a trip to Paris, I would grab the 7000 and the 18-105 and never look back. I used a 7100 and an 18-140.
bsprague wrote:
Probably not an option, but you never know.
It was worth a shot, true but I had a feeling that that was not where he was going.
If spending money was an option, I might have suggested a bridge camera. Sometimes we just have to work with what we have.
On the upside, there isn't any reason why he couldn't pump up the ISO to 2000 or more.
I have pics of Notre Dame Cathedral taken with a D7100 at ISO 2500 and some were noisy, but I can live with it.
Longshadow wrote:
It really depends on your photography style, and what you <like to> shoot.
I like to travel light. Given your list, I'd take the body you feel more comfortable using and the 18-105. Add the 50 if there is room.
When I went to Iceland I took an 18-200 and a 50. I only used the 50 for the Northern Lights.
Ditto. Beat me too it.
Go light, go efficient. Went visiting didn't take the Zeiss and 20 rolls of film.
Took the D200 and the (FX) 28-80. Happy
It would be easy for me.
I'd take the 70-300mm on the camera and use my phone camera for standard and wide-angle shots.
Caveat: Only if your phone has a decent camera (or cameras) and lots of storage. For this reason, I use a Samsung Galaxy S20 with a 512GB MicroSD card.
Memo
Loc: South Oregon Coast
I would look into a compact camera and leave your large, heavy DSLR at home. Today’s compact cameras are more than capable of capturing images of good digital quality. Choose one that offers a RAW capture option and you can’t go wrong. You will have many lens choices to decide on. Have a great trip.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.