Going on vacation - which lenses to bring?

[erikzen]

I'll be leaving on tomorrow (Aug 29) for Cape Cod and I'm trying to travel as light as possible. I'm trying to decide what lenses I should bring with me.

Undoubtedly, you have seen my thread about a lens for whale watching. I've settled on the 70-300mm for that so obviously I'll be bringing that. I also have 3 other lenses, the 14-42 and 40-150 kit lenses, as well as the 50mm macro. Ideally, I'd like to bring just two lenses with me but I'm afraid if I leave one home I'll be missing it at some point on the trip.

Besides trying to get shots of the whales, I will be primarily taking shots of my kids exploring the Cape - from the slightly tacky but extemely photogenic mini-golf and ice cream parlor excursions, to the beautiful Cape Cod National Seashore.

My first thought is to bring the 14-42. This will give me enough width to catch the kids if we're sitting in a booth at a clam shack or ice cream parlor or to capture them playing on the beach with the ocean in the background.

However, the best lens I have is the 50mm. It consistently takes the best photos under a variety of lighting conditions. It may also come in handy should we come across a tidal pool of sea horses or a horseshoe crab that I may want to get up close and personal with.

Last on the list is the 40-150. This seems like the least practical since I have the longer telephoto. However, I am anticipating that lens not working all that well as the light starts to fade and if we happen to be out in the early evening and want a little more reach than 42mm this lens would probably be better.

Of course, I could just bring all four lenses with me but leave the ones I'm not using in the car or hotel room, but with all the other gear we'll be bringing, it would be nice to have a couple less items to worry about.

So if you could only bring 1 of the 3 lenses plus the 70-300, which would it be and why?

[MB1]

It has to be the 14-42 unless you want to be all telephoto all the time. The 14 is going to work a lot better indoors than any of the other focal lengths you are thinking about.

FWIW we did a 2 week trip from Frankfurt to Budapest and all I took was the 14-42 (we were on a bicycle so weight was a concern). Got some great shots but for those times when I wanted another lens it was wide I was missing more often than long......and you are already planning on bringing a long lens.

[dumpy]

I'd say either the 14-42 or the 50, preferably both. I think the 14-42 is the most applicable to what you will be shooting, but you did say that you take the best shots with the 50mm, that should tell you something. Feet zooming is always an option. It's also the fastest lens in your quiver.

I never like to leave the house without a macro lens, but thats just me. I can think of some cool macro possibilities on a vacation to the coast, so if that's your gig, you may want to think about that as well.

How big is the 50mm?? I have the 35mm and it's a pretty small lens, I can't imagine the 50mm is that much bigger and the 14-42 is not a huge lens either. I say bring those two, plus your new tele and leave the other kit lens home.


Have fun and we are all anxiously awaiting some whale pics!!! (no pressure or anything )

[Sushigaijin]

I'd leave the 40-150 behind. that leaves a gap from 50mm to 70mm, but I don't think that will make much difference. Two standard grade telephotos are redundant. The 14-42 and 50 f/2 are both micro sized lenses that might even fit in your pocket, although I know the 50 is a stout little hand-grenade of a lens that lets you know you have some serious equipment on board...In any case, I wouldn't leave the 50 behind if you payed me to, and I'd like to have the 14mm end of the 14-42 also.

[erikzen]

I never like to leave the house without a macro lens, but thats just me. I can think of some cool macro possibilities on a vacation to the coast, so if that's your gig, you may want to think about that as well.

It's not really my "gig" so to speak - my kids are my "bread and butter" (or at least the reason my wife turns a blind eye to the cost of my somewhat expensive hobby) - but I do like to try and grab some macro shots from time to time. I've been reading some other user reviews around the web on the 70-300 and see that many people are using it sort of as a macro to good effect

How big is the 50mm?? I have the 35mm and it's a pretty small lens, I can't imagine the 50mm is that much bigger and the 14-42 is not a huge lens either. I say bring those two, plus your new tele and leave the other kit lens home.

The 50mm and the 14-42 are approximately the same size with the 50mm just being slightly thicker and a hair longer. The 50mm is bit deal heavier though, but not burdensomely so. Three lenses may be manageable, especially if I just pick two for daily excursions.

Have fun and we are all anxiously awaiting some whale pics!!! (no pressure or anything )

Fun is my number one objective but hopefully I'll get a few useable shots. Thanks!

[erikzen]

It has to be the 14-42 unless you want to be all telephoto all the time. The 14 is going to work a lot better indoors than any of the other focal lengths you are thinking about.

That is my thinking as well. Thanks.

[erikzen]

I'd leave the 40-150 behind. that leaves a gap from 50mm to 70mm, but I don't think that will make much difference. Two standard grade telephotos are redundant. The 14-42 and 50 f/2 are both micro sized lenses that might even fit in your pocket, although I know the 50 is a stout little hand-grenade of a lens that lets you know you have some serious equipment on board...In any case, I wouldn't leave the 50 behind if you payed me to, and I'd like to have the 14mm end of the 14-42 also.

It's looking more and more like 3 lenses will be taking a vacation. Oh, the sacrifices we make for our art!

[dumpy]

It's not really my "gig" so to speak - my kids are my "bread and butter" (or at least the reason my wife turns a blind eye to the cost of my somewhat expensive hobby)

Then I must ask (not to dig too deep or get too personal), how do you justify the headphone hobby to her? That sounds like an expensive one as well.. I'm just looking for tips and pointers!!:thumbsup:

[Greg McCary]

I think MB1 has it. The 14-42 would be my choice. The 50mm is just to limiting with a fixed focal length. I rarely use the 40-150 and I bet when you get use to the 70-300mm you will probably never use it.

[erikzen]

Then I must ask (not to dig too deep or get too personal), how do you justify the headphone hobby to her? That sounds like an expensive one as well.. I'm just looking for tips and pointers!!:thumbsup:

Good point. First off, I had a fair amount of headphone equipment before I got married. That created a base of capital I could use to sell and trade. I would say I've bought 75% of my equipment used. When I upgrade, which I haven't done in a while actually, I usually sell off my old gear. Also, there is a fairly robust DIY community. One of the amps I have I paid $140 for. It was hand built by an experienced builder using high quality parts and cost $250 when new. It rivals headphone amps costing twice as much.

My current main rig is a pair of vintage Stax Lambda Pro headphones with matching Stax SRM-1/MKII amplifier; being fed by a modified Sony SACD/DVD player with upgraded clock and power supply utilizing the coaxial digital output; to a non-oversampling Digital to Analog Converter made by a boutique electronics company called Ack Industries.

I bought all of the components used. I paid $600 for the headphone and amp, $350 for the DVD player (which by the way also makes an excellent home theater player in its own right) and $500 for the DAC. For less than $1500 I have a system that rivals many I've heard costing 3 times as much, brand new. I would wager that it rivals many very expensive speaker systems in terms of overall sound quality, although headphones are a unique experience, quite different from speakers.

Of course, I bought and sold many components along the way but that is part of the fun. If you want to build a headphone rig suited to your tastes, on a budget, you have to be dilligent in checking the for sale forums and patient enough to wait for what you want at your price.

I suppose you could buy used camera equipment as well but there are no mods or DIY pieces of kit available. Also, it doesn't seem like many Olympus lenses get sold off, except for the 14-42 and 40-150, which I already have.

[dumpy]

Good point. First off, I had a fair amount of headphone equipment before I got married. That created a base of capital I could use to sell and trade. I would say I've bought 75% of my equipment used. When I upgrade, which I haven't done in a while actually, I usually sell off my old gear. Also, there is a fairly robust DIY community. One of the amps I have I paid $140 for. It was hand built by an experienced builder using high quality parts and cost $250 when new. It rivals headphone amps costing twice as much.

My current main rig is a pair of vintage Stax Lambda Pro headphones with matching Stax SRM-1/MKII amplifier; being fed by a modified Sony SACD/DVD player with upgraded clock and power supply utilizing the coaxial digital output; to a non-oversampling Digital to Analog Converter made by a boutique electronics company called Ack Industries.

I bought all of the components used. I paid $600 for the headphone and amp, $350 for the DVD player (which by the way also makes an excellent home theater player in its own right) and $500 for the DAC. For less than $1500 I have a system that rivals many I've heard costing 3 times as much, brand new. I would wager that it rivals many very expensive speaker systems in terms of overall sound quality, although headphones are a unique experience, quite different from speakers.

Of course, I bought and sold many components along the way but that is part of the fun. If you want to build a headphone rig suited to your tastes, on a budget, you have to be dilligent in checking the for sale forums and patient enough to wait for what you want at your price.

I suppose you could buy used camera equipment as well but there are no mods or DIY pieces of kit available. Also, it doesn't seem like many Olympus lenses get sold off, except for the 14-42 and 40-150, which I already have.

I'm single, but in a fairly long running relationship, I will take your advice as "Buy the stuff before your finances are combined and then use that stuff to further fund the hobby". Seems like a solid investment plan to me :thumbsup:

While not an audiophile (strange considering my occupation as an AV nerd), I have expensive bike and ski habits, plus the obvious photo diversion. I know that unfortunately I will some day have to justify these expenses.

I believe it was on MTBR (PR's mud loving sister site) that I saw a discussion of "wife receipts". There are people on there that are having bike shops print them 2 receipts, one for real and one to show the significant other. That made me laugh!!

[erikzen]

The 70-300mm turned out to be quite versatile. It performed well under a variety of situations although for the whale watch, the impetus for buying the lens in the first place, was remarkably difficult. This was primarily due to the rough seas on the trip.

As a telephoto:





As a portrait lens:





For landscapes:

[Greg McCary]

Thanks for posting the pictures, maybe next time out the seas will be much calmer. After you get comfortable with the lens be sure and post some thoughts here and also write a review. We need as many as we can get on Oly glass.

[erikzen]

After going through my photos I think I could have gotten away with just the 14-42 and the 70-300; and if I wasn't going on the whale watching trip I might have left the 70-300 home and been pretty happy.

However, I'm still impressed with the quality of the shots I was able to get with such a long telephoto. Here is a shot at 273mm. The composition leaves a little to be desired but the clarity is very nice, and this was on an overcast day.

[Greg McCary]

Thanks for posting. I hope to be upgrading from the 40-150mm soon and all of the info helps. I am impressed with the 70-300mm