# Ok, so I took my T3i/24-105 combo to Mexico



## lilmsmaggie (Oct 9, 2013)

Just returned from 2 weeks in the Yucatan (primarily Cancun) with family and friends. Took along a T3i and 24-105. Went on two excursions: Visited Ek Balam and a nearby cenote the first week; Sotuta de Peon and Merida the following week.

For the most part, walk-around general shooting with this combo was ok. Architectural-ish wide-angle type shooting -- not so good. For example: Sotuta de Peon is the oldest working hacienda in Mexico. Beautiful, Colonial style structure built in the 1800's. Interior shots were a challenge if not outright impossible.

I didn't want to deal with a lot of lens changes in the heat and humidity and occasional rain that is common during the rainy season in the Yucatan. I probably should have taken my 17-55 instead of the 24-105 but I think the focal range would have been similar with the 24-105 providing a bit more reach. 

I guess this was a live and learn situation for me. I don't have the 10-22 and no plans on purchasing one.

Everything was shot RAW so I don't have any images to show (I've only been back 3 days and the first day was a crash day due to being up for about 16-18 hrs because of flight delay out of Cancun).

Maybe next time, shoot FF and 16-35 or something similar and just come to grips and carry 2 lenses.

If you could do this trip with these two venues in mind, what would you bring?


----------



## Skirball (Oct 9, 2013)

A 10-22, something small and fast for dark situations (50/1.4), and a general purpose lens with lots range. 24-105 would be ok, but so would something smaller like an EF-S zoom that would be lighter - providing I owned one. 

Do you own a FF and a 16-35? If so, yeah, that's what I would have taken. But if I only had a crop and I liked architectural shots I'd get a 10-22, no question.

I never really understood the not wanting to take more than 1 lens thing. That's why I bought an SLR, so I could use the optimal lens for a situation. I'll go light for outings, but I'll take more than 1 on a trip and leave the extras in the room if needed. Usually though sticking a 50mm in a bag or pocket isn’t a big deal and it’s nice to have if things get dim. I've never had a problem changing lenses in damp, humid, and dirty places all over the globe. With some practice you can do it quite quick.


----------



## wsmith96 (Oct 9, 2013)

I hear that a 15-85 is a wonderful walk around lens.


----------



## Jim Saunders (Oct 9, 2013)

If I was going to go to Mexico I'd take a Rebel and my Tamron 17-50; Enough lens and camera to be worth carrying around, not so much camera that I would miss it if someone really felt they need it more than I do.

Jim


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 10, 2013)

Although the 24-105 is a great lens on a crop camera, its not wide enough in many situations. I prefer my 15-85 for general use.


----------



## lilmsmaggie (Oct 10, 2013)

Skirball said:


> A 10-22, something small and fast for dark situations (50/1.4), and a general purpose lens with lots range. 24-105 would be ok, but so would something smaller like an EF-S zoom that would be lighter - providing I owned one.
> 
> Do you own a FF and a 16-35? If so, yeah, that's what I would have taken. But if I only had a crop and I liked architectural shots I'd get a 10-22, no question.
> 
> I never really understood the not wanting to take more than 1 lens thing. That's why I bought an SLR, so I could use the optimal lens for a situation. I'll go light for outings, but I'll take more than 1 on a trip and leave the extras in the room if needed. Usually though sticking a 50mm in a bag or pocket isn’t a big deal and it’s nice to have if things get dim. I've never had a problem changing lenses in damp, humid, and dirty places all over the globe. With some practice you can do it quite quick.




I do have a 5D MKII. It was a last minute decision on my part to take a DSLR vs a P & S. My FF lens options include a couple of primes: 241.4L, 100 2.8L and a 70-300L I also took a laptop but not with photography in mind. In hind sight, I should have taken advantage of the technology on hand but I wasn't sure what I would be doing in terms of sight-seeing. So, the T3i 24-105 was a compromise. Usually, I only have a single carry-on bag when I've visited Mexico ion the past. The one piece of equipment I definitely regretted not taking with me was a tripod. Beautiful night sky. To borrow a quote from Carl Sagan: "Billions, and billions of stars ..."

My last trip to Mexico, I had booked a tour to Ek Balam and it was cancelled because I was the only person to sign-up for the tour. I was expecting a similar outcome this trip but 5 other people signed up, so I'm really glad that I got to go. Ek Balam and the nearby Cenote Maya are worth going back to visit.




Jim Saunders said:


> If I was going to go to Mexico I'd take a Rebel and my Tamron 17-50; Enough lens and camera to be worth carrying around, not so much camera that I would miss it if someone really felt they need it more than I do.
> 
> Jim




I wasn't really concerned about the equipment but I'm 64 and let me tell you; if you're not in the habit of doing some type of cardio exercise on a regular basis, climbing a pyramid will test your mettle. The Mayan pyramid at Ek Balam is not as high as the one at Chichen Itza but its gonna work some muscles. It was a treat for me to have been able to safely climb to the top of Ek Balam. At the top, you're presented with a beautiful vista of the surrounding jungle and the other Mayan ruins including the ballpark in the distance. 

I say a treat because you can no longer climb the pyramid at Chichen Itza. A man fell to his death their a few years ago.

After a few hours of trekking through an archaeological site like Ek Balam in the heat and humidity, you definitely want to be traveling light. The cenote Maya at Ek Balam is cavernous, the water is very, very deep and very, very cold. I did not see anyone other than myself carrying a lot of camera equipment. Mostly, P&S's. With the exception of one woman from Monterrey, Mexico. She was photographing and doing video with an iPad. 

Smart lady.


----------



## CharlieB (Oct 10, 2013)

lilmsmaggie said:


> For the most part, walk-around general shooting with this combo was ok. Architectural-ish wide-angle type shooting -- not so good. For example: Sotuta de Peon is the oldest working hacienda in Mexico. Beautiful, Colonial style structure built in the 1800's. Interior shots were a challenge if not outright impossible.



Back a long time ago, the only (and first) camera that I owned was a Nikkormat FT2 and a 50/2.0 Nikor. Thats it. So, I shot with what I had, and knew its limitations and had work harder and get some interesting images. I shot mostly Kodachrome and Tri-X. Today, I look at some of those old negatives and slides from time to time, and ....I wonder why my images don't have a certain spark to them. Its because I've gotten creatively soft. 

You didn't have the lens to take the shots you had pre-determined that you'd wanted. But think of the shots that you didn't take, and could have, because you were wishing for more.


----------



## Ruined (Oct 10, 2013)

If you want an all-in-one vacation zoom IMO 24-105 won't cut it on crop as it simply is not wide enough... you need something that can do 17-18mm. As you stated in the OP, the 17-55 probably would have been ideal walkaround, maybe with a 55-250 stm in your pocket for telephoto range when you need it. Another option could have been the 18-135 stm but that would have yielded worse quality than all of the other lenses mentioned... then again not getting the shot at all is worse than less than ideal image quality IMO.

The 24-105 is a nice range if you have full frame, though.


----------



## bratkinson (Oct 10, 2013)

Ruined said:


> If you want an all-in-one vacation zoom IMO 24-105 won't cut it on crop as it simply is not wide enough...
> The 24-105 is a nice range if you have full frame, though.


I couldn't have summed it up better. When I had my 60D, I started with an EF-S 18-135 and loved it as an 'all around' great lens! But indoors, f3.5-5.6 didn't do well at all without a flash. So I replaced it with a 24-105, knowing I'd go FF one day. But I often needed 'wider' than the 24 (38mm equivalent FOV) could provide, so I ended up getting a 16-35 f2.8L for my 'wider' needs. When travelling, I'd take those two, one mounted and the other in a Lowepro case strapped to my waist. 

But since upgrading to a 5D3, the 16-35 sees little use. The 24-105 does just about everything. Although just a couple of weeks ago, I took the 24-105 and 135 f2L to Chicago. I shot with the 135 for about an hour or so. I should have used it more. The 135 ROCKS!!!


----------



## bholliman (Oct 10, 2013)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Although the 24-105 is a great lens on a crop camera, its not wide enough in many situations. I prefer my 15-85 for general use.



+1

The EF-S 15-85mm is a terrific walk around lens for travel. Maybe add a fast prime like a 35/2 IS or 35/1.4 for low light situations.


----------



## Sella174 (Oct 10, 2013)

lilmsmaggie said:


> ... but I'm 64 and let me tell you; if you're not in the habit of doing some type of cardio exercise on a regular basis, climbing a pyramid will test your mettle.



I would have taken the 5DII on the trip and bought a 50mm f/1.8 ... for wider angles, the 24mm f/1.4 lens is perfect.


----------



## TrabimanUK (Oct 10, 2013)

Had similar issues on my first safari - one body and 18-55, 70-300 and a "screw-on" wide angle thing to add to the 18-55. Total pain as the right lens was never on the camera at the right time and got a LOT of dust on the sensor through swapping.

Ended up getting an extra body for the second trip and better lenses (24-70 and 70-200 IS2), oh and a wife who took her's along adding 10-22 and 100-400 to the range, so effectively 10mm-400mm covered off, so never had to swap lenses, just camera setups. 

Wives are handy like that


----------



## Skywise (Oct 10, 2013)

I have both the 17-55 and the 10-22 that I carry around with me when traveling (along with my Canon T4i)

I used to primarily shoot with the 17-55 and occasionally switch to the 10-22 for large landscape shots but overtime I've found myself primarily shooting with the 10-22 and only switching to the 17-55 if I need its low light capabilities or a more detailed shot (the 17-55 is still sharper or I want to go closer then 22 will let me).

I have to shoot at ISO 3200 for lower light conditions and you get the vignetting, of course, and that used to keep me switching back to the 17-55 - but using Lightroom for post processing I can clean up a lot of that and end up with color/lighting that are as good as the 17-55 shots (I always shoot RAW). Now, the LR'd 17-55 shots look BETTER but I find I prefer the breadth of my shots with the UWA.


----------



## mkabi (Oct 10, 2013)

I think I've said this before. Even with the kit lens I rarely zoomed in, especially on a crop.
So, remember most kits begin with 18mm.... which translates to 28-29mm on FF

I would say any camera either crop or FF and either 16-35 or 17-40.


----------



## Chosenbydestiny (Oct 10, 2013)

You could have perhaps done a pan or tilt and stitch. A friend of mine does it handheld with a 50mm on full frame and the results were unexpectedly good.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 10, 2013)

I'm not real sure where this thread is supposed to be going...but for the past few years my standard travel kit has been the 15-85 EFS and the 70-300 L. Those two lenses cover about 95% of situations I am in. (Used on a 7D). 

This year I added a Fuji X-20, which I used for hiking the Grand Canyon. I was very glad I did. I took it to the bottom on the Canyon and left the 7D and lenses in the hotel on the rim. I saw several hikers lugging their DSLRs and could tell they were too miserable to think about taking pictures. I think the X-20 will be seeing a lot of use in future years when hiking and biking and I don't want to carry a DSLR. It will be when the pictures I'm taking are for personal memories rather than portfolio building. That little camera is just fun to use.


----------



## monkeyhand (Oct 10, 2013)

lilmsmaggie said:


> She was photographing and doing video with an iPad.
> 
> Smart lady.



My uncle uses his iPhone to make local documentaries. Even has a small steadicam attachment. The videos all look good too.


----------



## AlanF (Oct 10, 2013)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Although the 24-105 is a great lens on a crop camera, its not wide enough in many situations. I prefer my 15-85 for general use.



+1

The 15mm is just so useful - the 15-85 is a much more useful range on crop than 24-105.


----------



## ablearcher (Oct 10, 2013)

My Mexico kit has 7D, 10-22 plus a prime or two for evening shots (mostly people). I usually take 28/1.8 plus 85/1.8. This kit is quite small and not too heavy. I never had any need in a longer telephoto..


----------



## lilmsmaggie (Oct 11, 2013)

CharlieB said:


> You didn't have the lens to take the shots you had pre-determined that you'd wanted. But think of the shots that you didn't take, and could have, because you were wishing for more.



Not exactly true. I had no photographic plans per se. This was not a planned photographic outing. In fact, my original thought was just to hang around the resort and spend the time reconnecting with my brother who I haven't seen in 3 yrs. Other than our usual Wally-mart trip for groceries, I could have easily remained at the resort. Travel arrangements at this particular resort are handled by Thomas More Travel. 

Everybody wants to go to Chichen Itza, Tulum, Xcaret, Xel-Ha. I've been to those places. Its the excursions like Sotuta de Peon and Ek Balam that are hit or miss and more likely to get cancelled. As it stands both groups for these tours were small (Ek Balam there were 6 of us; Sotuta de Peon and Merida, 15). These were perfect size groups but I just got lucky and why I basically was pessimistic of being able to go to Ek Balam in particular in the first place. As far as Ek Balam is concerned, I think I got what I wished for. Sotuta de Peon wasn't even on my radar. 

If the travel agent hadn't mentioned Sotuta de Peon as an alternative to going to the Mayan ruins at Coba (which is where I WANTED to go), I would not have gone. Up until that point, I new absolutely nothing about Sotuta de Peon. It wasn't even on the tour board at the desk and there were no tour brochures. The agent went in the back office to get one for me after he told me about it.

The T3i/24-105 (with the exception of the 17-55 or maybe a G11), was really the only combo I considered taking. 

I wasn't looking forward with having to deal with TSA and especially Mexican customs personnel. I've had enough trouble with the later to not even want to take anything that might get confiscated. For example, my last trip to Mexico in 2006 resulted in having my cologne confiscated, even though it was well within the regulated size. Security/Customs in Mexico can be unpredictable. There have been times where I've had absolutely no issues entering or leaving Mexico; and there have been times where I felt I was living a nightmare. Generally speaking, I don't travel with both a camera and a laptop in my possession, so this was my first time where I had both. I like to travel light. The less I have to carry and/or check the better.

My next trip to Mexico will be a planned photographic outing. I will definitely be taking a tripod on that trip along with a variety of focal lengths to cover most possibilities.


----------

