# I have a weight limit....what would you bring?



## JPAZ (May 17, 2013)

This is the kind of post for which there is no single best answer, but I am curious as to other opinions. I will be traveling through Central Asia. I am limited by weight restrictions and it will be quite hot so I am trying to limit my kit. Right now, I am planning to bring my 70-200 f/4 IS, my 24-104, and my 17-40. While I may want to do some building interiors, I am not gonna carry my 14mm and the 100-400 is just too big and heavy for this trip. The 40 would be nice but redundant. My high iso shots have been OK, so I think that I can get by without a lens that fast. I have a Jobey that can squeeze into my bag, so that might be worthwhile.

My questions....anyone traveled through the 'stans before? Does my logic make sense to you? Would you do anything different? Maybe I just want some re-affirmation of my logic (or lack of) here. I tend to do "people" shots with some scenery. Thanks.


----------



## M.ST (May 17, 2013)

I think you made I good choice.

My minimum equipment for travelling is 16-35 2.8 II, 24-70 2.8 II, 70-200 2.8 II IS and a 2x TC for FF. APS-C body with 70-300 IS.


----------



## ecka (May 17, 2013)

JPAZ said:


> Right now, I am planning to bring my 70-200 f/4 IS, my 24-104, and my 17-40.



Do you really need to fill that 40-70mm gap? 17-40L + 70-200/4L IS could be enough.


----------



## Chosenbydestiny (May 17, 2013)

That's all fine, but perhaps do what I did and buy an inexpensive tripod when you get there, even if just for the weight of your 17-40  Good for night shots and at times you might want to be in your own photo to prove you were there. You can easily leave the tripod with a relative or friend before going back. I bought a tripod for 20 bucks, left it at my cousin's and when I went back I used it again. *shrug*


----------



## AlanF (May 17, 2013)

If you are not doing professional work and you are travelling light on vacation, take an SX50 and enjoy your trip without any worries.


----------



## eml58 (May 17, 2013)

Book an extra seat on your flights and take more gear.

Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it.


----------



## vscd (May 17, 2013)

I think a 24-70 2.8 with teleconverter should be enough. More wideangle can be done with stitching pictures, and 140mm (with 2x TC) should be enough for most uses. If you need more, you could take a 70-200f4 L IS with you. Maybe you have to specify more what you want to shoot. Landscapes only? Birds? 

I travel with a 24-85, 14mm and 80-200L... this covers anything I want. my new Lens is the pencake... this is a nice add on instead of an Lenscap


----------



## expatinasia (May 17, 2013)

ecka said:


> JPAZ said:
> 
> 
> > Right now, I am planning to bring my 70-200 f/4 IS, my 24-104, and my 17-40.
> ...



+1, I agree. 

Sometimes people travel with way too much stuff. This is fine if you are being paid, or may be paid in the future through stock footage stills etc., but if you are going for a holiday then try to pack as little as possible. Believe me, you will enjoy it a lot more.


----------



## tron (May 17, 2013)

ecka said:


> JPAZ said:
> 
> 
> > Right now, I am planning to bring my 70-200 f/4 IS, my 24-104, and my 17-40.
> ...


OP seems to have one camera so that would cause lens change more often. Still it remains an interesting combination...


----------



## mrsfotografie (May 17, 2013)

OP, your list of lenses is quite sensible to me. For cultural travels my kit consists of:

5DMkII Gripless
24-105 f/4 L IS
17-40 f/4 L
Tamron 70-300 f/4-5.6 VC USD (contingency lens if I need longer focal lengths, optically capable but compact)
50 f/1.8 MkI or 35 f/2.0.

I don't bring a flash or tri-pod but do carry a 77mm polarising filter that I only occasionally use.

This fits in a Lowepro Fastpack 250 with room to spare for some stuff like a jacket, food or whatever in the top compartment: http://store.lowepro.com/backpacks/fastpack-250

This setup (or variations there of) has served me well on several travels in countries like Oman+UIE, Cyprus, India. Note that we travel a lot by car (I drive most of the time) and the pace is rather high so there is limited time between journey legs for extensive photography and things like lens changes let alone tri-pod use. The 24-105 is the workhorse here that I should have bought much earlier (I made due with a 28-135 IS for a long time).

Now if I were to revisit Costa Rica (Wildlife) I would definitely take the 7D and 100-400 and very likely another body for general photography, possibly the Sony Nex-6 with the 16-50mm kitlens and the 30 mm f/2.8 in E-mount.


----------



## CanadianInvestor (May 17, 2013)

I agree with an earlier comment: 

*Do you really need to fill that 40-70mm gap? 17-40L + 70-200/4L IS could be enough.*

Do you have multiple bodies? Take a back-up one or a plain P&S. 

Enjoy your travels.


----------



## Chosenbydestiny (May 17, 2013)

You could always bring just your 24-105mm, known to be the perfect travel L lens, and shoot everything to an average degree from wide to telephoto. =P Saves a lot of space, weight, and helps you enjoy the trip more like a previous response stated.


----------



## Random Orbits (May 17, 2013)

Sounds good to me. If you were considering going to 2 lenses, then I would suggest leaving the 70-200 at home (unless you know you're going to an event that you know you'd use it). IS is made for interior shots, where you can trade longer shutter speeds for lower ISOs, so the 24-105 is a good choice.


----------



## aj1575 (May 17, 2013)

You should ask yourself, what are the subjects you like to photograph. From there you can derive the importance of a lens.

When I go out, my lightes kit is the 35mm f2 (on APS-C); If I'm out with the kids, I often take also the 70-200 f4IS with me, and when I know I will be indoors at some interesting place, I also take the EF-S 10-22 with me. Last year we did a 2 week cycling tour with camping; I wanted to go as light as possible, but the 35 would not have been felxible enough, so I brought my old 18-125 Sigma with me (no problem, the lightning was mostly good on the trip, and with good lightning most eqiupment makes good pictures).

So ask yourself what you like to do. My kit on a FF would be the 17-40 for indoors, cities and landscape, then the 70-200 for people and portraits, and finaly I would take a 50mm f1.4 with me. It always comes in handy, sometimes the light is bad, or if you go for a day trip where you like to be espacially light (and it fills the gap between the17-40mm and 70-200mm.


----------



## rpiotr01 (May 17, 2013)

Not central asia, but I traveled through Armenia about a month ago. Took the 17-40, 40 pancake and 100 2.0, and also had a gorillapod. I decided against the 70-200 f4 because it took up too much room in my pack and figured it would attract more attention than I wanted. The gorillapod was priceless for interiors of monasteries and group shots that I wanted to be in . If you anticipate there will be times when you can leave your main pack behind and walk around without it then the pancake makes sense, for me it was great for when I just didn't feel like carrying a lot of stuff.


----------



## yablonsky (May 17, 2013)

ecka said:


> JPAZ said:
> 
> 
> > Right now, I am planning to bring my 70-200 f/4 IS, my 24-104, and my 17-40.
> ...



+1


----------



## adhocphotographer (May 17, 2013)

Bring a coat with big pockets and shove a lens in there if you want an extra one (or two). Just an FYI!


----------



## kentandersen (May 17, 2013)

I am traveling regulary and I bring with me the 24-105 all the time.

Even though it should be no problem to bring with you all of the gear you mention, on the place you will probably like to travel with just the camera and one lens on.

I am always traveling with my camera bag. Even though it is much heavyer than i am alowed to take with me, it is consider alowed to bring the expensive part of youre lugage with you in the cabin. If in doubt, I take the camera out of the bag and hold it at the check in counter, then the weight is normaly perfect. Afther the weight my camera get into the bag again. Becouse of that I just take all the equipment I can cary. I just hate to be on a great place, and missing the lens that is perfect for the motive. If I end up using all of it is another question. I do tend to not using all of it, and it stays at the hotel.

Still I mostly end up with the 24-105.

If I would choose from your lenses, I would take the 24-105, the 14mm and the 70-200. That will definently fill all my needs.


----------



## JPAZ (May 17, 2013)

All interesting and thanks for everyone's thoughts. Today I am leaning towards the 24-105 + 17-40 + "Shorty 40" (for low light situations) in my Retrospective bag. I love my 70-200 but on past trips, based on EXIF on LR, rarely used it (this is my first trip with the 5D - my old kit was a crop with 15-85 + 10-22 + 70-200). I did use the WA zoom for interiors. I know that I'll miss whatever I leave home, but I've lugged a heavier kit in temps over 100F and it is no fun.

The Samyang 14 is a great thing but I don't know how often I'd feel the need over the WA zoom. I can always stitch in PP. 

Maybe the ultimate answer is to bring a personal porter!


----------



## ecka (May 17, 2013)

JPAZ said:


> All interesting and thanks for everyone's thoughts. Today I am leaning towards the 24-105 + 17-40 + "Shorty 40" (for low light situations) in my Retrospective bag. I love my 70-200 but on past trips, based on EXIF on LR, rarely used it (this is my first trip with the 5D - my old kit was a crop with 15-85 + 10-22 + 70-200). I did use the WA zoom for interiors. I know that I'll miss whatever I leave home, but I've lugged a heavier kit in temps over 100F and it is no fun.
> 
> The Samyang 14 is a great thing but I don't know how often I'd feel the need over the WA zoom. I can always stitch in PP.
> 
> Maybe the ultimate answer is to bring a personal porter!



Well, when it comes to stitching and cropping, all you need is shorty-40, really . And if you don't print "billboards", you can easily crop an 85mm FoV out of it (that's like 1/4 of the frame ~ 5.5mp).


----------



## 7enderbender (May 17, 2013)

Interesting statement about the 40mm vs high ISO. I personally would never go on a trip like that without a fast lens. To me that's strictly a DOF issue and has nothing to do with low light capabilities.

If my goal was to capture mostly people and their places I'd take the 50 and the 24-105. If it's more about landscapes and interesting interiors I'd take the 50 and the 17-40.

From my set when I want to go small I usually bring a 50 and my 135.


----------



## JPAZ (May 17, 2013)

Yeah, I get your thoughts about a fast lens, 7enderbender. I could bring my 50 1.4, but would not be using it wide open and the 40 is so small and light. Plus, I like the IQ out of the 40


----------



## Rocky (May 17, 2013)

It all depends what you want to shoot and your shooting style. If you are not into distant street portrait. 5D and 24-105 will handle most of the situation. Now you are down to one lens. With IS and f4 the lens can handle low light also. If you think that you will do a lot of low light shooting, get the f1.8 or 1.4 50. If you need something wider than 24, just use stitching.


----------



## sdsr (May 17, 2013)

JPAZ said:


> All interesting and thanks for everyone's thoughts. Today I am leaning towards the 24-105 + 17-40 + "Shorty 40" (for low light situations) in my Retrospective bag. I love my 70-200 but on past trips, based on EXIF on LR, rarely used it (this is my first trip with the 5D - my old kit was a crop with 15-85 + 10-22 + 70-200). I did use the WA zoom for interiors. I know that I'll miss whatever I leave home, but I've lugged a heavier kit in temps over 100F and it is no fun.



Since you're trying to keep weight down, it seems a bit odd to me to take two overlapping f/4 zooms. How often did you use the 17-40 wider than 24? If seldom, leave it behind. If you hardly ever use the 70-200 because you hardly ever go beyond 70mm (as opposed to because you seldom go beyond 105mm), what about taking 17-40 + 50mm prime?


----------



## scottkinfw (May 17, 2013)

Bring a safari vest and offload your heavies into it to meet weight.

sek



JPAZ said:


> This is the kind of post for which there is no single best answer, but I am curious as to other opinions. I will be traveling through Central Asia. I am limited by weight restrictions and it will be quite hot so I am trying to limit my kit. Right now, I am planning to bring my 70-200 f/4 IS, my 24-104, and my 17-40. While I may want to do some building interiors, I am not gonna carry my 14mm and the 100-400 is just too big and heavy for this trip. The 40 would be nice but redundant. My high iso shots have been OK, so I think that I can get by without a lens that fast. I have a Jobey that can squeeze into my bag, so that might be worthwhile.
> 
> My questions....anyone traveled through the 'stans before? Does my logic make sense to you? Would you do anything different? Maybe I just want some re-affirmation of my logic (or lack of) here. I tend to do "people" shots with some scenery. Thanks.


----------



## JPAZ (May 17, 2013)

All good thoughts. I am basing this on my past use when I had a crop. The 10-22 was my "go-to" very often indoors, and this almost corresponds to the 17-40. My most used lens was the 15-85 (almost corresponds to the 24-105) and I sometimes used the 70-200. When I used my 15-85, however, it was at 70-85 a lot. 

I am just trying to think through what my usage with FF will be. I figure the 17-40 will be used mostly indoors and the 24-105 most of the time (albeit with some cropping). I know I can "zoom with my feet" and crop in PP but just want to be ready for what I'll see. Sure, I could just bring the 14 and the 40, but I know I'll be wishing for the others....

Re: a vest.....I have been trekking in 110F with a bigger kit and my personal items on my back. I live in the desert. The temperatures where I'll be going will be quite warm. I'd rather not wear a vest or carry a backpack. Anyway, I'll continue to think about this.


----------



## Efka76 (May 17, 2013)

I traveled through Uzbekistan in July when heat was really enormous (+55 degrees C). In such trips try to take as less equipment as possible. All these options of taking 2-3 lenses theoretically seem fine, however after you spend 1 day in a heat with heavy bag you will curse yourself. During this New year eve i was in Rome and carried my 7d with kit lens 18-135 - at the end of the day i was really tired (my physical form is in a really good shape).

Also, take into consideration that these 'stans are poor countries and your expensive equipment could stolen or you could be robbed. Accordingly i suggest you to take 24-105 lens and maybe 40 (as this lens is very small? Leave everything (including tripod) at home. 

It would be interesting to hear from you when you complete your journey.


----------



## jcns (May 17, 2013)

given that you have a full sensor body I would suggest
24-70 or in your case 24-105
70-200
and a TC.


----------



## Hannes (May 17, 2013)

I've travelled through much of Kyrgyz(stan) and my views would be not to bring so much kit. Walking around in the day in Bishkek with a 350D and a 18-125 sigma and during night time I was advised by my friend who was living out there not to bring it but rather a compact for safety reasons. This was walking through central Bishkek which is not too bad a place. Kyrgyzstan at least don't see many foreign visitors so you stick out like a sore thumb wherever you are, unless you happen to look suitably Russian though. In Naryn it was even more looks though I suppose at that point we were fully garbed up in mountaineering clothing and on the way back four weeks later still in the same clothes so I suppose we may have had a certain whiff about us.

My suggestion would be 24-105 and the 17-40mm plus a compact that fits in a pocket. All kit in a suitably non descript canvas bag or similar. We were never hassled by anyone apart from the police who checked our documents a couple of times (make sure you have your passport on you). 

Astana (Kazak) is supposedly better and Dushanbe (Tajik) is worse than Bishkek.

There's fantastic opportunities for a bit of street shooting, especially in the markets with many colourful characters and great surroundings. If you find the 24 wide enough then skip the 17-40 but I'd probably bring it as the architecture in the Soviet republics is pretty spectacular and does certainly benefit from a wide angle to try and fit the massive scale in. Even with a wide angle you may well end up stitching panoramas

While you are out there I suggest you sample Kymyz, a slightly fizzy milk beverage that tastes a bit like cheese and contains about 5% alcohol. Best bought from the roadside out of a bucket, make sure your Hep A vaccinations are up to date though. Here's my friend trying some Charlie gives kymyz a go Another would be Maxim Shoro Maxim

The local vodka is pretty tasty and cheap as chips, often less than $3 for a bottle at a restaurant.


----------



## LOALTD (May 17, 2013)

By my standards, that setup is really heavy! I'd take a 50mm f/1.4 and a 24mm f/2.8 IS.


----------



## mrsfotografie (May 18, 2013)

sdsr said:


> JPAZ said:
> 
> 
> > All interesting and thanks for everyone's thoughts. Today I am leaning towards the 24-105 + 17-40 + "Shorty 40" (for low light situations) in my Retrospective bag. I love my 70-200 but on past trips, based on EXIF on LR, rarely used it (this is my first trip with the 5D - my old kit was a crop with 15-85 + 10-22 + 70-200). I did use the WA zoom for interiors. I know that I'll miss whatever I leave home, but I've lugged a heavier kit in temps over 100F and it is no fun.
> ...



The advantage of the 17-40 is that it is weather sealed and does wide as wel as 'normal', a real asset if changing lenses is a no-no (ie dusty or wet environment). This is why I carry both the 17-40 and 24-105. Depending on the conditions I often pick a lens and stick with it during the rest of the day.


----------



## JPAZ (Jul 4, 2013)

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=15621.msg285517#msg285517

Basically what I did. Thx mrsfotografie.


----------



## dickgrafixstop (Jul 18, 2013)

You have a weight and a space limit. I'd take the 17-40 and the 80-200 (if I knew how I'd use it)
add a 50mm f1.8 and a second body (best price performer out there is the Rebel T3 if you don't already
have the second body) You're not likely to run into a repair service in that part of the world. If you're
snobbish and wouldn't be caught dead with a Rebel, at least take a point & shoot for backup.


----------



## JPAZ (Jul 18, 2013)

Thanks, all. Given the weight limit and the heat, I took the 17-40, 24-105 and 40. In the end, of the 2000 RAW I brought home, over 90% of my shots were with the 24-105 and 4 shots were with the 40. I used the 17-40 to get a few interiors and probably, in retrospect, could have done the whole trip with 1 lens. All depends on what you want. I am not the tripod-long-exposure kind of shooter (yet). But, I will bring a lot more on my next adventure (Denali)!


----------



## RLPhoto (Jul 18, 2013)

I'd Take this again anytime.

17-40L
50mm 1.4
70-200 F/4L


----------



## RGF (Jul 18, 2013)

Looks like you it mostly covered. Only suggestion is the 70-300L vs 70-200


----------



## renlok (Jul 22, 2013)

For most of Asia I would take a 24-105L and my 35L

24-105 stays on most of the time and the 35L comes out in low light.


----------



## JPAZ (Jul 22, 2013)

The big thing I learned is that compared to APS-c, I can crop a FF image from the 24-105 and still get what I want. Not he best phot, but here's what I mean......


----------

