The base of a gigantic rolling crane structure, Mare Island Naval Ship Yard.
I did my first real night photography at this location, the historic Mare Island Naval Ship Yard, fifteen years ago. I more or less randomly saw an announcement for a free introduction to night photography at the Flyway Festival at Mare Island, and without giving it much thought I signed up. The session was organized by Tim Baskerville, a guiding-light (guiding dark?) of the San Francisco Bay Area night photography scene and the leader of a group called “The Nocturnes.” (Studio Nocturne SF, the night photography collective I work with today, is a direct descendent.) I had almost no idea what I was doing on that first night photography adventure, but I was taken by the genre (and by this location) and I’ve been photographing at night ever since.
This week a group of us met for a “Nocturnes Alumni Event” at Mare Island, and after sharing and pizza we headed out into the dark to make photographs. It is a bit of a strange experience for me by now. I am very familiar with many of the features of the place, but there have been many changes, too. Back in 2003 the site was almost entirely abandoned, and it was not clear what would become of it. Today portions are being redeveloped, for better or worse — mostly better, I think. So some of the old subjects are gone, others that were off-limits back then are now accessible, and new things have appeared. On this evening I was able to get up close to some of these remarkable and gigantic old shipyard cranes. In a Silicon Valley world of virtual industries, it is quite striking to stand beneath these very solid and very real machines — gigantic things that were used to move the components for building ships.
Note: I originally published this article under the title, “Thinking About Travel Photography Gear.” Since I’m planning a separate article about travel photography camera options, I have renamed this article to acknowledge its focus lenses.
Recently I’ve noted people trying to determine what gear will work well for photography while traveling, and especially wondering about what lenses to take. I do a fair amount of travel photography, and I’ll going to summarize a few approaches that can work.
But first, since what follows will mostly focus on lenses, let me say a few things about cameras, while recognizing that this will be far from an in-depth consideration.
Cameras
What is “the best” travel camera? That is a tough question, and it might be better rephrased as “what is the best travel camera for me?” Is photography your main reason for traveling, do you simply want to record the experience, or something else? Are you traveling alone, with other photographers, or with others whose interest in photography doesn’t match your own? Do you prefer to travel “heavy” — multiple bags and checked luggage — or you an ultra-light traveler who prefers to stick to carry-on only, even for long trips? Do you think of yourself as a scenic photographer, a people photographer, a street photographer, or something else?
With all of these possible variations, the right answer could be anything from your smart phone camera to a large, multiple lens system with tripod, or any of a number of intermediate options.
Chinatown, New York City
As a photographer, I’m not ready to give up good quality equipment that allows me to shoot my preferred subjects and make large prints from the images I bring back. Yet I also prefer to travel light, going “carry-on luggage only” even for multi-week overseas trips. The best solution for me has turned out to be a 1.5x cropped sensor mirrorless body with a small selection of lenses, mostly primes sometimes augmented by a zoom.
There’s a lot more to say about camera choice, but here I”m going to focus primarily on lenses you might use with a full frame or cropped sensor system. (Watch for another article focusing on camera options.)
Lenses for Travel
Rather than trying to answer the “what lens should I bring?” question, I’ll suggest a few approaches and briefly describe some pluses and minuses of each.
One zoom lens
A single zoom lens that covers sufficient focal length range, preferably with IS and a f/2.8 aperture might be all you need. While such a lens is not small, it is quite versatile. Especially if the lens — or your camera body – has image stabilization (IS) it will work in relatively low light in many situations, and it can work for everything from casual portraits to wide-angle photographs in constrained spaces. A “mid range zoom” lens can do the trick, whether it is one of the ubiquitous “kit zooms” or a more expensive f/2.8 zoom.
Pluses
One lens stays on the body all the time.
IS helps with handheld shots in low light.
The lens covers focal lengths most often needed.
Good image quality. Weight and bulk are less of an issue if you stick on only one lens.
Minuses
These lenses are not small.
You will give up some ultra-wide and telephoto options.
A big lens can make you look like a “photo tourist.”
Largest apertures not as big as you could get from primes.
No backup lens if this lens has a problem.
If you will only use one lens, you could get a smaller camera with a built-in zoom
A woman walks into an alley past a smoking bicyclist, Florence/Firenze, Italy
One zoom lens with large focal length range
Some zoom lenses cover a very large focal length range (18-300mm!) with variable aperture. As with the first option, this provides a great deal of versatility for folks who want a larger selection of focal lengths, but who don’t want to mess with multiple lenses.
Pluses
One lens stays on the body the entire time.
Decent (but probably not stellar) IQ.
Excellent focal length coverage for diverse subjects.
Minuses
Not the best lenses in optical terms, though may be good enough for many purposes.
Lenses can be relatively large.
Poor low light options. (Use flash?)
Big lens can make you look like a “photo tourist.”
No backup lens if your lens has a problem.
A single prime
Before the era of zoom lenses, it was not unusual for photographers to head out with only a single prime lens with a decently large aperture. (This could be an interchangeable lens camera with a single prime or a rangefinder style camera with a fixed focal length built-in lens.)
Pluses
The ultimate in simplicity and light weight.
Excellent image quality.
Good low light coverage with a large aperture.
You may look less like a tourist.
Minuses
No focal length flexibility. (Though some systems allow add on telephoto and wide angle converters.)
No backup lens if your lens has a problem.
A man making soap bubbles for the crowd in London
A few primes
Pluses
Can be small and light.
Good low light coverage.
Excellent image quality.
You may look less like a tourist.
Minuses
A few small primes may add up to the weight/bulk of one zoom.
Need to switch lenses more often.
Less focal length flexibility than a zoom.
Multiple zooms
Pluses
Lots of flexibility.
Good zooms provide excellent image quality.
Minuses
System quickly balloons in size and weight.
Probably need speciality photographic bag or backpack.
You not only look like a tourist… you look like a tourist carrying lots of expensive stuff, which is not always ideal.
Zoom(s) augmented by a large aperture prime
One zoom can cover ranges where flexibility is desired, and a smaller prime can provide a larger aperture option.
Pluses
You get the flexibility of a zoom.
You get the large aperture of a prime.
Fine image quality.
Minuses
Do you take a prime in the focal length range of your zoom (for low light) or a different range (covering different uses.)?
Multiple lenses to juggle.
Weight and bulk increase a bit.
The Karl Theodor Bridge, the old bridge, the Heiliggeistekirche, and portions of Altstadt-Heidelberg, Germany
Primes augmented by (most likely one) zoom.
For example, take primes for core use, but add a zoom telephoto.
Pluses
Good image quality.
Small and light system with primes for most photography.
You look less like a tourist when using the primes.
Focal length flexibility in range covered by the zoom.
Minuses
Not as small and light as primes-only system.
The not-a-tourist impression is lost when you attach that zoom!
The Answer
I know you’d like The Best Answer… but there isn’t one! No solution is perfect, and each photographer will likely balance the pluses and minuses in a different way.
What I do
Even though I use a full frame Canon DSLR system for most of my non-travel photography, these days I always rely on a smaller mirrorless system for my travel and street photography. This system mostly is built around primes of moderately wide to moderately long focal lengths, with lenses that are fairly small. In some cases I augment this with a single longer focal length zoom. The entire kit, plus my small laptop and a few other items, fits into a medium-size messenger bag that goes under the seat on flights.
A photographer and friend asked me for my thoughts on mini medium format, or “miniMF,” camera systems. I told her the answer was complex and that I’d write it up at the blog. Here it is!
I have attempted to include several things in the article: a bit of background regarding formats, some objective facts (“the numbers”) about them and their relationships, pluses and minuses of various options, my own current subjective thoughts on what this means to me, and a few alternative perspectives.
The evolution of digital medium format cameras has been among the most interesting photographic developments over the past few years. High MP backs from companies like Phase One and Leaf became the high-end standard for digital image making, and other companies have recently entered the market. The larger sensors may provide improved image quality in several ways: greater system resolution, greater pixel resolution, improved dynamic range, less noise, and more.
It wasn’t that long ago that digital formats larger than full frame were out of reach for nearly all photographers, with costs that were frequently many tens of thousands of dollars, often for only the digital back, which had to be attached to a medium format body.
However, in the last few years several manufacturers have driven down the cost of camera systems using larger-than-full-frame sensors, and now digital “medium format” (more on that term in a moment) bodies are available for less than $7000. A range of manufacturers are now in this market, including Fujifilm, Pentax, and Hasselblad.
When the costs of larger sensor bodies were in the mid-$20k and up (sometimes very up) range, few photographers using full frame DSLR or mirrorless cameras could realistically consider them as options. But the current $6500-$9000 price isn’t that much higher than the most expensive full frame bodies. At these prices the potential improvements in image quality are enough to make folks take a closer look, especially if they are photographers who produce large and high quality prints on a regular basis.
I began to pay attention when the miniMF Pentax 645d came out some years ago (though I was a bit disappointed to find out that the sensor wasn’t really “645” size), and my interest only increased as Pentax updated to the 645z and then as Fujifilm and Hasselblad brought out competing products. I thought a lot about the possible value of such systems for my photography, and I considered getting one. I haven’t done ao — though I won’t rule it out in the future — but I would like to share some of my musings about the choices. Continue reading Mini Medium Format… or Not?→
Sony, a company that has made innovative inroads in the camera market in the past few years, just announced its new Sony A9, yet another innovative product that continues the impressive progress of mirrorless cameras. Some describe it as a “DSLR Killer.” I’m not so sure. Some thoughts follow.
(Sit back. This isn’t going to be a short post! Hint: It isn’t anti-a9, though it isn’t exactly pro-a9 either.)
Sony A9 Digital Camera
First, some personal background and perspectives. I use both mirrorless and DSLR camera systems — a Canon system based around the 5DsR and a Fujifilm system based around the XPro2. I use both for serious photography. Either may be my first choice, depending upon my subject and other conditions, and each excels at some things and is less capable at others. All of this is my way of saying that I’m not “pro-DSLR” or “pro-mirrorless,” and that I’m fairly brand-agnostic. (My first digital cameras back in the pre-2000 “stone age” period were mirrorless!) There are a lot of great cameras coming from by a range of manufacturers today and choosing one brand over another makes little difference to one’s photography.
Fujifilm X-Pro2
I’m convinced at this point that mirrorless cameras have the potential to become the predominant serious cameras eventually, and that they are already serious tools that can be the best choice in some situations. Their pluses, both current and potential, include the following: Continue reading “DSLR Killer!” — Maybe and Maybe Not→
