Kit reduction!

Amp34

Amp34

Amp34

Caporegime
Joined
25 Jul 2005
Posts
28,851
Location
Canada
Right, sounds a bit of an odd topic but it's something all of us face at some point in time, the bulk of our kit... :p

I may be heading off somewhere for a few months, backpacking round with a 35l bag. This means space is at a premium, yet I don't want to be found wanting camera kit wise! At the moment my kit is:

400D
Tokina 12-24 f/4
Sigma 24-70 f/2.8
Canon 75-300 IS
Canon 300 f/4

(The 75-300 goes on holiday and the 300 f/4 is used for more photo oriented trips/short stays)

As well as a small tripod for walking use.

The problem is it takes up too much space as it is, first I wondered whether to sell as much of the kit as possible and get a GF1 with 20mm and 45-200mm lenses, however I just dont think I could get on with it, it's not wide enough or long enough and going to something without a viewfinder would be odd. It does have the benefit of being much smaller though.

The second option is to replace a few of the lenses with smaller versions, giving me not much difference in quality/range but a reasonable size saving. For that option, after looking on TP and having a think I've come up with something like this:

400D
Samyang 8mm f/3.5
Tamron 17-50 f/2.8
Canon 70-300 IS

The Samyang is a manual focus fisheye and pretty cheap/ reasonably small for those times when wiiiiide is needed and for skyscapes/starscapes with a bit of correction.

The Tamron 17-50 to replace the Sigma 24-70 and Tokina 12-24, with the 70-300 IS replacing the 75-300 and 300 f/4 (Almost as good IQ as the 300 f/4 but much smaller and more versatile, however losing a stop).

So yeah, that's my thinking, any other suggestions as to lenses to look at to get the optimum size/IQ ratio? GF1 the much better idea?

Also what is the 40D like size wise in comparison to the 400D? I find the 400D a bit annoying sometimes with its limitations and the 40D may be a benefit, although it doesn't have video which the GF1 has. :(
 
The kit you've specified sounds like it'll do the job just fine. My only concern would be not having a linear type wide angle lens but it's up to you. I went skiing last month and happened to carry the exact same kit as you most days (8mm, 17-50, 70-300) - anyway, I didn't really miss my 10-20.

I remember a while ago a hack came out to make the 40D (or was it the 50D) do video so that might be worth investigating. Either way, the trip is a great excuse for an upgrade!
 
My thinking with the 8mm instead of a normal wide angle is that with the 12-24 I generally use it at its widest or in the top half. The top half would be covered by the 17-50 and the widest end by the 8mm... Or at least that's my hope. :)

I don't know of any linear lenses at that sort of width, other than the wide zooms, which would be heavier and more expensive I think.

Out of interest how do/did you find the Samyang? Good?

That's an interesting option WRT the 40D and video. I'll have a check and see if I can find anything. :)
 
I think the 40D video hack was just recording the vga feed of live view. Certainly no replacement for the dedicated feature of a newer camera. Ask mrk though, I remember him trying the hack.

I'd question the use of a telephoto when travelling, maybe it's just my style but I can't imagine myself reaching for a 70-300mm that often and it'll take up plenty of space. I'd leave it at home or replace it with an 85mm f/1.8 if you need something a little bit longer.
 
I think the Samyang is fine. The sharpness and flare control is great for a non-brand lens, although for £200 it should be! The 180 degree FOV is also fun (although you Canon boys won't get that with a 1.6 crop sensor).

My intention was to buy it, use it for a week skiing, then flog it. That would have been cheaper than renting a proper fisheye. -But I'm still finding it quite fun to use so maybe I won't sell it. It's awesome for natural landscapes and video but urban stuff is much more hit and miss.

Don't be too sold by video, it's fine for static shots you can set up but if you require focusing whilst filming it's hell on an SLR (because it's an SLR!). Longer focal lengths are also very difficult to hold steady :/

In response to olv I would take a longer lens, you never know about wildlife and tele-landscapes can be quite refreshing after taking lots of wide stuff.
 
If your off backpacking try a 10-20mm, 30mm f/1.4 and 50-150mm (or an 85mm f/1.8).

All light. All small and compact. 10-20mm great for landscape and journalistic type shots, 30mm for lower light scenarios. 50-150mm (85mm f/1.8) for portraits and longer reach.




If 150mm (or 85mm) isn't long enough and you want more reach for anything Tokina make a compact 80-400mm zoom if I remember correctly, it's still small and light (for its zoom range). Although image quality is slightly comprimised with size, it's still a pretty good lens.
 
Last edited:
From the looks of the hack it seems a bit dodgy anyway so probably not that useful. :)

WRT video I'm not thinking of using it as a camcorder, but very much more artistic, landscape panos, wildilfe shots, that sort of thing, essentially an extension of what I already shoot, most of which would be on a tripod. :)

I shouldn't be backpacking per se, just living out of a backpack and staying in a variety of places in Oz. As for a long lens I need one of those as landscape and wildlife are my primary interests. :p

Robert do you have any examples of landscapes you've shot with the 8mm? I'd love to see a few. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom