Gear for Trip/Renting Lenses?

[Eob]

I'm going on a trip in a few weeks to California. I'm not sure what stuff to bring with me. I'll have opportunities to shoot city stuff in San fran, a few beaches, animals on a safari experience, and giant redwoods. The redwoods are what's throwing me off. It seems like I'd need a wide angle lens to get some cool shots. Wide angle would also be nice for some beach shots.

The widest lens that I own is the 18-55 kit lens that I was thinking about leaving home. I was planning on just taking my 35 1.8 and 55-300 zoom. I don't want to get bogged down with too much heavy stuff. Plus there's the all my eggs in one basket thing, and vacation drinking related possible oppsies.

I can't buy a $500 lens right now, so renting seems like a good option. Has anyone else tried it? I found a 10.5mm 2.8 af dx fisheye thats $87 for a week. Also there is a 14mm 2.8 and a 16mm 2.8 fisheye. I'd like opinions on whether I should just try to get some shots with what I have?

 

[TonyD315]

I have the 35mm 1.8 and while I do love it, I sometimes found myself putting on the kit 18-55 because the 35 was either too tight or not enough reach. It really depends on what kind of shots you want to get. If you have certain things planned for each day then I'd suggest bringing them and leaving what you don't think you'll need that specific day at the hotel.

I can say that back in December I went to Disney for a few days. I was in a similar position. I ended up going with the Nikon 17-55 2.8 and honestly, it didn't come off my camera. (With the exception of the Animal Safari) I looked at Adorama, and they just wanted too much. Since I was going to use my debit card, they would actually withdrawal not only the price of the rental, but also the total replacement cost of the lens. They informed me that they would credit it back shortly after I returned it, but it could take a few business days. I ended up going with BorrowLenses.com They were awesome and worked with me. Since I ordered it around christmas, UPS was backed up. They actually put a call into UPS to have it held at the sorting facility for me to pick up. I would 100% rent from them again.

Personally, I'd rent a fisheye. I think you could get some awesome shots of the redwoods with one...

 

[Eob]

I have the 35mm 1.8 and while I do love it, I sometimes found myself putting on the kit 18-55 because the 35 was either too tight or not enough reach. It really depends on what kind of shots you want to get. If you have certain things planned for each day then I'd suggest bringing them and leaving what you don't think you'll need that specific day at the hotel.

I can say that back in December I went to Disney for a few days. I was in a similar position. I ended up going with the Nikon 17-55 2.8 and honestly, it didn't come off my camera. (With the exception of the Animal Safari) I looked at Adorama, and they just wanted too much. Since I was going to use my debit card, they would actually withdrawal not only the price of the rental, but also the total replacement cost of the lens. They informed me that they would credit it back shortly after I returned it, but it could take a few business days. I ended up going with BorrowLenses.com They were awesome and worked with me. Since I ordered it around christmas, UPS was backed up. They actually put a call into UPS to have it held at the sorting facility for me to pick up. I would 100% rent from them again.

Personally, I'd rent a fisheye. I think you could get some awesome shots of the redwoods with one...

thanks for the input. I've heard that some places charge the full amount to your card until you return it. I'm looking at Calumet, thats nearby so I just pick it up. They do a 20% market value deposit. You are right about leaving some stuff at the hotel. That could work. I'm so fumbley changing lessons. I wish I had more of an all in one.

 

[Horoscope Fish]

There comes a time when you have to stop asking yourself, "What lens do I need to get the shot I want?" and start asking yourself, "How do I get the shot I want with the lens I have?" With that philosophy in mind, I'd feel perfectly well covered taking a 35mm f/1.8 and the 55-300mm; that's a very flexible combination right there.

Also, I'd forget about the fish-eye, personally, but that's me. Most of the shots I see done with fish-eye lenses have a "gimmicky" feel to them that just doesn't do anything for me. That's not to say they *can't* be used very creatively and very effectively but I wouldn't want to be lugging one around hoping for a shot to drop in my lap that made it all worthwhile. I'm a light and fast sorta guy; I like carrying minimal equipment that I feel will deliver maximum payload: less fuss and bother with equipment and more (mental) focus and planning on every shot.

....

 

[Lawrence]

There comes a time when you have to stop asking yourself, "What lens do I need to get the shot I want?" and start asking yourself, "How do I get the shot I want with the lens I have?" With that philosophy in mind, I'd feel perfectly well covered taking a 35mm f/1.8 and the 55-300mm; that's a very flexible combination right there.

Also, I'd forget about the fish-eye, personally, but that's me. Most of the shots I see done with fish-eye lenses have a "gimmicky" feel to them that just doesn't do anything for me. That's not to say they *can't* be used very creatively and very effectively but I wouldn't want to be lugging one around hoping for a shot to drop in my lap that made it all worthwhile. I'm a light and fast sorta guy; I like carrying minimal equipment that I feel will deliver maximum payload: less fuss and bother with equipment and more (mental) focus and planning on every shot.

....

This makes so much sense.
Take with what you have and one day maybe you get an opportunity with any new lens to shoot an alternative photo.

Edit note: Just to add if you are prepared to pay $87.00 for a weeks rental … open a "Savings for Lens" account and put that $87.00 into it. You are now a fair way into saint enough for your lens.

 

[Eob]

I see what you mean about using what you have, but I don't travel often, and would like to get the most/best pictures that I can out of it. I don't know if fish eye is what I'm looking for. I've been trying to find a site that compares the dx wide angles more clearly.

 

[Horoscope Fish]

I see what you mean about using what you have, but I don't travel often, and would like to get the most/best pictures that I can out of it. I don't know if fish eye is what I'm looking for. I've been trying to find a site that compares the dx wide angles more clearly.

I could try and explain why this approach doesn't work but I'll just say that different lenses are NOT going to get you *better* pictures, they'll just get you pictures. How *good* your shot's are is up to you. That might sound like I'm being condescending but I'm not. Understanding just how true this is could save you a bit of money AND improve your photography, so it's a sort of two-fer, really, which is always nice to come home to.

Anyhoo... It sounds to me like what you are trying to figure out is "focal length" and this focal length comparison tool might help you better understand what this means on a very practical level. Googling that phrase will get you lots of other hits if that one doesn't float your proverbial boat.

Since this trip is a bit of a big deal, I might suggest you spend some time learning some of the basic rules of photographic composition because this is what really elevates snapshots into decent photographs. Just a suggestion, of course, but you might find it worthwhile to read over this crash course in composition for starters. There are tons of them on the Intarwebs should you choose to pursue the topic.

...

 

[nikonpup]

rent a 18-105mm or newer 18-140mm. Take your 55-300mm and you will do fine. Learn how to do "panoramas"
works great when the view you want doesn't fit in the view finder. You can do both hor. And vert. Panos.
Practice with your 18-55mm b 4 you leave on the trip.

 

[Eob]

I could try and explain why this approach doesn't work but I'll just say that different lenses are NOT going to get you *better* pictures, they'll just get you pictures. How *good* your shot's are is up to you. That might sound like I'm being condescending but I'm not. Understanding just how true this is could save you a bit of money AND improve your photography, so it's a sort of two-fer, really, which is always nice to come home to.

Anyhoo... It sounds to me like what you are trying to figure out is "focal length" and this focal length comparison tool might help you better understand what this means on a very practical level. Googling that phrase will get you lots of other hits if that one doesn't float your proverbial boat.

Since this trip is a bit of a big deal, I might suggest you spend some time learning some of the basic rules of photographic composition because this is what really elevates snapshots into decent photographs. Just a suggestion, of course, but you might find it worthwhile to read over this crash course in composition for starters. There are tons of them on the Intarwebs should you choose to pursue the topic.

...

Right on. I get what you are saying. I can't use that focal comparison tool on my ipad. My Imac is aging and angry. I went to art school, so I've studied compsition, its just all of the technical stuff that flubs me up. I can't figure out what wide angle lens I'd want to buy or rent if I decide to do so. I read lots of reviews and watched youtube videos for hours yesterday, and I think I'm even more confused. I understand that fisheye is totally gimmicky, that's why I was thinking about renting it just for the trip, but a wide angle is something that I would use somewhat often. It would be nice to try one out.

 

[Horoscope Fish]

Right on. I get what you are saying. I can't use that focal comparison tool on my ipad. My Imac is aging and angry. I went to art school, so I've studied compsition, its just all of the technical stuff that flubs me up. I can't figure out what wide angle lens I'd want to buy or rent if I decide to do so. I read lots of reviews and watched youtube videos for hours yesterday, and I think I'm even more confused. I understand that fisheye is totally gimmicky, that's why I was thinking about renting it just for the trip, but a wide angle is something that I would use somewhat often. It would be nice to try one out.

Okay, gotcha...

Allow me to suggest you rent (if you can) the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 AT-X 116 Pro DXII or the equally long-named Tokina AT-X 12-28mm f/4 PRO DX. Either of these lenses will go as wide as any normal person could hope for, and are pretty fast at f/2.8 and f/4 respectively. Both lenses will auto-focus on your D3100 and give you superb image quality. Should you decide to buy one, they each sell for around $500; which is a pretty decent price for a lens of this quality.

I have the Tokina 11-16mm and it's a real tank of a lens that has proven to be nothing short of amaaaazing to work with. Of course I sometimes wish I'd gotten the 12-28mm instead but what can you do, eh? Either one of these lenses would serve you well for your trip.

Free Bonus Link: Sample Photos - Tokina 11-16mm F/2.8
.....

 

[wreckdiver1321]

That sounds like my photo kit. Here's my opinion, and remember I'm kind of new to DSLRs.

I own the kit 18-55, the kit 55-200, and a 35 1.8. If I was going on this kind of trip, since I can't buy the 16-85 that I want yet, I'd consider just where I'll be and what I'm going to be shooting. When I travel, more often than not I'm looking for a wider angle than a telephoto. I like landscapes and wider city shots, which the 18-55mm can do very well. I've been to the redwoods (before my D3100), and if I went today I'd toss my 18-55 on there and be happy. If I look at the metadata on 90% of my shots, odds are better than good that they are all shot at or below 55mm. That animal safari is where you might run into trouble unfortunately.

When I go walkabout in the city, I put my 35mm on. Great lens for a city situation, and very fast for low light. No matter where I travel, I think the 35mm will be going with. It's very small and light, and it works in a lot of situations.

For animal photos, longer reach is a must, so that 55-300 is a good idea to bring with as well.

So here is what I would do... Flying commercially, I would put my 18-55 and 35 with the body, rocket air, lens pen, etc. in my carry on. Then I'd carefully wrap the longer lens in clothes and put it in my checked bag (I've transported wine glasses and plates this way, no issues). That way, I can have all the versatility I want and keep the bulk down. If I'm going out in town, usually I'll wear a small backpack or something to keep stuff I collect with me. In that situation, I'd snap my 35 on and keep the 18-55 in the bag just in case I need it. On the safari day, I'd put the 55-300 on, and carry the 35 separately. In the forest, the 18-55 has it. Beach days would be a toss up between the 35 and the 18-55, so go with what you feel like.

The way I see it, an extra lens is pretty easy to stash away somewhere.

I wouldn't drop extra money to bring with a different lens when you already have all the focal lengths covered. I'd spend more time trying to get better with the lenses you already have. Keeping the 18-55 or the 35 on the camera a lot of the time has a habit of making you a better photographer. It forces you to think more about where you're standing, framing, composition, etc. If you limit yourself at first, you actually expand your skills.

 

[Eob]

Okay, gotcha...


Free Bonus Link: Sample Photos - Tokina 11-16mm F/2.8
.....

I really like that site! Its what I've been looking for. Its so great to see all of the sample images from each lens in one place. That lens sounds perfect. Reviews say its better than the nikon. Looks like I could rent it for 10 days for about $60 through LensGiant or BorrowLenses.com through the mail, or wait and get it for $509.

 

[Eob]

That sounds like my photo kit. Here's my opinion, and remember I'm kind of new to DSLRs.

I own the kit 18-55, the kit 55-200, and a 35 1.8. If I was going on this kind of trip, since I can't buy the 16-85 that I want yet, I'd consider just where I'll be and what I'm going to be shooting. When I travel, more often than not I'm looking for a wider angle than a telephoto. I like landscapes and wider city shots, which the 18-55mm can do very well. I've been to the redwoods (before my D3100), and if I went today I'd toss my 18-55 on there and be happy. If I look at the metadata on 90% of my shots, odds are better than good that they are all shot at or below 55mm. That animal safari is where you might run into trouble unfortunately.

When I go walkabout in the city, I put my 35mm on. Great lens for a city situation, and very fast for low light. No matter where I travel, I think the 35mm will be going with. It's very small and light, and it works in a lot of situations.

For animal photos, longer reach is a must, so that 55-300 is a good idea to bring with as well.

So here is what I would do... Flying commercially, I would put my 18-55 and 35 with the body, rocket air, lens pen, etc. in my carry on. Then I'd carefully wrap the longer lens in clothes and put it in my checked bag (I've transported wine glasses and plates this way, no issues). That way, I can have all the versatility I want and keep the bulk down. If I'm going out in town, usually I'll wear a small backpack or something to keep stuff I collect with me. In that situation, I'd snap my 35 on and keep the 18-55 in the bag just in case I need it. On the safari day, I'd put the 55-300 on, and carry the 35 separately. In the forest, the 18-55 has it. Beach days would be a toss up between the 35 and the 18-55, so go with what you feel like.

The way I see it, an extra lens is pretty easy to stash away somewhere.

I wouldn't drop extra money to bring with a different lens when you already have all the focal lengths covered. I'd spend more time trying to get better with the lenses you already have. Keeping the 18-55 or the 35 on the camera a lot of the time has a habit of making you a better photographer. It forces you to think more about where you're standing, framing, composition, etc. If you limit yourself at first, you actually expand your skills.

Thanks for the suggestions. I've only had the 35 for a few weeks. I'm excited to snap some street portraits around San fransisco and Chinatown. I hope its crowded so I can get some shots without people noticing. Creeper alert!

I have a kellymoore camera/bag purse that does fit all my stuff, but would be awfully heavy. I think I can keep it all with me in my seat on the plane. I think I could leave the 55-300 behind on beach days, but I do like taking bird pictures, so I might miss some stuff. I hope someone does't run off with my stuff if I go in the water.

 

[kluisi]

Then I'd carefully wrap the longer lens in clothes and put it in my checked bag (I've transported wine glasses and plates this way, no issues). That way, I can have all the versatility I want and keep the bulk down. If I'm going out in town, usually I'll wear a small backpack or something to keep stuff I collect with me. In that situation, I'd snap my 35 on and keep the 18-55 in the bag just in case I need it. On the safari day, I'd put the 55-300 on, and carry the 35 separately. In the forest, the 18-55 has it. Beach days would be a toss up between the 35 and the 18-55, so go with what you feel like.

I don't have much experience traveling with my camera gear, but I'm certain I wouldn't check it. That will be in my carry on or personal item for sure.

 

[TonyD315]

I don't have much experience traveling with my camera gear, but I'm certain I wouldn't check it. That will be in my carry on or personal item for sure.

Check with your airline. They usually allow one "carry on" and one "personal item"...two different things based on dimensions. When I traveled in December, I took my Lowepro SlingShot 202 as my carry on and my backpack as my personal item...

 

[wreckdiver1321]

I don't have much experience traveling with my camera gear, but I'm certain I wouldn't check it. That will be in my carry on or personal item for sure.

Ideally, I'd carry everything on. Sometimes though, weight can be a limiting factor. I ran into this once during a scuba diving trip to Florida. I wanted to carry all my gear on, but the weight and bulk forced me to check some stuff. In the end, it's up to the OP and what they feel comfortable with.

Thanks for the suggestions. I've only had the 35 for a few weeks. I'm excited to snap some street portraits around San fransisco and Chinatown. I hope its crowded so I can get some shots without people noticing. Creeper alert!

I have a kellymoore camera/bag purse that does fit all my stuff, but would be awfully heavy. I think I can keep it all with me in my seat on the plane. I think I could leave the 55-300 behind on beach days, but I do like taking bird pictures, so I might miss some stuff. I hope someone does't run off with my stuff if I go in the water.

Ha! I sneak candid shots of people I sit near at the local library. I can't wait to get somewhere nice and busy to do some street shooting. The 35mm on a DX is great for that. If you do it right, the bokeh is nice and the images are very sharp.

Remember, you only have to worry about lugging your gear around through the airports and that short distance between the plane and ground transportation!