[allachie9]

I have used Canon equipment for many, many years, long before digital and even before we had autofocus. So yes, more years than I care to remember and certainly more years than I would dare to mention here !

I love my DSLRs and the ability we have with digital to do so much more. I just wish the whole digital thing had started 30, or more years ago, as there is still so much I want to do.

I recent years I have found carrying a whole bag of bodies and lenses, and all the other bits and pieces, around the world on our travels has become a bit of a chore. That, and the fact that digital cameras, even compacts, have got so much better.

In addition to longer trips, my wife and I have started to revisit some Eastern European capitals, and that is where this 'Travelling Light' thing really started.

I took a conscious decision 3 years ago, on a trip to Prague, just to take my Canon G12 and a small tripod plus remote release. This was in preparation for a longish trip to China where we planned to do some serious trekking on some of the remoter parts of The Great Wall.
My experiment was a success and the G12 did (almost) everything I wanted it to do. So the lightweight G12 outfit became my travelling kit and that's all I took to China. The results from that trip were also successful, and although I will never abandon my DSLRs, a good Canon compact, with the ability to give me good quality RAW files, is now all I need to take away with me. Especially on a trip involving lots of long walks.

2 years ago I retired the G12 and replaced it with a Canon G1X and I just love the image quality I get from it.

I wondered if any of you guys also travel light on trips and whether you get enough from your lightweight travelling kit.

We revisited Budapest earlier this year and the G1X gave me good results by day and especially by night, which is a favourite time, for me to shoot.

Here, as an example, is the Hungarian Parliament at night, taken on the G1X.



Canon G1X, f/8.0, 100 iso, 1.6 secs.

[M_Six]

^^^^^Awesome. Insane detail.

[dcstep]

I consider it "travelling light" when I leave the 500mm and the extra body at home.

For travel, I take the full-frame, 15mm diagonal fish-eye, 24-105mm, 70-200mm, 1.4x and 2.0x TC-III, plus odds and ends. Not long ago, I was in San Francisco and the sea lions were mating and doing all kinds of crazy things. Having 400mm available was important to me, since nature photography is my main interest, then travel and landscapes.

I suppose that I could put together a much lighter kit for travel with a Sony or Fuji, but they don't have any great super-telephoto solutions, so that'd be an extra kit. I have a ThinkTank bag that I throw over one shoulder to carry everything on the plane and when I'm out shooting.

I find that when I leave something home, I regret it.

Dave

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by M_Six

^^^^^Awesome. Insane detail.

[bosstones]

Originally Posted by dcstep

Traveling light to me is 5D body + 16-35 and maybe a 24-105. One could make the argument, though, that in instances where I don't want to risk a dSLR that traveling light is just bringing my G12.

[overcoil]

Originally Posted by M_Six

^^^^^Awesome. Insane detail.

+1

[suspenceful]

Great results out of a compact camera. I shoot with a Canon Rebel T2i and get decent results. I'd love to get something smaller though, like you have with RAW capability.

Just so I can contribute a "travelling light" picture. The Chicago Skyline in the middle of winter with floating ice caps. Had a crappy wide angle adapter on at the time, wish I had my Sigma wide angle at the time.


Chicago Skyline by Jacob Spence, on Flickr

[overcoil]

^^^ Yep. That's a good photograph.

[dcstep]

Nice shot Jacob. What was lighting the ice so nicely?

Most people won't notice the geometric distortion, particularly since the buildings are relatively small, but with nice proportion. As long as you don't print it too large, it'll show well.

Dave

[allachie9]

Thanks everyone, some interesting responses regarding your travelling kit.
Yes, I agree about your Chicago shot Jacob, a great shot.

Dave, I fully understand your viewpoint, and if wildlife were a main interest when travelling, I can see why you need to have a long lens with you.

However, as my interests when travelling are mainly landscapes and people, I'm more than happy to just take my G1X, small tripod, remote release and a small Canon flash.

A further illustration of the compact quality I get, and to complement the Budapest Parliament at night shot, here it is by day -

BudapestParliament_1 by Alan Butterfield, on Flickr

[dcstep]

Alan, the 1.5" sensor of your G1X is key to me. Any smaller and you can't make a decent sized print. I've got some shots that I love with my old G7 and G9, but when I went to print them for my office, they ran out of steam at around 18" on the long side.

Here's a favorite taken with my G9 a few years back:

Ranch Structure and Pond, Perry Park, CO USA by David Stephens, on Flickr

It shows very well here on a monitor and it's hanging above my desk, but I'd love to have been able to blow it up further for a different wall.

There are lots of great compact camera choices these days, but I recommend careful attention to sensor size when taking that route. If you will never print anything, then it's not so important, but, if you might print, then I suggest going with something no smaller than 3/4.

For those that sell Stock images, pixel-count turns into dollars. The difference between selling a 3MB file and a 10MB can be several hundred dollars, depending on the license. Getty and Flickr (their stock image wing is coming soon) require "at least" 3MB. That's a good enough reason for me to carry a full-frame if there's any chance that the images might be salable. (Thinking about a Canon 5Drs for next year's budget).

Dave

[allachie9]

Lovely shot Dave and your comments regarding sensor size are spot on. I certainly wouldn't want to go any smaller (sensor-wise) than the G1X. My previous compact was a Canon G12 and I also got good results from that.
I enjoy printing at home and print up to A3+. No problem printing up to that size from either my DSLRs or the G1X.
Very occasionally, if I need to increase the size of an image, to send to a pro printer, I use OnOne Perfect Resize 7 Pro and have had good results from that. Especially if enlarged images are to be viewed at a normal viewing distance.

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by allachie9

Lovely shot Dave and your comments regarding sensor size are spot on. I certainly wouldn't want to go any smaller (sensor-wise) than the G1X. My previous compact was a Canon G12 and I also got good results from that.
I enjoy printing at home and print up to A3+. No problem printing up to that size from either my DSLRs or the G1X.
Very occasionally, if I need to increase the size of an image, to send to a pro printer, I use OnOne Perfect Resize 7 Pro and have had good results from that. Especially if enlarged images are to be viewed at a normal viewing distance.

The Canon G9 image shown above printed nicely at A3 and that sensor is relatively tiny.

I was wondering, how large have you resized up to? Can you see artifacts when you put your nose near the print? I use a pro printer and he can take me up to 72", which I'm tempted to try with a full-frame image of the Grand Canyon with snow.

Grand Canyon Snow by David Stephens, on Flickr

[allachie9]

I resized this image up to 42 inches wide for a friend who runs a local Bed and Breakfast. Although it's not my favourite shot of our local East Beach, he wanted it in his hallway for his guests to see. (The East Beach is just along the road from his B&B).

East Beach Pano copy by Alan Butterfield, on Flickr

Viewed on the wall at 'normal' distance it looks OK. Although we are probably over critical of our own work, he thinks it looks OK.

Here is a small crop at 100%

100% crop by Alan Butterfield, on Flickr

Not so good when your nose is up against the glass !

[dcstep]

Yeah, usage is important. I was hyper-critical with the things in my office, because I it kind of "represents" my work, although my office is about finances, not images. Still, a few people come in to only see the images.

[Itsed65]

Like Dave, I normally travel with everything but the kitchen sink, including 2 bodies and several big whites, but that said, if I am just playing tour guide for visitors, or out to wine taste or something, I have really started to rely on my Fuji XT1 with the 18-55 kit glass. It is pretty small and lightweight, yet still versatile. It has an APS-C sensor, and it really makes nice images, and it's less obtrusive indoors, and people don't stare as much as they do with a 1DIV and 100-400 on it. I'm pretty sure I could print this one pretty large. I plan to take it with me and use it heavily on my next Yosemite trip.

Semper Paratus by lennycarl08, on Flickr

[M_Six]

I'm still trying to figure out how I'm going to get my Sigma 120-300 out to Denver next week and still have room for my other glass and two bodies. One leg of our flight involves a very small commuter jet, so my carry-on must fit under the seat. But the 120-300 and 2x TC are "must haves" on this trip.

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by M_Six

I'm still trying to figure out how I'm going to get my Sigma 120-300 out to Denver next week and still have room for my other glass and two bodies. One leg of our flight involves a very small commuter jet, so my carry-on must fit under the seat. But the 120-300 and 2x TC are "must haves" on this trip.

Don't show up without at least 300mm. I don't want you whining that I can't get you close enough.

I'd bring a crop-sensor body with the long zoom as the primary body. Of course, it is Colorado, so a decent landscape set up might be useful.

Dave

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by Itsed65

Like Dave, I normally travel with everything but the kitchen sink, including 2 bodies and several big whites, but that said, if I am just playing tour guide for visitors, or out to wine taste or something, I have really started to rely on my Fuji XT1 with the 18-55 kit glass. It is pretty small and lightweight, yet still versatile. It has an APS-C sensor, and it really makes nice images, and it's less obtrusive indoors, and people don't stare as much as they do with a 1DIV and 100-400 on it. I'm pretty sure I could print this one pretty large. I plan to take it with me and use it heavily on my next Yosemite trip.

Will you also take the kitchen sink to Yosemite? That's a car trip for you, so I'd throw everything in the trunk, if it were me.

Dave

[dcstep]

I may look into a Fuji, or something equivalent.

[Itsed65]

Originally Posted by dcstep

Will you also take the kitchen sink to Yosemite? That's a car trip for you, so I'd throw everything in the trunk, if it were me.

Dave

Oh yeah. No traveling light when I do Yosemite, I take my van with a pelican case full of gear. I usually go with a couple of buddies who are also there to shoot. We all shoot primarily Canon, so we can trade and borrow gear that each other don't have.

Still, I got a pano head for the tripod at Christmas, and want to try it out with the Fuji (and of course the 5d3). I want to get a good prime for the XT before I go.

[dcstep]

High class problems...