Think I found my new standard travel kit

[dbmiller]

Just got back from a trip to upstate NY. A former co-worker of my wife has family down there, and we were down to see the new place and their new (4-month old) baby.

I took the A9, Sony 20mm/1.8, Sony 24-105/4, and the Tamron 70-180/2.8. They fit nicely in my Lowepro Transit Sling 250 AW camera bag. Along with the Flashpoint TT685S flash, Flashpoint R2 Pro MarkII transmitter, batteries, MAGboob, and rocket blower. I couldn't find my bag with my ND-filter and step-up rings, but they would normally go in that bag as well. As we were intending to drive there with my wife's friend and her husband, we were trying to pack as little as possible. The A7r3 with the 24-240 that my wife normally uses stayed home. I would need the larger backpack to take two camera bodies plus an extra lens. (No room in the sling for just the A7r3 body - unless I didn't take the flash equipment, which I knew I would need)

The 20mm was great for scenic shots. Wide, but not too wide. I used the 70-180 when I could for portraits, as well as shots of people out on the lake. The 24-105 was useful for shots when there wasn't enough room to use the 70-180.

Sure, there were some shots of things out over the lake where I wish I had the 200-600, but for just a travel kit, I was quite pleased with my options.

 

[AlwaysOnAuto]

Do you feel landscapes taken with the 24-105 at 24 would have differed significantly from the ones you got with the 20?

 

[dbmiller]

Do you feel landscapes taken with the 24-105 at 24 would have differed significantly from the ones you got with the 20?

4mm at the wide end can sometimes make a big difference, but for most landscape pictures, perhaps not. I definitely needed that extra little bit on this last trip when taking pictures of their lake house. A couple of interior and exterior shots where just right with the 20, whereas the 24 would not have been wide enough. And shots I had previously taken with the 12-24 always looked ridiculously wide to me. I also have the 28/2 with the UWA adapter, but you can't put an ND on that combo. Going back over prior photos I had taken with that combo, I knew I'd be happy with the look from the 20.

I'm also hoping to be able to try some astrophotography at some point, and the extra 2+ stops of light will be most appreciated then.

Could I get by with just the 24-105 and 70-180? Yeah, probably. But the 20mm doesn't take of that much space, and will work out much better than the 12-24 with its damn 150x150 filters. Now if I could just find my 77mm 10-stop ND filter and the step-up rings.