I have been fortunate enough to travel a lot for photography and to some pretty tricky locations too. When I first started traveling for photography (or even for pleasure but wanting to take my camera gear with me), I was unable to leave anything behind. I was plagued with the "what if" question when packing my camera bag; what if I see some wildlife and need a long lens? What if I want to do some astrophotography on a clear night? What if I want to do some street portraiture? It doesn't take many trips until you see the error of your ways.
After a while, I knew that lightness of kit was to be a priority — depending on the brief, of course — and so I would gravitate to one of two things: compact and lightweight, or multipurpose. If you know what you'll likely be shooting, you can cut back on kit and lenses like this Sony FE 16-25mm f/2.8 G come into their own.
Personally, I'd sacrifice a little weight and sharpness for a little more range on the zoom, but this is a fast, lightweight wide-angle lens for a fairly reasonable price. What do you think? Is this the sort of lens you would use for travel photography?
For me, this is a too limited range. If I had to take one lens that would be a 24-70 for sure. If I was travelling far (which I'm not really doing anymore), I think that I would take the following kit:
- A9 + 100-400mm
- A7r3 + 24-70mm f2.8 (switching lenses is really killing the fun IMO therefore the 2 bodies)
- Eventually an UWA prime but in reality for landscape that can be covered by stitching 24mm shots. That doesn't really work well for seascape shots however... I would maybe take my 14mm f1.8. That's worth it if the location and dates have a potential for astro. Otherwise, a slower lighter prime would be better, Tamron 20mm f2.8? (don't have it though)
- Ultra light tripod
- Magnetic filters kit that covers all the lenses (would be the first thing to be removed if I had to save weight)
With this I can be sure that almost no frustration will happen 🙂