Ray - , Jun 26, 2009; 04:58 a.m.
I came back from Malaysia and Brunei which I did a 8 day trip. Only had so much annual leave.
Coming from a place where it was 12 degrees celcius (53 Fahrenheit) with a summer max usual of 24 degrees (75 Fahrenheit), I got to Asia and it was 35 degrees (95 Fahrenheit), overnight at 28 degrees (82 Fahrenheit) maybe more cos of the heat factor. I had with me a D70 and my 18-200mm VR and my Sigma 10-20mm. I also had a tripod.
Do you think I am crazy to swap that lens which was optically fine for me, to swap it for a Nikon 18-55mm (non VR) because it weighs less. I have a 18-70mm from my 2nd D70 (2nd hand) that came with the lens but that is still some what heavier. Most of my pictures were stopped down (apeture), some were hand held at night (Petrona Towers) at ISO 800 and to me they were fine too without the restricted tripod. I think I never shot more than 50mm.
So what about a 18-55mm (non VR) and even possibly a Nikon D40 or a D40x, I travel with compact digital lenses so they will all be AFS compatible.
Look forward to your opinions.
Thanks.
Matthew Brennan 
, Jun 26, 2009; 05:58 a.m.
Ray,
I'm not going to call you crazy, we all have our reasons for doing as we please. The 18-70mm DX lens is somewhat under rated in my opinion. I too had one with the D70 as a kit lens- after using some higher end Nikkors in the past years I now appreciate that the 18-70mm lens is rather good, esp. in the value for money stakes.
Having said that; if you think the IQ of the 18-200mm is acceptable then the 18-55mm DX lens is likely to please - however I 've only used the 18-200mm never tried the 18-55mm lens in either guise. If you drop the 18-200mm from your line up, what photo opportunities are you going to miss beyond either 55mm or 70mm ??
As you already have a tri-pod I'd stick to your current line up of two lenses and one body with that tri-pod. You will be hard pushed to go better than the 18-200mm Nikkor with VR as a one lens does it all for 'traveling light'. By pro grade-lens standards the 18-200mm Nikkor is light in weight.
Oppressive climatic conditions are all part of the travel experience. If heat and humidity bother you to the point of tossing up wether to swap lenses to save a mere 350 grams in weight (difference between 18-55mm non VR and 18-200mm VR) then I'd say you might want to choose a more agreeable climate to take vacations in.
You have to decide if you are travelling for the sake of the travel experience or if you are travelling to take photographs.
Ray - , Jun 26, 2009; 06:43 a.m.
Thanks, yeah the 18-200's IQ was good enough for me. I don't think I used anything longer than 45mm on my trip. I just checked my Lightroom catalogue for a few shots that I used a longer FL ...
Yes, climate is an issue for me. I am now back to 12 degrees (53F) and it is great. I can wear layers and a jacket, the cold tingle is enjoyment. Sometimes it may even be 8 celcius (46F). No sweating skin. My underwear does not roll down, the seat does not stick to me. At my hotel room it was set at 16 degrees (60F).
I am also looking at at a Gitzo traveler + Markins Q3 ballhead. I took with me a Feisol 3402 + Kirks BH3. I left my Gitzo 1228 at home.
I would put travel more important than photography. Via travels, I don't tend to shoot sunrise and sunset only withou tripod, in the day I leave the tripod in my room and just do snapshots. i do landscapes / cityscapes hence I just handhold it. For my 8 day trip I took under 500 pictures. So I not a volume shooter. I tend to nail a sunrise or a sunset .. sometimes I don't shoot at sunrise because the buildings - they turn the lights off overnight, I tend to nail a couple of iconic shots.
Ray - , Jun 26, 2009; 06:54 a.m.
What may even be more impt for me is the reduction of size ... a 52mm filter thread - being my main walking around lens.
Errol Young - Toronto, ON, CA , Jun 26, 2009; 07:25 a.m.
I am off to Venezuala next week and leaving my D300 here. I am taking my D70s and my 18-70 because they are lighter and it is still a great combo.
I looked into lighter cameras but I do not want to buy a D40 and a big P&S would just frustrate me. So I will ung the D70 combo.
Robert Budding , Jun 26, 2009; 08:21 a.m.
A light kit that you carry is better than a heavy one that sits at home.
Kent Staubus 
, Jun 26, 2009; 08:55 a.m.
I started using a D80 and Nikons 18-55mm VR + 55-200mm VR for times I want to cut weight (and risk of theft.) They've worked out fine. You might consider getting a new Nikon D5000 camera. They are much smaller & lighter, and have the sensor of the D300. You can easily shoot them at ISO 800 and even ISO 1600. With the 18-200mm VR you might get away with no tripod because of the two extra stops.
Kent in SD
Peter Hamm 
, Jun 26, 2009; 09:10 a.m.
I think the difference in weight is minimal. Stick with the 18-200.
Luis G 
, Jun 26, 2009; 09:41 a.m.
Stick with whatever it takes for you to make the best pictures you can. I often travel with one of a number of Nikon DSLRs, the 18-55 2nd version, and a 50/1.8. Works for me. YMMV.
To Errol, be careful in Venezuela.
Wouter Willemse 
, Jun 26, 2009; 09:42 a.m.
I would rather leave the tripod home than going from 18-200 back to 18-55. Hand-held technique and VR can cover a lot of loss of the tripod (except maybe night photos), while extra lenght never really hurts.
Or maybe even leave the 10-22 at home too, and get the 16-85VR. The two extra millimeters make me grab the 12-24 less and less, but then again, I'm not too much a wide-angle type.
