Choosing a single prime lens for travel forces a real trade-off, and most people default to a 35mm or a wide angle out of habit. The 50mm prime makes a compelling case that it deserves that spot instead, especially if you care about how a location actually feels in a photo rather than just how much of it you can fit in the frame.
Coming to you from James Reader, this visually rich video makes the case for traveling with a 50mm prime over the more common wide angle options. Reader's core argument is about compression. A 28mm or 35mm lens pushes backgrounds away from your subject, which can make enormous mountains or dramatic architecture look small and distant in the final image. At 50mm, that compression pulls the background visually closer, so the location feels like it's actually part of the scene rather than a tiny detail happening far behind your subject. If you've ever come home from a trip and wondered why your landscape shots don't match what you experienced standing there, this might be exactly why. Reader also makes a strong point about subject separation. Even at the same aperture, a 50mm produces more depth and pop than a 35mm, which translates directly to portraits that feel layered and cinematic rather than flat.
One technique Reader covers that's worth your attention is using the 50mm to shoot through foreground elements. Flowers, grass, fences, crowds: at 50mm with a fast aperture, these melt into soft blur and become framing tools rather than distractions. This creates a layered, atmospheric quality that wider lenses struggle to replicate because everything stays relatively in focus and spread apart. He also makes a practical case for stitching multiple frames into a panorama when you need a wider field of view, which lets you keep the compression and rendering of 50mm while still capturing a broad scene. It's a technique that genuinely changes how you think about the lens's limitations.
On the gear side, Reader discusses the Canon RF 50mm f/1.8, the RF 50mm f/1.2, and the RF 50mm f/1.4, laying out where each one sits in terms of size, image quality, and practicality for travel. The f/1.8 is the smallest and cheapest, which matters when you're already carrying a bag full of gear. The f/1.4 lands somewhere in the middle — compact enough to travel with but fast enough to deliver the separation and depth that makes the focal length worth choosing in the first place. He's honest about the downsides too, including tight city streets where 50mm becomes genuinely restrictive, and the lack of weather-sealing on the f/1.8, which he ran into as a real problem in Iceland. He doesn't recommend traveling with a 50mm as your only lens; it works best alongside a zoom or a wider prime for the moments where you simply can't back up far enough.
Check out the video above for the full breakdown from Reader, including the side-by-side comparisons between focal lengths and his thoughts on when to leave the 50mm behind.
8 Comments
I completely agree. Honestly, I had to work quite hard to convince myself that investing a fairly substantial amount in a “boring” 50mm f/1.2 prime was actually a good decision. I used to go hiking with the 24–105 and 70–200, but now I often find myself just putting the 50 on and leaving it at that. Thanks for the article.
All great info and photos help in the education of the view of the different MM's. One reason for not using a prime is not having OSS/IS on the lens, yes today mirrorless have IBIS but those with DSLR do not. Another point is you will want to have enough MM play for all close and far. Back in the 2000's there were magazine(yes paper) advertisements for the Tamron 50-500mm and 50-600mm as the best travel lens.
As far as Sony there is the FE 24-240mm f/3.5-6.3 OSS (SEL24240) and in APS-C mode you get a in camera crop of 36-360mm.. Yes not that f/1.2-1.4-1.8 for the bokeh but that first is all about your focus point like those who do portraits where if eye focus you will get a blur ear and nose so you need to adjust your f/#.
Also if you want bokeh today SW will get in post. Also prims are more expensive in most cases.
Having a 10x you save on not having a lot of lenses and you are ready for anything. Today also most are carrying higher MP cameras where one crops in post for that affect of closeness, not the same I know but one also as those sections of MM also in the telephoto.
Not to rain on your video or information but when in travel it all is unknown before going.
For my everyday carry lens in my teardrop over the shoulder bag I have the FE 24-240mm f/3.5-6.3 OSS but if needed also a 16-35mm for those inside captures plus the 2013 APS-C E10-18mm (15-27mm in 35mm) f/4 OSS that I use for day or night in Full Frame at 12-18mm (removing the light shield). So I am ready for 12mm - 360mm at a moment of getting an eye on something.
I am not saying prims are no good for they are great and I have most all Sony prims for somethings planned, but when on a drive or walkabout of the unknown it is nice to have a lot at your hands with a simple twist and knowing editing tools also.
Your MM imagery differences is great info when selecting a MM, not many have seen the differences and why. That is the real greatness of your video, BRAVO!!!!! Thanks for the Share!!!!!
1. 12mm using the E 10-18mm in full frame
2.A7SM3 and FE 24-105mm F 4 G OSS at 24mm next to truck on a drive on a dirt road Deer.
3.FE 24-240mm f/3.5-6.3 OSS at 24mm getting crescent moon and comet
4. FE 24-240mm f/3.5-6.3 OSS at 360mm focused on head great blur/DOF behind. It is where you focus. Donkey on farm and just a walkabout.
I am a late comer to digital photography, purchasing my first Pentax DSLR in 2017. It had IBIS that is quite effective, as do the subsequent Pentax DSLR bodies. Seldom a problem, even with the old manual glass on the cameras.
Travel kit very much depends on how I am traveling, to where , and for what reason. If going light is necessary, I may take a film camera, a 24mm, the 50mm, and some sort of 70-210 zoom. Would be nearly half the weight of a kit with the DSLR in it.
Typical daily kit includes a 1.7 50mm and a 2.8 24mm prime. Both are old school manual focus and the 50 is strictly manual, but both fit on the DSLR and the film cameras. Also carry a 28-105, a 100-300 and a lens of the day, currently a 100mm macro. Grew up primarily using the Takumar 55 and for many years a 50mm was the only lens I owned. The 50mm is my number 2 go to lens, considering both film and DSLR, the 28-105 doing a lot of the work on the DSLR.
I think 50mm is a bit long for a travel lens . Going through photos of past trips most were taken in 24-35 focal ranges
I hold the same opinion. If I go traveling, I would prioritize the Tamron 28-200 lens. If I need to bring an additional prime lens, I would go for a 28mm prime, as I personally prefer wide-angle perspectives. Of course, everyone has different photography styles and habits, so there is no right or wrong when it comes to lens selection~
On APS-C (Sony A6700), my default travel lens is Sigma's tiny 18-50mm f/2.8 zoom (giving a 27mm-75mm full frame field of view), supplemented by the Sony 15mm f/1.4 G prime and 70-350mm f/4.5-6.3 compact telephoto zoom, if I think needed/have the space. For evenings out I might take a small 25mm prime like the Viltrox 25mm f/1.7. Works for me!
Thanks for your reply! The gear you’re using reminds me of the choice I had to make before buying my camera. I was deciding between the Sony A6700 and the a7M4, and I ended up going with the latter lol.
Your mention of lenses also got me thinking about something I’ve been pondering lately: whether I should replace my Tamron 28-200 with a standard zoom lens. After my most recent trip, I realized almost all of my favorite photos were shot at focal lengths between 18–70mm — I even brought my Batis 18mm specifically for landscape photography.
Although I did use the telephoto end for close-up shots during the trip, I only share those photos when I don’t have better alternatives. That’s why I’ve been considering swapping my Tamron 28-200 for a higher-quality standard zoom with better optical performance, yet I still can’t quite bring myself to give up the focal lengths beyond 75mm.