tdigi Posted August 4, 2008 Share Posted August 4, 2008 Bring what will give you the best results. I cant see why anyone would suggest leaving the 17-55 at home? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manuel barrera houston, Posted August 4, 2008 Share Posted August 4, 2008 A vacation is not a photo shoot? I am baffled. Sigma 10-20 and 28-135 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petespositives Posted August 4, 2008 Share Posted August 4, 2008 Roger! I live in Scotland but it is on the fringes of Europe in sooooo many ways. However, it does make for relatively easy access to the mainland of the continent :) In visits to France and Italy in my recent digital phase I have used the Sigma 10-20 and a Nikkor 24-120 with polarisers available. The 70-300 has stayed in the rucksack. In visits to Edinburgh, London and other places in between the same two shorter lenses have been used a lot. My partner would be heartbroken if I didn't make our vacations a photo shoot from my point of view. Otherwise her research into local wines, beers and local recipes would be severely restricted by her having to indulge in the lost art of conversation! It's a 50/50 deal from my point of view and a win/win one from hers. Enjoy it all but leave the long lens at home. Best wishes Pete :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kemalriza Posted August 4, 2008 Share Posted August 4, 2008 I would take Sigma 10-20 mm and Canon 28-135 mm. But I must say Joe Walsh's suggestion is interesting too :) Bon voyage :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lightsmith1 Posted August 4, 2008 Share Posted August 4, 2008 If you start with the types of subjects and circumstances it becomes easy to decide on the best lens choices. Inside museums and churches the 17-55mm is not wide enough. The 10-22mm is a better choice. For people photography a small and unobtrusive tele works well. My first choice is the Sigma 50-150mm f2.8 lens, but your 28-135mm would be my second choice. Your camera provides excellent IQ at ISO 1600 so there is much less need for a f1.4 prime lens. A flash of any size that can be bounced off a wall or ceiling is a big help indoors as tripods are both more cumbersome and often prohibited while flash is usually an option. If the flash is used only for fill in dark churches and museums your batteries will last a long time, possibly the duration of your trip with just one set. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yakim_peled1 Posted August 5, 2008 Share Posted August 5, 2008 >> To all of you that are going to Europe: I would take your fastest lens. There are many churches and palaces where flashes aren't allowed and may not be able to setup a tripod. When subject monument is not an issue (e.g. you want the church to be focused and don't mind if the people will smear) than IS is far more effective than a fast aperture. Moreover, you may want to stop the lens down for more DoF and then, the faster aperture becomes meaningless. You have not mentioned a tripod but my recommendation is to get a small and light one. The Gitzo 1550T might be enough but you may want to consider the 1541T as well. Happy shooting, Yakim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arie_vandervelden1 Posted August 5, 2008 Share Posted August 5, 2008 Another vote for Sigma 10-20 and Canon 17-55/2.8 IS. Leave the tripod at home. With the 17-55 set at f/2.8 and IS turned on and the camera at 1600 iso you can shoot in near darkness. I've shot inside dimly lit museums with my Tamron 17-50/2.8 with good results, and I don't have IS. Yes you do get some noise but who cares. I've shot inside churches and buildings with my Sigma 10-20 balanced on a pew. I've shot nightscenes with the camera balanced on a railing, on a canal bridgedeck. Tripods smack of photoshoot, they are cumbersome, don't bring one. Improvise. Bring a cable release though, you don't wanna have the self-timer beeper going off inside a church. Definitely leave the hotshoe flash at home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chiefkeefe Posted August 5, 2008 Share Posted August 5, 2008 I took the 10-22, 24-105 and 100-400 with me to Italy in May for my 40D (and yes, my back still hurts)... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rogernoel Posted August 5, 2008 Author Share Posted August 5, 2008 Thank you for all of the comments and responses. I am going to take the Sigma 10-20 and Canon 17-55 2.8 lenses. I have polarzing filters for both and will also have lens hoods for both. I have five 4 GB cards and three 2 GB cards. I will need them shooting in RAW and JPEG. I really enjoyed all of the input. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tscheung Posted August 6, 2008 Share Posted August 6, 2008 if really just want to pick up two lens, 10-20 and 28-135, that is enough coverage more than 95% shots Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_r._fulton_jr. Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 Most people take too much when they travel. I'm with Puppy Face. Take the 17-55. That's all you need. While you're at it dump everything out of your suitcases and take only what you need. If you're having to check suitcases THAT's too much, too. Don't be a pack mule. Have fun on your trip. Good luck! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now