Travel advice--take 5d, or 20d to use 10-22

[karen_smith7]

<p>Hi, I am going to London and Paris, and mulling over what to take (and having the good fortune to have way too much stuff to choose from). My qs for the forum is, would you take the full frame camera or the 30d in order to use the 10-22? If i go with the 5D the widest i have will be 24. But, obviously, it's a better camera and the 20d has its limitations with the other lens. I'm also taking the 70-200 2.8 (heavy, but i know i will regret it if i leave it home). Mostly cities--museums and churches, etc. (And yes, i know that this is ultimately my choice, but i appreciate other points of view and like to hear them.) Many thanks for your thoughts. </p>

[ken schwarz]

<p>Personally I like a lightweight kit for city tourism. I hate the weight and security risks of a big bag, and I don't like changing lenses in the street. So, I use just one lens, the 24-105 and it's amazing how well that works out. The IS feature is very helpful when shooting interiors without flash. The 24mm wide end is sufficient in my experience. It sounds like you are set on bringing the tele zoom, and for picking out details it's important, but remember that a moderate crop on the 5D will come very close to simulating its effect with the 24-105 on the long end.</p>

[mike_stemberg]

<p>Karen, my feeling is that if you are interested in museums and churches, then the low light capabilities of the 5D is the way to go...</p>

[buffdr_rasouliyan]

<p>This is a tough question. I just took a trip and I ended up taking my 7D instead of my full frame. Biggest reason is the on-board flash. I didn't want to pack one of my external flashes. So I went with 7D plus 17-55 2.8 IS. Great combo. If you KNOW you will not use the flash, take the full frame. I would make sure I have a fast prime in my side pocket just to be sure. v/r Buffdr</p>

[John Crowe]

<p>Sorry. Take both. The 30D and 10-22 can't be that much more to add to your bag. If you are not into sports you could sell this combo and get a used Canon EF 17-35/2.8 L or used Canon 16-35/2.8 L I for your 5D. </p>

<p>Have an awesome trip.</p>

[thomas_sullivan]

<p>well, if you have the money, I'd buy a 17-40mm f/4 (which Canon has a rebate on right now) and just bring the 5D. The 17-40 on the 5D is great and it don't add much weight to the package. Throw in a 50mm whatever (I'm sure you have one) and you'll be ready for anything. Full frame one way or the other in my mind....you'll be sorry if you don't bring it.</p>

[robin_sibson1]

<p>Assuming you can't change the kit you have available, leave the 70~200 at home, take both bodies, the 24~105 and the 10~22. The 24~105 on the crop body will give you the same angle of view at the long end as a 168mm lens on FF, and I don't think you'll miss the extra 30mm or so for what you propose to photograph. You would certainly miss having nothing wider than 24mm-on-FF.</p>

[tdigi]

<p>5d without a doubt if its just 1 camera.</p>

<p>As to lenses, 24-105 is such a great travel lens so this is a must if I am only taking 1 or 2 lenses.</p>

<p>I would and did sell my 10-22 for a 17-40 when I went to full frame. personally I see little sense in owning a lens I cannot use on all my bodies. With this you could go with 17-40 and 70-200 with 2 bodies. ( assuming you want to carry 2 bodies )</p>

<p>My last trip I also debated taking my 70-200 2.8 and in the end I took it and I ended up using it about 60% of the time so I was happy I had it.</p>

<p>Maybe take along the 24-105 and use it in places where you don't want to change.</p>

<p>How do you plan to carry it? having the right bag to make it comfortable means a lot.</p>

<p> </p>

[mark_pierlot]

<p>I usually find 24mm to be sufficiently wide on FF for my purposes, and seldom find myself reaching for my ultrawide zoom. However, your "vision" may be wider than mine, and you may well miss having a lens to match it, especially in cities that afford so much photographic opportunity.</p>

<p>If you're unsure, take both bodies. Leave the 10-22 on the 20D, and swap between your 24-105 (if that's what you have) and 70-200 on your 5D. Or, better still, pick up a used 17-40 (they're relatively cheap and plentiful these days), and leave the crop body at home.</p>

[nathangardner]

<p>sell the 10-22mm to get a 17-40mm f/4L (they're very similar in price and would be an even trade) and put the 17-40mm on the 5D.</p>

[robin_sibson1]

<p>My comment was made on the basis that you were not about to reorganise your kit. Of course, if you do have the time and the funds to do so, then you have a number of interesting options. With your current bodies, 17~40 on the 5D is probably better than 10~22 on the 20D, and I agree with other posters that selling the 10~22 to buy a 17~40 (not too costly an option) would give you a sensible one-body kit for your trip – no backup body, for sure, but you may not be too worried about that. My own experience of townscape and architecture (in London, Paris, and many other European cities) is that 24mm on FF is useful but frustrating, and you will almost certainly feel the need to go wider. I'm assuming that you are not about to splash out on a TS lens.</p>

<p>However ...</p>

<p>The 10~22 is an excellent lens, well built if not quite up to L-series standards, and arguably at least as good, perhaps better, optically compared to the 17~40 (I have both). 10~22 on 1.6-factor versus 17~40 on FF is not a foregone conclusion. Provided you are not limited by high-ISO capabilities, where the FF bodies really do have an advantage, 10~22 on a 7D would probably be at least as good as 17~40 on a 5D, and competitive with 17~40 on a 5DII. Just bear that in mind before getting rid of your 10~22, and think about the longer term in relation to whether you want to go entirely FF or maintain an updated dual-format kit as I do. </p>

[bill_morrow1]

<p>Just got back from a trip, and didn't want to take a photo bag as such; so I separated lens<br>

and body to fit in a briefcase--thereby accessible for use from airplane window.<br>

Same thoughts....5D or 7D. Flash if needed is a plus on 7D, so I wound up taking that.<br>

I have a Tamron 18-270 VR just for trips. There were times I missed the 70-200 2.8, and<br>

the 24-105, but on balance--the above did 95% of what I wanted. </p>

 

[mike_whalen]

<p>A great dilemma to have, but resist the urge, travel light and take the 5D with only the 24-105 (if that is your lens). This combo will cover 85-90% of your your needs and it will make your trip so much more enjoyable having not to lug more gear along or worry about changing lenses. Bring a P&S too. Enjoy Paris -- it is wonderful (except for the crowds this time of year!)</p>

[karen_smith7]

<p>These are all such wonderful responses; I wish i had the time to thank you all individually. It's good to know that the 'thought processes' one goes thru are actually on the mark--i've seen most of them echoed here. My 'better angels' are saying take the 5d and the 24-105 and call it quits--well, that and borrow my husband's 50/1.8 which takes up no space. I might eventually see if i can sell the 10-22 and buy a 17-40 or some wider lens that fits the full frame ( a great idea) but probably not in time for this trip. <br>

Now if only i can keep that 70-200 from creeping back into my backpack.....<br>

Best,<br />Karen </p>

[faysal]

<p>Rent a 17-40L or 16-35l mk2, and take the 5d :)<br>

hide the 70-200 in a shoe and bring it too!</p>

[nathangardner]

<p>rent a 70-200mm f/4, its very easy to travel with</p>

[herma]

<p>I just travelled to Europe this winter (cities, very little nature). I did not use my 70-200 and I regret having had to lug it around. I nearly had a heart attack when our car got broken into. They didn't realize what they left behind was a fortune in camera gear. All they grabbed was a bag on the front seat with paperwork. I hate to say it (but I can because I am European and I grew up in the Netherlands) but there is a lot of opportunity theft happening. Much more than here in America. I guess legalized drugs have not become cheap enough yet. Do not leave ANY thing in sight in a car. It's funny how habitual my family in Europe has become. They even take the GPS plug out of sight. Americans tend to stick out as a sore thumb and you could become an easy target for thiefs, especially with a 70-200 hanging around your neck.<br>

I took my 7d with the 10-22 and the tamron 28-75 2.8. That was my most used combination. I should have left the rest at home. The 7d low light ability is just as good as the old 5d.<br>

For the trip I added extra, no deductable insurance to my home owners insurance, just in case.<br>

BTW, photography is not allowed in every museum. Enjoy your trip but be safe.</p><div></div>

[awahlster]

<p>On our trip to Europe we took a 19mm 24mm 28-70mm 28-85 50mm 75-200<br>

we shot 85 rolls of film in 3 weeks.<br>

I barely used the 19mm I think less then 10 frames<br>

I used the 24mm a LOT in all the small churches we visited<br>

I used the 50mm to copy some family photo's from an album using a close up tube I brought<br>

We used the 28-70 and 28-85 the most with maybe 70% of the frame shot with those lenses<br>

the 75-200 was invaluable on our cruise up the Rhine river to shoot the various railroad tunnels and castles along the river.</p>

[mark_pierlot]

<p>Karen, since you don't you seem keen on the ultrawide end, why not take your 5D with your 24-105 and your 70-200 on your trip, but limit yourself to just one lens each time you're out and about, taking the one most appropriate for the "sightseeing" you'll be doing that day? That way, you won't regret leaving the longer zoom at home and missing the kinds of photographic opportunities that Mark mentions.</p>