Best Lenses for city travel with a crop body

[elliotte_harold]

<p>You're flying to a European/American/Asian city wielding a 50D/7D/60D/etc. You'll shoot buildings, people, museums, churches, boats, pets, zoos, food, stores, etc., both indoors and outdoors. Whatever catches your eye. All camera equipment has to fit in your carry-on bag. What lenses do you take with you and why?</p>

[philip_wilson]

<p>If you want to travel light I suspect something like the 15-85 or 18-135 ( I only have the latter and gave it to the kids). Myself I tend to take 16-35 F2.8 II, 24-70 f2.8, 70-200 f4 IS and a couple of primes - currently drawn from 100 f2.8 LIS, 85 F1.8 Mamiya M645 on tilt shift adaptor and 8mm fisheye. I am planning to add a 17 f4 TS which will displace a prime from the bag. I also carry two bodies 5DII and 7D. When walking around I will either take the 24-70 or the 16-35 and I take the 85 F1.8 or 100 f2.8 or 70-200 depending on my expectations for longer shots. If buildings are a likely subject then the Mamiya M645 and Mirex adaptor get thrown in - and when I get the 17 F4 this will come. I like shooting wide angle, love to use tilt / shift and need at least one longer lens for portrait type use.</p>

<p>When I travel for a short trip (I fly about 250,000 miles a year for work) I will usually pack a body and two lenses - when I do this I tend to take two good lenses rather than a big focal length range. That said I tend to go to cities I have gone to before for work and usually have very limited time - for example I flew a total of 12 hours last week and never took a shot as i was too short of time!</p>

[scott_ferris]

<p>I've done several trips with a 1.3 crop body and a 16-35, and battery charger. I more normally have a FF body with 16-35 or 24-70 and 50 f1.4 and a Manfrotto 190 tripod.</p>

<p>I used to carry as much as Philip but was put off by the weight, now I have a ThinkTank Airport roller bag I don't worry so much about the weight but seem quite happy with less gear. For work I'll take just about everything, it is amazing what you can get in these bags!</p>

[tdigi]

<p>Wow I am probably the opposite of Phillip, I go pretty light usually at most 3 lenses but probably 2. I went to Galapagos with just a 24-105 and 70-200 and I thought that was fine but I wish I took 2 bodies like I originally planned. I just ordered a 35L and I have been liking the idea of 35L and 100L combo ( and maybe a 17-40 if I was going somewhere with buildings ) but I like to go as light as possible. I would be find with just a 24-70 and 50 prime for most anyplace.</p>

[arie_vandervelden1]

<p>My travel setup: Sigma 10-20/4-5.6 plus Tamron 17-50/2.8</p>

<p>then depending on itinerary I'll bring Canon 55-250 IS or Canon 85/1.8 or Tamron 90/2.8. For city travel I'd take the 85/1.8.</p>

<p>Everything fits in a little 30L backpack. If I were to start from scratch with city travel in mind then perhaps I'd pick Tokina 11-16/2.8 plus Tamron 17-50/2.8</p>

<p> </p>

[pjmeade]

<p>I usually have just the 24-105, if I pack a second lens, it's going to be the 70-200/4 (so much lighter than the 70-200/2.8 IS, which is more for business use. If I feel the need for something shorter, then the 17-40 is a good option.</p>

[mike_hitchen]

<blockquote>

<p>buildings, people, museums, churches, boats, pets, zoos, food, stores, etc., both indoors and outdoors.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Are you asking how much gear it is possible to take in as carry-on? Or asking what people would take a travel set? This is what I normally take and it suits all I need to do.<br />In my carry-on I usually have the LowePro Slingshot 200 which is well under carry-on limits and in that I can get my 30D, Canon 17-55 f2.8 and Canon 70-300 IS and 50mm 51.8. Plus CPL for each lens, 0.3 ND, 0.6 ND and a set of ND Grads with their holders, spare batteries and spare cards and cable release. And battery charger, Epson 3000 back up device and charging cables.<br />Gear I am thinking about getting is 24-105 to reduce the lens-swapping during city shooting and on a day devoted to walking around town I would have that and the 17-55. And a flash. For carrying during a flight I am sure these 3 lenses and the accessoreis would still all fit into a larger bag such as the Slinghot 300 which is still under carry-on limits. If space becomes limiting then I would put the non-delicate stuff such as filters and chargers into the checked.<br />I have gradually come to prefer a shoulder bag when moving about in the city but again its size would be well under carry-on limits. For maximum flexibility I have sometimes used the Slinghot for the flight itself with a shoulder bag in the checked baggage for when I get to the destination - I use the sligshot if I forsee doing a lot of walking around or the shoulder bag for busy streets.</p>

[amol]

<p>1) Tamron (or Canon) 17-50 <strong>F/2.8</strong>- this is a must for museums/churches or other places that do not allow flashes.<br>

2) Canon 55-250 IS USM or a Canon 70-200<br>

Then, depending on your shooting style:<br>

3) Canon 15-85 USM IS for the outdoors and decent lighting conditions, general walk around lens, plus it gives you an extra 2mm on the wide end.</p>

[hjoseph7]

<p>If you want to go light, a Canon 35mm f.2 and a Canon 50mm f1.8.</p>

[jim r]

<p>Canon 10-22 (scenics/environmental portraits); 50 f/1.4 (low-light work, interior details and portraits); and 85 f/1.8 (+ your feet for telephoto work).</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>To cover all the bases, a ultrawide (10-20 more or less), a EF-S 15-85, and a EF 70-300mm. IS, of course. Maybe also a 35mm f/2 or a 50mm f/1.8 for low light.</p>

<p>If this is too much, scratch the 70-300 first, then the ultrawide last.</p>

[William Michael]

<p>24/1.4 and 50/1.4 and 135/2 maybe x2.0MkII and 1.4MkII . . . and my 5D<br>

Why: because the lenses are all fast. Collectively they give a good spread. Better spread with the dual kit format. The total weight is OK for carry on. What do you do if the "50D/7D/60D", fails?</p>

<p>WW</p>

[mark from thailand]

<p>In a city: Only the 16-35 f2.8. You'll need the wide aperture for all of those gloomy cathedral shots.</p>

[ty_mickan]

<p>Elliote, there is no way that you will be able to ascertain what lenses to take on your trip. Some people see wide, others prefer longer focal lengths, most people nowadays just settle for a zoom lens, whilst some still prefer the weight and IQ advantages of primes. Just consider that you are not going to be shooting in fast paced environments, so you should have ample time to change lenses, and that two quality primes will have less bulk and weight than a zoom, and should also be one or two stops faster. </p>

<p>FWIW, I shoot both personally, and for clients, 90% of the time with two lenses - a 35mm and a 75mm.</p>

[charedan]

<p>On my 50D that would be my 10-22, 24-105, 70-200 2,8L II,<br>

On my 1DMKIII scratch the 10-22. </p>

[JeffOwen]

<p>I have tried to travel light and have three lenses, the Canon 10-22, Canon 17-85 IS and Canon 70-300 DI IS. Last month in the middle of Australia my 17-85 packed up (stuck iris) and I coped well with the ultra wide & telephoto but missed the mid range.<br>

I have now parted with the 17-85 and replaced it with the Tamron 18-270 with the aim that when travelling I only have the two lenses, the Tamron & the 10-22. If I had to go with only one lens I would take the ultra wide, it's my favourite. I will probably through in my 50mm 1.8 as an insurance.</p>

[robert_schulz]

<p>If I am traveling super light I will simply do a 50D (minus grip) and the 18-200. A great combo for all around light travel. If I am willing to take a bag or backpack, I do my 5DII, 24-70 2.8L, and 100mm 2.8L macro. I dont currently own any superwide full frame lenses but would probably add that if I had one.</p>