Off To Italy
Feb 16, 2020 14:05:29 #
clint f. wrote:
I followed the advice of a fellow UHH and took 1 l... (show quote)
Yes, I removed my grip also for my trip.
Feb 16, 2020 15:19:23 #
sinderone wrote:
I’m heading to Rome and Sicily. I’ll be taking my trusty D7100 with me. I plan on taking my 18-200 as my walk around and my 10-20 for crowded cities, churches and scenery. I also have a 35mm 1.8. Do you think I’ll really need that. I’d like to travel as light as possible but don’t want to shortchange myself. Your input is much appreciated.
We took a two week cruise from Bergen to the Nordkapp then to London in 2018 and I took my Canon 80D DSLR with 3 lenses. I used the 18-135 over 90% of the time (used the 70-300 once and the 10-18 very little). We're taking a cruise from Venice to Barcelona and I'm leaving the 80D at home and taking my new Canon G5X Mk II (1.8 24-120 fixed lens) and expect to enjoy the trip more while I travel light while getting excellent photos. The camera fits in a shirt pocket; the camera in it's carrying case with two spare batteries and memory cards fits in a jacket pocket. Something to consider.
Feb 16, 2020 16:54:42 #
I took only my 12-40 on my Olympus OM-D. Never wished I had another lens to tote around. A tripod would have been nice, but way outside logistics.
Don't forget, you will be walking a lot. You don't want to burden yourself with extras.
I got a lot of good shots and some great shots on the dozen or so stops we made. The things you want to photograph mainly will be in small areas, streets built before cars, so a wider angle will be mostly appropriate. A fast lens is a necessity, IMO.
Don't forget, you will be walking a lot. You don't want to burden yourself with extras.
I got a lot of good shots and some great shots on the dozen or so stops we made. The things you want to photograph mainly will be in small areas, streets built before cars, so a wider angle will be mostly appropriate. A fast lens is a necessity, IMO.
Feb 16, 2020 20:22:38 #
sinderone wrote:
I’m heading to Rome and Sicily. I’ll be taking my trusty D7100 with me. I plan on taking my 18-200 as my walk around and my 10-20 for crowded cities, churches and scenery. I also have a 35mm 1.8. Do you think I’ll really need that. I’d like to travel as light as possible but don’t want to shortchange myself. Your input is much appreciated.
When I went to Rome I took my Nikon D7000 and an 18-300 lens. Nothing else. I found no need for any other lens. You'll be glade you traveled light.
Feb 16, 2020 21:30:09 #
35 MIGHT BE USEFUL. In a similar situation, I found the 18-200 of most use. A 12-24 worked for cathedral interiors.
But, my 35mm lens was essential for shots from miles on a bus. Between the tinted windows and often overcast skies, my D7100 was at ISO 800 with shutter preference at 1/1000+. Focused at infinity usually, the 35mm lens opened automatically according to meter readings. In image rich areas, I set the body for its quickest operation because I found myself missing scenes that passed before their potential registered for my reaction. Naturally, I deleted most of these, but got a few gems that would have been missed otherwise.
Once home, I ordered the rubber collapsible lens hood that, at the window, would have prevented all those reflections.
On the next trip overseas, I carried a D610 with Nikon 24-70 and an old 20mm D which yielded enough keepers.
Hope you enjoy your trip and share your technique and equipment observations.
But, my 35mm lens was essential for shots from miles on a bus. Between the tinted windows and often overcast skies, my D7100 was at ISO 800 with shutter preference at 1/1000+. Focused at infinity usually, the 35mm lens opened automatically according to meter readings. In image rich areas, I set the body for its quickest operation because I found myself missing scenes that passed before their potential registered for my reaction. Naturally, I deleted most of these, but got a few gems that would have been missed otherwise.
Once home, I ordered the rubber collapsible lens hood that, at the window, would have prevented all those reflections.
On the next trip overseas, I carried a D610 with Nikon 24-70 and an old 20mm D which yielded enough keepers.
Hope you enjoy your trip and share your technique and equipment observations.
Feb 17, 2020 10:13:44 #
LouV
Loc: Juno Beach, FL
18mm on your camera will give you an equivalent field of view of approximately 28mm. That should be wide enough for most things but I would be inclined to include the 10 to 20 for interiors and dramatic landscapes.
Other than that it’s probably sharper than the zooms the only advantage of the 35 is it’s speed. But with its equivalent FOV of around 50mm it’s not wide enough for most interiors which is when the speed would be most advantageous. If space and weight are considerations I’d leave that one at home.
Other than that it’s probably sharper than the zooms the only advantage of the 35 is it’s speed. But with its equivalent FOV of around 50mm it’s not wide enough for most interiors which is when the speed would be most advantageous. If space and weight are considerations I’d leave that one at home.
Feb 17, 2020 10:31:53 #
LouV
Loc: Juno Beach, FL
Just some unsolicited advice and you may already be aware. Rome is a dense city. When shooting architecture you will often not be able to get far enough away from your subject and will need to use your wide angle zoom. That will create a lot of vertical distortion (buildings appear to lean back and taper towards the top). That distortion is very easily corrected in post processing software BUT that correction crops as it corrects. The greater the correction, the more of the original image is lost. So, if you care about that and intend to fix it in post, leave LOTS of extra room around your subject when you shoot it.
Feb 17, 2020 17:12:34 #
I think that having your 18-200 would amply meet your needs while you’re enjoying yourself in Italy. I’ve found on a recent trip that the 16-70 I had used for more than 90% of my photos. I found that a monopod was handy where you’re not allowed to use a tripod. That’s been my experience... happy snapping!
Feb 17, 2020 17:37:21 #
If you photograph tall structures from the ground and get the tapering effect, as mentioned above this can be fixed with post-processing. However, you'll need to leave a lot of space above the building, as the fix expands the image both upwards and sideways and if you haven't provided space for that expansion the image will get the top cut off. (Ask me how I know. . . .)
Feb 20, 2020 12:40:33 #
gsmith051 wrote:
The 18-200 lens will work for 99 percent of your shots. I’ve always taken a small camera for backup and never used it. Frankly, a cell phone would do the job as backup.
I found that out be accident...when I flew to Israel from JFK a few years back, I'd occasionally shoot clips of different countries/scenery going by my window seat, only to find out that my recording never stopped and I had well over an hour of combined video of the floor and bottom of my seat - with a few dead battery to show for it!!!! When I got to TLV, I had to use my cellphone to show the main concourse after going through customs. I hope that doesn't happen again in June when I head to Spain.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.