Lens for vacation (Page 2): When I planning a trip to across Canada from Toronto to Vancouver, I decided my two canon kit lenses were just too much trouble. they were 18

Brian in Whitby Loc: Whitby, Ontario, Canada

planepics wrote:

I've had to cancel (or had cancelled on me) vacations last year and this due to COVID. Next year I'm hoping to actually, finally go somewhere (13-day tour to France w/birthday in Paris) My newest lens is a 24-105 Art. Would that be sufficient or do I need to rent some thing like an 18-300 (or whatever the length is)?

When I planning a trip to across Canada from Toronto to Vancouver, I decided my two canon kit lenses were just too much trouble. they were 18 - 55 mm and 55 - 250 mm. I bought a Sigma 18-250 mm for my crop sensor camera. It has hardly been off my camera. I have since purchased Sigma's 150 - 600 mm that I sometimes use for wildlife but the 18 to 250 is my go to lens.

billmck Loc: Central KY

I keep a Tamron 18-400 on my D7100 most of the time. When I review my photos from a trip like you're taking, I find most of my shots are on the shorter end of that range, so if it were me, I think your 24-105 would work fine.

AGO

I travel to Europe frequently and always take 3 lenses for my DX camera. The one I use 90% of the time is an 18-200mm. I also carry a 10-20mm that I use for a couple of shots every day. Although I don't use this lens all that often, it is indispensable when I need it. I also have a fast 30mm prime that I use in very low light situations. I find that on some trips I don't use this lens at all, especially now that digital cameras (and software) do a better job handling noise in low light situations.

mizzee Loc: Boston,Ma

I think your lens will be perfect for your trip.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

I like the 18-300mm. It's almost always on my D750. If I were taking such a trip, I would get a good one-lens compact.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

I would not take a FF unless I was on assignment by NatGeo ! - and, if I had the money for European travel, I think I could find $1400 for a Sony RX10 IV to insure a pleasant photo/travel experience and leave all the big/heavy stuff behind.
If I were crazy enough to take a full frame, it would be with a 28-200 Tamron.
.

317tman Loc: Indianapolis, In

I was in Paris for a 10 days and had 2 lens 24-105 and 17-40 on a full frame. The 17-40 was very handy particularly in the city. The 24-105 was generally long enough, I could not see needing 300mm on a crop sensor camera. For myself I would want something wider than the 24; I bought the 17-40 for my previous crop sensor and found at 17mm (27mm equivalent) to be a bit lacking. You could take your 24-105 and walk around downtown St L and see if you can get the type building/city shots that would be encountered in France. If you don't regularly use a wide angle you might want to rent one for the trip.

47greyfox Loc: on the edge of the Colorado front range

When my wife and I really started traveling in earnest, I faced a similar dilemma. My thoughts were (still are) that I didn’t want to lug around around 3-4 lbs of camera and lens made even worse by additional lenses. In the end, I brought a Canon 60d along with the 24-105 f4L. I considered an excellent combination for tours and general sightseeing. Since the trip was a river cruise, I also brought a bridge camera for the “from the boat” shots. For the vast majority of shots, not knowing your plans or goals, I think you’re on track, even for the second lens, especially if your body is APS-C. If FF, I might consider renting longer.

flasfill Loc: Sandy Springs GA

I have been very happy with the Nikon 28-300 on both FX and DX bodies.

planepics Loc: St. Louis burbs, but originally Chicago burbs

Lots of good comments. Thanks...sometimes hogs put other people down when they ask certain types of questions. Someone mentioned Ireland...THAT was the trip I cancelled this year. I was going to spend my birthday in Waterford. Last year, my Spain trip was cancelled by the tour company. I was going to be in Seville then. Hopefully the third time will be the charm and I'll be in the "City of Light." I think (unless I get another lens in the meantime, like renting or buying a 10-20) will take my a99ii with the 24-105. As for panos I saw a video on YouTube where the photog used the camera in vertical to make a more pleasing aspect ratio, i.e. not super long and skinny. I forgot what else I was going to respond to, but I think that the weight savings of my a77 would be more than compensated for with the better IQ of the heavier a99ii. Besides, all but one of my lenses are f/f. Why not use their full capabilities? Have a nice weekend :)

photoman43

planepics wrote:

I've had to cancel (or had cancelled on me) vacations last year and this due to COVID. Next year I'm hoping to actually, finally go somewhere (13-day tour to France w/birthday in Paris) My newest lens is a 24-105 Art. Would that be sufficient or do I need to rent some thing like an 18-300 (or whatever the length is)?

For Europe and France, I would take my Nikon 24-85mm. Your 24-105 is an excellent choice, enemies better as it has a little more reach. You may need a faster prime like a 35mm or 50mm in addition to the 24-105 if you plan on lots of indoor shots like churches. If your camera can shoot at higher isos without too much noise than the fastptime might not be needed.

Have a great trip! Have fun!

Saigon Loc: Atlanta, GA

Hi,

I spent 3 weeks in Europe summer 2019 - With 2 Lens: 16-35mm f2.8 and 24-105 f4.0 on a full frame body. I used the ultra wide angle len probably 80-90% during the that trip. Just bring your best quality lens for the trip you will be fine.

Enjoy your trip.

Fredrick Loc: Former NYC, now San Francisco Bay Area

planepics wrote:

I've had to cancel (or had cancelled on me) vacations last year and this due to COVID. Next year I'm hoping to actually, finally go somewhere (13-day tour to France w/birthday in Paris) My newest lens is a 24-105 Art. Would that be sufficient or do I need to rent some thing like an 18-300 (or whatever the length is)?

In 2019 I spent a month traveling in Europe with a fixed 35mm camera, and had zero regrets. A 24-105 lens will give you a lot of versatility. Relax and have a good time.

User ID

ELNikkor wrote:

Because you mention "18-300", it makes us think your camera is a DX, which means you probably already have an 18-55. Don't know why you'd get an expensive FX lens, unless you intend to get an FX body real soon. Either a) just take your 18-55, b)get a cheap 55-200 and take both, or c) get your FX body now and take the 24-105 only with the FX body.

Always tricky to read an OP’s mind, especially when their question omits important basic info. Omissons could imply a poorly informed or toadally inexperienced OP such that it’s not reasonable to infer anything at all :-(

That said, your analysis is more likely correct than not, and so your advice makes great sense on that basis.

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

I find it truly weird how many threads are about “going to Paris, Yellowstone, London, Everglades, and a wedding in Eastbumfuk. I have an 18-200, what new lens should I buy ?” A worthless question so no sooprize that it always draws ten pages of worthless answers.

rfahrens

I do a lot of traveling in Europe and use Sony equipment. I recommend the full frame camera with the 24 - 105 lens. Frankly, it fits 96% of my needs when touring Europe. As others have pointed our you are normally in very close quarters. If you need to shoot wider, use pano. It works well in a pinch, but don't over do it. There is very little opportunity for long range telephoto lenses. Travel as unencumbered as possible and enjoy.