Yet another Travel kit advice question?

[RoyC]

Ok, so maybe this one's a little different. I am traveling to Venice, Rome and Florence for 12 days in August and have the following available:

 

1) Fuji -XT1, 10-24, 55-200

2) Nikon D750, 24-120 f4

 

I am not a fan of the Nikon 24-120 on FX and that combo is too bulky for me and its going to go ...

 

I am not too sure I really need to take the Fuji 55-200 for this trip - comments?

 

I am considering taking either:

 

1) Fuji Xt1, 10-24,

2) Nikon D750, 50 f1.4

 

Or just the Fuji Xt1, 10-24, 35 f1.4

 

A more radical step as I am also contemplating which system to keep as I really am moving away from the bulk of a DSLR for everyday use and have been thinking of selling the D750 (awesome camera but used seldom now). I would then consider possibly taking the XT1 and Xt10 with 10-24, 35 f1.4 and perhaps a 56 f1.2.

 

Advice, suggestions, comments please....

[milandro]

I would use three of the lenses that I have the 10-24mm, the 35mm AND take the 50-230mm ( just in case), I also own the 60mm ( which wouldn’t be, strictly speaking, necessary but nice) and the 8mm 2.8 samyang (which I would take unless traveling light would be of the essence).

 

You need a tripod, even just a gorilla pod.

[x-tc]

IMHO, on vacation time is scarce so less lens changes and light weight is best.  Lack of light won't be an issue outside, and inside you will need fairly good DoF inside.  When shooting portraits, you will more likely want to incorporate in the background than do isolation. So OIS > fast lens.  Never needed a tripod with the 10-24.  Also took 18-55 on second X body.

 I did not take the 55-200; its too big.  Instead I took my Nikon V2 w/ CX 30-110 (81-300 equiv. attached). It got used about 10% of the time. 

[RoyC]

Sorry, forgot to mention that I have a Manfrotto travel tripod -great for the xt1 but I wouldn't use it for the D750

[azmmount]

I would take the Fuji and all three lenses. If I had to leave one behind, it would be the 55-200. If I could only take one it would be the 10-24.

 

That said, I haven't been to any of those places but I would suspect I would want to shoot wide over tight.

 

Mike

[milandro]

Tripods are essentials unless you never shoot anything in the dark. Besides they also allow you to shoot from positions that would be rather awkward.

 

A fat, oldish and bald man doesn’t look nice while laying flat on the floor trying to get a frog-eye shot.

[Nero]

When I went to Europe last year, the 10-24 rarely came off my camera. However, I was in the Alps in Switzerland and I tend to prefer shooting wide. If you like detail shots, bring both zooms. Otherwise, the 10-24 and the 35 are the way to go.

[NorthernXposure]

Just back from a cruise around the Greek Islands and I took my Fuji XE2 with 18-55mm and 10-24mm. The 18-55mm was on my camera 95% of the time with the 10-24mm making the odd appearance for wide interiors.

[WINN]

Had the opportunity to visit Florence, Rome as well as travel on a Mediterranean cruise last year. The 10-24 and the 18-55 were my most used lenses, by far, for the images I like to take. I brought the 55-200 along but it spent most of the trip in the room safe. Florence and Venice are pretty small cities. You can always go back to a location the next day if desired with the longer lens. I had little problem using either lens indoors though I sometimes had to push the ISO up to between 1600-3200 in order to do so. These sensitivities are well within the usable range of the XT-1. The IS of both lenses were also helpful. The 35mm could he useful during the evening when those cities come alive after their residents come out after work. I didn't find the 35mm that useful indoors because you often didn't have room enough to step back and zoom with your feet. Remember that there will be thousands of others visiting those cities when you are, it's high season in August. My recommendation would be to take them all and bring with you what you might find useful that day. Just don't let your photography prevent you from really looking around and have a great time!!

[Naddan28]

I spent four days in Rome and used the 14,35 &56mm lenses throughout the holiday. I found the 14mm was great for architecture and interior shots and 35mm covered general street stuff. The 56mm was more specialised, mainly a few portraits and some cityscapes.

 

I used a gorilla pod too, instead of a full tripod. In some ways I wish I'd taken the tripod but not sure I would have carried it all day. A series of the images from that trip (with exif) can be found here:

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/77034028@N07/sets/72157651390711318

[Alan Sircom]

A few years back, I would have probably said 10-24 and 35, but now I'd tend toward the 10-24 and the 56, skipping the 35mm entirely.  The 10-24 is most comfortable at its wider end, and it's large compared to a 35mm (or especially the 23mm on the X100s), but I'd be happy to use the 10-24 as the primary walk around lens, and that 56 for when I wanted to go for a spot of Steve McCurry!

[aceflibble]

Knowing Italy, I'd say the 10-24 and 35mm. Unless you decide to try some impromptu portraits, there's no reason to have the 55-200. The 10-24 will be good for the narrower streets and wide vistas. The 35mm, if that's your fastest prime, will be good if you take the camera out in the evening. The 23mm would be better, though.

Leave the tripod at home, tourists with tripods do nothing but piss off the locals and in most countries throughout continental Europe, using a tripod can get you moved on by the police. (Don't worry, you wouldn't actually get arrested, but they'll tell you to put it away.) The 10-24 has IS anyway and the primes are fast enough to keep the shutter speed high. Maybe you intend to do some long exposures, but if that's the case, find a rock you can rest the camera on. If you do take the tripod, don't bank on using it a whole lot.

If I was going back to any part of Italy, in a perfect world with every piece of gear available to me, I'd either take the X-T1 and the 23mm f/1.4 or I'd take an X100T. If I was a zoom user, I'd take the 10-24mm for the day and at night I'd just leave the camera in my hotel. Telephoto isn't as useful around Italy as medium-wide angle is, and you don't want to be lugging around any more than one body and one lens at a time. The 35mm will work okay in place of the 23mm or X100 if you don't have either of them.

[darknj]

Clearly the 10-24 and 35mm would be the two lenses of choice, although for Roma, I would take the 55-200, some places can be really crowed and it could be useful to be able to shoot above the crowd and zoom into your subject.

[TedGamble]

I recently took a trip to Boston and Maine. It was my first outing with the 10-24. I also took the 27 and the 18-135. Prior to the trip I was expecting that I would be using the 18-135 for 80% of my shots because of it's very large range. Boy was I wrong! I took over 75% of the shots with the 10-24. I only used the 18-135 for longer reach. The shot stats showed that the larger percentage of my shots were in the 14-24 range (21-35 equivalent), but oddly enough, the single most focal length used at 10 (15 equivalent). I had lots at the 24 (35 equivalent) length, but that's understandable because I simply chose to use the lens that was on the camera (10-24) at it's longest length instead of swapping out to the 18-135 for maybe only a little more reach.

 

The 10-24 is a truly outstanding lens, and so is the 18-135. One thing that seems to hold true regardless. Pick a lens, stick with it, and learn to "see the world" through the eyes of that lens. You'll worry less about "which lens do I need for this shot" and enjoy your trip more.

 

Here's a link to my flickr album of the shots: https://www.flickr.com/photos/tedgamble/albums/72157658417469231

[dcwwagner]

Only you can know what type of photos you want to take, but having lived in Italy extensively, I would not take the 10-24 if I was limited to 1-2 lenses. Basic reasons being, I will would want to work in the 50-80mm range extensively, as the people are so photogenic, and I would rarely go wider than 24mm. But then again, I think ultra-wide angle shots of church interiors are so overdone. I never figured out a way to make those shots either original, or personally pleasing, so I stopped taking them. 

 

If it were me, I would take a normal zoom, or if I had to keep it small and light, the 23, and then I would add either the 56/60 (if size is critical), or a tele zoom. You'd be surprised how many cool details there are, especially in Tuscany and Rome, that can only be captured with a telephoto, from distant hills to Rome's towers, dome's and ruins, as viewed from a rooftop bar.

[bujinkan]

Only you can know what type of photos you want to take, but having lived in Italy extensively, I would not take the 10-24 if I was limited to 1-2 lenses. Basic reasons being, I will would want to work in the 50-80mm range extensively, as the people are so photogenic, and I would rarely go wider than 24mm. But then again, I think ultra-wide angle shots of church interiors are so overdone. I never figured out a way to make those shots either original, or personally pleasing, so I stopped taking them.

 

If it were me, I would take a normal zoom, or if I had to keep it small and light, the 23, and then I would add either the 56/60 (if size is critical), or a tele zoom. You'd be surprised how many cool details there are, especially in Tuscany and Rome, that can only be captured with a telephoto, from distant hills to Rome's towers, dome's and ruins, as viewed from a rooftop bar.

you are so right. In our recent trip to Italy with motorcycles rome,and Tuscany region 80%of the 800 shots were with the 18-135.

 

Στάλθηκε από το D6603 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

[Virtuoso]

If you want to go FF with the Nikon and the destination is europe, then you need a wide.  The 16-35mm is superb and not as heavy.  However, like at Fuji users, weight is one of the main considerations for buying Fuji.  I would go with the 10-24mm for landscape.  35mm would be good for portraits but perhaps an 18-55mm would be more versatile. 

 

My last EU trip i brought 10-24mm, 18-55mm and a 27mm.  Did not get to use the 27mm much because the 18-55mm was so good hahaha.  I normally have a two body set-up to avoid changing lens. 

[jlmphotos]

Tripods are essentials unless you never shoot anything in the dark. Besides they also allow you to shoot from positions that would be rather awkward.

 

A fat, oldish and bald man doesn’t look nice while laying flat on the floor trying to get a frog-eye shot.

Oh Crap!  you've seen me then?!  

[jlmphotos]

I would pack my 18-55 (I don't really leave home without it), the 16 1.4 and the 23 1.4.  I would leave my 55-200, and my 35 1.4 at home.

[RoyC]

Thank you so much for all the advice. Well, circumstances certainly did change dramatically which I won't go into here, but I ended up taking the following:

 

1) Nikon D750 with 24-120 f4, 16-35 f4 and the wonderful Sigma 35 f1.4 ART.

2) Fuji X-T10 with 35 f 1.4

 

After the 2nd day I ended up taking the D759, 24-120 f4 with the X-T10 and 35mm wholesome days and evenings only took either the D750 & Sigma 35 or Fuji & 35. Both of these were fantastic combos and I found it so great to walk around at night with the Fuji and 35mm.

 

We rarely used transport and walked everywhere from early morning until late at night on most days.

 

What I discovered is:

 

1) I really do not enjoy frequent lens changes

2) I prefer traveling light so in future would rather take Fuji X-T1 with 18-135 and X-T10 with a prime

3) I found the occasions/days when I chose to just take one of the bodies and a 35mm, initials quite challenging but really enjoyed this as it seemed to help develop a different creative view. I eventually grew to love this time and some of my favorite images came from these "prime adventures"