Amateur photographer looking for suggestions on what to bring

Just speaking about amount, there is no limit on what you bring/pack on a Rick Steves tour. The only issue is that you must be able to carry your own bags.

...Is this going to be too much?...good small, sturdy lightweight travel tripod?...20 - 135mm zoom for...

As one who spent a number of years freelancing for several publications, and as one who has also been on many RS tours, my opinion is that it's too much. You will find traveling light photography wise has the same advantages as traveling light luggage wise.

My suggestion is to not take a tripod. In most cases you'll be able to brace yourself well enough to not need one. For the lens, take only one. The 20-135 should be enough to cover just about any situation. If additional "zoom" is needed, it can be done by enlarging and cropping digitaly on the computer.

One the other hand, you might want to consider a small compact "point and shot" with built in zoom and flash capability. These are no longer "toys". The quality one can get from the latest ones really rival the quality one used to get only using super expensive, heavy, multi-lens equipment. Some of the pictures we've taken absolutely look as if they were taken with really high dollar equipment. We both use small Cannons that only measure about 4 1/2 by 3 1/4 even in the soft case. Just slips into our pockets and we're set to go.

Just something to consider.

I agree with ditching the tripod, even if it’s small, you will find you might only use it a couple of times. I have slowly ditched most of the stuff I used to drag with me and rarely, or never, used. I now have a nice little Olympus mirrorless with a 70-150 lens. I also have a 17mm pancake lens for it, and I do take that, but only use it in certain situations. You will find that the tours often move too quickly for those of us who want to stop and spend some time to get just the right shot, so it’s best to go with the most multipurpose set up. I still just use my iPhone in low light situations and museums. It takes great photos in those situations, and saves me the hassle of trying to find somewhere to steady myself, or change all my camera settings. I have done the VFR tour back when I was still carrying a full size DSLR, and there was a fellow on our tour who did a lot of professional photography, and he was travelling with a simple Canon point and shoot, and got terrific photos.

This is essentially a religious question. You will get many passionate, sincere and contradictory opinions on how much is too much, too little, or perfectly Goldilocks. Only you can decide "what's worth it."

Personally, I'm fairly passionate about photography, and I am perfectly willing to lug my mirrorless DSLR and a couple lenses, including (at least on SOME trips) the big, honkin' 800 mm telley, which is heavy, fragile and expensive. I do think twice and then a third time before bringing that big lens. It comes along only when I expect there to be wildlife or other small, distant things that I want to shoot. For a trip with no birds or whales or other critters, I just don't take that heavy lens. For most trips, I bring one good-enough-for-most-things (36-135) zoom. MAYBE a second lens (either wide or a longer zoom but not both). Glass is heavy/fragile/expensive.

All that said, I leave the tripod at home (unless I'm driving there, not flying). For trips off my home continent, I can make do without a tripod, it's only rarely necessary even when shooting most wildlife, and I can't justify bringing it on top of all the other photo and tech gear I will suffer for. Maybe, MAYBE if I was off to shoot the aurora and/or wanted nice star trails or other astro shots, and IF it was a trip completely or mostly dedicated to astro photography, then I'd consider it, but I'd still struggle mightily with the decision.

It's your trip (and your back) so you make the call, but consider all the other gear you will be taking, and ponder each item (especially large/awkward/heavy/fragile/expensive ones) before you mentally commit to bringing it. With those considerations, my tripod has not traveled with me overseas for many years. YMMV. Have fun.

Thank you to all who have responded. You’ve offered valuable information that I am taking to heart. Going to skip the tripod. My camera has ibis so that should suffice. I had notions of doing long exposure photography but this is not practical and as a few of you stated, there will be sturdy places to brace myself or set my camera. I’ve heard a lot of praise for Canon point-and-shoot cameras (which I may look into). And they are smaller than my cropped sensor Sony. Someone mentioned taking a pancake lens. I may go in that direction. The one I have is 20 mm and incredibly light and small. On the other hand the 18 - 135 zoom may be coming along as it covers a lot of options.

Again, many thanks!

For me a major advantage of the DSLR is the viewfinder - much more natural for someone who grew up with 35mm SLRs, and better for composing in bright conditions.

I bring the focal length range and speed I shoot at 70%of the time and let the rest go by the wayside.

With the A7c, I like my 20-70/f4. I give up a little range and a little speed, but frankly, never notice it. I even use the hone to cover the gaps from time to time.

The ASPC lens for the Sony offer great variety and you should look back on your shooting data to figure out what your preferred length ranges are. I know the Tamron 17-70 and Sigma 18-50 are very highly regarded travel lenses for this format.

I never travel with flash or a tripod. The IBIS in these Sony units is that good.

100 ASA, f16@1/60th works for me. Ilford film is better than Kodak if shooting B&W.

I still travel with a full sized Canon 7D dSLR, and typically pack two lenses on trips - a 10-22 wide angle and a 24-105 Zoom lens. I've found that those two lenses cover about 99% of the situations. I also have a 70-300 zoom lens but often leave that at home.

I have packed a Tripod on some trips and find it very useful, especially for time lapse shots at night. The tripod I'm using is similar to THIS MODEL.. It's small enough to pack in my checked luggage so it's not difficult to travel with. I don't regret taking a tripod on some trips and will continue to do so when necessary. I also take a flash as it can be useful at times also, and it's not large or heavy.

I also take at least one P&S camera for "backup" and shots of less important subjects. I've had to use the backup on at least one past trip when my dSLR had an "accident" and wasn't working. Finally, I always have an iPhone for less important photos, and in some situations it is capable of getting reasonably decent results.

Often when I travel in places where I can rarely be back I bring with me different lenses, but doesn't means that every day I bring all gears with me: something could be left in the hotel or luggage when unnecessary.
For example, if I'm out where I hope to watch wild animals from afar I bring a strong zoom (up to 300mm) and a focus-magnifier. If I'm out in a city with friends a more multipurpose zoom is much better. During the night a bright fixed lens is better.
I never travel with a standard tripod, but I have purchased a little one (honestly, rarely used). Instead I found very helpful a monopod like the Benro A35FBR1: is heavy enough to give much more stability, but doesn't take too much space in my backpack. And is much faster to be set in position or move around.

I'm also a very ambitious amateur photographer. Regardless of the fact that we're talking about a tour, I would always bring a tripod. Then a lens that allows me to zoom in further (24-105), and a wider-angle lens (16-35). And I also always have a very wide-angle lens (12-24) with me, because I also like to photograph in churches or staircases (yes, it sounds weird, but it's cool https://www.flickr.com/photos/calabrones/albums/72157697694914942/).
And the legitimate question of why a 12-24 and a 16-35 can be answered simply by saying that my 16-35 creates the most beautiful light stars ever when I close the aperture :-)

For me, smartphone photos aren't an option because it's harder to take long exposures (especially important for me on the canals in Venice https://www.flickr.com/photos/calabrones/albums/72177720314337177/). So I either lug all the equipment around with me or I prefer not to take any photos at all.

I use tripods from Novoflex, a German manufacturer. Although mine is made of carbon, it's heavy because the ball head weighs a ton (in my case it also has to cope with a heavy tele lens). I think they also have travel tripods, though. In any case, the quality is sensational. Since you can buy all components individually at Novoflex, it is sometimes a bit confusing on their website, but they always help you to find the right product for you ..... and no I'm not working for Novoflex I'm just a fan girl :-) But I can also imagine that there are lighter travel tripods that have just as good quality.

Mignon is the guru of travel photography here BTW.

Oh thank you, now I'm really blushing

Nice shots Mignon. I see you were luckier than me with some Color in the sky in Venice. Every morning and evening I went out, and never once was there any Color in the sky. Good reason for a return trip!

Thanks Anita. I was actually hoping for fog but well.