dSLR and Lenses for Itally

Dan, I like shooting anything from landscapes to close-ups of statues and clocks on bell towers. So I like the whole range. I have three lenses for my Canon 5D Mark II DSLR: a 17-40mm, a 24-105mm, and a 70-200mm (with 1.4X extender).

FYI, a "10-20mm lens" isn't going to give you the same view on every camera. Your camera may also have a "crop factor" - meaning, your camera can "see" only a portion of the lens. My 5D does not have a crop factor - it is a full-sensor camera. So when I put my 24-105mm lens on it, I'm seeing the full 24mm when zoomed out. But if I put that same lens on a camera with a crop (like a Canon 7D - crop factor of 1.6X), that 24mm is effectively cropped or zoomed to 38.4mm. (But the 105mm is also multiplied by 1.6 - so it's effectively 168mm.)

So is my 24-105mm wide enough for someone's Canon DSLR? As you can see - depends on the camera! Someone with a 7D might want Canon's 10-20mm EF-S mount wide-angle zoom (which actually won't work on a full-frame DSLR like my 5D). That would give them, effectively, 16mm-32mm compared to my camera - about as wide as my 17-40mm lens is on my camera.

So what's wide enough? Assuming you have a crop camera, your 18-130mm is probably wide enough for me. I basically lived with something that wide on my last trip to Italy. I've taken my my wide 17-40mm and a bag with several other lenses to Italy a few times, but in May, I visited Italy (and France and Slovenia) with a new Lumix DMC-FZ1000 "bridge camera," which has an (effective) 24-400mm zoom built into it (and a big low-noise sensor). (My 24mm probably being about as wide as your 18mm - with the crop factor taken into account.) A few times on my recent trip, I did miss the wider lens from my DSLR - but I lived without it - and was very happy instead to have a much lighter camera to deal with. On the other hand, this was the first time I have traveled with something as tight as 400mm zoom, and I REALLY used that a lot! This is the big benefit of having such a variable zoom lens: not needing to drag a bag of heavy lenses around to get a variety of wide and tight shots with a single lens, without getting a sore shoulder.

How much in Italy would you miss not having the new wide zoom you are contemplating? Probably a few times. I think you'll mostly use your existing zoom lens and switch in the wide once very rarely, when you just can't step back to get the wider shot you want. You'll just have to decide what kind of pictures you really want vs. how much more weight you want to lug around!

Sorry I can't give you a definitive "buy the lens!" answer - but I hope that helps!

I have a Nikon 5200, so it does have a crop factor. I only travel with a 18-300 mm zoom lens. While I understand that the quality deteriorates a bit with such a wide zoom, for me the convenience of not having to continually switch lenses is worth it to me. I use the widest end of the range for interior pictures and I use the zoom to get close to details on buildings and animals. The one thing I would like to get is a 10-20 like you mention, as it would be great for photographing the interiors of churches and such in Europe. You just can't capture the grandeur of the architecture with a 18 mm with a crop factor. I am not a professional by any means, but there are my two cents.

Thanks Andrew and Tamara for the wonderful info.
I just peaked online and I hadn't realized how much less equipment costs than it did 10 years ago. Maybe a 18-300 would be the way to go along with something for low light such as a 35mm 1.8. I'm on a crop lens (dx) so I think I would be covered pretty well.
One of the wide zoom lenses may be nice, but it sounds like not a necessity.
I did love traveling with my 70-200mm 2.8....heavy, but awesome pictures!

Okay. Me dumb. Wife smart. She owns a Pentax K50 (1.5x crop factor) with an 18-135 WR f3.5-5.6.

The lens came with the camera. This is the first I've heard of crop factor and I hope this lens should be adequate for travels. Wife is a supremely talented photographer who had a K1000 years ago and knows what all the traditional terms means. Me dumb.

Do lenses come for crop sensors vs full sensors? Or is she getting the multiplier factor on the range?

Is there a lens you might add to this to address a weakness?

Yeah, Dan, my 70-200mm (only the f/4.0 version though!) is amazingly sharp, even out at 200mm. Some lenses lose a bit of sharpness at their extremes - my old 100-300mm lens sure did. I always had to remember to back off to about 250mm to avoid soft pictures.

I was quite surprised how sharp pics are at 400mm, even hand-held, on my Lumix. I skoffed at the idea that it would be even worthwhile, coming from years of DSLR shooting, but I've got some nice sharp pictures all the way out at 400mm from my last trip. I did have a tripod, but I really needed it only at night. In low light, I have learned to live with the noisier pictures I get with higher ISO inside churches etc.

Just read the reviews of any lens before you buy it. Photographers used to recommend Canon's cheap 50mm f/1.8 prime lens as a budget prime for low light, but once I got it, I realized it's pathetically soft anywhere close to wide open, mooting most of the supposed benefit of a "fast" lens. (The f/1.4 version is a lot better but, naturally, much more expensive.) I'm kind of a stickler for sharpness.

Dan,

I've found over many years of travel that I tend to use only two lenses with my 7D - a 24-105 zoom and a 10-22 wide angle. I often have a 70-300 zoom available also, but rarely seem to use it. I rarely give much thought to the crop factor. If I remember correctly the 10-22 is an EF-S lenses so is designed for the crop cameras.

A few other bits of gear I find useful.....

• Circular Polarizer (you may have to pack more than one if the lenses are different sizes)
• Tripod (I have a light and compact Manfrotto tripod which isn't hard to travel with, but I don't take it on every trip - I have found it very useful on a couple of occasions).
• Lots of memory cards (I generally have enough card capacity to last an entire trip).
• Remote shutter release (especially good when the tripod is used).
• At least one spare battery and of course the charger with Plug Adapter).
• Flash (I don't always take that either, but have found it useful on some occasions).
• Lens Hoods for each lens to minimize glare.

Ken, the reason I mentioned the crop factor was to allow Dan to know a point of reference when other people with different cameras chime in. There's nothing wrong with a crop factor on a DSLR, but if someone without a crop factor on her camera says, "My 24-105mm lens" is perfectly wide enough," that isn't useful to Dan - because for him, that 24mm would be less wide due to the crop factor. Comparing people's experiences with lenses is only useful if know the frame of reference!

In your case, Ken, it's much more important for you with your 7D to have that 10-22mm lens than it is for me with my 5D, because 24mm is usually wide enough on my camera. On my old Canon Digital Rebel, with the crop sensor, that lens wasn't wide enough.

Andrew,

When I mentioned "crop factor", I wasn't specifically referencing your comments. I just wanted to indicate that regardless of the crop factor, I just work with the limitations or characteristics of the gear I have with me. The OP didn't indicate what type of camera he's using, so I was just making a general comment.

Hi Dan!

Great advice so far - my only recommendation is to rent the lens you are considering to try it out. Many of the larger photography shops do rentals but you can also borrow them online. This way you can really put it through it's paces - travel photography is really about the trade- offs in terms of size/weight and utility and only you can decide what the acceptable trade offs are.

For your trip I'd think in terms of what you will be shooting. So probably a wide angle (for building interiors -here is where a low F stop would be good), a general prime lens (street scenes and general interest shots) and then an all around zoom - I like ones in the 24 - 120 MM range. Unless I'm shooting wildlife, anything above about 120mm is too heavy for me to to haul around - but again, only you can decide that!
That should cover just about everything you'll want to shoot and give you lots of options.

They make different lens for both ASPC (crop) and Full Frame.
In most brands a full frame lens can be used on a crop body but rarely makes sense to do so since it will be larger, heavier and more expensive.
In most brands a crop lens cannot really be used on a full frame body.

You are not going to be shooting wildlife in Italy so you don't need more than say 100mm on a crop body for anything you will be doing ; that would be 150 mm view which is plenty long.

You do want to have something wide, though suspect on a crop something that goes to the mid teens on the wide end will be fine. The more the zoom range the more convenient but usually the worse the quality so that is your call. Any lens that comes with the camera on an interchangeable lens camera is usually the worst quality available. The 10-20 may be fun to have for interesting compositions provided you know how best to use it.

You don't need a fast lens unless you a.) like street shooting in the evening or b.) are not bringing a tripod.
If you want nice photos I would recommend a tripod before a 2nd or 3rd lens.
If you are answering yes to both a and b then yes you will want to bring at least 1 very fast lens.

Always remember you can bring more lens with you and leave them in your hotel room and just take what you need for that day. Don't think what you bring is what you will be carrying each day.
Some days I will lug my camera and gear with me, other days I leave it behind and take pics with my phone, it is very rare that I will "do anything" with a shot taken at mid day but somewhere as scenic as the Cinque Terre could prove to be an exception.
I never worry about anything being stolen from my room, I usually will hide any pricey items in with underwear, socks or similar just in case but honestly not something I think is a concern.
Your car is far more likely to be broken into, especially in Italy so be mindful of leaving any gear in your car during your trip.

Hi Nancy,
I really don't have much experience photographing interiors. I would assume have something wide. Is the f-stop as critical if nothing is moving inside whatever building I'm in? I'm not planning on bringing a tripod (have enough to carry around with the baby) so I'll either be shooting handheld or propping the camera up on or against something. Also I would assume that a shallow depth of field wouldn't matter as much since having everything in focus would be ideal. What focal length have you had good experience with indoors? Is 18mm wide enough on a 1.5 crop sensor (Nikon dx)?

Renting is a good idea. I'd like to see how I would enjoy something ultra wide.

It sounds like the 35mm 1.8 would be ideal for street photos....and it's pretty small. I've always enjoyed using it.

I still love my 70-200mm 2.8. There's just something magical about it. However, I'd only bring it to look like an uber tourist and to intimidate people with smaller cameras :)

Thanks again for your feedback!

Inside a church or some of the other famous sites even your 10mm on a crop body is not really wide enough to capture everything in one frame.
It is very dark typically so not only do you need a fast F stop due to lack of available light, you have to crank your ISO up degrading the quality.
Indoors a tripod would usually not be permitted anyway.

It would be better to shoot less wide open and have more in focus but you really don't have that option in a dark church without a tripod. You might be able to brace yourself or prop the camera to take a longer exposure but not one long enough to really reduce your f stop (given the choice I would rather reduce my ISO than F stop if I cannot do both) so faster the better for shooting interiors.

Everyone has their own shooting style so asking for advise on lens is in general a bad idea.
I for example would use a 70-200 all day for shooting portraits, it might be a little short but also useful at shooting wildlife, lastly in a mountain type environment or other setting where what I want to photograph is a good distance away it would be very helpful. Inside a church, in a city or most of the landscape opportunities you are talking about it would be fairly useless to me or at least the very long end of it would be so I would save the weight and bring other lens for my trip so portraits would not be part of it, you are not going to the mountains and there is no notable wildlife where you are going. 70-200 on a crop body is a 105-300 lens to my way of thinking.

My tripod recommendation is more for night time cityscapes and sunrise/sunset shots. To me those would be the main pictures I would want to come home with and are the ones where the benefits of the tripod will be clearly seen.

Dan, I'm glad you mentioned this lens, I was not aware of it. I would note, though, that I see in Ken Rockwell's review that there are potential compatibility concerns for camera's made 2013 and earlier, just a heads up-see "Compatibility" in link below. Great value though! I had my eyes on the 20 fixed, but it is expensive by comparison. Have fun!

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/10-20mm.htm

Dave, thanks for the heads up. I was using the 10-20mm kind of as a general "range" of lens since there are several of them out there that are comparable. However, I actually was looking at the newer 10-20 Nikon as well due to it's low price. I didn't know it won't work with my older D80 (still a good usable camera) so thanks again. That's a bit of a turn off on Nikon going forward.

Gotcha, I have a D90 so I'm out too as far as that lens. I really like the idea of the fixed 20/1.8, though it's $800 ;-)

I would definitely take a wide angle lens. Hubby and I both have Canon DSLR's therefore we can share lenses and therefore can take more lenses than if I were going alone. We both used the wide angle lens a lot on our last trip. I used it more than our 70-200 or 70-300 lenses which we also had with us. I would not consider traveling without the wide angle lens. Hubby used a 17-55 f2.8 as his main walk-around lens and I used an 18-135 because I like to zoom in more and didn't want to hassle constantly changing lenses. If you'll be in the car a lot, you can take more lenses with you and swap out as necessary. I have fantasized about getting an 18-300 for convenience sake but i feel like I'd be sacrificing a lot in terms of quality. My next camera will hopefully be mirrorless so I can decrease the weight/load a little. I'm waiting for them to come down in price and get better in terms of burst rate as I do a lot of HDR. Happy travels. Make sure to take circular polarizes for each lens. We used them a lot.

There's a lot of good advice in the previous answers, particularly mreynolds' comments. The first time we traveled to Europe I brought only an 18-200 Nikon lens to use on my full frame Nikon D809. I was frustrated by the lack of sharpness in a lot of the photos and an inability to get good shots in low light. When we started planning a second trip, I checked the metadata on the shots I had taken on that trip and found I had shot at 18-24 mm more than 85% of the time. I bought a 24-70mm f/2.8, and brought a 70-200 f/4 and a 16-35 f/4. I kept the 24-70 on my camera 95% of the time and never used the 70-200. I shot a lot of multiple shot panoramas with the 24-70, which eliminated the need for a wider lens.

The weight of all that heavy equipment was just too cumbersome, so I sold my Nikon equipment and bought a Fuji X-T2, a crop sensor camera, for a trip to Ireland last year. I brought a 16mm f/1.2 specifically to shoot inside pubs in the evening, a 10-24mm f/4 a 16-55 f/2.8, (the equivalent of a 24-70 on a full-frame camera) and a 55-200 f/4. Again, 95% of my shots were taken with the 16-55. We're taking the RS Village Italy tour and I will probably only bring the 16 mm and the 16-55.

Even with increased low-light capabilities and less noise at higher ISOs on newer cameras, I really like having fast glass. It gives you a lot more options for depth of field and creative control in addition to better low-light capabilities. Have fun with it, whatever you choose.

I bought the Tokina 11-20 f2.8 for Nikon a few months before my first Italy trip last year. I have been to Italy twice since then and it has been my stay on lens on my D 7100 for most of the time. It is cheaper than the Nikon alternative, lighter and almost as good. I have never carried a tripod to be frank but I have taken decent night photos using walls, benches and similar for support where necessary. The Tokina is amazing for photography inside the churches which is why I bought it in the first place. It has relegated my 18-55mm kit lens to my cupboard as I hardly use it anymore. I also carry a 35mm f 1.8 prime as a portrait lens as it is small and very easy to carry around and gives great results for taking photos of the better half.
I also carry around my favourite Nikon 300mm f4 prime just out of habit but hardly use it, except for taking photos of the statues high up in the church facades. So I only take it out of my hotel room only on a few days. It is my lucky charm so I never leave home without it.
I am sure that you know that any lens you buy, you should practice with before you head out to vacation. I learnt this the hard way with my first lens buy and have never repeated the same mistake again.
Italy is a landscape photographers paradise and I am sure you will return with some great photos like I did.
Have a great trip.

We've been to Italy twice and I've use a Nikon D7000 (DX) with 10-24 and 16-85 mm lenses. I will say that the 16-85 is on the camera 95% of the time and the wide angle used for inside churches and museums. On our second trip (Italy villiages tour) I didn't have a need to go to the wide angle. The 16 seems to be wide enough for most everything and I've never felt the need to go beyond the 85 mm long end. On these trips it's been mostly about interior shots and landscapes.

Dave

Yogi--
That Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 lens is a GREAT lens.
When I was considering the change from a crop sensor to full-frame, that was a consideration i looked at for a good amount of time because there is no comparable lens for full frame cameras. And the price is very reasonable.

Anybody looking for a wide angle zoom lens (although the zoom range is definitely limited) should look at this lens.

One tip that I think for Italian cities can be especially helpful.
At the famous sites there will always be plenty of other tourists in your way of a "perfect" shot.

If you have Photoshop, take many pictures the exact same as people move about and then bring them all into Photoshop and use the stack mode of MEAN. This will remove anything that differs between frames so any tourist that moved from your first picture to your last will magically disappear. Can be very useful in churches, middle of piazzas and in front of famous monuments in the cities you are going to.
it is not perfect and sometimes people don't move before you need to, but in absence of being there at sunrise with a tripod when there is no one else about it can be a nice alternative.