What is the best Camera Lens to take to Europe on a Holiday.

Steve,
I don't know anything about cameras so can't help you, however,
I'd suggest you change the title of your post to something like.... Which camera lenses should I take?

And post it on the General Europe Forum or on the Technology Tips (under Tips & Trip Reports)

There are some professional photographers that contribute to this forum & I'm sure you will get great advice from them ;-)

Steve,

I would also suggest changing the title of your post to more closely reflect the actual question, and move to either the General Europe or Technology sections. If you're not able to move the post, send a note to the Webmaster and I'm sure he will be able to help with that.

In the same situation, I'd probably pack the 24-70 and the 70-200. Both are f2.8 so that provides lots of flexibility with depth-of-field. The 16-35 is somewhat redundant as it covers some of the range of the 24-70, and is also only f4. No point in packing around extra weight if it's not essential. I agree with your comments about using the 24-70 most of the time.

I also travel with a Canon 7D DSLR on all trips, and I find that I use two Lenses about 99% of the time - a 24-105L (which on a crop camera is ~38 - 168) and a 10-22 (which should have been designated as an "L" series). In the past I've also taken a 70-300 DO but I've found that it very rarely ever gets used.

I have in the past also hauled a Tripod (a smaller Manfrotto travel model), and although it's a nuisance to carry there have been a few occasions when it was indispensable and allowed me to get shots that wouldn't have been possible without it. I haven't decided yet whether I'll take it on my next trip.

Don't forget extra memory cards, an extra battery and also Plug Adaptors.

I used to travel with the same amount of camera equipment. It sounds fine, with Ken's additions, as long as you don't mind carrying it around.

The question is not clear to me either.
Photograph is a trip priority of mine, but we all have different styles.

For me the 16-35 will get the most use in Italy (Pairs and London I imagine as well) and if I were to leave one of your trilogy at home it would be the 70-200 which is a really large lens to carry around for the few times I imagine I would use it.
A tripod for me would be more important than the 70-200 but as I stated we all have different shooting styles, low light is my specialty I guess you could say and when not shooting portraits/animals I would not use wide open apertures.

Overall it makes sense that the 24-70 would get the most use and definitely is the better overall walking around lens.

I would take a different tack (and I actually am here in a week). Leave your 24-70 @ home. It's a great portrait lens, but how many of those are you really going to be shooting on your trip?
You'll need your 70-200 (as heavy as it may be) for the detail shots (architecturally - the 24-70 can't zoom in enough to draw attention to the different gargoyles). Additionally, the compression of the zoom lens will enhance the background details if you're taking any pictures of travel companions (you'll just have to be slightly further away to take the pic). It will also allow you to unobtrusively capture street scenes as you are traveling around the cities.
Your 16-35 is needed for the wide-angle views from atop the Eiffel tower, or capturing the interior of Notre Dame, or catching the sunset from the steps of the Sacré Cœur basilica. Most places won't allow tripods anyways, so just bump up your ISO and handhold in the interior of churches (still great picture on the MkIII). But I would recommend renting a tripod locally if you are going to do some dedicated night shooting (although I don't know about the security of doing that nowadays...)
I'll be taking my 5D MkIII; 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II (my go-to lens); & 11-24mm f/4L.
Bonus recommendation based on your gear: Lose the stock neckstrap, the one that advertises the camera model in bold letters. This link is a newer, better version of what I use (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1159152-REG/pacsafe_15258100_carrysafe_75_anti_theft_camera.html) And use black gaffer's tape on the camera body over the brand and model info. Use the tape to cover up the red band on your L series lenses. These things may not eliminate the chance of theft of your gear, but should reduce it.
Whatever you decide, post pics when you return!

It really depends on your photography style and goals. I shoot a lot of moderate-wide angles (cityscapes, landscapes, broad views of interiors). I have an 18-140 and that does all I need. Most of my best shots are 35 or under anyway. However, I don't do detail photography very well. A lot of people really value a high zoom for that, there will be amazing architecture or art details that only a high zoom will capture. But I just don't quite see those type of shots, my eye doesn't work that way. And

The aperture is equally important. My 18-140 is F3.5 -5.6 which is...OK especially at the wide angles. I do carry a 35mm F1.8 for nights and very dark interiors. This has been very handy at certain times. I'd prefer an 18-140 with a f2 or so, but I'm a hobbyist not a pro so...trade offs need to be made :)

For what it's worth we are going to Venice, Rome, and Cinque Terre in October and I'm taking my Canon 6D, 17-40, and 24-105. I anticipate the former for interiors or skylines and the latter for details and portraits. I'm a bit torn on a tripod as if like to try some night photograpy, but it is a bit cumbersome. Bumping the ISO up does work pretty well with the newer bodies, which is convenient.

I've owned the 24-70 previously and it is extremely versatile and produces great quality. Personally I'd leave the 16-35 at home from your set of you need to slim down. But that just adds to the depends-on-your-style motif going on here.

Thanks everyone for your input.

JPWhite

Since it has not been said I will just add that "Italy" could many places
For Tuscany landscapes I would want the 70-200
For Cinque Terre seascapes I would want the 16-35
For dolomite mountains most of the time I would want the 24-70 but sure I could find some 16-35 times there too
The problem with cities are the crowds if you want pictures worthy of your gear you need to go in the hours when there are less tourists. This often means bad weather or low light (sunrise, before sunrise, night) hence the tripod
Sure you can add your ISO instead but you would get better pictures from a lighter setup and a tripod than such heavy gear without one
Now famous buildings/museums inside cities present the challenge of no tripod allowed and may even take issue with the size of bag you would need to carry such a camera and lens kit
For museums I would take the 24-70 only, indoors the 2.8 will be helpful
Figure inside of churches you want as wide as possible, 16 may not be wide enough!!! So would stick with the 16-35 despite the f4
Different places/towers that you can climb may have bag size restrictions as well so need to think about best lens for specific places if you are serious about it
If portraits or shots of your travel party/family are part of the intended shots the 24-70 would be a workhorse for that

Steve,

I took my Canon 5d mark III, 16-35, 24-70, and 35 mm 1.4 for my first trip to Europe on the RS BOE 14 tour. I used 24-70 most of the time and the 35 mm in museums. Only used the 16-35 for a hand full of shots.

On my second trip to Europe, the RS Scandinavia tour, I took the same gear again along with the 70-200. I used 70-200, a lot more than I thought I would. Good for shots of waterfront area, parks, building details, or from boats. Still only used the 16-35 a few times.

So next trip, will probably leave the 16-35 at home and take the 70-200. I couldjust take the 35 mm and 70-200, if I really wanted to save weight.

Happy travels!

Thanks for your help guys. I will take the gear I planned to carry as it give me a focal range fro 16 to 200. I am also sure I will fined I do not use one of the lenses that much but which one, I will have to wait and see.

Just be careful planning out your days Steve.
I am struggling with this myself, for example if you know you will be going into the Florence Dome and want to want to walk up the stairs to the top, or in Siena and doing the Gates of Heaven tour, climbing various bell towers throughout Italy, climbing towers at Notre Dame, etc...
All of these places a bag large enough to hold the camera you are talking about and the multiple lens you are talking about is likely out of the question / will not pass security.
I don't think it is worth the risk of waiting on a line, possibly paying already and then being denied entry cause your bag is too big and there will be no safe place to put it so for these type of things you really need to bring your camera with a lens attached and keep it on a shoulder or wrist strap forgetting about the other lens you packed. Unfortunately this may mean that entire day is affected because your plans may not allow you to do this one thing and then go back to your hotel/apartment to get something else.
Large camera gear can be a real pain in a big city, not to mention you will always be nervous about theft.

Also, if you are anti-tripod, I picked up for my trip an item called a Green Pod
It is basically a fancy bean bag but I anticipate it being a nice aid in churches and similar places where tripods are not allowed.
Small enough that I can fit in a pants pocket.
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/762981-REG/The_Pod_GR0079_The_Green_Pod_Camera.html

For my trip to Europe this spring, I took a messenger-type bag that slings over one shoulder. This was in addition to the camera backpack which I travel with (including laptop computer). I packed the sling bag in my luggage while traveling and then took from the backpack what I needed for each day's photography needs -- a Nikon D750 with 24-120mm lens (attached) and a 70-300mm lens, as well as polarizers for each of those lenses and extra SD cards.

I had no trouble in any location I toured in England or in Paris. And while I am aware that those places are not Italy, the sling bag was not any larger than a regular, unpadded day pack I used for my camera last year while touring cities and sites in Italy. And I was not turned away for size there, either.

I have not travelled with a DSLR in years. Too much stuff to lug. 18-55, 55-250 and a 50 prime and sometimes a tripod and flash. Also, i often alienated the family making them wait for me to swap out lenses etc. I am currently using a better than average Canon S120 which replaced my old SD600 which i used for more than 8 years!

That old SD600 actually made me a better photographer. No image stabilization, small sensor, having to shoot at lower ISO without flash and using longer shutter speeds to reduce noise. I had to find creative ways to brace the SD600 to reduce blur and to compose sharp photos. I didn't even zoom because the sweet part of the lens was at the wide end which was only 35 mm. I have gotten so used to that focal length that i almost find the 24mm of the newer s120 to be a bit too wide for my taste. When you rely less on the zoom, you have to zoom with your feet and move around to get better angles and views. The more limited the equipment, the more I have to work to take a decent shot.

I have just started playing with my old DSLR again with a brand new 24mm f.28 pancake lens. The equivalent focal length on my crop sensor DSLR is 38mm which is wide-normal and close to my favourite perspective. This is a very compact DSLR setup with a sharp lens and a relatively huge sensor compared to my S120. I have ditched the neckstrap on the DSLR and made a home-made wrist strap. The camera is in my right hand and always ready to shoot. I may use this set up on my next trip along with the S120 for when i want a pocket camera.

I love my camera backpack but found it not a good choice for crowded European cities and sites would take issue with it's size and seem to be anti-backpack (for good reason).
Just want to make sure others realize this as well.

For our upcoming trip, will be taking my beloved camera backpack but also found it necessary to get a satchel type bag that can hold and keep protected my camera with lens plus a backup lens. I hope this will allow me access most everywhere.

That said, I am not sure many forum members realize just how large a 70-200 F2.8 full frame lens is?
This is an 8" long lens with 3.5" diameter not including the camera and lens itself weighs over 3 lbs.
For me to bring such a lens, I would need to have something very specific in mind that the 70 mm length could not capture well enough.
It is much larger than a 70-200 F4 lens which is still larger than the padded compartments in my camera satchel can fit, not sure my smaller bag could not fit the 24-70 2.8 either for example so finding something to fit a full frame Canon camera and the trio of lens the OP mentions which are all large, is going to result in something that will be challenging to gain admission to certain sites in my opinion.
The OP planning on carrying around $7500 in camera gear is unlikely to be interested in leaving that at any sites bag check area either.

This thread is really timely. I'm heading for Sicily soon and have been debating about which lenses to bring. Most of my at-home photography involves birds, so my main question has been whether to bring my big 300 prime lens or just stick with my Nikkor 70-300 along with my 18-55. For most shots, the two zooms will be fine...but my partner surely doesn't want to spend the trip listening to me wish I'd brought the big lens if we encounter interesting birds.

However, until reading this thread I had not thought about the potential problem of being turned back at an attraction because my camera + lens was too big. I wouldn't trust that I could safely leave that lens at a check station. How commonly are people turned away because their setup was too big - is this a likely occurrence?

I would say to bring the equipment that you can use with ease. When you call it a holiday, I assume you are traveling with someone and are not there on a photography job, but a vacation that you want to take some great images.

I am a professional photographer and have gone from carrying numerous cameras and backpacks full of film and a heavy tripod to now bringing one lens. I use my 18-125 and for my style of photography it enables me to capture most images without spending a ton of time fumbling through a camera bag. The camera is almost always over my shoulder and ready to go. I would never bring extra equipment just because I 'might' want to use it. All that extra weight and stuff just stifles my creativity.... so for me, the challenge of photography comes from being able to get a great image with what is available. And a few times that has been my phone when I have chosen to take a break from even one camera!

Have a great trip...

I took almost exactly the same kit on our Rhine River cruise in July. I took:
Canon 5D2, 17-40 f4, 24-70 f4 IS, 70-200 f2.8 (non IS). I estimate my lens usage as 50% 24-70, 30% 70-200 and 20% 17-40. I actually rented the 24-70 since the only thing I had to fill the gap from 40mm to 70mm was a Nifty Fifty. I debated between renting the f 2.8 and the f4.0 IS, deciding on the IS because of weight and rental expense. I liked it so much that I bought the rental copy instead of returning it.

I also took a GorillaPod SLR tripod, but rarely used it. It just takes too long to fiddle with and since it is a table top height tripod, I found few places I could use it. I took a WeyeFeye transmitter and an iPad Mini to do remote shooting (with the GorillaPod), but rarely used it as well. I was thinking I'd use it for multiple exposures for HDR, but ending up hand holding my HDR exposures. I framed loose, shot fast and my HDR software had no problems aligning the images.

One of the best pieces of kit I took was the Lowepro ProTactic SH 200 AW camera bag. This bag holds everything listed above as well as a lens shade for the 17-40, batteries, CF cards, a polarizing filter, lens brush and other accessories. I love this bag because it has a zippered opening in the top. You can store your camera in the bag and pull it out when needed without having to open up the bag. It works better than a sling bag and much better than a backpack that you have to take off to do lens changes. I rest my arm on the bag when I carry it and lightly grasp the shoulder strap when in crowds. I don't use camera straps (I think you run the risk of them catching on something and pulling the camera out of your hands). Instead I use a stout wrist strap. No one can grab my camera without getting me as part of the bargain!

While the 5D will fit in the bag with a battery grip, it's a tight fit. I took off the grip and left it at home. I took 6 batteries and rarely had to change out during the day even though I normally shot over 300 frames a day.

We went to Italy in December and I took the 17-40, 50 1.8, 85 1.8 and 135 f2.0. I left the 70-200 at home. I also took a Panasonic Lumix LX7, which I used in big cities. I left the primes at home in July and didn't really miss them, although the 135 is a magic lens. I also left the Lumix at home, since I never felt unsafe when in Tuscany. The Lumix did a great job, but is noisier and can't shoot above ISO 400 without the images falling apart.

I hope you have a great trip! Take the kit you listed. Look hard at the LowePro bag, which is the best travel bag I've owned in 50 years!

Pat, not usually a wildlife photographer. I have done so but rented equiptment when I have since I do not own a really nice super telephoto.
For what you might encounter on vacation to Italy I don't understand why you would take a large and heavy Prime 300 lens vs. a 70-300 personally but like I said we all have different styles.

Is their specific wildlife you plan on photographing and spots you are aware of to see them?
I usually don't think wildlife when I think of a trip to Italy.

If I were on a cruise boat I would think differently as you need more reach as nothing is ever close, but otherwise you should be able to walk with your feet close enough for 200 to be more than enough reach.
Personally I am only taking no greater than 135mm but also not planning on seeing any animals. The 135 I am only bringing for specific locations I have scouted in advance, otherwise I plan on using wider angles as my go to.

Bag choice may be more important than camera body and lens for getting denied admission. Backpacks seem to be much more likely to be denied than a shoulder/messenger style even if shoulder style is physically larger.

I strive for a similar plan as Terry mentions above of using one lens when walking around and trying to be creative, though admit to being more technical. I go with printouts and maps for specific locations knowing exactly where I want to be and what lens to use at what time of day. If the light works, great it not so be it. These won't be that creative but with some nice light and post processing I can put my own creative spin on it.
When not on said specific mission which would be mainly sunrise/sunset times and allow me to bring excess gear since I can drop it off after, I will review the days plans and take just 1 lens with camera to walk around with that day in the smallest possible shoulder bag and/or on wrist strap. As mentioned in part to allow more creativity/originality but also because I have to be mindful of my wife's interest which don't involve circling a place for 30 minutes in pursuit of the perfect composition.

We are in Italy now and hubby and I both have Canon DSLR's (aps-c sensors) and a multitude of lenses. The lenses I've used the most over the past 3 weeks (in Rome, Lake Garda, Tuscany and Venice) are the wide angle (we have 2 different ones), the 17-55 f/2.8 and 18-135. The lenses my hubby has used the most are 17-55 and wide angle 10-18. We have used the 70-200 a few times (tonite actually when shooting at sunset from Giancolo Hill in Rome) and I brought along a fish-eye lens which I've had fun experimenting with (really good for inside cathedrals, narrow spaces like towers, etc). It helps that my husband and I can share lenses and share the load but still, our camera bags are heavy. We each brought tripods but only take them with us if we think we'll need them (tonight for instance). I think you'll use the wide angle lens more than you think so I would definitely keep it in your bag on a daily basis.

By the way, we did a fantastic photography tour in Tuscany with a local photographer. We spent about 5 hours with him which culminated at sunset and he tailored the tour to what we wanted. He took us to a lot of the iconic places you see in photos and we got some great shots. It was money and time well spent as even if we could have logistically gotten to each place, we wouldn't have known what vantage points to shoot from, etc. For example, he took us to a famous grouping of cypress trees but from the road it looked boring and uninteresting but when he took us down into the field under the freeway about a quarter of a mile, the vision of the scene came to life. He took us to another iconic scene for sunset but when we discovered the light wasn't optimal, he told us to get in the car and he drove us down the road a bit to a much better scene and use of the golden light; we wouldn't have known about these secret places without him. If you'll be in Tuscany and are interested, let me know and I'll give you his contact info. Have a wonderful trip!

I shoot Nikon full frame and have essentially the same lens selection. They are all coming to Italy with us next week. I find the three lens selection covers all my needs and does so with pro level gear. The only tradeoff is the weight, but I have been schlepping pro gear for 40 years and have no issue with it. I also have a small travel tripod capable of supporting the FF DSLR and the 70-200. I use it for night shots and for self portraits of the wife and I as there is not always a willing photographer around when you need one.
I've even added to the selection over the years. I've purchased Nikon's excellent 14-24 2.8 and added it to the kit when I planned more city travel.
Good luck with whatever you decide.

Pat