tips for Europe trip
- Thread starter jd7
- Start date
Hi,
I have a 6D and I don’t need a flash. I did a trip to Roma and at night, I just used the 2 second delay to be a bit more stable. I got great pictures (not in the same league as Neuro of course). Even portrait indoor at night, it is good enough.
The 70-200 is very good and light but I use it less with the 6D than I was with the 600D. I use now the 100-400II but not sure I would carry it if I need to walk a lot.
I found the 6D to be fun to use with the 40mm pancake. The combination is very light, not intrusive and image quality is good (the best lens value from Canon to me).
I have an eosM but I don’t use it too much. I wish canon had a worthy successor of the G12 that have a viewfinder and fit in the pocket.
Paris is like many cities (I leave there), when you feel uncomfortable in a place, just leave. I remember a trip in Miami where I ended in a dodgy street or in New York where in some place, I had the feeling that I had better to leave. The north and north east of paris are probably the less safe place. Keep the bag closed and in front of you (not in the back) in the Metro. If a girl is begging at you, it is often a tactic to distract you while another visit your bag so watch your belongings.
Apart from that, Sacré Coeur / Place du Tertre is a nice place with a great view from the top. If weather is clear it is a good spot.
A place I really like is the “Musée Rodin”. You have to arrive early if you don’t want to queue for ages.
A walk in the “ile aux cygnes” close to the Tour Eiffel is also nice.
The boat trip in the “Canal Saint Martin” is nice.
You can go conveniently to “Chateau de Versailles” with the train.
After, it depends on what you want to see. Science, nature, architecture etc…
Have a nice trip,
I have a 6D and I don’t need a flash. I did a trip to Roma and at night, I just used the 2 second delay to be a bit more stable. I got great pictures (not in the same league as Neuro of course). Even portrait indoor at night, it is good enough.
The 70-200 is very good and light but I use it less with the 6D than I was with the 600D. I use now the 100-400II but not sure I would carry it if I need to walk a lot.
I found the 6D to be fun to use with the 40mm pancake. The combination is very light, not intrusive and image quality is good (the best lens value from Canon to me).
I have an eosM but I don’t use it too much. I wish canon had a worthy successor of the G12 that have a viewfinder and fit in the pocket.
Paris is like many cities (I leave there), when you feel uncomfortable in a place, just leave. I remember a trip in Miami where I ended in a dodgy street or in New York where in some place, I had the feeling that I had better to leave. The north and north east of paris are probably the less safe place. Keep the bag closed and in front of you (not in the back) in the Metro. If a girl is begging at you, it is often a tactic to distract you while another visit your bag so watch your belongings.
Apart from that, Sacré Coeur / Place du Tertre is a nice place with a great view from the top. If weather is clear it is a good spot.
A place I really like is the “Musée Rodin”. You have to arrive early if you don’t want to queue for ages.
A walk in the “ile aux cygnes” close to the Tour Eiffel is also nice.
The boat trip in the “Canal Saint Martin” is nice.
You can go conveniently to “Chateau de Versailles” with the train.
After, it depends on what you want to see. Science, nature, architecture etc…
Have a nice trip,
Upvote
0
+1 on whoever said to go wider, and I'd also recommend IS for handheld interiors in churches and museums that allow photography.
My perfect simple travel set would be your 24-70 f/4L IS + the 16-35 f/4L IS (if you have it). Both are light, sealed from spring rains you'll likely see, both have IS, and you'll have 16-70 covered, which from my experience is all you need for travel. In fairness, I prefer wider FL work.
Some espouse longer FL lenses, but other than my 100L, everything I have longer than 70mm is white, large and attention grabbing. So I'd recommend against such lenses unless (a) you will only be in very touristy areas in daytime or (b) you own some less conspicuous telephotos (135L, 200L, older 70-300 lenses, etc.) or (c) you are a large/imposing enough person to deter thieves.
Keep in mind your greatest risk of theft is not a smash and grab nearly so much as leaving your bag somewhere for a moment. THAT I never do when traveling anywhere (let alone abroad). Keep in mind I am a worry wort about theft and probably on the more cautious side of this forum's posters.
- A
My perfect simple travel set would be your 24-70 f/4L IS + the 16-35 f/4L IS (if you have it). Both are light, sealed from spring rains you'll likely see, both have IS, and you'll have 16-70 covered, which from my experience is all you need for travel. In fairness, I prefer wider FL work.
Some espouse longer FL lenses, but other than my 100L, everything I have longer than 70mm is white, large and attention grabbing. So I'd recommend against such lenses unless (a) you will only be in very touristy areas in daytime or (b) you own some less conspicuous telephotos (135L, 200L, older 70-300 lenses, etc.) or (c) you are a large/imposing enough person to deter thieves.
Keep in mind your greatest risk of theft is not a smash and grab nearly so much as leaving your bag somewhere for a moment. THAT I never do when traveling anywhere (let alone abroad). Keep in mind I am a worry wort about theft and probably on the more cautious side of this forum's posters.
- A
Upvote
0
ahsanford said:
You can't prevent theft. Being an NFL linebacker probably won't deter a robber with a gun. Instead of worrying about your gear or leaving at home lenses you'd otherwise want to take, just insure your gear. Typical non-commercial coverage is relatively inexpensive and provides full replacement for damage/theft/loss worldwide with no deductible. Damage coverage is nice, because honestly you're far more likely to topple your tripod and destroy your camera and a lens compared to being robbed.
My typical travel kit is in the US$12-14K range, and while I exercise due caution for my own safety, I don't worry about my gear.
Upvote
0
I have travelled all continents numerous times over the last 30 years, very often with lots of photography gear with me. I have never been robbed of anything (except in my home town, about 30 years ago). If you behave sensibly and avoid the worst areas of whatever city you visit, you should be safe. Don´t let that be a limiting factor when considering what to bring.
Upvote
0
ahsanford said:
...hence what I wrote above. I respect everyone's opinions on this, I do, but it seems that whenever I give travel advice, I usually get my ears boxed for stressing caution. This forum is nothing if not consistent.
- A
Upvote
0
dilbert said:
Are you implying I've never traveled with photography gear? I absolutely have experience to share, and that's exactly what I'm doing.
Or are you implying that my recommendations are invalid until I myself am robbed while not following them? I was 100% transparent in saying how conservatively I play things, and I make no claims that my advice is more correct or better than anyone else's. I'm just sharing my perspective.
But there's no need for that tone. Feel free to disagree, but do it respectfully and move on.
- A
Upvote
0
ahsanford said:
Sensible caution is always advisable. "Don't bring a white lens even though you want a good quality telezoom because it will attract thieves," is not particularly sensible.
I haven't skipped any trips because of the possibility of being struck by a falling meteor. Theft is like that – you can't fully prevent either, so insure your camera gear and your life, then bring your gear and enjoy your trip.
Upvote
0
The only exception is that 50mm f/1.4 IS USM prototype lens we all know you have and won't share. That's a thief magnet, so flash it around at your own peril.
Upvote
0
It's hard to say what focal lengths you'll want/use/miss without knowing the sorts of things you like photographing. Long can seem silly in a fairly cramped city, but not if you like capturing architectural details and pulling in distant objects etc.; and so on. On the other hand, there's also something to be said for limiting your options - it can be oddly liberating and force you to be more imaginative and view your surroundings differently. Regardless of what you take, chances are if you take several lenses there will be at least one or two you won't ever use and at least one you left behind you'll wish you hadn't.
I would strongly consider taking a back-up body, even if it never leaves your hotel room; years ago when I owned Nikon the camera's AF failed, which was a tad annoying....
Also bear in mind how much stuff you like carrying around for extensive periods; on one trip to Paris a few years ago, after carrying a 5DII & 70-200 f4 IS & 17-40L all day, I was tempted to kick it all into the Seine.... So the last time I went I took a few small vintage MF primes from 24mm to 135mm and a couple of FF Sony mirrorless bodies (the complete silence of one of them was a huge bonus in churches, theatres etc.); small, light, unobtrusive, don't draw attention. I'll do the same when I return in May, though I'll add a wider lens, perhaps the wonderful little Rokinon 12mm (nice on an a7rII in aps-c mode, though I guess I shouldn't be saying any of here.
If you like tripods, go for it, but remember that many buildings won't allow them (or flash) and in busy places you'll be a nuisance if you use one.
And don't be surprised if some places won't even allow a camera - St Paul's Cathedral in London was one such the last time I visited 15 months ago; I've no idea if that's still the case.
Have fun!
I would strongly consider taking a back-up body, even if it never leaves your hotel room; years ago when I owned Nikon the camera's AF failed, which was a tad annoying....
Also bear in mind how much stuff you like carrying around for extensive periods; on one trip to Paris a few years ago, after carrying a 5DII & 70-200 f4 IS & 17-40L all day, I was tempted to kick it all into the Seine.... So the last time I went I took a few small vintage MF primes from 24mm to 135mm and a couple of FF Sony mirrorless bodies (the complete silence of one of them was a huge bonus in churches, theatres etc.); small, light, unobtrusive, don't draw attention. I'll do the same when I return in May, though I'll add a wider lens, perhaps the wonderful little Rokinon 12mm (nice on an a7rII in aps-c mode, though I guess I shouldn't be saying any of here.
If you like tripods, go for it, but remember that many buildings won't allow them (or flash) and in busy places you'll be a nuisance if you use one.
And don't be surprised if some places won't even allow a camera - St Paul's Cathedral in London was one such the last time I visited 15 months ago; I've no idea if that's still the case.
Have fun!
Upvote
0
If the 24mm is going to be your widest lens, before you go, get some practice doing hand held panoramas of larger/taller buildings from a distance of about 20m. It's not as easy as a landscape - you need to be more conscious of the impact from tilting your camera. But its a very useful skill to have and helps cut down the gear to take.
Upvote
0
I spent a couple of days in Amsterdam in October (on vacation) and brought my gear.
A bit of statistics, for what it's worth, from the 528 images:
- 339 were with the 24-70mm
- 171 were with the 16-35mm
- 18 were with the 70-200mm
From a focal length POV, the high-scores are:
102 16mm
123 24mm
109 70mm
26 35mm
19 41mm
17 31mm
15 50mm
14 33mm
Interestingly, if I put on the 70-200mm, I would either be at 70mm, or very close to 200mm (185-200mm). I have zero shots with focal lengths between 70mm and 185mm. Most likely because I couldn't be bothered to change from the 24-70 to the 70-200
I would most likely leave the 70-200mm at home next time, simply from the sheer weight and size.
A bit of statistics, for what it's worth, from the 528 images:
- 339 were with the 24-70mm
- 171 were with the 16-35mm
- 18 were with the 70-200mm
From a focal length POV, the high-scores are:
102 16mm
123 24mm
109 70mm
26 35mm
19 41mm
17 31mm
15 50mm
14 33mm
Interestingly, if I put on the 70-200mm, I would either be at 70mm, or very close to 200mm (185-200mm). I have zero shots with focal lengths between 70mm and 185mm. Most likely because I couldn't be bothered to change from the 24-70 to the 70-200
I would most likely leave the 70-200mm at home next time, simply from the sheer weight and size.
Upvote
0
dilbert said:
Oh, ok then, dilbert. :
Please, tell us about all the many posts you've written based on your vast experience. When you used the Canon DIGISUPER box lens, did it take pictures without a camera attached? When you used the EOS 1D C, did it not shoot 4K video, or was it not a dSLR? Of all the sports photographers and sports magazine editors with whom you've spoken, which ones agreed with you that there is no point in having the ball in the image?
I'd call your post ironic, but irony that extreme crosses over into pathetic. If you want to post something based on your actual experience, start by looking around you and describing the contents of your mom's basement.
Upvote
0
neuroanatomist said:dilbert said:
Oh, ok then, dilbert. :
Neuro, I'll indulge him. We're back on topic.
It's been a while, a few years back -- I was in Paris and small town outside of Milan on business. I was awaiting my 5D3 in the mail if memory serves, so I was still shooting crop then. According to the shots I took, I was packing the EF-S 10-22, EF 24-70 F/2.8L I (didn't own the f/4L IS yet), and my trusty old 50mm f/1.4 USM.
As with most of my travels, I had little time to compose and generally just walked the city and shot my surroundings, all handheld, all natural light (again, I keep it simple with travel):
- Architecture in particular, generally wider vistas from riverlines and major thoroughfares, but some longer shots of church tower faces, etc.
- Some street work (if crowded enough, it's generally not my thing)
- I always end up in ancient churches and choose to flog my sensor with uncapturable handheld single frames of light coming through windows. (It's a rookie move I never tire of for some reason. I was doing this for an hour at La Sagrada Familia on another trip.)
- In Paris, a good 300 casual bicyclists blew past me near Musee D'Orsay and I dabbled at panning. I never do that, but it was a fun 10 minutes of the weirdest sort of Parisian people watching.
- It was also a work trip, so I took pictures of surgeries that I attended (but that really has nothing to do the OP's question)
- A
Upvote
0
neuroanatomist said:MrFotoFool said:
Great tip, one which I found to be true. This was taken last April from the other side of the river, half-way down the stairs leading from Quai de Montebello down to the river.
Notre Dame at Night
EOS 1D X, EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM @ 35mm, 25 s, f/11, ISO 100
Lovely shot of Notre Dame. Studoc, your shots are compelling too!
John, could you please remind us which travel tripod you bring to Europe? Thanks.
Upvote
0
YuengLinger said:
Thanks!
I use the RRS TQC-14 + BH-30 LR (link). When packing it in my checked luggage (or when sitting in my closet at home), it's inside a TQB-47 quiver bag, also from RRS (link). The tripod in its bag fits inside a carryon hard case (previously a Storm im2500, now a Pelican Elite Carry On).
Upvote
0
Uncertainly regret not bringing a moderately long lens (like 70-200) on my recent trip to Prague. I had only wide lenses with me, and most of my photos of buildings are converging lines from standing nearby and aiming up. A 70-200 would have allowed me to back off and frame from a higher perspective while still getting a lot of pixels on target.
Not a mistake I'll repeat.
Not a mistake I'll repeat.
Upvote
0
