# Need some Travel advice



## kalgra (May 12, 2016)

So I apologize if this isnt the proper place to post this question. I am primarily a Canon user so I figured here was maybe a good a place as any.

I am traveling to Paris in June. Ive never been before and I'm pretty excited about the photo opportunities it will present for me. The dilemma I'm running into is deciding what gear to bring with me. I have this over whelming impulse to bring what I am guessing is just going to be too much.

I need help deciding what to bring. I am also concerned about bringing my very best glass because honestly Im afraid TSA will drop one of my lens or something if they decide to rifle through my bag or it might get stolen. This happened to me coming back from Mexico, TSA dropped a lens and now I'm terrified. I would like some advice on this as well. I know I will never have this opportunity again and Id hate to not have my best glass for this trip.

I will be primarily focused on architecture and land/cityscapes as well as some portraits and general street photography.

I am planning on using a 6D body and have the following lenses for consideration for this trip.

Canon 16-35mm 4.0L with IS and AF
Canon 100mm 2.8L with IS and AF
Loawa 15mm 4.0 Ultra wide with shift Manual
Zeiss 50mm 1.4 Plannar Manual
Zeiss 21mm 2.8 Distagon Manual
Zeiss 100mm 2.0 Makro Manual
Zeiss 135mm 2.0 APO Sonnar Manual

The logical side of me says to bring three lenses. The canon 16-35mm for versatility with architecture and cityscapes and the Canon 100mm for portraits and a little longer reach, and the Zeiss 50mm for general walking around and low light situations. It seems like AF and IS would be a nice to have as well. 

My heart wants to bring only my Zeiss glass which will be much more limited in versatility but has superior low light capabilities and overall IQ especially the 135mm. However these are my most prized possessions and I feel for their safety not too mention that they are heavy.

To add to the mix Id kind of like to bring the 15mm shift lens for taller structures but thats just another thing to be lugging around. For those of you that have experience traveling to places like Paris what would be your best recomendation?


----------



## table1349 (May 12, 2016)

For me my travel lenses are generally the Canon Trifecta.  16-35, 24-70 & 70-200.  Pretty much covers everything and for me and for travel, convenience is a necessity.


----------



## sec (May 16, 2016)

kalgra said:


> So I apologize if this isnt the proper place to post this question. I am primarily a Canon user so I figured here was maybe a good a place as any.
> 
> I am traveling to Paris in June. Ive never been before and I'm pretty excited about the photo opportunities it will present for me. The dilemma I'm running into is deciding what gear to bring with me. I have this over whelming impulse to bring what I am guessing is just going to be too much.
> 
> ...


My suggestion would be to take the two Canons and the 50mm Zeiss. If architecture and street photography are your main subjects you should be fine.  My main lens is the 24-105mm and I often found myself needing a wider angle in Paris for buildings. I'm still saving for that wide angle lens.

How does TSA drop a lens and why are they handling it to start with? Don't intend for that to sound rude at all, though I'm sure it does now that I've seen it on screen. Just trying to understand what happened here to avoid the same problem in the future. ALL my camera equipment goes in my carry on bag with me. In 16 years of international travel the only time security of any kind has ever touched any of my gear was at the Tibet/Nepal border. Chinese "security" in Tibet is what it is and you are at their mercy at all times.

Keep in mind anything you take you will have to carry and keep up with. From your post I think you know what you want to take is too much. I think that happens to all of us. The further from home I go, the more I have the urge to take. I know I should do just the opposite but it is hard to fight that urge sometimes. Paris is very nice and I would love to go back, but like any large city it does have it's share of crime. Be aware of pickpockets and bag snatchers especially in the tourist areas.

Unless you are a professional getting paid for the Paris shots I would leave the Zeiss glass at home, except maybe the 50mm. As you said they are heavy and not as versatile. You have other lenses covering basically the same focal lengths. Mostly though I would leave them home for peace of mind. Paris is a wonderful city. You don't want to spend your vacation worrying about the safety of your prized possessions. I don't see any benefit to taking them.


----------



## Designer (May 16, 2016)

I'm not a Canon user, but I just want to remind you that everything you carry will be a burden of some sort or another.  Every time you get on or off a train, bus, taxi, whatever, you're going to have bags of stuff to maneuver.  

What about buying or renting a mid-length zoom (70-200mm)and just take your short one and the rented zoom?  With the focal range of 16mm to 200mm you should be able to get nearly everything.  

So that would make it the camera and two zoom lenses.  The rented one will be insured, and maybe you can purchase insurance for all your stuff just for the trip.  

Don't bother with a tripod, as museums won't allow them in.  I've heard of people taking a monopod, which will help a lot.


----------



## kalgra (May 16, 2016)

[/QUOTE]
My suggestion would be to take the two Canons and the 50mm Zeiss. If architecture and street photography are your main subjects you should be fine.  My main lens is the 24-105mm and I often found myself needing a wider angle in Paris for buildings. I'm still saving for that wide angle lens.

How does TSA drop a lens and why are they handling it to start with? Don't intend for that to sound rude at all, though I'm sure it does now that I've seen it on screen. Just trying to understand what happened here to avoid the same problem in the future. ALL my camera equipment goes in my carry on bag with me. In 16 years of international travel the only time security of any kind has ever touched any of my gear was at the Tibet/Nepal border. Chinese "security" in Tibet is what it is and you are at their mercy at all times.
[/QUOTE]

Thank you much for your suggestions this is the kind of feed back I was looking for. So the time the lens got dropped is was the Canon 100mm 2.8L. I had all my gear in a lowepro carry on and for some reason when I went through security they pulled me aside and asked to search my bag (my wife says its because I look like a terrorist, lol). They wouldn't let me touch it at that point and wouldnt tell me why. They seemed to be looking for something specific because as they kept removing things they obviously where not finding what they were looking for because they kept running the bag through the scanner then digging around some more. I asked if I could help, perhaps if they could have explained the shape or something I could have said " Oh yeah that the such and such. Its in the inside pocket that compartment there!" Instead they snapped at me and told me to please step back.  Anyway long story short the lady pulling everything out, went to pull the 100mm out of the compartment where it was tightly packed and fumbled it where it hit the edge of the table then the floor. To this day I still have no idea what they were looking for.

Luckily that was one of the first lenses I purchased and I also purchased a  3 yr protection plan. Honestly I dont think the lens got damaged it seemed to work fine and only had one small scuff on the plastic but I still got it replaced anyway just in case. My 6D and two Canon lenses all have protection plans against drops and water damage but as most of my Zeiss glass was purchased second hand it does not. For that reason alone it makes sense to just bring those.

On a side note: I was at the airport yesterday waiting for my wife's flight to arrive and decided to go talk to one of the airport "ambassador" staff to get some tips. They told me if TSA or any airport personnel for that matter damages your property you are pretty much screwed in terms of getting them to take responsibility for it. I was told the best way to avoid the situation I encountered is to remove anything you dont want security handling and place it in the bin so it can be easily seen and identified, then they can riffle through the bag as much as they want without danger of something being dropped or falling out. This also gives them a sense of trust that you presented them with open items as well.

One last question. I may be picking up a Canon 85mm f1.2L next week. Im thinking that would make for some great pics of my wife and family members especially in the eveing. If you had the choose between the 100mm 2.8 and the 85mm 1.2 which one would you bring.?






Designer said:


> I'm not a Canon user, but I just want to remind you that everything you carry will be a burden of some sort or another.  Every time you get on or off a train, bus, taxi, whatever, you're going to have bags of stuff to maneuver.
> 
> What about buying or renting a mid-length zoom (70-200mm)and just take your short one and the rented zoom?  With the focal range of 16mm to 200mm you should be able to get nearly everything.
> 
> ...



I actually checked at the local Camera shop for a rental and asked specifically about the 70-200mm 2.8L IS and they wanted almost $400 and stated it is NOT insured and that I would be responsible for the value of the lens if anything should happen to it. I might still consider that but Its a little difficult for me to do that when I see it as $400 I could put towards just buying a lens.

Thanks for you input on the tripod as well. My thought there is I will pack a Lightweight tripod, a monopod, and my gorilla pod in my checked luggage then depending on what we have planned for the day take which ever is most appropriate. For museums maybe the monopod. For indoor non museum but potential restricted from tripod the gorilla pod might work in a pinch either on the floor or wrapped around a railing or something. We will be spending allot of time outside and along one of the rivers as well so a lightweight tripod could work for those occasions.

What are your thoughts with that?


----------



## Designer (May 16, 2016)

kalgra said:


> Thanks for you input on the tripod as well. My thought there is I will pack a Lightweight tripod, a monopod, and my gorilla pod in my checked luggage then depending on what we have planned for the day take which ever is most appropriate. For museums maybe the monopod. For indoor non museum but potential restricted from tripod the gorilla pod might work in a pinch either on the floor or wrapped around a railing or something. We will be spending allot of time outside and along one of the rivers as well so a lightweight tripod could work for those occasions.
> 
> What are your thoughts with that?


Yes, a lightweight tripod is an excellent idea, just be mindful that some local authorities may have an issue with it.  If you are stopped from using it, just very politely put it away and don't argue about it.  When you do use it, make sure you're not blocking a sidewalk or doorway with your tripod.

Also, since this may be a trip of a lifetime, get the 70-200 2.8L IS and put it on your credit card.  You will be glad you did.  Talk to your banker about a personal loan for the trip, saving credit card carrying charges.  My bank would probably charge me about 7% on a personal signature loan, whereas my credit card would charge more like 20%.  So if you have to carry a balance for a couple of months, better to pay 7% rather than 20% interest.


----------



## sec (May 17, 2016)

Thanks for the info on the TSA incident and sharing what you learned yesterday. It's very interesting. Also a huge crock that they can forcibly separate you from your gear, dig through it, break it and then take no responsibility for it. They should absolutely be held accountable for damaging peoples property. Maybe if they knew they were going to be accountable they would be a little more careful. I work in a prison and inventory inmate property regularly. They have nothing of any financial value, but if I break it or lose it I am held accountable. There is no reason why the TSA shouldn't be when they are dealing with free citizens and valuable property.

Personally I would bring the 85mm. But there are people here far more qualified than me who can give you a better answer about which to bring and why. Hope you enjoy Paris.


----------



## kalgra (May 17, 2016)

So I've kinda taken a new approach this and would still like some more input. Im hoping those that have actually shot in Paris or somewhere very similar might be able to chime in. I went to the camera shop yesterday played around with two different lenses. The canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II and the canon 24-70mm f/2.8L II.

Right off the bat I love the 70-200 and there is no doubt I will add that to my arsenal one day... but its big and heavy as hell and I know for a fact I wont be wanting to lug that around with me all day let lone one or two other lenses and possibly a travel tripod. Not too mention it screams "Tourist with expensive white lens, come mug me!" Also I just dont think im really going to use/need that kind of focal length all that often for this trip, not for the kind of shots I do. In addition my wife will have the Sony a6000 with the 55-210mm in her bag so if I need something with that kind of reach I will have something.

The 24-70 seems to be the most logical choice and to be honest I dont have a lens that covers this range so its probably the most versatile and useful addition I could make trip or not. If I do that I can say bye bye to the 85mm at least for now as I just wont have the cash for it which bums me out a bit but at the same time I dont do that much portraiture so I have to ask myself what justification I really have to get the 85 over the 24-70. None really! Other than im addicted to lens porn and the 85mm 1.2 is definitely a niche piece of lens porn to be certain.

So here is the next bit Id like advice on if I purchase the 24-70 2.8 do I bring the 16-35 4.0 or the Zeiss 21mm 2.8?

Does anyone really think I will need anything wider than 21mm? In my opinion when it comes to IQ the Zeiss destroys the 16-35 canon but is more challenging to use, its heavier and way more expensive if anything were to happen to it.

My gut still says to just take the 16-35 and the 24-70 and call it good. 

Opinions? Advice? Anyone just want to to call me an idiot?  Its all welcome Thanks!


----------



## table1349 (May 17, 2016)

Need some Travel advice#2 should answer the question as it covers a lot of bases.  This is where versatility trumps.


----------



## kalgra (May 17, 2016)

gryphonslair99 said:


> Need some Travel advice#2 should answer the question as it covers a lot of bases.  This is where versatility trumps.



Thanks Gryphonslair, Some reason this think just takes me back to this page.


----------



## table1349 (May 17, 2016)

kalgra said:


> gryphonslair99 said:
> 
> 
> > Need some Travel advice#2 should answer the question as it covers a lot of bases.  This is where versatility trumps.
> ...


It's supposed to.  Read what I wrote in post #2.  If you get the 24-70 take it and the 16-35.  That is where the convenience comes in.


----------



## sec (May 18, 2016)

I agree with gryphonslair. If you are going to get the 24-70 I would take that and the 16-35. That way you only have to take two lenses.

 I'm not familiar with your wife's camera but the point is she has something that covers the 200mm length. I have the 70-300 L.  Never used the 70-200 so don't know how they compare in weight and size. I did take the 70-300 to Paris but rarely used it. The things I did use it for I could have gotten by moving closer to the subject. I think the only thing I used it for that I probably couldn't have gotten closer to was detail of architecture on the top of Notre Dame. I wouldn't take it again. For the few things I would need it for I would just take a quality point and shoot that covers that range.

Whether you need wider than 21mm depends on what you want to shoot. For general outdoor and street photography probably not. If you want to take wide scenic shots, maybe. Where you may want the wider lens is inside buildings. I took my 24-105 L and used it for 95% of my shots because it is the widest lens I have. If I had the 16-35 I would have used it often. I would take it over the 21mm because it gives you more flexibility and you don't have to worry about your Zeiss glass. Yes the picture quality is slightly lower, but the vast majority of people won't even notice. If you are one who will, only you can decide if taking the 21mm is worth the trouble. Your 16-35 is an L series lens. It's not like we're talking about a budget lens here.


----------



## KC1 (May 18, 2016)

Shooting in Paris is just like shooting in any city in the world, there is traffic, pedestrians, locals and tourists, buildings and infrastructure. One thing you learn from extensive travels abroad is that any place is just like any other place. Practice in your nearest large city and you'll see exactly what you need to shoot in Paris or any other city.


----------



## kalgra (May 18, 2016)

sec said:


> I agree with gryphonslair. If you are going to get the 24-70 I would take that and the 16-35. That way you only have to take two lenses.
> 
> I'm not familiar with your wife's camera but the point is she has something that covers the 200mm length. I have the 70-300 L.  Never used the 70-200 so don't know how they compare in weight and size. I did take the 70-300 to Paris but rarely used it. The things I did use it for I could have gotten by moving closer to the subject. I think the only thing I used it for that I probably couldn't have gotten closer to was detail of architecture on the top of Notre Dame. I wouldn't take it again. For the few things I would need it for I would just take a quality point and shoot that covers that range.
> 
> Whether you need wider than 21mm depends on what you want to shoot. For general outdoor and street photography probably not. If you want to take wide scenic shots, maybe. Where you may want the wider lens is inside buildings. I took my 24-105 L and used it for 95% of my shots because it is the widest lens I have. If I had the 16-35 I would have used it often. I would take it over the 21mm because it gives you more flexibility and you don't have to worry about your Zeiss glass. Yes the picture quality is slightly lower, but the vast majority of people won't even notice. If you are one who will, only you can decide if taking the 21mm is worth the trouble. Your 16-35 is an L series lens. It's not like we're talking about a budget lens here.



Thanks for your input I really appreciate it. I went ahead and bit the bullet and picked up the 24-70 yesterday. Yeah I dont now what I was getting so hung up on the 16-35 and 24-70 are the clear choices I suppose. Thanks for everyone's advice I do sincerely appreciate it.


----------



## kalgra (May 18, 2016)

KC1 said:


> Shooting in Paris is just like shooting in any city in the world, there is traffic, pedestrians, locals and tourists, buildings and infrastructure. One thing you learn from extensive travels abroad is that any place is just like any other place. Practice in your nearest large city and you'll see exactly what you need to shoot in Paris or any other city.



I suppose that makes a lot of sense! Ive not done much traveling at all outside of the US. I guess in my mind I envision there are certain "things" that one goes to see in a place like Paris and someone having been there might have a better perspective of what focal lengths would be be best for those "things".  Thinking about this in your terms I see that I am over complicating something very simple.   Thank you!


----------

