# Going to europe for the first time. Need advice kindly..



## torakun (Nov 2, 2014)

How are you doing?

I'm planning for my first ever trip to Europe. I only have a budget for about $1900-2000 and I have a dilemma, I hope you can help me.

So, I'm gonna go to Italy (rome, florence), germany, belgium, netherland and paris. I am really worried on missing shots! I heard that the places are quite narrow, so I will need an ultra wide angle lenses. The problem is, fuji's ultra wide option are only 2. 10-24mm (expensive!!), and 14mm f2.8 (I heard its excellent, but is 21mm enough?). I figured I will need 2 lenses. 1 Ultra wide + 1 fast lens for night time, etc

Since my budget is only that little, I was thinking of going for either xe1 second hand or xpro1 second hand. I can get 8 months warranty left, excellent condition xe1 for $450, as well as xpro1 for $550. I can't decide which one to get between the two honestly. Whats left is the lens. I figured there are couple of choices.

1. 10-24mm+50mm 1.4 = $1300 ish
2. 14mm f2.8+50mm 1.4 = not to flexible I suppose, 2 primes.. but I won't know.
3. 56mm f1.2+18-55mm = because my gf is living in germany and I'm gonna meet her, I figured 56 f1.2 will be a great choice because I want to take a beautiful picture of her. However, not sure about the practicality. With this option, I think I'll be happy because I know 56mm f1.2 is a great lens, but I'll be stuck with 18mm (27mm equiv) for wide angle in those cities. 

So, my question to you is, which are the best combo? Or maybe you can suggest something totally different, I'd appreciate it as well. 

This is really my first time going to europe and I really want my choice of camera+lens to be perfect.
Looking forward to your reply.
Sincerely,

Tora


----------



## Designer (Nov 2, 2014)

Oh, my word, are you ever going to miss shots!  You're going to MISS seeing WAY more than you will see.

Not everything is narrow.  There will be plenty of open spaces and vistas.

I would definitely take the 18-55, and maybe something for low light.

For portraiture I think you want a somewhat longer lens than 55mm.

Remember; everything you take will have to be carried around all over the place, so be mindful of how much weight you're carrying.

Oh, and forget about "the perfect combo", because there probably is no such thing.


----------



## torakun (Nov 2, 2014)

Designer said:


> Oh, my word, are you ever going to miss shots!  You're going to MISS seeing WAY more than you will see.
> 
> Not everything is narrow.  There will be plenty of open spaces and vistas.
> 
> ...



Ahh.. I see... Forgive me, the widest lens I ever use is 24mm, and I have never been to europe. I wonder how 27mm will fare when I'm inside the churches or for example wanting to capture the top of a great building when I can't back up. So in your opinion, 27mm is wide enough for travelling around europe?

thank you!


----------



## Nevermore1 (Nov 2, 2014)

If it were me I would go with a wide angle as well as something that has some reach to it.  What is it that you normally like to take photos of?  If you are only interested in snapshots as you go on tours of buildings/castles then a wide angle may be fine.  If you want to be able to get any closeups of items on display you may need something with more reach.  A lot of the castles and palaces have huge rooms with high ceilings (think 20 or more ft) and swords, shields etc displayed going all the way to the top.  It can be tight on the streets and between the building but not always tight in the buildings.


----------



## Designer (Nov 2, 2014)

torakun said:


> Ahh.. I see... Forgive me, the widest lens I ever use is 24mm, and I have never been to europe. I wonder how 27mm will fare when I'm inside the churches or for example wanting to capture the top of a great building when I can't back up. So in your opinion, 27mm is wide enough for travelling around europe?
> 
> thank you!



I guess you didn't say what camera, so I'm assuming a crop sensor (APS-C) because that is what mine is.  

I gave you my preference, but if you only use wide lenses, then by all means take wide lenses.


----------



## torakun (Nov 2, 2014)

Designer said:


> I guess you didn't say what camera, so I'm assuming a crop sensor (APS-C) because that is what mine is.
> 
> I gave you my preference, but if you only use wide lenses, then by all means take wide lenses.




Hi! The camera is Fuji mirrorless. Yes it have APSC sensor. Personally, its more like the situation of the landspace/building that demands having a suitable lens vs my style of photography I suppose.


----------



## weepete (Nov 2, 2014)

It really does depend on your style of shots, I've used a 28-105mm lens on an apsc camera for years around Europe and it is possible to get shots if you are careful about framing. If you're aiming to get some scenes with lots of foreground you'll definatley want the wider option as well though.


----------



## pgriz (Nov 2, 2014)

When travelling, the point (at least to me) is to SEE things and experience the local flavours.  If you're constantly worrying about your camera and capturing the "perfect" image, it will take away a lot of your attention from what's happening around you.  My advice would be to keep it simple, even to the point of taking only one lens.  As for using an ultra-wide, it's a specialty lens and you really have to be careful with your horizon lines to avoid unpleasant-looking distortion.  I don't know which zoom lenses are available for the Fuji, but my thinking would be to take a single zoom with the range of medium-wide to medium telephoto.  If you need wider, then use photo-stitch.  If you need longer, then crop.


----------



## torakun (Nov 2, 2014)

weepete said:


> It really does depend on your style of shots, I've used a 28-105mm lens on an apsc camera for years around Europe and it is possible to get shots if you are careful about framing. If you're aiming to get some scenes with lots of foreground you'll definatley want the wider option as well though.



I will take no landscape or creative shots. I am more like "trying to get X building/painting into 1 frame"



pgriz said:


> When travelling, the point (at least to me) is to SEE things and experience the local flavours.  If you're constantly worrying about your camera and capturing the "perfect" image, it will take away a lot of your attention from what's happening around you.  My advice would be to keep it simple, even to the point of taking only one lens.  As for using an ultra-wide, it's a specialty lens and you really have to be careful with your horizon lines to avoid unpleasant-looking distortion.  I don't know which zoom lenses are available for the Fuji, but my thinking would be to take a single zoom with the range of medium-wide to medium telephoto.  If you need wider, then use photo-stitch.  If you need longer, then crop.



I see.. I agree with you.. Never use a lens wider than 24mm before.. so I guess with the trip coming up in 2 weeks, its not an ideal situation to "try". What if I don't like the angle.. hmm.. 

I will take your advice to heart.

Thank you!


----------



## sashbar (Nov 2, 2014)

If money is tight, why don't you consider a 18-55?
It is versatile and a wonderful lense both for city shots and portraits. With 2,8 it is fine with late evening shots  - check this: the1st one was taken with 18-55, ISO 6400, 1/15 sec. , handheld, no pp apart from some crop. The 2nd one was shot with ISO 3200. This is both SOOC JPEGS.
It is warm again | Photography Forum

If you add 10-24 for wide shots, that will be enough for travel.

PS: OK, I see I have missed that you had mentioned 18-55.


----------



## Gary A. (Nov 2, 2014)

For your budget I suggest the Zeiss lenses:

1) 12mm and
2) Zeiss 32mm or the Fujinon 35mm.

That will cover your wide to normal stuff.

Gary


----------



## torakun (Nov 2, 2014)

sashbar said:


> If money is tight, why don't you consider a 18-55?
> It is versatile and a wonderful lense both for city shots and portraits. With 2,8 it is fine with late evening shots  - check this: the1st one was taken with 18-55, ISO 6400, 1/15 sec. , handheld, no pp apart from some crop. The 2nd one was shot with ISO 3200. This is both SOOC JPEGS.
> It is warm again | Photography Forum
> 
> ...



Is that using a fuji camera? which one? ISO 6400? really?? that looks like ISO 1600!

I see.. Yea, I guess the 18-55 is good enough because I often forgot that the aperture is 2.8-4. As a pair, which one will you suggest, 14mm f2.8 (21mm equiv) or 23 f1.4 (35mm, maybe overlapping) or 35mm f1.4 (50mm equiv)? I can only afford those lenses.

Was thinking about the 18-135mm so that it can be do it all lens, but the aperture is standard even though it got IOS.



Gary A. said:


> For your budget I suggest the Zeiss lenses:
> 
> 1) 12mm and
> 2) Zeiss 32mm or the Fujinon 35mm.
> ...



Zeiss one is quite expensive, I just checked.. wow.. Is it really worth it? I know that the range is good, I think 12mm is more than enough, but not sure about the price at the moment. 

Is the fujinon 35mm sharp enough to be used wide open at night?

thank you!


----------



## Gary A. (Nov 2, 2014)

Wow, I am surprised at the price jump. There was a Zeiss special a while back and they were about the same price as the Fujinon.  There is no significant difference in IQ between the Zeiss 12mm and Fuji 14mm ... the same can be said of the Zeiss 32mm and the Fuji 35mm. Yes, the Fuji 35mm is very sharp wide open. All Fuji XF lenses are very sharp ... easily L lens sharp.


----------



## Gary A. (Nov 3, 2014)

Sashbar may have the best solution. The 18-55 is very sharp and it has IS. Fuji has very clean high ISO:







Fuji X-Pro1 w/55-200 @ 200mm, 1/125, f/4.8, ISO 3200





Fuji XT1 w/55-200 @ 200mm, 1/250, f/8, ISO 6400


----------



## torakun (Nov 3, 2014)

Gary A. said:


> Sashbar may have the best solution. The 18-55 is very sharp and it has IS. Fuji has very clean high ISO:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Woooww.. you got to be kidding.. that first pic is sharp! too sharp even! ISO 3200, I can even see her pores.. wow..


----------



## sashbar (Nov 3, 2014)

torakun said:


> Is that using a fuji camera? which one? ISO 6400? really?? that looks like ISO 1600!
> 
> I see.. Yea, I guess the 18-55 is good enough because I often forgot that the aperture is 2.8-4. As a pair, which one will you suggest, 14mm f2.8 (21mm equiv) or 23 f1.4 (35mm, maybe overlapping) or 35mm f1.4 (50mm equiv)? I can only afford those lenses.
> 
> ...



Yes, it was X-T1 with 18-55, first shot ISO 6400, second shot ISO 3200. The good thing about 18-55 - it's AF is really fast. And, as Gary said, it has IS - I have checked the metadata again - the first one was shot at 1/17s with no support.  And if you want to take some photos of your girlfriend, the lense is good enough for a casual portrait.
It is sharp. This one was shot ISO 1250, at 32 mm f/4 1/250






As for your choice between wide lenses, 14 mm is crazy good. If I wanted a 23 mm lense, I would just bought X-100s instead as a second camera. Not much price difference. With 35mm there is a rumor ( I am not sure if there is anything behind it) that FUJI is going to update it to speed up the AF.


----------



## torakun (Nov 4, 2014)

sashbar said:


> torakun said:
> 
> 
> > Is that using a fuji camera? which one? ISO 6400? really?? that looks like ISO 1600!
> ...



Wow! Any idea for 18-135mm? I'd imagine 14mm is amazing! I agree on the 23mm.


----------



## sashbar (Nov 4, 2014)

No ideas about 18-135 to be honest, apart from the fact that it is big and heavy.


----------



## Gary A. (Nov 4, 2014)

torakun said:


> Gary A. said:
> 
> 
> > Sashbar may have the best solution. The 18-55 is very sharp and it has IS. Fuji has very clean high ISO:
> ...


Probably more lighting than anything else ... (big pores probably helps. lol). The 55-200 is sharp across the entire range.


----------



## Gary A. (Nov 4, 2014)

torakun said:


> sashbar said:
> 
> 
> > torakun said:
> ...







The 14mm is great. The 18-135 is too slow for my tastes but it is weather sealed. (The only weather sealed X camera is the XT1.)


----------

