Need advice on photography for Travelling in Europe!


13lackant

New Member
Jun 15, 2012
9
0
0
Singapore
Hi guys,

I'm a student going for an exchange programme this coming August for 4-5 months in the Netherlands. Will be touring a lot around Europe, in countries such as Italy, France, London, Germany, Belgium, Spain, Portugal.

My current camera is a Canon 60D EOS.
Lenses available are:

Tamron 17-50 f2.8 non-VC
Canon 18-55 f3.5-5.6 IS
Canon 55-250 f4-5.6
Canon 28mm f1.8 (prime)
Canon 50mm f1.4 (prime)

Currently, due to weight and space constraints, I'm thinking of bringing 2 lenses. General purpose lens would be the Tamron 17-50, but i'm struggling with the choice of the other lens. Thinking of bringing either the 28mm or 50mm.

Do you guys have any advice regarding lens choice? Advice regarding when to use which lens would be greatly appreciated as well.

Thank you :)

Samuel
 

I will bring the 28mm prime for indoor shooting whereby the use of flash is prohibited (eg, museums, art galleries, etc) . 50mm lens is too tight for indoor.
 

Sam,
If i am you, will choose Canon over Tamron because it has IS. It is useful unless you can handle Tamron on the move without shaken caption.
Prime,28mm is better,as mentioned.
 

Currently, due to weight and space constraints, I'm thinking of bringing 2 lenses. General purpose lens would be the Tamron 17-50, but i'm struggling with the choice of the other lens. Thinking of bringing either the 28mm or 50mm.

Do you guys have any advice regarding lens choice? Advice regarding when to use which lens would be greatly appreciated as well.

I think that depends on what your shooting style is, and whether you have a tripod. I think the Tamron is a definite bet, but with 2.8, what are the chances that you actually use the 28 or 50 primes that already overlap the range? Yes, they do have better aperture for indoor shots, but only you can answer the question of whether you will take the trouble to change lens in these situations. Personally, I'd pick the 55-250. Aperture's not fantastic, but it has reach, and I would find that useful for streets and certain landscape situations.

Just my two cents.
 

Just want to add my 2 cents based on my trip in Italy, and also due to the fact that I have those exact 5 lenses that you listed.

I definitely recommend the Tamron 17-50 over the Canon 18-55, it is a much better lens. Although it is lacking VC or IS, if you can hold your camera steady enough it takes much better images. And agree with bruggink, on a 1.6x crop factor a 50mm is too tight. I brought the 55-250mm with me when I went to Italy for 2 weeks but I only took it out to shoot a few pics cause I didn't want to have brought it all the way there for nothing. There weren't many situations, as it turned out, for me to require the extensive zoom range. The 28mm is much more practical to bring for such a trip, IMO, because, like what Bruggink said, sometimes you need to shoot low-light, and the image quality from the prime is great.

If you think you will shoot a further range you may go with 28mm and 55-250. If you don't think you need range I'll say 17-50 and 28 (which is what I'd go for). I think if you bring 28mm and 55-250 it may not be wide enough in some instances. I rather shoot wider and crop if necessary than have an image that is too 'tight' because my lens was not wide enough.
 

It's a tour, and since you are a student, I think you will be doing the Chan Brothers refugee style touring with many stops in few days, try and KISS.... kiss your fellow students and Keep It Simple...
Don't fret if you don't get the best shot.

I just have a single 18-200mm. No fuss. I suggest you bring the lightest gear and the least number of lenses. The Tamron and the 55-250mm.
 

17-50 and 55-250, throw away the rest.. :angel:
 

Thanks guys for all the advice! appreciate it :)

I have a friend studying long term in UK and travels frequently, his advice was to use the 50mm for the portrait shots for the bokeh, esp for places that have more people and less landscape. Still considering this though, as it's really quite tight and im not sure if i can use it very often. leaning towards the 28mm haha.

Another concern is regarding the 55-250mm! It sounds very convenient to have a telephoto lens ready, but from what friends have been telling me (and LazyEye as well), it seems like there aren't many situations where such a long zoom is needed. Does anyone know why this is the case? (My first destination is Italy as well!)

Definitely want the Tamron due to the wide angle it provides. So its down to this:

Tamron 17-50 and 55-250 or
Tamron 17-50 and 28 prime
 

Long zooms are useful when you can't get close to your subject(For example you want to shoot something across a river)

Or you want to snip people from a far, not wanting to know they are being photographed, so as to catch their most natural reaction
 

I'm studying in the UK and I'd have to say 17-50 and the 28 prime. The streets of most European cities are too narrow for you to use the 55-250 and on the occasions when you do travel outside of the city (ie. to go hiking/trekking) you'd really like to have a wide or ultra-wide angle lens to capture landscape and panoramic shots. The 28mm and the 50mm end of your Tamron will be good enough for portraits.

If you do find that the 17mm end of the Tamron isn't wide enough in the future then go for an ultra-wide especially since you're on a crop sensor.

Oh yeah just look at all the threads of photos of the CS members and you will realize that most of their shots in Europe were taken using wide angle lenses : )
 

As I mentioned earlier, it really depends on your style and what you like to shoot. I'm still definitely for the 55-250, and had a quick flick through my flickr stream to find travel photos that were taken with a tele. It's a largely European set, only the last few photos are USA/Canada.
Tele Travel - a set on Flickr
 

Rh, nice pics!

But seems like your photos taken more with UWA?
 

Rh, nice pics!

But seems like your photos taken more with UWA?

Thanks!

Yes, I do have a thing for ultra wide angles, but I guess what I was trying to say is that I personally would have no use for a 28 prime in addition to a 17-50 (or in addition to a 10-20 for that matter), and that a 55-200/250 would serve me much better.
 

True, 17-50 would do actually since the streets are tight. Ts can capture archi and landscape with that lens. Since TS u going for 4 months, should not bring overlap FL. 55-250 could be useful in street photography for taking portraits of strangers. If space allows, bring 28mm also to give yourself more choice you decide to go for bokeh close up
 

I'm studying in the UK and I'd have to say 17-50 and the 28 prime. The streets of most European cities are too narrow for you to use the 55-250 and on the occasions when you do travel outside of the city (ie. to go hiking/trekking) you'd really like to have a wide or ultra-wide angle lens to capture landscape and panoramic shots. The 28mm and the 50mm end of your Tamron will be good enough for portraits.

If you do find that the 17mm end of the Tamron isn't wide enough in the future then go for an ultra-wide especially since you're on a crop sensor.

Oh yeah just look at all the threads of photos of the CS members and you will realize that most of their shots in Europe were taken using wide angle lenses : )

Thanks for the advice! Seems like a good idea using the uwa. Will probably hold back on this for now though, as i'm still quite new to the whole photography thing, not looking to invest in another one of them yet :) Definitely a consideration for the future though!


As I mentioned earlier, it really depends on your style and what you like to shoot. I'm still definitely for the 55-250, and had a quick flick through my flickr stream to find travel photos that were taken with a tele. It's a largely European set, only the last few photos are USA/Canada.
Tele Travel - a set on Flickr[/url]

Thanks!

Yes, I do have a thing for ultra wide angles, but I guess what I was trying to say is that I personally would have no use for a 28 prime in addition to a 17-50 (or in addition to a 10-20 for that matter), and that a 55-200/250 would serve me much better.

Amazing pictures man, just had a look at the photostream. Really impressed by all of them, not just the telephoto ones! :)

May I ask, how often did you feel the need to change lens to a telephoto while you were in Europe?

Also, another question on my mind is if there are many circumstances of low lighting where a 28 f1.8 prime is able to capture a shot better than the tamron f2.8. If the difference is negligible, then it might be a better idea to just use the tamron for those shots, and save the hassle of carrying a prime and changing lenses. I guess another consideration for the prime would be the better bokeh and portrait shots.

Sorry for the lack of passion for the telephoto! haha. Haven't had much experience with the telephoto yet so I'm not sure if it'll really play out to my liking.
 

Bro, I guess low lighting areas are indoor situations and outdoor at night?

If you will be shooting people or specific things in these situations, makes sense taking f1.8 where u get fast speed and bokeh. But take note the shallow dov.

If most of your low lighting shots are of indoor archi spaces or night landscape, more likely you will take at f4 and above, which renders your f1.8 pretty useless since your 17-50 can go f2.8
 

m... i m jz a newbie.. i travel to europe for 3 wks just carrying a 15-85mm lens.. glad I did.. if not its very very heavy for my shoulder especially when I do hikes.. my 2 cents =)
if i have the money I would have purchase the UWA lens and bring over there too !
 

Amazing pictures man, just had a look at the photostream. Really impressed by all of them, not just the telephoto ones! :)

May I ask, how often did you feel the need to change lens to a telephoto while you were in Europe?

Thanks :)

Well I guess the 10-20 stayed on my camera 60-70% of the time... the 55-200 mainly came out when I wanted to shoot architectural details or people, or to introduce some amount of bokeh into my shots.

On a side note, are you bringing a tripod? If you are, then you probably won't have a need for an ultra large aperture.
 

When I went Europe,i took my Samsung NX100 which mostly had 20-50 on,except on the move,when i used the zoom because of OIS. Night shots were taken with a tripod.
Since you will be going for 4-5months,it wil be winter then..low light caption with tripod or IS will be good. Fast lens gives nice results when you take fall sceneries.
Again,it depends where the family or school will take you..and what type of photography you prefer.
 

Thanks :)

Well I guess the 10-20 stayed on my camera 60-70% of the time... the 55-200 mainly came out when I wanted to shoot architectural details or people, or to introduce some amount of bokeh into my shots.

On a side note, are you bringing a tripod? If you are, then you probably won't have a need for an ultra large aperture.

I see, cool! And nope i won't be bringing a tripod. Planning to primarily enjoy the trip rather than be weighed down by lugging a tripod and many lenses along. I understand that there may be quite a lot of nice landscape shots that require a long shutter speed and a tripod though! Do you have any interesting solutions as to a make shift tripod?


When I went Europe,i took my Samsung NX100 which mostly had 20-50 on,except on the move,when i used the zoom because of OIS. Night shots were taken with a tripod.
Since you will be going for 4-5months,it wil be winter then..low light caption with tripod or IS will be good. Fast lens gives nice results when you take fall sceneries.
Again,it depends where the family or school will take you..and what type of photography you prefer.

Cool! Never had the opportunity to take shots in fall/winter before so maybe it'll be great to try it out there. :)