London-Paris

[Kayaker72]

Just found out I am being sent later this month to London and Paris. Rough, I know, but if I have learned anything about work travel is that it is still mostly work. That said, I will tack on a couple of days to "adjust to the time zone difference."

I will be taking my 5DIII, but I am wondering about which lenses to bring. My initial thoughts were that I was going to be all set with the 24-70 II and 70-200 II. But, as I was doing research on photo opportunities, I keep coming across phrases that could be summed up as "my UWA lens never left my camera," or "I couldn't get wide enough."

So, I could also take my Rokinon 14 mm f/2.8, but I hardly consider that a walk around lens.

So, my question to everyone, what lenses would you recommend for photographing large cities, cathedrals, etc? Do you think I can get away with 24-200 mm as the primary range covered with the occasional 14 mm shot? Or, put another way, which lenses would you take?

I intend to try to take every single cheesy postcard shot I can find. So, this will be landmarks, cathedrals, and maybe just a bit of street photography.

[neuroanatomist]

In large cities like that, many landmarks don't have a lot of space in front of them, so an ultrawide option is very useful. In Basel, Switzerland a couple of weeks ago, I used the TS-E 17mm for ~1/3 of my shots, the TS-E 24mm for a few, and the 24-70/2.8 II for the rest. When I go back in April with the whole family, I'll likely take only the EOS M...but I just ordered the EF-M 11-22mm to bring along.

Bring a tripod - business travel means dawn and night shooting. Have fun!

[HDNitehawk]

Here are my thoughts, a free business trip to London and Paris. Can I get a 11-24 L preordered in time? Better check the bank account to see if it is willing to take the hit.

But, I have never been to London or Paris, but every big city that I have been and inside every ornate building I have ever went in to I always end up having to stich if I want to capture the interior the way I want. I like the idea of having the wide lens for those situations.

I would take both lenses (not really I would be checking the bank account). Beyond that figure out a way to carry 14mm in your pocket.

[neuroanatomist]

If you don't need shift to correct the verticals, a shift pano with the TS-E 17mm gives you an 11mm FoV.

[conropl]

TS would be nice. But you may want AF (also a reason not to use the 14mm). You may want to consider renting a 16-35 f/4, and then take the 24-70 mm. As was already said, not a lot of room to back up without getting more pavement and people than you probably want. A 70-200 is a bit to lug around, and probably won't get used as much unless you decide to zoom in to get building details (especially at the cathedrals). A very fast prime lens for inside the cathedrals or the Louvre would also be a good idea (also good night lens).

My choice would be:
16-35 f/4L
24-70 f/2.8L II (or even the lowly 24-105L if you still have one).
Fast prime (f/1.4 in the 24-50 mm range if you have one would be good).

[Haydn1971]

Having visited London lots and Paris recently, I didn't want for tele ranges... Most of my pictures are with the 16-35 & 24-70 ranges, both f2.8 - I didn't really feel a desperate need to go wider and I do like to shot at 16mm. I've recently packed my lensbaby fisheye, which gives me a circular image on full frame, it's not expensive, quality isn't great compared to my 24-70 but it's fun - you could look at a cheapo fisheye from ebay as an alternative.

Re tripods, just don't, it's too busy, take a mini desktop or a beanbag instead - I'd always pack some ND's for the river shots, spokeless London eyes and traffic free streets. I'd also take your EOS-M as Paris in particular is really dodgy at night and at all times there's pick-pockets and Eastern European females trying to scam you asking if you speak English as a distraction whilst another rummages through your backpack.

Best photo sights ? Science & Natural History Museums, Louvre, Greenwich, Sacre Cur, Notre Dame, Canary Wharf, plus do the river tours, avoid the bus tours, you can't get a good photo on a bus.

[Haydn1971]

A selection of my London/Paris shots

London 2013 - https://flickr.com/photos/26084767@N04/sets/72157634286288743

London - 2014 - https://flickr.com/photos/26084767@N04/sets/72157644313628370

Paris 2013 - https://flickr.com/photos/26084767@N04/sets/72157639196336745

[M_Six]

I'll echo Pat here. I would think about leaving the 70-200 at home if you're going to be in the city only. I hauled mine all over the UK and did get one very nice shot with it, but mostly it was extra weight. The 24-105 was my main lens. I also used the Sigma 50 1.4 for interiors. I did some work with the Tokina 16-28, which has now been replaced with the 16-35 f4, but the Tokina interior shots showed a bit more distortion than I like to see. I ended up using the 24-105 for indoor shots when I had enough light, and the 50 1.4 when I didn't. I did bring my 24mm TS-E, but never used it. The price I pay for traveling with a non-photographer who doesn't like to sit around while I fiddle with tripods and lenses.

I concur with Pat's lens suggestions. 16-35, 24-105, and a fast prime would suffice nicely.

[Kayaker72]

Thanks everyone. As suggested, I am kicking around the idea of the EF 16-35 f/4. A rental price of $95 for 2 weeks would give me some time to test it out before the trip, and, of course, it is on the "next tier" of lenses I have in the back of my head that I might like to buy. I could see the IS and UWA being a good combination inside cathedrals and for quick landscape shots. Plus, it is 77 mm thread, which I already have.

I thought about TS-E lenses, but I think that is a skill I would want to develop before going to someplace like London/Paris. Then, if the EF 11-24 is even available, I don't even need to check my bank account. Plus, how many shots with my toes at the bottom do I really need? ;)

I appreciate the advice on the 70-200. It is along the lines of what I have found. When I travel with it, but it either gets used a lot or not at all. It is to the point where I am not going to automatically travel with it, but, after scrolling through Flickr, I found a number of shots I may want to make were at 200 mm (here, (https://flic.kr/p/jpRBx9) and here (https://flic.kr/p/nqahrC)). I'll think about it a bit more, but it will likely still make the cut.

[Bill W]

Brant.....rent an ultra-wide (16-35 f2.8) and maybe a fast prime; e.g. Zeiss 25 f2.0 (great architectural lens).

Jet lag suggestion (used by airline crews); if you don't have an immediate obligation after landing, take a 2hr nap and then stay up as late as possible.

I would suggest, if possible, while in London....visit one of the universities.....we really enjoyed U. of Oxford and surrounding small towns. We also enjoyed the pubs in this area.....thatched roofed buildings, locals have their own mugs hanging up and walk in wearing their Wellies.

Hopefully you'll have adequate free time.

Bill

[Kayaker72]

Bill. Did you end up with the Zeiss? I know you were thinking about it. If so, how do you like it?

BTW..the 11-24 does look remarkable (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=977&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=3&API=3&LensComp=949&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=3).

[M_Six]

There is one daytime flight (American Airlines) to London from O'Hare. We always try to take that because it gets you to London around 10:30PM. By the time we get to a Heathrow hotel and check in, it's 11:30PM or so and we're tired enough to surf/email a bit and then crash. Wake up the next morning as usual and not have to deal with jet lag. You might check to see if Logan has a daytime flight to London (assuming you're going there first).

[NFLD Stephen]

Brant;

Alot of good advice here already, but I'll chime in with my 2cents anyway... I find that london and paris are not particularly crowded with large buildings and most of the tourist areas have plenty of space to back up so a UWA is not always necessary (although there will definitely be lots of people in the shots). I've been to London quite a lot (we lived in the UK for a short period) and most of my london shots were taken with a Rebel Xsi and 15-85 lens. But I'll also add that a 70-200 lens is great there as well. You'll find that there are numerous areas where you can shoot the iconic images (london eye, buckingham palace, tower of london, parliment, etc) from a distance away with a longer lens and give a different perspective. Similar to the shots you linked from Paris (although my Paris trip was pre-dslr so I don't have direct experience with lens selection there).

Someone also suggested leaving the tripod home, but I strongly disagree with that! May not be allowed inside most churches, etc. but it is great for longer exposure at night. Lots of buildings are well lit at night and make for great photo-ops. Shouldn't be any issue finding space to use a tripod in most areas, especially after dark.

If you have specific questions about things to see in London I know the city fairly well from a tourist perspective. Feel free to PM me. I'll also see about posting some of my London shots to Flickr...

Stephen

[M_Six]

Have to agree about bringing a travel tripod along. Tower Bridge and Westminster both beg to be shot at night.

[NFLD Stephen]

FYI Brant, I just uploaded a few photos from London to my flickr page. Added a new album for London. Tried to give a cross-section of some of the main tourist attractions to give you an idea what to expect.

Stephen

Edit: Here is the link - https://www.flickr.com/photos/nfld_stephen/sets/72157651213501922/