Heading Overseas - What to take?

[TheBurningCrown]

Hey guys! So I'm heading overseas in a little under two weeks (France/UK) and I'm wondering what I should take. You can see my equipment via the link in my signature. Here's what I'm thinking at the moment:

-Rebel XT
-Elan 7E
-17-40
-50 1.4
-580EXII
-70-200 II

I'm still definitely on the fence about whether to take the 70-200 (a lot of weight/pricey glass to carry around), and the flash as well. I'm probably going to take a mix of black and white and color (C-41 and slide) film, a total of ~ a little more than a dozen rolls (I can get more while I'm there, probably). Anything else I should consider?

Bag shopping is on my agenda for tonight.

[RPCrowe]

I would forget the film camera and take the rest. Your Rebel and lenses plus flash would probably weigh the same as the film camera plus film...

[TheBurningCrown]

Originally Posted by RPCrowe

I would forget the film camera and take the rest. Your Rebel and lenses plus flash would probably weigh the same as the film camera plus film...

I've dropped down the list:
-Rebel XT
-Elan 7E
-17-40
-50 1.4
-Film

I want to do some film shooting, so the film camera stays .

[rick_reno]

how will you be getting around while there? and what are your lodging plans?

[TheBurningCrown]

Originally Posted by rick_reno

how will you be getting around while there? and what are your lodging plans?

Getting around on foot - lodging in a hotel and then an apartment.

[bransom]

Having spent too many trips carrying too much stuff, I always recommend going light unless you're working and really need the gear. I always found myself thinking, "Damn, this bag is heavy!" rather than "Man, I wish I'd brought my ________."

One thing that gets forgotten sometimes when planning a trip is that there's always extra stuff you haul around that isn't part of your normal camera stuff: maps, guidebooks, maybe an iPad, jacket and/or umbrella, water bottle. It adds up.

Me, I'd go with one body (digital) and a couple lenses, and call it done.

[TheBurningCrown]

Originally Posted by bransom

Having spent too many trips carrying too much stuff, I always recommend going light unless you're working and really need the gear. I always found myself thinking, "Damn, this bag is heavy!" rather than "Man, I wish I'd brought my ________."

I keep thinking both . "This bag is heavy" at the same time as "man I wish I had brought that one lens which weighs three pounds."

[philmar]

Man up!!! Carry the mother load. It's exercise and it is good for you.

[TheBurningCrown]

Originally Posted by philmar

Man up!!! Carry the mother load. It's exercise and it is good for you.

My shoulder begs to differ .

[Theojt]

Pack your extra gear leave it in your hotel/apartment or take it with - decide once you get there. Yeah, you'll have to carry the extra weight while traveling but won't have to struggle with the decision of what to take.

[sas8888]

I wouldn't think of not taking the 70-200. I use the 70-200 about 60% of the time and the 16-35 the other 40. both on my 5D. The 70-200 is a little heavy but I go on these trips to take good photographs so I suck it up and bring what I need. If you are just going to take photos to say I was here then take the appropriate camera and lens. If you want to take artistic photos use what you normally use to take these photos.

[RedMatrixXRS]

I went on a trip all around London and carried the 70-200 2.8 IS. I hardly used it and the bag got annoying after a while. I wanted to enjoy my time in London and not have to worry about taking pictures. For the amount of pictures I took with the 70-200, I should have just left it at home.

To be honest, I would have been fine with just a 17-55 (or equivalent walk-around lens) and 50mm.

[mangkukhayun]

Originally Posted by RedMatrixXRS

I went on a trip all around London and carried the 70-200 2.8 IS. I hardly used it and the bag got annoying after a while. I wanted to enjoy my time in London and not have to worry about taking pictures. For the amount of pictures I took with the 70-200, I should have just left it at home.

To be honest, I would have been fine with just a 17-55 (or equivalent walk-around lens) and 50mm.

+1.

Unless I am on specific photographic assignment, I prefer to travel light so that I can enjoy my vacation, while still having a good lens when opportunities come.

[Moose408]

I'm leaving for Europe on Saturday and struggling with this as well. Here's what I am definitely taking.
- 5dmkII
- 17-40mm
- 24-105mm
- travel tripod

I'm thinking of leaving the flash at home and doing a lot of long exposure shots (hence the tripod). My only concern here is taking photos in the Paris Catacombs. Don't know if I can get away with a tripod or shooting at 6400 iso.

What I am really struggling with is the 70-200mm. There are only 2 reasons I would take it, one is to photograph Stonehenge, the other is to take fashion shots of my 17 yo daughter in front of London and Paris icons (her request for the trip). I don't anticipate using it for anything else, so I'm torn on whether I can get the shots I need with the 24-105mm.

I am visiting 5 cities over 3 weeks so going to have to lug the equipment around a fair bit.

[TheBurningCrown]

^I just went to Stonehenge and wished I had my 70-200 with me. Then again, I've also wished I had it at a number of places, while also being thankful that I didn't have to lug the thing around.

I wouldn't bring the flash unless you're taking the fashion pics. It's useful, but at the vast majority of places I went using a flash is a big no.