San Francisco : Gear suggestion

For San Francisco 4 day visit, I am in a dilemma whether to take

5DM3, 24-105f/4+ 16-35F/4

or simply G1X

Visits are going to be around the city only mostly.
For that it is worth to lug the full frame with 2 lenses or just go light with G1X
Though I am leaning towards G1X, I don't want to repent for some of those places where 5d3 would be most appropriate.
On the flipside the same, i.e. repenting to lug the heavy stuff where G1X could have been more than adequate.

Appreciate your inputs.

It depends on your reason for the trip. I have a daughter living in that area and usually travel heavy.

Whatever you do, leave NOTHING at all visible in the passenger compartment. San Francisco has a virtual epidemic of car break-ins...about one every
17 SECONDS is reported. Even a child's backpack -- the only thing visibie -- has been stolen! San Francisco has almost 31,000 car break ins during 2017. Blame is directed at the police for not 'doing a better job', but most incidents take 30-60 seconds, and then the perpetrators are gone in a getaway car.

Last month, it was reported that numerous Bay Area car break-ins have been linked to a multimillion-dollar fencing operation in which computer tablets and laptops stolen from vehicles were shipped overseas and sold on the black market in Vietnam. This has increased auto break in incidents in a number of Bay Area cities, SF is not alone. In Fremont, incidents were up 35% last year.

Tapeman wrote in post #18588690
It depends on your reason for the trip. I have a daughter living in that area and usually travel heavy.

This is our first visit to that place.

Wilt wrote in post #18588713
Whatever you do, leave NOTHING at all visible in the passenger compartment. San Francisco has a virtual epidemic of car break-ins...about one every
17 SECONDS is reported. Even a child's backpack -- the only thing visibie -- has been stolen! San Francisco has more than 30,000 car break ins during 2017.

Yes. I have heard that from almost everyone. Thanks for alerting though.
That is one of the reasons too that I am thinking of going with less expensive but good enough for the cause equipment.

I haven't been to SF since the mid-70s. I do spend a fair bit of time in Chicago. If I only take one lens to Chicago, it is my Sigma 8-16mm (12-24 II when I was using full frame). Something a bit longer may come in handy from time to time.

Bassat wrote in post #18588739
I haven't been to SF since the mid-70s. I do spend a fair bit of time in Chicago. If I only take one lens to Chicago, it is my Sigma 8-16mm (12-24 II when I was using full frame). Something a bit longer may come in handy from time to time.

Different photographers have different styles.

• 8mm-16mm is know as 'ultrawide' for a reason...if you do not care to see things at a reasonable size and detail (unless they are people standing a half dozen feet away...where they can be subjected to perspective distortion), and you want simply wide areas in a single frame.
  
• I find 20-24mm is a much better choice as the widest FL where one is not after an 'artsy' shot.
  

Wilt wrote in post #18588746
I find it rather 'interesting' that in the days of film photography 40 years ago, most folks bought telephotos for themselves, and might wait a very long time before finding a need even for a moderate wide angle (35mm). Now folks lean very rapidly to ultrawide.

I think you are right. When I was a photojournalist in the late 70's I was unique in my regular use of a 24mm lens. Almost no one else even carried a lens that wide. 28mm was pretty much the standard wide angle lens.

I still use wide lenses quite a bit. I love my 16-35.

Wilt wrote in post #18588746
...

I find it rather 'interesting' that in the days of film photography 40 years ago, most folks bought telephotos for themselves, and might wait a very long time before finding a need even for a moderate wide angle (35mm). Now folks lean very rapidly to ultrawide.

I've been doing this for about 50 years. I got my first 'wide' lens right around 40 years ago, a 28mm f/2.8. I mostly avoided wide until about 4 or 5 years ago. Once I got started, I got addicted. I went from Rok 14mm, to Sigma 15 FE, to Rok 12 FE, to Sigma 12-24II on FF. Now I am using Sigma 8-16 on an 80D. I don't do 'artsy', but it makes for some interestingly different photos to go really wide.

Wilt wrote in post #18588713
Whatever you do, leave NOTHING at all visible in the passenger compartment. San Francisco has a virtual epidemic of car break-ins...about one every
17 SECONDS is reported.

And be aware that Twin Peaks is a dangerous place for photographers. I'm not talking only about property crimes.

However, anyone interested in shooting large landscapes, such as are seen from Twin Peaks, probably wouldn't consider taking only a G-series camera.

If the 24-105f/4 and 16-35F/4 are your only choices, and I had to eliminate one, it would be the 16-35.

Take a trip to the Cable Car Museum by the way. It is free.

Will you have wheels?

OhLook wrote in post #18588774
And be aware that Twin Peaks is a dangerous place for photographers. I'm not talking only about property crimes.

However, anyone interested in shooting large landscapes, such as are seen from Twin Peaks, probably wouldn't consider taking only a G-series camera.

Thanks.
So this is the place G1x will fall short?

John from PA wrote in post #18588775
If the 24-105f/4 and 16-35F/4 are your only choices, and I had to eliminate one, it would be the 16-35.

Take a trip to the Cable Car Museum by the way. It is free.

Will you have wheels?

Yes I will have wheels for may be a day or two.

rndman wrote in post #18588792
Thanks.
So this is the place G1x will fall short?

Hmmm...not sure Twin Peaks would be on my list of a must have landscape. See http://www.sftodo.com …twin-peaks-san-francisco/. I'd rather try to catch the classic view of the Golden Gate bridge looking from the far side. See https://www.brendansad​ventures.com …h-the-golden-gate-bridge/ for some examples. If you are into "street photography' hit Chinatown early in the morning.

rndman wrote in post #18588792
Thanks.
So this is the place G1x will fall short?

It's a high point with distant views, where you'd need a long lens to catch detail. Whether a G-anything will do depends on what kind of photos you'll go for. There are other vista spots, including many where you could stand to photograph Alcatraz Island, for instance. Alcatraz is far enough from the shore that a DSLR would be better for it.