>I'll be in London late May and early June on my honeymoon.
Hey, early Congrats on that Neil!!!!
>....I'm thinking right now of 24-120, 50, and fisheye. But wonder >if I would really want the macro or telephoto? We will be >visiting the British museum, London eye, Westminster Abbey, >etc.
On my trip to London, and similar trips to Paris, Vegas, etc. I have always used my 24-70 and found it very versatile. So I think 24-120 as the core is perfect (if I had one I'd bring that in preference over my 24-70).
And I ALWAYS bring my 50 for handheld night shooting. And fisheye, you bet. I tend to not shoot my fisheye all that often around home, but on a vacation, I pull it out and use it a lot, just for fun. So I think your main three choices are bang-on!
I pretty much always bring an extension tube and my 70-200 (or 70-300) but they don't get much use. I'm also trying to make more use of my 16-35. Mostly I just walk the streets with one camera and one lens on my Black Rapid strap, maybe a second lens in a pocket, and the gear that is not with me is locked up in the room safe. I never carry all my gear on walkabouts. I select what I need and go. The rest stays back in the room.
I also oftentimes just go out with the V1 and lenses on a small belt bag, especially for mid-day. But for the nice light early and late, it's DSLR and lens or two.
Anyhow congrats and I'm sure you'll have a blast! Best regards, SteveK
I had the 24-70 for a few years so I know what you mean. I decided that the 24-120 would probably be much more useful for me. In fact, I wish I could find someone to swap a 70-200 VR1 with to get a 70-200 f4. As my needs change and focus equipment needs to move around.
So fisheye would be useful! That is the piece I'm most wishy-washy with right now. I've seen some examples doing google search but only a few compelling ones. I had a 10.5 fisheye once and really enjoyed it.
So macro not that useful? Even in museums? I'm definitely bringing my polarizer to handle both skies and window/glass reflections.
My fiancee will have my V1 so we're covered there, too! Have a nice small thinktank bag for it.
The last time I was there (which was last year), I just took a 24-120mm, and that worked very well. While you can photograph London with about any lens imaginable, there's a lot to be said for going light in a city environment. You're more likely to walk further, keep your photographic energy level higher - all good things. I didn't find myself missing much with just this lens. Adding the 50mm 1.8 for low-light portraits would be a good complement and would add little weight or size.
Wed 06-Feb-13 12:55 PM | edited Wed 06-Feb-13 01:09 PM by Ray B
Firstly many congratulations on getting married and taking your honeymoon in London !!
I'm a Londoner by birth so know the city well, you're staying near Trafalgar Square in the heart of the action !!
You'll be walking around a lot and the 24-120 is by far the best solution for one main lens, it's both wide enough and long enough for most stuff.
Wider rather than longer would sometimes be useful, but not essential and personally I wouldn't want to lug my 70-200mm about. Like many European cities London has quite compact streets!
The Fisheye makes sense as you can simply stuff it in your pocket and get some fun shots and unusual perspectives with it. I'd take the 50mm too and use that as my only lens at night.
If I were on honeymoon I'd also factor in a desire to remain married ... lol ... and with that in mind I'd say honeymoon first photography second with regards to carrying around too much gear !!
PS, the light can be poor in London and a Speedlight might be useful on occasion
PPS - If you like pure "street" photography London is great for that and the prime I'd consider is the 28mm 1.8G. It could be fun to take that out instead of the zoom sometimes, if you're that way inclined.
LOL! We're staying 10 days so there's plenty of time for everything!
She's bringing a V1 and we both want to do some good sight seeing. It's great to hear that wider is better than longer. Will the light be poor in the late May/early June time? I saw that the temps will average 70-75 F for a high which is very much like our late spring here in the eastern US.
When it comes to "seeing" I usually see telephoto and ultrawide. Haven't done well with street photo stuff but then again I don't often have the chance to explore that area...
Interesting suggestion on the speedlight. Would that be allowed indoors most places?
Wed 06-Feb-13 03:36 PM | edited Wed 06-Feb-13 03:40 PM by Ray B
> >She's bringing a V1 and we both want to do some good sight >seeing. It's great to hear that wider is better than longer.
As a generalization for most people in London yes! Some will like shooting long but most don't feel the need.
>Will the light be poor in the late May/early June time? I saw >that the temps will average 70-75 F for a high which is very >much like our late spring here in the eastern US.
The daily temp of 70 to 75 is a bit optimistic, I'd say 65 to 70 a more realistic average, but with our weather it could hit 85 !! The issue with our temperate climate is that at that time of year you could be bathed in glorious sunshine or leaden grey skies and rain, for days on end or both in the same day !! Just be aware of that > >When it comes to "seeing" I usually see telephoto >and ultrawide. Haven't done well with street photo stuff but >then again I don't often have the chance to explore that >area... Bearing in mind I'm with the others in so much as carry ONE lens during the day (or zoom on camera and prime in pocket).
Option 1 - I'd still advocate the 24-120 as spot on for London (with fisheye in pocket if it were me).
Option 2 - If you like extremes then I'd lean wideangle and get a 16-35mm 4.0 VR INSTEAD of 24-120 - still only using one zoom. In that instance the 50mm would be my second lens. I'd not lean towards telephoto in London as the other extreme by default
ALSO - If "street" is something you at best dabble with don't consider a prime just for that - either zoom we have discussed has it covered. > >Interesting suggestion on the speedlight. Would that be >allowed indoors most places?
Most visitor attractions won't allow flash, but if you like portraits with fill light I'd go that way. At close quarters the pop up will do just fine. You'll be eating out too - flash allowed
Wed 06-Feb-13 03:45 PM | edited Wed 06-Feb-13 03:54 PM by Ray B
>Great point. I was thinking light. I may add a super wide >prime then. Like the 20mm. It gives me something the 24-120 >can't and is very small.
On that front I have the 20mm 2.8D and its great on DX - super sharp, I bought it for use with my D7000 for street (now I use the 28mm 1.8D on FX for the same use). To date I've not used it FX on my D700 or D600 as I've not felt the need, but Thom Hogan rates it if you look at his review.
I have a 20mm 2.8D, and it's fine on FX. Not outstanding, but fine. The 14mm mentioned earlier is just plain awful, so I definitely wouldn't recommend one of those (unless you want to buy mine - kidding).
>I have a 20mm 2.8D, and it's fine on FX. Not outstanding, >but fine. The 14mm mentioned earlier is just plain awful, so >I definitely wouldn't recommend one of those (unless you want >to buy mine - kidding).
Sounds about right, my 20 2.8D is retired now, but it served me well on DX
I do find this threaded system on Nikonians difficult to follow but I'd like to offer a summary so far:
1. If you want to capture London with minimum fuss: 24-120mm 4.0 VR plus fisheye in pocket. Use 50mm instead of zoom at night
2. If you like "extremes" go 16-35mm 4.0 VR, forget the fisheye and bring the 50mm as well for night and portraits.
3. Forget long end as your other preferred extreme in this instance
Wed 06-Feb-13 06:53 PM | edited Wed 06-Feb-13 06:59 PM by Ray B
>Both, of course!
Well fair play, but it's easy to get a bit "scatter gun" planning these trips - ya know, let's pack it all
If we rewind a bit to your original thinking and the early advice we got to 24-120mm plus fisheye in pocket for walkaround and 50mm for night/lowlight.
I'd still advocate that, but it depends how much you want to take on the trip, how much you want to carry each day, how much you want to change lenses and your strategy for carrying it all
As a Londoner by birth who lives just 45 minutes from the city to this day if I were going into the city "to shoot the sights" I'd take the 24-120 plus fisheye (next on my list), nothing else. or my 16-35mm - nothing else. At night I'd take my 28mm 1.8 or 50mm 1.4. Nothing else.
Sun 10-Feb-13 04:43 PM | edited Sun 10-Feb-13 05:02 PM by Vlad_IT
>Hi! > >Let me dissent: if it's a honeymoon, make it a pocketable >compact... you're not there for photography, are you? > >Olivier Rychner
First of all - congratulations!
Just wanted to say the pretty much similar to what Olivier said, immediately after reading OP.
Honeymoon is about you and your wife and never about you and your toys. be carefull. any trip is a great excuse to pick a new equipment, but i would reconcider putting a honeymoon into "any trip" category.
Let me add my congratulations, also. I was in London last summer for a week and took my 16-35, 50 1.4 and 80-200 with my D800. Of those three lenses I used the 16-35 about 90 percent of the time. I think the 24-120 would cover most of your picture taking needs. Anything else could be covered with the Nikon 1 and 50 f1.8. Good luck on your decision.
Thu 07-Feb-13 03:02 AM | edited Thu 07-Feb-13 03:10 AM by richardd300
Early congrats. London in late May early June is possibly the best time to visit. It's not too tourist busy, the light is terrific and the long days allow terrific photo opportunities. In your position I'd choose the 24-120 and a wider angle.. I wouldn't bother too much about a macro, however a telephoto would be good, that's when I use my 28-300mm as my 70-200mm is a bit heavy for city work. Mostly I use a 24-70 and not that you have one, but a 16-35mm on city trips as some frames are tight. Now that I have one, my V1 would definitely be handed to my wife for her use.
Neil -- I lived in London from 1984 to 86 while stationed in the Navy there. If I was going to do the photo part of your trip, I'd be inclined to carry the 24-120 on the camera and the 50 in my pocket. Lighter is good. You'll find the light there different than Tennessee. London is a lot further north than most Americans realize. It's not due east of NYC! Actually it is the same latitude as the south end of Hudson Bay, Canada. As such, the light has a warmth we don't see a lot here. Late May-early June is also a time of long days -- longer than any in the US (except Alaska) with lengthy twilight period on both ends. I think the VR of the 24-120 will serve well. If you must take a fisheye, I have the Nikon 16mm full frame and it is a very fun lens. That'd be my 3rd lens. One hint: if you go to the Tower of London to see the crown jewels, hustle straight to them first versus following a circuitous path. They are popular and within 30 minutes, attract quite a crowd -- get in and get out of that particular segment. Also, ride the dbl-decker tour busses and race to the top front (if it's not raining!) Have a great honeymoon -- congratulations!
Thank you! I thought that I would have more daylight than here but not that much! I've been to Maine and Alaska so I've seen some long days and long nights. So it looks like the 24-120, 50, and I'm bringing a polarizer and infrared filter for the fun of it. Fisheyes are fun but I'm just not sure III want to buy one. Maybe rent but then I'm carrying even more.
Thank you everyone for the advice! More is always welcome.