C'mon guys I want more suggestions!
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
In France "château de la Loire" like Chambord and Chenonceau, the Alps, Mont Saint Michel, Beauval zoo (in the top ten of the Times magazine), Paris of course and so many other places !I won't miss the chance to see this for sure (i'm french canadiand(Quebec) so speaking french will please me )
While 4-8 weeks seems like a long period of time you are looking at decent size continent that probably couldn't be more diverse. It's kind of the same question that you get from Europeans traveling to the US. They often do the same thing where they either drive cross country (without much time to actually see and experience much) or criss cross from coast to coast to check of the stereotypical tourist attractions from their list.I understand what you mean but, i'm only 20 and will be 21 when I'll star the trip so I will have a looooot of time (I hope so haha) to do it again.. I'll try to choose maybe 10-15(max) places with my Girlfriend to have enough time enjoying it. And for the gear, I'll bring the 8-16 because of the unique perspective it can achieve,for landscapes I'll do some panos with the 24-70, and the 120-300 is a Huge lens I know, but considering the 24-70 as my second longuest focal, I can't not bring the 120-300 because if I miss some long shots, i'll be a little mad at myself
If that's what you want people have given you the list already. And I'm not saying that Paris and Zermatt aren't worth visiting. Quite to the contrary. Only I would stick to 2, maybe 3 places that really interest you and get to know them better and beyond recreating the pictures and mental images that you already find at your local travel agent or on "Rick Steve's Europe" show.
To me traveling has always been about learning how places tick and where they're coming from. And I personally have a thing for putting things into historical contexts to understand the world a bit better. The one time I did one of those "20 countries in 10 days" undertakings with two very good friends we actually followed the path of one of the crusades with the added bonus of one of the friends being quite the expert on this subject. Not that the local food, drink and girls were dismissed along the way...Those were the days...
And I would stick to the 50 and the 24-70 and leave the rest at home.
Really? Nikon doenst have good FX lenses? I thought it was pretty similar to Canon..minus a "few" special ones…Joke right? anyway the only lens a lot of canon shooters are missing is the 14-24 as previously said.Also the 200-400 but the canon one exists.
But there's 1 lens i wished Canon had..it's not the best lens but i think it makes a great travel lens for FF…the 28-300…that's something i wish Canon had..something similar at least but none..
I'd be a bit concerned about the lack of support from Canon. As you note, Canon no longer sells parts or services the lens, so you will need to go to a third party and hope they have parts if you need one.I agree with this, I just bought the 120-300 (and here in canada 10 years warranty) donnu for the USof A. It's super sharp ansd I know theres a lot aof complains about issues with sigma lenses but I have 3 of them (8-16, 50, 120-300) and they're all perfect (except focus jumps a little bit on the 50. The 120-300 meets a perfect focal range for fiel sports as soccer football rugby etc. focus is fast and the 2 IS types are great. Couldn't ask for more, and the lens is 2999(here in canada) and 3199 at BH. the cheapest 300 2.8 available
I'd tend to look really hard at the Sigma zoom, maybe even rent one to try.