Headed to Copenhagen / Stockholm -- gear/location advice appreciated

[hne]

Currently living in Stockholm, I'd suggest these spots for first week of June:

* If the weather is halfway cloudy in the morning (around 8 ), the view from the east side of Västerbron towards downtown Stockhom can be rather nice. The straight is 700 meters wide at a 2000 meter distance, so 85mm on full frame would give you the opportunities to get both shores in frame, with Gamla stan in the middle.
* Gamla stan, (literally Old Town) the original island that was Stockholm. Full of really old buildings and narrow alleys, down to less than a meter wide. Wide angle lens highly suggested, but you a 35/2 or 35/1.4 could be sufficient
* Fotografiska (photographic museum) as already mentioned. Don't need a camera for this one.
* Vasa museum as already mentioned. Wide angle lens highly recommended.
* After Vasa museum, take the ferry to Slussen at about 17:30 for a nice sunset over Södermalm. 70-85mm should be plenty narrow enough.
* There are high vantage points available at Monteliusvägen, Katarinahissen, Skansen (outdoor museum of swedish cultural heritage and wildlife) and the northern end of Tantolundsvägen. Google Streetview might give you an idea of what to look for, but we're probably talking details with long lenses or panoramas. Possibly portrait with your wife if you bring a tripod.
* For a coffee break, make sure to visit Drop Coffee or Johan&Nyström close to subway station Mariatorget. Nice area for street photography too. 24-50mm

Based on the above, I'd bring a 35 and an 85. A flash and/or a tripod for portraits of the both of you.

 

[jhpeterson]

I don't use LR but I used a smart album-ish sort of approach to back out how little I use the 70-200. Since I got it in 2012, I have captured:

• 1,759 pictures (from any lens) that I personally peg as a 3/5 star or better shot.
  
  
• 
  Only 105 of those were taken on the 70-200
  

It's a stellar, stellar lens. But I use it 4-5 times a year for the odd portraiture need or occasional varmint spotting while hiking or camping. It will not join me on this trip due to weight, what I prefer to shoot, and the relatively close confines of the city.

- A

I guess you and I shoot quite differently. I've had a career as a photojournalist, sports and on-location commercial photographer. Many situations would come up where, despite packing a long tele, I could never get close enough. Even if I'd carry only three lenses, one would be a 300 - or longer.
I agree with you, in the city, a good wide angle is likely to be the lens most used. That's why the 16-35 is an obvious choice. But, unlike you, I find the 50mm focal length unnecessary and it's perspective uninteresting, which is why I'd want something longer. I'm just not sure that 70mm or even 85mm is enough for a lot of cases, say on the ferries around Copenhagen and Stockholm or when you want to zoom in on a architectural detail or isolate your subject.
You're right in that the 70-200/2.8 can be burdensome when you're trying to travel light. (I'm afraid I'm so used to it. In fact, it's the shortest in my three-lens kit when I shoot sailboat racing (the others are 300 and 500, and, yes, hand held). You can save a little bit of weight by removing the tripod mount. Or, better yet, rent or borrow the f:4 model; the IS version won't disappoint you.
I went back and looked into my catalogs to see what lenses I used most on recent overseas trips - Danube, Middle East, Greece and Australia. By a large margin, the 70-200 was my go to lens, with the 16-35 being used less than half as much. Even if I looked at only what I photographed in the cities, it still made up nearly half of my shots.
While I don't know how you shoot or what are your particular subjects (you can probably tell I don't have children), but I would think having something long (at least 100mm anyway) would be a good call. It's probably my photojournalist training, but what I most want to bring back from my trip is the story of where I've been