Which wide angle lens for Italy??

[rickp1]

Going to italy in June, should I take a 14mm 2.8 prime or a 16-35mm 2.8??


thanks
R.

[RichardTaylor]

I would take the 16-35mm 2.8 mainly because of it's versatility.

[milosh]

Originally Posted by RichardTaylor

I would take the 16-35mm 2.8 mainly because of it's versatility.

+1

I'm not familiar with their performance, but judging from their focal lengths and situations in which you may find yourself, I would take the 16-35mm as well.

[wulf]

The zoom lens gives you more flexibility and both are equally fast. On that basis, the zoom looks better as 14mm is not much wider than 16mm. However, it does depend on how you get on with each lens; does the 14mm lens have a magic which makes you love it?

Also, what other lenses are you taking? If you have longer focal lengths covered, there might be a call for what I imagine is probably the smaller, lighter 14mm lens and the creativity that can be inspired by working with a prime.

Wulf

[rickp1]

I'm planning on taking my 24-105mm lens. Actually I rented the 14mm 2.8 prime. it's fast and it's pretty wide, I figured the 24-105 will fit the rest of my need. I just wish it was a tad bit faster but oh well.
I want to travel light this time so I'm leaving my 70-200 2.8 at home. The rest of what I'm taking is my 580II my tripod, monopod, 2 batteries, 3 mem cards, and a couple of filters and ND and a CPL. I think that should cover all my needs.

[inkista]

I'm eccentric and a prime lover, and I'd go for the 14L over the 16-35L, because while 2mm may not seem a lot wider, at ultrawide angles, it can be a lot, and if I were going to Italy, I'd probably be doing more city/small-street/building-interior shooting than I'd be doing landscapes. If you're going to do landscapes, then either the 16-35, or (possibly) the 17-40, since you're bringing the tripod with you, and it'll be hecka smaller and lighter than the 16-35.

16-35 is probably the logical choice, though, simply for the zoom.