Lens Choice for a trip to Rome

[nonicks]

I am planning a trip to Rome. I decided to take 26/m with ZF due to the low profile and the FOV is very close to the travel camera, Q2, it replaced.

I am thinking to bring and ultra wide lens. For those of you who visited Rome before, would you recommend:

1. Viltrox 20mm/2.8. Or

2. Voigtlander 15mm/4.5 Super Wide- Heliar

The main trade off here is aperture vs.focal length. I have no problem to MF with the 15mm. So the operation speed is not a main concern.

If 20mm is wide enough in most situation, I actual prefer to take it with me as the weight difference is noticeable although I have no problem to carry or mount either on the camera all day.

Any recommendation?

Also just curious about how useful 35mm/40mm or longer in Rome?

Thank you!

 

[nergsrof]

I am planning a trip to Rome. I decided to take 26/m with ZF due to the low profile and the FOV is very close to the travel camera, Q2, it replaced.

I am thinking to bring and ultra wide lens. For those of you who visited Rome before, would you recommend:

1. Viltrox 20mm/2.8. Or

2. Voigtlander 15mm/4.5 Super Wide- Heliar

The main trade off here is aperture vs.focal length. I have no problem to MF with the 15mm. So the operation speed is not a main concern.

If 20mm is wide enough in most situation, I actual prefer to take it with me as the weight difference is noticeable although I have no problem to carry or mount either on the camera all day.

Any recommendation?

Also just curious about how useful 35mm/40mm or longer in Rome?

Thank you!

I took my 14-20 S f4 and my 24-120 S f4 along with my Zf to Rome last year. The streets of Rome are small and the buildings are huge, even at 14MM I couldn't always fit everything in because there's little room to back up in such narrow, crowded streets, especially around (and in) the Pantheon, St. Peter's Square, and along the Coliseum.

 

[shuncheung]

I am planning a trip to Rome. I decided to take 26/m with ZF due to the low profile and the FOV is very close to the travel camera, Q2, it replaced.

I have never been to Italy, but for any European cities, I would take something like a 24-70mm/f4, 24-120mm/f4, 24-200 ... and a super wide for architecture and building interiors, e.g. churches and museums. Clearly there is no shortage of those in Rome.

I happen to think a 20mm should be wide enough, but for myself I would take a 14-30mm/f4.

However, IMO the 26mm (which I have and it is quite decent) without anything longer is kind of limiting.

I am thinking to bring and ultra wide lens. For those of you who visited Rome before, would you recommend:

1. Viltrox 20mm/2.8. Or

2. Voigtlander 15mm/4.5 Super Wide- Heliar

The main trade off here is aperture vs.focal length. I have no problem to MF with the 15mm. So the operation speed is not a main concern.

If 20mm is wide enough in most situation, I actual prefer to take it with me as the weight difference is noticeable although I have no problem to carry or mount either on the camera all day.

Any recommendation?

Also just curious about how useful 35mm/40mm or longer in Rome?

Thank you!

 

[Nebido]

Like one of the previous speakers, I use the Z 14-30/4 S in this area, but I would definitely prefer the Voigtlander for a trip to Rome.

The user nergsrof has already described this very well.

There's not much more to add, except that the 15mm also gives you leeway in PP for perspective corrections that a 20mm doesn't have.

All of this is based on the premise that you feel comfortable working with 15mm and know how to use it.

Apart from the fact that you can ultimately use all focal lengths in a city like Rome, this would definitely be a spot where even a 9mm or 10 mm lens would be worthwhile.

 

[bhollis]

I am planning a trip to Rome. I decided to take 26/m with ZF due to the low profile and the FOV is very close to the travel camera, Q2, it replaced.

I am thinking to bring and ultra wide lens. For those of you who visited Rome before, would you recommend:

1. Viltrox 20mm/2.8. Or

2. Voigtlander 15mm/4.5 Super Wide- Heliar

The main trade off here is aperture vs.focal length. I have no problem to MF with the 15mm. So the operation speed is not a main concern.

If 20mm is wide enough in most situation, I actual prefer to take it with me as the weight difference is noticeable although I have no problem to carry or mount either on the camera all day.

Any recommendation?

Also just curious about how useful 35mm/40mm or longer in Rome?

Thank you!

I've been to Rome twice. Both times took my Z7 and 24-70 f/4S. Served me very well. Never really needed anything wider or longer.

If I were you, I'd take the 24-70 f/4S (which is a great lens that can be got for a song used) and your 20/2.8. I doubt you'll need wider, and if you do, you can always take a stitch pano.


Santa Maria Maggiore, Rome

 

[Nebido]

Here is an interesting post that highlights the advantages of ultra-wide-angle solutions, at least when working with perspective corrections in PP.

Nikon Z Images Thread - Nikon-mount SLRs - Photography - FM Forums

Join the Nikon-mount SLRs photography discussion: All the individual gear threads are great for research, but at the end of the day it's about the image, not the gear. So how about a general thread for images f

www.fredmiranda.com

A 9-10mm lens can effectively be used in much the same way as a 14mm shift.

The last image in the post once again dramatically illustrates the differences in FoV, where the user has set a frame for focal lengths of 9-24mm.

 

[areallygrumpyoldsod]

You cannot use a tripod inside the most famous/popular places, which means that if you are seeking to capture, say, the whole of the inside of the Pantheon in one shot then you would need a lens that delivers a 180 degree field of view.

A fisheye lens with a focal length of around 8mm will give you a diagonal 180-degree field of view on a full-frame camera. While it provides a highly distorted, circular or extreme view, this focal length allows you to capture a vast amount of the scene, making it suitable for landscape, artistic, and action sports photography.

Since 8mm is tough to source - a 14mm is more realistic. 20mm is too long for internal shots and narrow lanes.

A 14mm lens on a full-frame camera provides an ultra-wide angle of view, capturing a significant portion of the scene. While the exact angle can vary slightly between lens designs and calculation methods, it is generally around 114-115.7 degrees diagonally. As a result you should plan to take 9 or more shots with lots of overlap which you can stick together later. Remember to soot manual with the same settings and manual focus distance for all shots.

Much longer focal lengths are essential for shooting details and scenes with a more natural pov.

 

[FKS]

I used the 14-30mm f/4 for most of my photos inside and outside of the many churches and Roman sites in Rome. Most of the time it was at 14mm. I used a Z7, and didn't find the f/4 aperture an issue.
I did bring a short tele (old 75-150E) for those instances when I wanted to zoom into a feature (eg the details on the Arch of Constantine across from the Colosseum), so I would recommend something longer than 35/40mm if you have it.

 

[monte12345]

Yes, I know you were asking for just one lens. However the 20mm f2.8 Viltrox and the 26mm f2.8 are light enough to be considered as just one lens. BTW I have both and these are marvelous lenses with excellent image quality. I am adding in the 16mm because of it's gathering rave reviews as an Astro lens and those folks are VERY picky. So I am confident that it's a very fine lens and will be very useful in a city renowned for 3000 years as having narrow streets. BTW I have a 10mm for my Z50II and a 12-24mm Sigma for my Full Frame cameras so I know how useful that 16mm will prove to be. It is just about the perfect focal length for a crowded city environment.

Finally I will point out an alternate setup. That is to replace the 26mm f2.8 with the 24-50mm f4-6.3 Nikkor collapsing zoom. While there is a Speed issue with this lens I am quite familiar how clean and correctable the Noise produced by the Zf is. That camera can be used at ISO 64,000 and produce very good looking Film Like images that appear to have been shot using Kodacolor 200. It's why the maximum ISO I have set on my Zf is at 64,000. It's also why I have ND filters in the bag for my Zf. What you are really giving up with this lens is the ability to "blow out" the background with the 26mm f2.8 and to be honest all you are really doing is adding a touch of softness to the background. So that advantage for the 26mm is actually rather slight. I will also note that based on Thom Hogan's review if this lens it like the 40mm f2, not the sharpest lens but good enough to produce very good looking images if you don't peep them at higher than 100%. Basically this is a matter of balance, do you want the ability to 24-50mm in focal lengths while keeping light and compact or give up on shooting longer than 26mm. BTW, if weight isn't an issue the 24-70mm f4 would be fantastic.

 

[Peter3579]

I am planning a trip to Rome. I decided to take 26/m with ZF due to the low profile and the FOV is very close to the travel camera, Q2, it replaced.

I am thinking to bring and ultra wide lens. For those of you who visited Rome before, would you recommend:

1. Viltrox 20mm/2.8. Or

2. Voigtlander 15mm/4.5 Super Wide- Heliar

The main trade off here is aperture vs.focal length. I have no problem to MF with the 15mm. So the operation speed is not a main concern.

If 20mm is wide enough in most situation, I actual prefer to take it with me as the weight difference is noticeable although I have no problem to carry or mount either on the camera all day.

Any recommendation?

Also just curious about how useful 35mm/40mm or longer in Rome?

Thank you!

I took my 14-20 S f4 and my 24-120 S f4 along with my Zf to Rome last year. The streets of Rome are small and the buildings are huge, even at 14MM I couldn't always fit everything in because there's little room to back up in such narrow, crowded streets, especially around (and in) the Pantheon, St. Peter's Square, and along the Coliseum.

I took exactly the same lenses with my Z7 a couple of years ago and had exactly the same outcome. These 2 lenses are the ideal combination for Rome IMO.

 

[phinix]

I was in Rome last year with my Zf, 24-70 f/4S and Viltrox 20/2.8.

This was first time I used Viltrox 20mm - bought it month before the trip.

I mounted it once, tried to take photo against the sun and results were so terrible I took it off after 5minutes.

24-70mm was too narrow, 20mm would be perfect for 80% of the time, but then something wider would be useful in about 20% of my trip, that is why I think Voigtlander 15mm would be perfect.

 

[Rich Rosen]

When I visited Rome many years ago, I bought a bunch of lenses and 2 cameras with me. I wouldn't do the same today, although I would like to. My kit for that trip, included a 70-200, a 17-35, and a 28-70...the holy trinity of that period. It also included a 1.8 prime (a 50? not sure). Today I would bring 16 f1.8, a 24-70, and either a 100-400 or 70-200, with one camera. Rome, like Athens and Madrid are beautiful cities to photograph. I have no experience with either of the lenses you mention, but I would go with lenses that large apertures, because much of Rome's beauty come out at night. So my 16 would be my lens of choice at night. The other two would serve me well during the day and in the early part of the evening.

 

[Richard M Nikon]

I am planning a trip to Rome. I decided to take 26/m with ZF due to the low profile and the FOV is very close to the travel camera, Q2, it replaced.

I am thinking to bring and ultra wide lens. For those of you who visited Rome before, would you recommend:

1. Viltrox 20mm/2.8. Or

2. Voigtlander 15mm/4.5 Super Wide- Heliar

The main trade off here is aperture vs.focal length. I have no problem to MF with the 15mm. So the operation speed is not a main concern.

If 20mm is wide enough in most situation, I actual prefer to take it with me as the weight difference is noticeable although I have no problem to carry or mount either on the camera all day.

Any recommendation?

Also just curious about how useful 35mm/40mm or longer in Rome?

Thank you!

Wow, I love Rome. I've been there numerous times with a Z7 + 14-30/4 + 24-70/4 + 70-180/2,8, and occasionally also an 11/2.8 fisheye and / or a 70-300/4.5-5.6.

A super-wide FoV is essential for the interiors of the Pantheon, Colosseum and St. Peter's, plus Piazza Navona, the Trevi Fountain, the Spanish Steps, etc.

Longer focal lengths are great for building details and for distant shots from the roof of Castel Sant'Angelo, St. Peter's from in front of the castle and from the Umberto I Bridge, the Colosseum from across the Forum, etc.

Enjoy your trip!

 

[JacquesC]

I've been to Italy many times and always found a zoom such as a 24-70 or 24-120 to be a good choice. On my last trip I didn't go to Rome but spent quite a bit of time in Florence and Sienna amongst others, and this time I took only 2 lenses for my Z7, the 24-70 f4 S and my 28mm 2.8 SE - I never missed anything else. The 28 2.8 was great for indoor low light shots or when I wanted to carry light.

I think you will have lots of use for your 26mm lens indoors, but should consider either the 24-70 f4 or 24-120 f4 as a second lens.

 

[nonicks]

I am planning a trip to Rome. I decided to take 26/m with ZF due to the low profile and the FOV is very close to the travel camera, Q2, it replaced.

I am thinking to bring and ultra wide lens. For those of you who visited Rome before, would you recommend:

1. Viltrox 20mm/2.8. Or

2. Voigtlander 15mm/4.5 Super Wide- Heliar

The main trade off here is aperture vs.focal length. I have no problem to MF with the 15mm. So the operation speed is not a main concern.

If 20mm is wide enough in most situation, I actual prefer to take it with me as the weight difference is noticeable although I have no problem to carry or mount either on the camera all day.

Any recommendation?

Also just curious about how useful 35mm/40mm or longer in Rome?

Thank you!

I took my 14-20 S f4 and my 24-120 S f4 along with my Zf to Rome last year. The streets of Rome are small and the buildings are huge, even at 14MM I couldn't always fit everything in because there's little room to back up in such narrow, crowded streets, especially around (and in) the Pantheon, St. Peter's Square, and along the Coliseum.

Thank you! Sounds 15mm will be a good choice.

 

[nonicks]

I was in Rome last year with my Zf, 24-70 f/4S and Viltrox 20/2.8.

This was first time I used Viltrox 20mm - bought it month before the trip.

I mounted it once, tried to take photo against the sun and results were so terrible I took it off after 5minutes.

24-70mm was too narrow, 20mm would be perfect for 80% of the time, but then something wider would be useful in about 20% of my trip, that is why I think Voigtlander 15mm would be perfect.

Can you elaborate a little on the challenge you had with the 20mm? I did not use it enough to really understand the flaws of the lens. But I used it for some night city pictures and it performed well. Sharp in the center and deliver more than adequate sharpness across the frame as a value lens. Color was vibrant and flare caused by light source are well controlled in general. No unforgivable noticeable distortion out of camera. And it's light.. very light. That is why I think it may be a good choice for this trip. The only thing I am not sure is if this is wide enough for taking care the ultra wide needs in Rome.

--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/183079213@N06/

 

[nonicks]

I am planning a trip to Rome. I decided to take 26/m with ZF due to the low profile and the FOV is very close to the travel camera, Q2, it replaced.

I have never been to Italy, but for any European cities, I would take something like a 24-70mm/f4, 24-120mm/f4, 24-200 ... and a super wide for architecture and building interiors, e.g. churches and museums. Clearly there is no shortage of those in Rome.

Maybe I should bring a cheap 75mm to cover the long side..... I can't imagine I need anything longer than 75mm

I happen to think a 20mm should be wide enough, but for myself I would take a 14-30mm/f4.

Great! Another vote to go wider than 20mm.

However, IMO the 26mm (which I have and it is quite decent) without anything longer is kind of limiting.

I agree it will be limited although I can crop the frame using DX mode to archive an approximately 40mm equivalent FOV if I need to. I understand the resolution will drop to 18MP. My priority is to make the package light as I expect to be walking and standing for long hours in Rome most of the time.

.

I am thinking to bring and ultra wide lens. For those of you who visited Rome before, would you recommend:

1. Viltrox 20mm/2.8. Or

2. Voigtlander 15mm/4.5 Super Wide- Heliar

The main trade off here is aperture vs.focal length. I have no problem to MF with the 15mm. So the operation speed is not a main concern.

If 20mm is wide enough in most situation, I actual prefer to take it with me as the weight difference is noticeable although I have no problem to carry or mount either on the camera all day.

Any recommendation?

Also just curious about how useful 35mm/40mm or longer in Rome?

Thank you!

--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/183079213@N06/

 

[nonicks]

Like one of the previous speakers, I use the Z 14-30/4 S in this area, but I would definitely prefer the Voigtlander for a trip to Rome.

The user nergsrof has already described this very well.

There's not much more to add, except that the 15mm also gives you leeway in PP for perspective corrections that a 20mm doesn't have.

Thanks for reminding.

All of this is based on the premise that you feel comfortable working with 15mm and know how to use it.

Great reminder again. I am not an ultra wide person. I feel more home with the 20mm as the Fuji 14mm/2.8 was one of my favorite lens for years. 15mm is not easy to use but using it to cover interior and architect are not as hard as using it for landscape and creative portraits.

Apart from the fact that you can ultimately use all focal lengths in a city like Rome, this would definitely be a spot where even a 9mm or 10 mm lens would be worthwhile.

No room for 9mm/10mm lens... they are definitely something I won't use often enough even I have them. LOL

 

[nonicks]

I am planning a trip to Rome. I decided to take 26/m with ZF due to the low profile and the FOV is very close to the travel camera, Q2, it replaced.

I am thinking to bring and ultra wide lens. For those of you who visited Rome before, would you recommend:

1. Viltrox 20mm/2.8. Or

2. Voigtlander 15mm/4.5 Super Wide- Heliar

The main trade off here is aperture vs.focal length. I have no problem to MF with the 15mm. So the operation speed is not a main concern.

If 20mm is wide enough in most situation, I actual prefer to take it with me as the weight difference is noticeable although I have no problem to carry or mount either on the camera all day.

Any recommendation?

Also just curious about how useful 35mm/40mm or longer in Rome?

Thank you!

I've been to Rome twice. Both times took my Z7 and 24-70 f/4S. Served me very well. Never really needed anything wider or longer.

If I were you, I'd take the 24-70 f/4S (which is a great lens that can be got for a song used) and your 20/2.8. I doubt you'll need wider, and if you do, you can always take a stitch pano.


Santa Maria Maggiore, Rome

I agree. Stitching is what I usually do to address situations if I don't have a wide enough lens for certain shots although the proper way to do is using 35mm or 50mm. I still could manage to get it done quite well with my Q2 with LR.



--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/183079213@N06/

 

[nonicks]

Here is an interesting post that highlights the advantages of ultra-wide-angle solutions, at least when working with perspective corrections in PP.

https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1599448/357#16891358

A 9-10mm lens can effectively be used in much the same way as a 14mm shift.

The last image in the post once again dramatically illustrates the differences in FoV, where the user has set a frame for focal lengths of 9-24mm.

Thank you for the link. --

Stefotograph

Explore Stefotograph’s 376 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com