Two bodies or an extra lens for my upcoming trip to Rome?

redli0nswift wrote:

I've never been to Italy but I've been preparing for this trip the last couple of weeks. I bought a Rick Steves Rome 2015 book to guide me. He says multiple times throughout the book that thievery is rampant in Rome. He references the bus lines from Termina Station to places like the Vatican that are packed with tourists.

Do I have any first hand knowledge of this? No.

Will I plan accordingly? Yes.

I'm no stranger to Europe travel but when Rick Steves said be careful at the Eiffel Tower, Louvre, and the Paris Metro. He was right. My father-in-law was targeted in the metro and swatted away a hand that touched his wallet.

Besides, Italy isn't just full of Italians. Europe is more diverse than that and everywhere you see tourists you must know that crime is bound to happen.

Pick a country, any country, then pick a reasonable sized city, any city in that country, and you will find street crime present somewhere there. And, if you frequent tourist areas or any other crowded venue, you will have a better chance of being a target.

But, I have been to twenty-six different countries, plus all of the U.S. offshore territories, and forty of the fifty states. Once, back around 1975, I was in a shop in Istanbul and a boy tried to pick my pocket. Before I could react, the store owner had the kid by the back of the neck and a policeman appeared out of nowhere. The last I saw of that kid was when he was tossed in the back of a police car. The only place I have ever been robbed or burglarized was in New York, where I grew up and lived in, except for collage and the military, until I was almost thirty.

I live across the Connecticut River from Springfield, MA. A couple of years ago, Springfield finally made it onto the FBI's ten most dangerous U.S. cities list. Last Year, it managed to move up to number five, and this year they are hard at work to move up further but, it's tough to move up when you have to compete against places like Chicago, Detroit, and Baltimore. May that's why Rick Steves stays in Europe, issuing ominous  warnings to the tourists in his books and videos.

Wow.  The wife and I love these photos.  I'm sold.  Looking at the 9-14mm Oly, I think I'm going to wait until July when the new lens comes out in hopes it drives the cost of this lens down.

Thanks for posting this.

Any bag recommendations?

bean bag?  I've never heard of this for photography.  I looked around at B&H and there are several.  Is there one you would recommend for M4/3?

Thanks.

Is there a reason not to go wider with the 7-14mm Pany vs the Oly 9-18mm?  Thanks.

redli0nswift wrote:

Is there a reason not to go wider with the 7-14mm Pany vs the Oly 9-18mm? Thanks.

Could be. The Panasonic lens is best on a Panasonic body, because of the significant purple blobs and flare that can be seen with it on Olympus bodies. (The best fix is to build a filter into the back of the lens.) 7mm is a lot wider than 9mm, but then again, 18mm gives you more range on the other end than 14mm. The 9-18 can take a 52mm filter on the front, whereas the 7-14 isn't made for that. The 9-18 can be used with or without a hood. Size and weight could be a concern with the Panasonic lens (though the new Olympus 7-14 is bigger and heavier still). And then there's the cost difference. All of these considerations led me to choose the 9-18 for travel. Wider is nice, but there are other options besides the Panasonic 7-14 for that.

Pete Berry wrote:

Isabel Cutler wrote:

Changing lenses is a royal pain and opens the cameras to dirt on the sensors. Changing lenses is asking accidents to happen.

I went to England last year with two e-pl5 bodies, the 12-40 and 35-100 lenses. Not tied down with a huge amount of weight and a good choice of equipment.

Almost had a mini-disaster in a car park one day when a keen-eyed person noticed I had dropped the door to the battery compartment of one of my bodies. I couldn't thank him enough.

Isabel

I'm with Isabel here. Lens changes on-the-fly touring a city, etc are an accident waiting to happen. In my six years with m4/3's including a variety European and Asian destinations, two bodies, with a P-L 14-150 on the main and a 7-14 on the other, with a rarely used Panny 25/1.4 on the side, served me well, with very rare lens changes and minimal baggage.

The GH de jour (now GH4) on a cross-chest strap and the secondary/7-14 (way wider than 12mm!) with wrist strap in a beat-up old lens-down belt-holster from the Nikon film days. No swag bag per se that attracts attention. The 25mm, flash and minipod in a small day pack w/ rainjacket, water, etc, and hotel shower caps for camera rain protection, with chips and a battery or two in pack or cargo pants/shorts.

I shot a heck of a lot above 40mm in the tight little towns of France's Alsace as well a big cities like Prague and Zurich, so I think a "super-tele" such as the Oly m14-150 or the Panny 14-140 (or the sublime, but heavy 4/3 P-L 14-150 with adapter, which may be passe by now) would be a great walk-around choice for you. I rarely found the lens speed or shallow DOF limitations of my kit limiting - certainly not for the usual daylight architectural and street-scene shots, where f/6.3 seemed my sweet spot at all FL's.

Pete

I use them rather than neck straps because I believe the latter, as well as lens changing, offer more chances for accidents - leave one hanging off the edge of a table and well.....

Although I have wrist straps on each of my cameras I rarely allow the cameras to hang from them because I've read stories on these forums about the lugs in the cameras breaking free from the bodies and cameras crashing to the ground.  I simply don't have confidence in them - perhaps that's a bit anal - but I'm very protective of my equipment!

Isabel

however, the only attempted robbery of my camera bag happened in Naples. Was quite spectacular. Robber fell on his nose

well padded, inconspicuous look

Caveat: I haven't read any other posts here.

If you want a telephoto, the Olympus 40-150 4-5.6 is a terrific lens for very little money, and while the 35-100 is a great lens, I imagine you'll usually be outside when you use it and consequently won't need the extra stops. That should leave plenty for a camera for your wife. If she's at all interested in taking pictures, it's invaluable for her to have a camera in her hands. My wife has a really good eye, but her perspective and creative vision are often very different than mine. It also gives us a common experience that we enjoy sharing.

Olympus @ f 5.0

Panasonic

Is the Panasonic better? Definitely. But is it “hundreds-of-dollars-and-my-wife-doesn’t-get-a-camera” better? Not for me.